WASTENEYS (WASTNEYS), Sir Hardolph, 4th Bt. (1674-1742), of Headon, Notts. and Bilsby, Lincs.
Available from Boydell and Brewer
Family and Education
bap. 19 Feb. 1674, s. of Sir Edmund Wasteneys, 3rd Bt., of Headon by Catherine, da. of Col. William Sandys of Askham, Yorks. educ. L. Inn 1694. m. settlement 1699, Judith, da. and h. of Col. Richard Johnson of Bilsby, Lincs., s.p. suc. fa. as 4th Bt. 12 Mar. 1678.1
The Wasteneys family may have been resident at Headon from at least as early as Edward III’s reign. From 1700, when he was appointed to the deputy-lieutenancy, Wasteneys played a full role in county administration, although he possessed sufficient influence to avoid the shrievalty of Lincolnshire in 1702. His political interests centred on East Retford, his seat at Headon lying only a few miles to the south-east of the borough. He stood with Robert Molesworth* in the 1705 election, but they were defeated by their Tory opponents. On petitioning the Commons they were seated on 17 Jan. 1706. During his career in Parliament he was appointed to no committees of importance, but was present on 18 Feb. 1706 to support the Court over the ‘place clause’ of the regency bill. He was granted leave of absence on 31 Jan. 1708 for one month. His Whiggish outlook was noted on two parliamentary lists in 1708. All was not well, however, between Wasteneys and his main patron at East Retford, the Duke of Newcastle (John Holles†). Wasteneys and John Thornhagh* wished to petition Parliament for legislation to curb the depredations of the deer in Sherwood forest which Newcastle opposed for fear of upsetting the Queen. When John White* was quizzed by William Jessop* in October 1707 about the next election, he was reported to have said that ‘he was sensible Sir Hardolph had acclaimed himself so not only to your Grace but to all mankind that it would be ridiculous for him ever to attempt to come in at Retford again’. Accordingly, he did not stand in 1708, voting against his erstwhile partner Molesworth, who retained Newcastle’s backing, and thus helping to elect a Tory. The repercussions of this dispute were still apparent in the county election of 1710 when Wasteneys voted for Thornhagh and William Levinz* (the Tory victor at East Retford in 1708).2
Wasteneys did not stand after 1708, but continued to be active in local affairs as a deputy-lieutenant and justice. He was able to avoid a commission in the militia in 1715 by pointing out that he was a stranger to all military discipline, ‘nor have I any time to spare to qualify myself for such a command, having much business in Lincolnshire, and acting as justice of the peace in this county’. However, he subsequently accepted a commission to captain a voluntary troop of horse raised at Worksop in response to the Fifteen. In the county election of 1722 he voted for both Whig candidates. Wasteneys died at his Nottinghamshire seat on 17 Dec. 1742, whereupon the baronetcy became extinct. In his will he left the bulk of his estate in trust for his niece, the wife of Robert Sutton of Scofton, Nottinghamshire.3
Ref Volumes: 1690-1715
Author: Stuart Handley
- 1. IGI, Notts.; info. from Dr D. F. Lemmings; NRA Rep. 12643 (Eyre of Grove), p. 2.
- 2. Thoroton’s Notts. iii. 251; CSP Dom. 1700–2, p. 35; 1702–3, p. 524; Add. 70025, ff. 62–63; Notts. RO, Foljambe pprs. DDFJ11/1/1, f. 17, Wasteneys to St. Andrew Thornhagh; Notts. RO, Portland mss DD4P64/21/2, Jessop to [Newcastle], 22 Oct. 1707; Pollbks. of Nottingham and Notts. 1710 (Thoroton Soc. Rec. Ser. xviii), 52.
- 3. Add. 32686, ff. 41–42, 57, 65, 75–76, 81, 90, 241; Notts. Co. Recs. 18th Cent. ed. Meaby, 32, 45; Notts. Pollbk. 1722 (IHR), 26; London Mag. 1742, p. 624; Nottingham Univ. Lib. Ey. 270.