ACLAND, Sir Hugh, 1st or 5th Bt. (c.1639-1714), of Killerton, Devon.
Available from Boydell and Brewer
Family and Education
b. c.1639, 4th s. of Sir John Acland, styled 1st Bt., of Columbjohn by Elizabeth, da. of Sir Francis Vincent†, 1st Bt., of Stoke d’Abernon, Surr. educ. Exeter, Oxf. 1652, BA 1655. m. lic. 19 Mar. 1674, aged 35, Anne, da. of Sir Thomas Daniel of Beswick Hall, Yorks., 6s. (2 d.v.p.) 1da. suc. nephew 1672; cr. Bt. 21 Jan. 1678 with precedence from 24 June 1644.1
J.p. Devon 1670-July 1688, Oct. 1688-96, 1700-2, ?1704-d., South Molton 1684; commr. for assessment, Devon 1673-80, 1689-90, recusants 1675; freeman, Exeter 1675; dep. lt. Devon 1676-July 1688, 1703-?d., col. of militia ft. by 1680-?July 1688; j.p. and alderman, Tiverton 1683-7, mayor 1686-7; commr. for rebels’ estates, Devon 1686, sheriff 1690-1.2
Acland’s family had been seated in Devon since the 12th century and first entered Parliament in 1586. His father, a commissioner of array, was in arms for the King in the early days of the Civil War, and was awarded a baronetcy in 1644 for his loyalty and financial support; but the patent failed to pass the seals. He compounded on the Exeter articles in 1646 and was fined £1,727.3
Acland succeeded to an estate of £2,000 p.a. in 1672, and next year stood unsuccessfully at a by-election for Tiverton, eight miles from his home. He was created a baronet in 1678 with the precedence of the original warrant, and returned for Barnstaple at the first general election of 1679. An inactive Member of the first Exclusion Parliament, he was added to the committee to consider a petition from a pamphleteer who had aroused the wrath of the exclusionists, and made no recorded speeches. Listed as ‘base’ by Shaftesbury, he was given leave on 28 Apr. and was absent from the division on the exclusion bill. Defeated for the county in 1681, he returned to Tiverton for the general election of 1685, and was elected as a Tory. He was again inactive in James II’s Parliament, in which he was appointed only to the committees to prevent the exportation of wool and to enable a local gentleman to change his name. He gave the same negative answers as Sir Edward Seymour in 1688 on the repeal of the Penal Laws and Test Act and was removed from county office.4
Acland never sat again after the Revolution. He appears to have taken the oaths to the new regime, but he refused to sign the Association in 1696, and desired to be excused from the lieutenancy in 1701, probably because of a quarrel with Edward Seymour. He was buried at Broad Clyst on 9 Mar. 1714. His son John, who sat for Callington in Queen Anne’s first Parliament, had predeceased him, but his grandson, the 6th baronet, represented Barnstaple as a Tory from 1721 to 1727.5
Ref Volumes: 1660-1690
Author: J. S. Crossette
- 1. Vivian, Vis. Devon, 4; CSP Dom. 1676-77, p. 326.
- 2. SP44/335/234, 373; A. Jenkins, Hist. Exeter, 175; M. Dunsford, Hist. Mems. Tiverton, 194, 449; PC2/72/535; Cal. Treas. Bks. viii. 546.
- 3. Cal. Comm. Comp. 1221; HMC Portland, i. 588; Clarendon, Rebellion, iii. 87; CSP Dom. 1661-2, p. 618; J. Prince, Worthies of Devon, 4.
- 4. L. Magalotti, Travels of Cosmo III, 129; CJ, ix. 358; CSP Dom. 1680-1, p. 199.
- 5. HMC 13th Rep. VI, 40; HMC Portland, iv. 134; Exeter city act bk. 10, f. 415; Rokeby Diary, 30; CSP Dom. 1700-2, p. 251.