FAIRFAX, Sir Thomas I (1559/60-1640), of Denton and Nun Appleton, Yorks.

Published in The History of Parliament: the House of Commons 1604-1629, ed. Andrew Thrush and John P. Ferris, 2010
Available from Cambridge University Press



1625 - 5 July 1625
1 Aug. 1625

Family and Education

b. 1559/60,1 1st s. of Sir Thomas Fairfax† of Denton and Dorothy, da. of George Gale†, ld. mayor of York.2 educ. Queen’s, Camb. 1577; L. Inn 1579.3 m. settlement ?1 Mar. 1582, Ellen (d. 23 Aug. 1620), da. of Robert Aske of Aughton, Yorks. 9s. (6 d.v.p.), 3da. (1 d.v.p.).4 kntd. 27 Sept. 1591;5 suc. fa. 1600;6 cr. Bar. Fairfax of Cameron [S] 18 Oct. 1627.7 d. 1 May 1640.8 sig. T[homas]/Tho[mas] Fairfax.

Offices Held

Capt. of horse 1585-6;9 vol. Scotland 1588, France 1591;10 capt. of ft., Low Countries and Cadiz 1593-6.11

Capt. militia ft., Yorks. (W. Riding) 1587, col. by 1599-d.;12 commr. Middle March 1595;13 j.p. W. Riding c.1592/3, by 1598-d., Cawood liberty by 1602-d.;14 commr. musters, W. Riding 1598-9, dep. lt. by 1614-c.1633;15 member, Council in the North 1599-d., v.-pres. 1600;16 commr. oyer and terminer, Northern circ. 1599-1607, 1610-d.,17 sewers, Western Riding by 1603-d.; member, High Commission, prov. of York 1604/5;18 commr. survey R. Ouse, Yorks. 1610,19 Knaresborough Forest, Yorks. 1615-16,20 subsidy, W. Riding 1608, 1621-2, 1624,21 Forced Loan 1626-7.22

Gent. privy chamber (?extraordinary) 1603-25.23


A junior branch of the Gilling family, the Fairfaxes settled at Steeton, near York, and Sir William Fairfax acquired Denton by marriage in the early sixteenth century.24 Sir William’s eldest son was a lunatic, and while the next son, Sir Thomas, should have inherited everything, his brothers Gabriel and Henry were granted a 57-year lease of the Steeton estate in 1557. Sir Thomas protested, but was forced to accept the partition following arbitration by Sir Thomas Gargrave†.25 In 1580 Sir Thomas planned to marry his son, the future MP, to one of the daughters of Sir George Bowes†, but the negotiations collapsed, and Fairfax and a sister eventually made a double marriage with the Askes of Aughton.26

Despite being his father’s sole male heir, Fairfax led a surprisingly eventful youth. In 1583 he set out for Scotland with the 2nd earl of Essex, but he and the rest of the party were obliged to turn back at Berwick. Two years later, however, Fairfax was able to complete the journey, bringing James VI horses from the earl of Leicester (Sir Robert Dudley†). The English ambassador in Scotland, Sir Edward Wotton†, assured Leicester that Fairfax ‘did not omit the doing of any good office whereby he might imprint in the king’s mind a good opinion of your Lordship’.27 In December 1585 Fairfax went to the Low Countries with Leicester as captain of a troop of lancers, but he was quickly dismissed upon suspicion of trying to build a Scottish party among the army.28 He returned to Scotland several times thereafter, serving as a volunteer in James’s campaign against the renegade Catholic Lord Maxwell in 1588, and journeying to attend the king’s wedding in the following year. The celebrations were abandoned, however, when storms delayed the arrival of the bride from Denmark. Fairfax joined further embassies to Scotland in 1590 and 1593.29 He also took part in the Rouen campaign of 1591, during which time he was knighted by Essex. In October 1593 he was appointed captain of a company under Sir Francis Vere, and thereafter campaigned in the Low Countries and at Cadiz in 1596.30

Fairfax returned to England in 1597. After raising recruits for service in Ireland, he was employed in the ordnance department at Berwick, where Ralph, 3rd Lord Eure†, warden of the Middle March, recommended him for appointment as deputy warden. In 1599 he was appointed a member of the Council in the North by lord president Burghley (Thomas Cecil†), who in the following year helped him settle a dispute with his half-brother Edward over their father’s will.31 Although a new appointee, Fairfax was one of the few local members of the Council young enough to play an active part in its affairs. Indeed, he later recalled ‘divers private conferences’ with Burghley on security matters, and acted as vice-president in the autumn of 1600. During this time, he defended Lord Eure against a ‘vile and base report’ sent to Burghley about the humiliation of Sir Thomas Hoby* by a party of drunken huntsmen led by Eure’s brother and son.32 Fairfax undoubtedly owed his return as knight of the shire for Yorkshire in 1601 to Burghley’s influence.

Many years after the event, Fairfax recalled being unable to serve under Essex in Ireland because of ‘an incident which I could not avoid, which concerned me and mine’. This undoubtedly referred to a protracted family quarrel over the Steeton estate, which his uncles Gabriel and Henry Fairfax had partitioned between themselves in 1568. Henry Fairfax’s son sold the manor of Owston Grange to Gabriel Fairfax’s son William, but Henry subsequently attempted to recover it by exploiting a loophole in his deed of assignation. On his death this claim passed to his widow Dorothy, who made Fairfax a trustee of her interest when she remarried in August 1600. Her new husband, Richard Beverley, began a fresh suit against Gabriel Fairfax’s son William, but was thwarted, largely as a result of the opposition of Edmund, 3rd Baron Sheffield, whose daughter had married William’s son Philip. In September 1602 Sheffield accused Fairfax of circulating a letter demanding an apology for his partisan conduct, whereupon Fairfax denied that he was behind the letter. This was probably truthful, but Fairfax undoubtedly hoped to use the quarrel to further his own claims to the estate.33

Fairfax’s experience of the Scottish Court put him in a promising position at James’s accession. He later recounted that ‘after I had proclaimed His Majesty, I went into Scotland with six of my nearest kindred to swear loyalty to His Highness’, a demonstration of initiative rewarded with a place in the privy chamber. According to Burghley, Fairfax subsequently resolved to live at Court. His absence from Yorkshire, as well as Sheffield’s appointment as lord president, doubtless explain why Fairfax did not stand for Parliament in the spring of 1604.34 Fairfax made little impression at Court; he was chosen to accompany the duke of Lennox on an embassy to France in November 1604, but asked to be exempted. Following the Gunpowder Plot, he encouraged Bishop Mathew of Durham to accept a promotion to the archbishopric of York and service as Prince Charles’s tutor, hoping ‘the king can be at less charge and more secure, having had in the late horrible treason too great an adventure in one ship’. However, nothing came of this ambitious plan.35

While at Court, Fairfax kept a close eye on the affairs of his Steeton cousins. After William Fairfax died in July 1603, the wardship of his son, Philip, was obtained by Sheffield, who pressed Richard Beverley to surrender his wife’s remaining interest in the Steeton estate in return for an annuity. However, Fairfax, as a trustee of Dorothy Beverley’s estate, initially refused to consent to this agreement, claiming that it would prejudice the reversion of the Steeton lands, which were to come to him when the 1557 lease expired in 1614. Eventually though, Fairfax waived his objections, thereby allowing Beverley to assign his interest to Philip Fairfax. It seems that Sheffield secured Fairfax’s co-operation on the understanding that when Philip, who was heavily indebted, began to sell off his lands, Fairfax would be offered first refusal. Thus in April 1608 Fairfax was able to purchase Bilborough manor from Philip. The newfound accord between Fairfax and Sheffield was cemented in the following autumn, when Sheffield married one of his daughters to Fairfax’s heir, Sir Ferdinando*.36

Even after his son’s marriage, Fairfax remained dissatisfied with the agreement over the Steeton estate, complaining to the 7th earl of Shrewsbury (Gilbert Talbot†) that ‘I have finished all my suits with a poor composition’. He took the precaution of choosing Shrewsbury and Burghley (now 1st earl of Exeter) as trustees for the marriage settlement, in the hope that they ‘would not be overruled’ by Sheffield ‘or any other’. Meanwhile, Sheffield lost patience with Philip Fairfax, now knighted, who had burdened his estate with a large number of leases. In March 1612 Sheffield apologized to Fairfax for the ‘evil course’ adopted by his son-in-law, and informed him that Sir Philip would sell Steeton if he could make good his title. He added that, if this were to happen, ‘I rather wish it to you than to any other (being the seat of your ancestors)’. In the following month, Fairfax bought the manors of Toulston and Newton Kyme from his cousin for £500, a price which reflected the level of debt with which the estate was charged, and Sir Philip later sold him the manor of Bolton Percy. The encumbrances on the Steeton inheritance took many years to clear: as late as 1625, Fairfax was fighting Beverley’s heir over arrears of the annuity the latter had been promised in 1607.37

While the recovery of the Steeton estate was Fairfax’s main concern during the first half of James’s reign, his military experience left him with a lasting interest in foreign affairs. He maintained a regular correspondence with old comrades in arms such as Sir John Ogle, governor of Utrecht, in whose care he placed his son William, and Sir Horatio Vere, into whose regiment his son was later commissioned.38 He was a strong supporter of the German Evangelical Union, and also of the Dutch, whom he saw as England’s first line of defence against the expansionist policies of Habsburg Catholicism. In 1614, during the J├╝lich-Cleves crisis, he considered taking up a command in a planned English expeditionary force, and six years later he joined the army gathering in Holland for the relief of the Palatinate, perhaps with the encouragement of the Scottish diplomat James Hay, Viscount Doncaster.39 According to his son William, Fairfax was greeted ‘with very great respect, the memory of his former actions as well in these parts as in France being the chiefest cause thereof’, but he only spent a short time in the field, leaving for England upon news of his wife’s death.40

Although all of Fairfax’s children were fully grown, those of his eldest son Sir Ferdinando had lived at Denton since the death of their mother in 1619. Sir Ferdinando’s frequent absences at Westminster made domestic life difficult for Fairfax, particularly after his wife’s death, and in 1621 he chided his son for his reluctance to remarry: ‘consider what a father you have that is contented to want a nurse for myself, and to undergo the care of housekeeping, that I may be a nurse to your children’. This admonition went unheeded, however, and Fairfax was forced to adapt to the burdens of a second parenthood. Indeed, he even considered a fresh marriage for himself in 1626, which upset Sir Ferdinando, who feared that further siblings would diminish his own inheritance.41 Fairfax returned to Yorkshire in time for the parliamentary elections in the autumn of 1620. His support was earnestly canvassed on behalf of Sir Thomas Wentworth* and secretary of state (Sir) George Calvert* by both Henry, Lord Clifford* and Wentworth himself, who asked him to muster his supporters at Tadcaster on the eve of the election, ‘that so we may go into York together’. Although some of their tenants were then at loggerheads over common rights, Fairfax almost certainly backed Wentworth, whose ‘nearest and dearest’ cousin George Wentworth of Woolley was shortly to marry his daughter Anne.42 His decision was particularly significant as most of his estates lay close to York, and thus his tenants could be expected to turn out in large numbers.

The cost of a confessional war came home to Fairfax in the autumn of 1621, when his sons William and John were killed in the defence of Frankenthal. News also arrived of the death of another son in the Levant, and it eventually emerged that a fourth, who had gone to France in the summer of 1621 as a member of Viscount Doncaster’s embassy, had been robbed and killed while attempting to smuggle a message into the Huguenot stronghold of Montauban. Over the next few years Ogle, then in London, sent Fairfax a series of gloomy assessments of foreign affairs. In April 1623, with Prince Charles in Madrid, and the conclusion of the Spanish Match apparently inevitable, Ogle sarcastically noted that ‘some are of so little faith as they will not believe that the marriage etc.; God send us our Prince well home again’.43 Official policy was quickly reversed following the prince’s return to England later that year without a Spanish bride, a change Fairfax welcomed with a tract entitled ‘A Highway to Heidelberg’, in which he set out the grounds of his own hostility to Spain. He portrayed the pope as an absolute monarch in spiritual affairs, who abused his prerogative in persecuting Protestant dissenters, and characterized the king of Spain, who ‘doth hold his whole estate by his sword’, as Rome’s secular equivalent. He warned that the fall of the Low Countries would spell disaster for England’s allies, and advocated the hiring of a continental army to reinforce the Dutch. Although addressed to the princes of Europe, a preface found elsewhere in Fairfax’s papers suggests that this tract was intended for presentation to King James, perhaps in April 1624, when Count Mansfeld was in London lobbying for English subsidies. It may also have been drafted at the entreaty of Viscount Doncaster, now earl of Carlisle, one of Mansfeld’s warmest advocates. However, there is no evidence that it was ever presented, probably because of the surprising speed with which James agreed to raise an army for Mansfeld.44

In the spring of 1625, Fairfax joined William Mallory* in standing against Sir John Savile* for the knighthood of the shire, possibly because he disapproved of the anti-war stance Savile had adopted in Parliament in 1624. He was outraged when Savile’s chaplain accused Mallory of Catholic sympathies, but when the latter resigned he quickly paired with Wentworth. On the day of the election the opposing parties were so evenly matched that the sheriff, Sir Richard Cholmley*, was forced to undertake a poll. This was abandoned when Savile disrupted the proceedings, whereupon Cholmley returned his allies Wentworth and Fairfax, to whom he was related through the Belasyse family. Savile petitioned against Cholmley’s decision, and the committee for privileges spent much of the first two weeks of the session debating the issue. According to (Sir) John Eliot*, Wentworth assumed sole responsibility for defending their case, ‘his colleague in that service [Fairfax] being but passive in the work, and so involved with him as what was accidental to the one was necessarily contingent to the other’. Savile proved more than a match for his opponents, however, and the election was overturned on 5 July.45 Wentworth quickly prepared for a fresh contest, but Fairfax was apparently more reluctant. On 15 July, Wentworth proposed that, as in 1620, they should gather their supporters at Tadcaster on the eve of the election, but Fairfax had not replied to this suggestion ten days later. The two men ultimately proved successful, and on 1 Aug. they were declared re-elected after ‘a tedious and troublesome polling’.46

Aside from his involvement in the election dispute, Fairfax left little trace on the Commons’ proceedings. However, on 30 June he apparently seconded Sir Robert Phelips’ proposal to give just two subsidies. This was a derisory sum with which to set out the fleet, and while Phelips, an opponent of the war, had an obvious motive to make such a motion, Fairfax’s support is more difficult to explain. He may have been dismayed by the disintegration of Mansfeld’s English army, paid for by the 1624 subsidies, or concerned about the likely impact of further taxation on an economy already disrupted by war and the plague. Fairfax did not speak again, but his papers contain a petition asking him to promote a bill to curb the practice whereby Yorkshire freeholders were fined for failing to appear at the assizes, ‘the officers and bailiffs well knowing that the pleading of such a cause will cost them [the freeholders] more than the fine’. This was presumably the bill ‘for ease of freeholders in the county of York’ which received a single reading on 25 June. Fairfax left no trace on the Oxford sitting, being readmitted to the Commons only four days before the dissolution.47

While Wentworth’s appointment as sheriff prevented him from standing against Savile in 1626, Fairfax stood aside in favour of his son-in-law, Sir William Constable, 1st bt.*, who was paired with Wentworth’s neighbour Sir Francis Wortley*. The rival factions apparently reached an agreement on the morning of the election whereby Savile and Constable were returned unopposed. However, only weeks later Savile revived the dispute over the 1625 election by filing a Star Chamber bill against his erstwhile opponents. Fairfax dismissed the charges as ‘stinking lies’, but confessed ‘I sit upon thorns till this bill be answered’; the case lingered on file until 1629.48 At the same time, Fairfax approached lord president Scrope to be discharged from a Privy Seal loan of £50; as he was not involved in the collection of the loan, his plea was rejected. Ironically, it was his enemy Savile who subsequently secured a general reduction for Yorkshire.49 When a much larger Benevolence was demanded in September 1626, Fairfax noted that all but one of the subsidymen, ‘whose offer was unworthy the mentioning’, had protested their inability to contribute, blaming the poor harvest, the charges of the militia and of the subsidies voted in 1624 and 1625.50

The Benevolence was quickly superseded by the Forced Loan. Fairfax served as a commissioner for the West Riding, and reported Wentworth, among others, for refusing to pay. His assistance in collecting the Loan was undoubtedly secured by the offer of a Scottish barony, probably made at the suggestion of Savile, now a privy councillor and a leading supporter of the duke of Buckingham, who was worried that Fairfax would join Wentworth and Constable in refusing to pay the Loan, and thereby provoke a general revolt among the Yorkshire gentry. Although Fairfax may have been troubled by his defection, he clearly coveted a peerage to match the elevation of his nephew Sir Thomas Belasyse* to an English barony. Moreover, the honour also served to elevate him above Sir Thomas Fairfax II*, head of the senior branch of the family.51 Fairfax’s patent was sealed in October 1627, which left him free to oppose Savile at the general election of March 1628, when he supported the pairing of Wentworth and Belasyse’s son Henry* for the county seats. Savile exacted a measure of revenge for his defeat by encouraging Lord Colville to pester Fairfax for additional fees and charges for the sealing of his patent, but Fairfax stood his ground, and the quarrel apparently petered out as Savile’s star waned at Court.52

In December 1628 Wentworth succeeded Scrope as lord president. Fairfax offered him his congratulations, and asked to ‘be commanded some service by your Lordship wherein I may express my humble affection in more than paper’. Wentworth asked Fairfax to deputize for him at York as vice-president in the following month, an honour he was obliged to decline because of ill health. The two men remained on amicable terms throughout the 1630s, despite Wentworth’s quarrel with Henry Belasyse, who allegedly snubbed Wentworth at a Council meeting at York by turning his back to talk to Fairfax. In 1630, Fairfax unsuccessfully lobbied Wentworth to revive the office of master of the Ordnance at Berwick for his son Sir Ferdinando. The post could pay for itself, he claimed, if charges were imposed upon the North Sea herring boats for safe haven, and provisions were sold to the fishermen.53

Fairfax’s health gradually deteriorated during the 1630s: forced to cancel a militia muster because of an attack of the stone, he asked Wentworth ‘to appoint another in my place, who may better do the service, though none hath more desire to’. This request was perhaps not to be taken too seriously, but he eventually resigned from the lieutenancy in 1633. Although he remained a militia colonel until his death, it was Sir Ferdinando who led his regiment against the Scots in 1639.54 While confined to Denton by his infirmities, Fairfax continued to study foreign affairs, and took great interest in the upbringing of his favourite grandson Sir Thomas†, the future general. In his last surviving letter, addressed to Wentworth and written in the summer of 1638, he made a final, touching appeal to be relieved of his offices, ‘for it is an old saying where there is nothing to be had the king must lose his right, yet I have a heart that always shall be loyal to my sovereign and obedient to my superiors’.55

Fairfax died on 1 May 1640. His will, drafted five years earlier, was relatively perfunctory, his lands having long since been entailed on his eldest son and grandson, and his other children provided with generous portions.56 His death allowed his son and grandson greater freedom to oppose Charles I, and both became prominent parliamentarians during the Civil War.

Ref Volumes: 1604-1629

Author: Simon Healy


  • 1. C142/261/26.
  • 2. Vis. Yorks. ed. Foster, 96-7; Vis. Yorks. (Harl. Soc. xvi), 120.
  • 3. Al. Cant.; LI Admiss.
  • 4. C142/229/128; Clay, Dugdale’s Vis. Yorks. ii. 188; Bodl. Top. Yorks. c. 43, f. 90v; Vis. Yorks. ed. Foster, 96-7; Yorks. Peds. (W. Riding) ed. J. Foster (Fairfax of Gilling, Denton etc.).
  • 5. Shaw, Knights of Eng. ii. 89.
  • 6. C142/261/26; C142/263/15/1.
  • 7. CP; Registrum Magnum Sigillum Scotorum, 1620-33, p. 404.
  • 8. C142/600/124.
  • 9. R. Strong and J.A. van Dorsten, Leicester’s Triumph (Sir Thomas Browne Inst. pubs. spec. ser. ii), 116; HMC Dudley and De L’Isle, iii. p. xxxiv.
  • 10. Fairfax Corresp. ed. G.W. Johnson, i. 13; Shaw, ii. 89.
  • 11. CSP For. 1593-4, pp. 153-4; Longleat, Devereux Pprs. vol. 1, ff. 89-90.
  • 12. Sotheby’s, Fairfax sale 13 Dec. 1993, lot 414; Add. 28082, f. 80; Add. 36293, f. 31v.
  • 13. CBP, ii. 70-1.
  • 14. Hatfield House, ms 278; C231/1, f. 45; C181/1, f. 7v.
  • 15. APC, 1598-9, p. 491; Yorks. Arch. Soc. DD56/L3, bdle. ‘Militia etc.’; Bodl. Fairfax 30, ff. 159v, 168v.
  • 16. R. Reid, Council in the North, 496; Add. 30305, ff. 15-17.
  • 17. C66/1509, m. 35 (dorse); C181/1, f. 19; 181/2, ff. 22v, 117.
  • 18. HMC Hatfield, xv. 394.
  • 19. C181/1, f. 106; 181/2, f. 127; 181/4, f. 82.
  • 20. CSP Dom. 1611-18, p. 300; APC, 1615-16, pp. 532-5.
  • 21. SP14/31/1; C212/22/20-23.
  • 22. APC, 1626-7, pp. 243-4; CSP Dom. 1627-8, p. 194.
  • 23. HMC Hatfield, xv. 106; APC, 1619-21, p. 264; Bodl. Fairfax 30, ff. 127, 159v.
  • 24. Vis. Yorks. ed. Foster, 96-7; H. Aveling, ‘Recusancy of Yorks. Fairfaxes’, Biog. Studs. iii. 70-1.
  • 25. C142/280/84; C2/Chas.I/B157/63; LPL, ms 3196, f. 85; ms 3206, f. 453; CSP Dom. 1547-80, p. 193; 1601-3, p. 516.
  • 26. Glamis Castle, Bowes Letter Bk. 3/31; C142/229/128.
  • 27. Fairfax Corresp. i. 12; CSP Scot. 1585-6, pp. 10, 63, 90.
  • 28. Fairfax Corresp. i. 12-13; HMC Dudley and De L’Isle, iii. p. xxxiv; HMC 9th Rep. ii. 421a.
  • 29. Fairfax Corresp. i. 13; G. Donaldson, Scotland: James V-James VII, 185-6; HMC Hatfield, iii. 360; M. Lee, John Maitland of Thirlestane, 163-5; APC, 1589-90, pp. 89-90; 1592-3, pp. 54-5.
  • 30. Shaw, ii. 89; CSP For. 1593-4, pp. 153-4; Longleat, Devereux Pprs. vol. 1, ff. 89-90; Add. 36293, ff. 3, 16.
  • 31. APC, 1598-9, p. 491; Fairfax Corresp. i. 13; CBP, ii. 369; SCL, Strafford Pprs. 12/108; HMC Hatfield, x. 32, 106.
  • 32. Fairfax Corresp. i. 13; Reid, 495-6; Add. 30305, f. 17; SIR THOMAS HOBY.
  • 33. SCL, Strafford Pprs. 13/57; C2/Chas.I/B157/63; 2/Chas.I/F15/50; Vis. Yorks. ed. Foster, 119; Fairfax Corresp. i. pp. xxi-xxii; HMC Hatfield, xii. 474-5.
  • 34. Fairfax Corresp. i. 14; HMC Hatfield, xv. 106.
  • 35. HMC Hatfield, xvi. 374; Add. 4274, f. 238; LPL, ms 708, f. 83.
  • 36. C142/280/84; STAC 8/142/9; C2/Jas.I/B24/61; C2/Chas.I/A18/32; 2/Chas.I/B157/63; 2/Chas.I/B162/18; Bodl. Fairfax 30, f. 127.
  • 37. LPL, ms 708, f. 55; Fairfax Corresp. i. pp. xxiv-xxvii; C2/Chas.I/B135/23; 2/Chas.I/B157/63; 2/Chas.I/B158/43; 2/Chas.I/B162/18; 2/Chas.I/F15/50; 2/Chas.I/F25/65; 2/Chas.I/F44/19.
  • 38. Bodl. Fairfax 30, ff. 154, 158, 161v, 167-8; Fairfax Corresp. i. pp. xxxi, lvii, 24.
  • 39. APC, 1619-21, p. 264; Eg. 2593, f. 175.
  • 40. Bodl. Fairfax 30, ff. 167-8; Fairfax Corresp. i. pp. xxxv-xxxvii.
  • 41. Fairfax Corresp. i. pp. xxxv, 57-61; Bodl. Fairfax 30, f. 148.
  • 42. Strafforde Letters (1739) ed. W. Knowler, i. 12; Wentworth Pprs. ed. J.P. Cooper (Cam. Soc. ser. 4. xii), 91-2, 159-60; Bodl. Fairfax 30, f. 150.
  • 43. Bodl. Fairfax 30, ff. 152, 158, 163.
  • 44. Bodl. Fairfax 34, f. 7; Add. 28326; T. Cogswell, Blessed Revolution, 238-45.
  • 45. Fairfax Corresp. i. 6-7; Bodl. Fairfax 34, f. 47; Procs. 1625, pp. 295, 314-15, 500; H. Cholmley, Memoirs (1787), pp. 23-4.
  • 46. Fairfax Corresp. i. 7-10; Cholmley, 24.
  • 47. Ibid. 245, 274-5, 423; C. Russell, PEP, 224-7; Bodl. Fairfax 34, f. 25.
  • 48. HMC Hodgkin, 43; Fairfax Corresp. i. 24-8; Wentworth Pprs. 250; Historical Collections ed. J. Rushworth, ii. 21.
  • 49. APC, 1625-6, pp. 421-2, 429; Fairfax Corresp. i. 24-8, 59-61.
  • 50. Fairfax Corresp. i. 73-4; R. Cust, Forced Loan, 94-9.
  • 51. APC, 1626-7, pp. 243-4; CSP Dom. 1627-8, p. 194; Fairfax Corresp. i. 15-18.
  • 52. Wentworth Pprs. 287; Fairfax Corresp. i. 15-18.
  • 53. SCL, Strafford Pprs. 12/46, 51-2, 108; APC, 1630-1, pp. 292-3.
  • 54. SCL, Strafford Pprs. 12/156, 13/57; Add. 28802, f. 80; Bodl. Fairfax 31, ff. 133-4; HMC Cowper, ii. 228-9.
  • 55. SCL, Strafford Pprs. 18/111.
  • 56. C142/600/124; Borthwick, Original Wills, Ainsty, May 1640.