STRICKLAND, Sir William, 3rd Bt. (1665-1724), of Boynton, Yorks.
Available from Boydell and Brewer
Family and Education
b. Mar. 1665, 1st s. of Sir Thomas Strickland, 2nd Bt.†, by Elizabeth, da. and coh. of Sir Francis Pile, 2nd Bt., of Compton Beauchamp, Berks. educ. Exeter, Oxf. 1680. m. 28 Aug. 1684, Elizabeth, da. and h. of William Palmes of Lindley, Yorks., 1s. suc. fa. 20 Nov. 1684.
J.p. Yorks. (E. and N. Ridings) 1689-d., commr. for assessment 1689-90; sheriff, Yorks. 1698-9; dep. lt. (N. Riding) 1699-?d.1
Although the families of Sizergh and Boynton intermarried, it is not clear whether they were originally of the same stock. Strickland’s ancestor acquired Boynton in 1549, and as MP for Scarborough was a prominent Elizabethan puritan. Parliamentarians during the Civil Wars, both his grandfather and great-uncle were called by Cromwell to his ‘Other House’, and his father sat for Beverley in 1659. Despite this, the family was unmolested at the Restoration and in the years that followed lived quietly on its estates.2
In 1683 Strickland was bound over to appear at the assizes for having connived in the escape of the Scottish Whig Sir John Cochrane. No proceedings seem to have been taken against him on that score, but the Government continued to regard him as disaffected, and orders were issued on Monmouth’s invasion to take him into custody at Hull. During the Revolution he accompanied the Hon. Thomas Fairfax to Leeds to collect contributions for William of Orange. He was returned for Malton in 1689 upon the interest of his father-in-law, whose Whig politics he shared. In the Convention he spoke twice in the debates on the bill of indemnity, advocating strong action against all who had served under James, and on 24 June he led demands for the House to look further into the arrest of Peregrine Osborne. He was not an active committeeman, being appointed to twelve committees, of which the most important were to consider the Lords’ amendments to the bill of rights and settlement and to examine the state of the public revenue. He was listed among those who supported the disabling clause in the bill to restore corporations. Subsequently he became a junto Whig. He died on 12 May 1724. His son, who had previously sat for Malton and Carlisle, represented Scarborough from 1722 to 1735, acting as one of the leading government spokesmen in the Commons.3