ABNEY, Sir Edward (1631-1728), of Willesley Hall, Leics. and Portugal Row, Lincoln’s Inn Fields.

Published in The History of Parliament: the House of Commons 1690-1715, ed. D. Hayton, E. Cruickshanks, S. Handley, 2002
Available from Boydell and Brewer



1690 - 1698

Family and Education

b. 6 Feb. 1631, 2nd but 1st surv. s. of James Abney of I. Temple and Willesley, sheriff of Derbys. 1656, by 1st w. Jane, da. of Edward Mainwaring of Whitmore, Staffs.; bro. of Sir Thomas Abney*.  educ. Ashby-de-la-Zouche (Mr Porter) and Measham (Mr Houlton) schs.; Christ’s, Camb. 1649, BA 1652–3, MA 1656, LL.D. 1661, fellow 1655–?70.  m. (1) 21 July 1661, Damaris (d.1687), da. of Thomas Andrewes, fellow of Christ’s, Camb., 1s. (pres. d.v.p.) 3da.; (2) 18 Dec. 1688, Judith, da. and coh. of Peter Barr, merchant, of London, 2s. (1 d.v.p.).  Kntd. 2 Aug. 1673; suc. fa. 1693.1

Offices Held

Clerk in Chancery 1670–82; commr. of public accts. 1694–5.2

Freeman, Leicester 1690; Fishmongers’ Co. 1696.3


A branch of the Abney family had been established at Willesley since at least the early 15th century. Abney’s father had participated in the Royalist defence of Ashby Castle in 1645. Before entering the House at the age of almost 60, Edward Abney’s career was devoted to civil law. Initially he pursued an academic existence at Cambridge, having been allowed to retain his fellowship at Christ’s after marrying the stepdaughter of the college’s master, Dr Ralph Cudworth, the eminent Platonist theologian. Until 1662 his elder brother was still living and consequently the retention of this post was clearly of importance, especially as his marriage brought him no property. He was re-elected a fellow again in 1669, but in the year following obtained a highly lucrative place as one of the six clerks in Chancery.4

In 1685 Abney, a Presbyterian, stood for Leicestershire but was defeated. It was rumoured during the electoral preparations early in 1690 that he was to stand at Tamworth but in fact he stood for Leicester where initially his chances were considered doubtful, the corporation being dominated by Churchmen, ‘t