Part 33

Perhaps, after all, like Captain Absolute, John Paston had more a mind of his own in the matter than might be inferred from his giving so many commissions to another to negotiate a wife for him. At all events, if he had not made up his mind before, he seems really to have made it up now, and he steered his way between difficulties on the one side and on the other with a good deal of curious diplomacy, for which we may refer the reader to the letters themselves.[302-3] In the end, though Sir John seems to have been in vain urged by his mother to show himself more liberal,[302-4] all other obstacles were removed, and during the autumn of the year 1477 the marriage took effect.[302-5]

[Footnote 302-3: Nos. 901, 904, 905, 913, 915.]

[Footnote 302-4: No. 916.]

[Footnote 302-5: No. 923.]

Before Christmas in that same year, it had become apparent that children would soon follow of their union;[302-6] and after the New Year John Paston took Margery to her father’s house to be with her friends a short time, while yet she could go about with ease.[302-7] Their eldest child was born in the following summer, and received the name of Christopher.[302-8] Other children followed very soon,[303-1] and by the time they had been seven years married, John and Margery Paston had two lads old enough to be sent on messages,[303-2] besides, in all probability, one or more daughters. It was, however, their second son, William,[303-3] that continued their line, and became the ancestor of the future Earls of Yarmouth.

[Footnote 302-6: _Ibid._]

[Footnote 302-7: No. 925.]

[Footnote 302-8: No. 936.]

[Footnote 303-1: No. 982.]

[Footnote 303-2: No. 999.]

[Footnote 303-3: He was a lawyer of some eminence, received the honour of knighthood from Henry VIII., and was Sheriff of Norfolk in 1517-18. He died in 1554. It was his grandson, another Sir William, whose name is so well known in Norfolk as the founder of the North Walsham Grammar School.]

[Sidenote: The Duke of Suffolk again gives trouble.] In the spring of 1478 Sir John Paston was again involved in a dispute with a powerful nobleman. The Duke of Suffolk revived his old claim to Hellesdon and Drayton, and ventured to sell the woods to Richard Ferror, the Mayor of Norwich, who thereupon began to cut them down. Sir John brought the matter into Chancery, and hastened up to London. Ferror professed great regret, and said he had no idea but that the manor was in peaceable possession of the duke, adding that if Sir John had sent him the slightest warning, he would have refrained from making such a bargain. This, however, was a mere pretence; for, as Sir John remarked to his brother, he must certainly have spoken about the matter beforehand with some well-informed men in Norwich, who would have set him right.[303-4] At all events Ferror went on with what he had begun, and nearly the whole of Drayton wood was felled by Corpus Christi Day, the 20th day of May. Whetley, a servant of Sir John Paston, who had been sent down from London on the business, writes on that day to his master that the duke had made a formal entry into Hellesdon on Wednesday in Whitsun week. He dined at the manor-house, ‘drew a stew, and took plenty of fish.’ I suppose from what follows that he also held a court as lord of the manor. ‘At his being there that day,’ writes Whetley, ‘there was never no man that played Herod in Corpus Christi play better and more agreeable to his pageant than he did. But ye shall understand that it was afternoon, and the weather hot, and he so feeble for sickness that his legs would not bear him, but there was two men had great pain to keep him on his feet. And there ye were judged. Some said “Slay”; some said “Put him in prison.” And forth come my lord, and he would meet you with a spear, and have none other ’mends for the trouble ye have put him to but your heart’s blood, and that will he get with his own hands; for and ye have Hellesdon and Drayton, ye shall have his life with it.’[304-1]

[Footnote 303-4: Nos. 929, 930.]

[Footnote 304-1: No. 932.]

It appears, however, that the Duke of Suffolk was not in high favour with the king, and it was considered at this time that Sir John Paston’s influence at court was very high. Although the affair with Anne Haute had been broken off, it was expected that he would marry some one nearly related to the queen’s family; and Margaret Paston thought it a strong argument for the match, if her son could find it in his heart to love the lady, that it would probably set at rest the question of his title to Hellesdon and Drayton.[304-2] This ambitious hope was not destined to be gratified. We know not even who the lady was that is thus referred to; and as to the dispute with the Duke of Suffolk, it remained unsettled at least a year and a half--in fact, as long as Sir John Paston lived.[304-3]

[Footnote 304-2: No. 933.]

[Footnote 304-3: No. 956.]

[Sidenote: The manor of Oxnead.] Two or three months after the beginning of this dispute, William Paston the uncle accompanied the Duke of Buckingham into Norfolk on pilgrimage to the shrine of Our Lady at Walsingham. At his coming he brought a report that there was likely also to be trouble in the manor of Oxnead, which belonged to his mother Agnes, the widow of the judge. The nature of this trouble is not stated; but apparently it was either occasioned, like the other, by a claim of the Duke of Suffolk, or it was feared the duke might attempt to profit by it. ‘Wherefore I pray you,’ writes Sir John Paston to his brother, ‘take heed lest that the Duke of Suffolk’s council play therewith now at the vacation of the benefice, as they did with the benefice of Drayton, which by the help of Mr. John Salett and Donne, his men, there was a quest made by the said Donne that found that the Duke of Suffolk was very patron, which was false; yet they did it for an evidence.’ Whether the duke’s council attempted the same policy on this occasion, we cannot say; but by some means or other the Paston family were hindered from exercising their right of presentation, so that they very nearly lost it. A rector named Thomas, presented to the living by Agnes Paston three years before, died in March 1478. On the 5th August following, Agnes Paston made out letters of presentation in favour of Dr. Richard Lincoln, but for some reason or other this presentation did not pass; and eight days later she presented a certain Sir William Holle, who we are told ran away. Her rights, however, were contested; and after the benefice had remained more than a year vacant, some insisted that it had lapsed to the bishop by the patron not having exercised her rights within six months. She had, however, as a matter of fact, delivered Sir William Holle his presentation within that period; and though he did not avail himself of it, she was, after a good deal of trouble, allowed to present again.[305-1]

[Footnote 305-1: Nos. 934, 935, 936, 937, 943.]

[Sidenote: Walter Paston.] In the spring of 1478 Margaret Paston had a serious illness, and, thinking that it would carry her off, she made her will. She lived, however, six years longer, and the will she had made was superseded by another dated on the 4th of February 1482.[305-2] For in the interval considerable changes took place in the family, which we shall mention presently. At this time she had five, if not six, sons and two daughters, but the daughters were both of them married; and, as we have already intimated, she was particularly anxious about her son Walter, who was now at Oxford being educated for the priesthood.[305-3] He had not yet taken orders, when his mother, finding some benefice vacant, of which she expected to have the disposal,[305-4] thought of conferring it upon him, and took advice upon the matter of Dr. Pykenham, Judge of the Court of Arches. She was told, however, that her intention was quite against the canon law for three reasons: first, because her son had not received the tonsure, which was popularly called Benet; secondly, he had not attained the lawful age of four-and-twenty; and thirdly, he would require to take priest’s orders within a twelvemonth after presentation to the benefice, unless he had a dispensation from the Pope, which Dr. Pykenham felt sure he could never obtain.[306-1] His progress at Oxford, however, seems to have given satisfaction to his tutor, Edmund Alyard, who reports on the 4th March 1479 that he might take a bachelor’s degree in art when he pleased, and afterwards proceed to the faculty of law.[306-2] This course he intended to pursue; and he took his degree at Midsummer accordingly,[306-3] then returned home to Norwich for the vacation. His career, however, was arrested by sudden illness, and he died in August. He left a will, hastily drawn up before his death, by which it appears that he was possessed of the manor of Cressingham, which he bequeathed to his brother John Paston, with a proviso that if ever he came to inherit the lands of his father it should go to his other brother Edmund. He also possessed a flock of sheep at Mautby, which he desired might be divided between his sister Anne Yelverton and his sister-in-law Margery, John Paston’s wife.[306-4]

[Footnote 305-2: Nos. 932, 978.]

[Footnote 305-3: No. 931.]

[Footnote 305-4: Oxnead, which was certainly vacant at the date which I have supposed to be that of Margaret Paston’s application to Dr. Pykenham, was in her mother-in-law Agnes Paston’s gift; but it is not at all unlikely that this was the living in question, as she may reasonably have expected to be able to prevail upon the old lady to give it to her grandson.]

[Footnote 306-1: No. 941.]

[Footnote 306-2: No. 949.]

[Footnote 306-3: Nos. 945, 946.]

[Footnote 306-4: No. 950.]

[Sidenote: Clement.] Of Margaret Paston’s other sons one named Clement is mentioned in Fenn’s pedigree of the family; but he is nowhere spoken of in the correspondence. I presume that Fenn was not without authority for inserting his name in the family tree, and I have surmised that he was one of the ‘young soldiers,’ about whom Margaret Paston was solicitous, who went over to Calais in 1475. He may perhaps have died soon after. The absence of his name, especially in his mother’s will, is at least strong presumptive evidence that he was not alive in 1482. [Sidenote: Edmund and William.] Edmund Paston, another brother, was probably of about the same age as Walter, perhaps a year or two older; and the youngest of the family was William, who in the beginning of the year 1479 was learning to make Latin verses at Eton.[306-5] He must have been at this time barely nineteen years of age;[306-6] but he had precociously fallen in love with a certain Margaret Alborow. He writes to his brother John Paston how he first became acquainted with her at the marriage of her elder sister,--that she was not more than eighteen or nineteen (which was just about his own age); that she was to have a portion in money and plate whenever she was married, but he was afraid no ‘livelode’ or lands till after her mother’s decease. His brother John, however, could find out that by inquiry.[307-1] As might have been expected, this calf-love came to nothing. I do not know if William Paston ever married at all. At a more advanced age his brother Edmund writes to him offering to visit on his behalf a widow, who had just ‘fallen’ at Worsted, whose deceased husband had been worth £1000, and had left her 100 marks in money, with plate of the same value, and £10 a year in land.[307-2]

[Footnote 306-5: No. 942. _See_ a previous letter of his, No. 939, and also a notice of his schooling as early as August 1477, when Margaret Paston writes to Sir John to pay for his board and school-hire, gowns, and other necessaries (No. 917).]

[Footnote 306-6: No. 842.]

[Footnote 307-1: No. 942.]

[Footnote 307-2: No. 974.]

For Edmund Paston himself the same kind of office had been performed in 1478 by his brother John, who, having heard while in London of ‘a goodly young woman to marry,’ spoke with some of her friends, and got their consent to her marrying his brother. She was a mercer’s daughter, and was to have a portion of £200 in ready money, and 20 marks a year in land after the decease of a stepmother, who was close upon fifty. This match, however, did not take effect, and about three years later Edmund Paston married Catherine, the widow of William Clippesby.[307-3]

[Footnote 307-3: No. 975. There is an oversight in the preliminary note to this letter. The date is certainly 1481, and no later, as Margaret Paston in her will makes bequests not only to Edmund and his wife Catherine, but to their son Robert, who must therefore have been born before February 1482.]

[Sidenote: Death of Agnes Paston;] The year 1479 was, like several of the years preceding, one of great mortality, and it was marked by several deaths in the Paston family. The grave had not yet closed over Walter Paston, when news came to Norwich of the death of his grandmother, old Agnes Paston, the widow of the judge. At the same time John Paston’s wife, Margery, gave birth, in her husband’s absence, to a child that died immediately after it was born.[307-4] This perhaps was a mere accidental coincidence. Two months later Sir John Paston found it necessary to go up to London on business, partly, it would seem, about his dispute with the Duke of Suffolk, and partly, perhaps, to keep watch on the proceedings of his uncle William with regard to the lands of his grandmother; for it appears that his uncle, who immediately on his mother’s death laid claim to the manor of Marlingford,[308-1] had been making certain applications to the escheator on the subject, which were naturally viewed with jealousy. On his arrival in town, Sir John found his chamber ill ventilated, and his ‘stuff not so clean’ as he had expected. He felt uneasy for fear of the prevailing sickness, and some disappointments in money matters added sensibly to his discomfort.[308-2] [Sidenote: and of Sir John Paston.] He fell ill, and died in November. John Paston was on the point of riding up to London to have brought down his body with that of his grandmother, who had been kept unburied nearly three months, to lay them both in Bromholm Priory, beside his father. But he was met by a messenger, who told him that his brother had already been buried at the White Friars, in London.[308-3]

[Footnote 307-4: No. 952.]

[Footnote 308-1: No. 953.]

[Footnote 308-2: No. 956.]

[Footnote 308-3: No. 962.]

[[Sidenote: Death of Agnes Paston; _not an error: sentence continues later_]]

We cannot close the record of Sir John Paston’s life without a certain feeling of regret. The very defects of his character give an interest to it which we do not feel in that of his father or of his brother John. He is a careless soldier, who loves adventure, has some influence at court, mortgages his lands, wastes his property, and is always in difficulties. Unsuccessful in love himself, he yet does a good deal of wooing and courting disinterestedly in behalf of a younger brother. He receives sprightly letters from his friends, with touches of broad humour occasionally, which are not worse than might be expected of the unrestrained freedom of the age.[308-4] He patronises literature too, and a transcriber copies books for him.[308-5] With his death the domestic interest of the Paston Letters almost comes to an end, and the quantity of the correspondence very greatly diminishes. The love-making, the tittle-tattle, and a good deal of the humour disappear, and the few desultory letters that remain relate, for the most part, either to politics or to business.

[Footnote 308-4: Nos. 906-908.]

[Footnote 308-5: No. 695.]

[Sidenote: The title to Marlingford and Oxnead.] As soon as the news of his death arrived in Norfolk, John Paston wrote to his mother, desiring that his brother Edmund would ride to Marlingford, Oxnead, Paston, Cromer, and Caister, to intimate his right of succession to the tenants of these different manors, and to warn those of Marlingford and Oxnead to pay no rents to the servants or officers of his uncle William.[309-1] These two manors, the reader will remember, belonged to Agnes Paston; and her son William, with whom she lived, had doubtless watched the old lady’s failing health, and made preparations even before her actual decease to vindicate his claim to them as soon as the event occurred.[309-2] The manors, however, having been entailed under Judge Paston’s will, properly descended to Sir John Paston, and after his death to his brother John. In accordance, therefore, with his brother’s instructions, Edmund Paston rode to Marlingford on Sunday before St. Andrew’s Day, ‘and before all the tenants examined one James, keeper there for William Paston, where he was the week next before St. Andrew; and there he said that he was not at Marlingford from the Monday unto the Thursday at even, and so there was no man there but your brother’s man at the time of his decease’ (we are quoting a letter of William Lomnour to John Paston). ‘So by that your brother died seised. And your brother Edmund bade your man keep possession to your behoof, and warned the tenants to pay no man till ye had spoken to them.’ In the afternoon Edmund went on to Oxnead, where a servant named Piers kept possession for Sir John Paston, and he found that William Paston’s agent was not there at the time, but had ordered another man to be there in his place. Whether that amounted to a continuance of the possession of William Paston, was a point to be considered.[309-3]

[Footnote 309-1: No. 962.]

[Footnote 309-2: No. 940.]

[Footnote 309-3: No. 963.]

As usual in such cases, farmers and tenants had everywhere a bad time of it until uncle and nephew were agreed. John Paston’s men threatened those of his uncle William at Harwellbury, while, on the other hand, his uncle William’s men molested those of John Paston at Marlingford.[309-4] During the interval between Agnes Paston’s death and that of Sir John, the tenants at Cromer had been uncertain who was to be their lord, and at Paston there was a similar perplexity.[309-5] Sir John’s bailiff ordered the Paston tenants to pay no rents to Mr. William Paston; but one Henry Warns wrote to Mr. William of the occurrence, and ordered them to pay none to any one else. After Sir John’s death Warns still continued to be troublesome, making tenants afraid to harrow or sow lest they should lose their labour, pretending that John Paston had given him power over everything he had himself in the place.[310-1] Things went on in this unpleasant fashion for a period of at least five years.[310-2]

[Footnote 309-4: Nos. 970, 982, 983.]

[Footnote 309-5: No. 957.]

[Footnote 310-1: Nos. 852 and 853, which by inadvertence I have assigned to the year 1474. They are undoubtedly of the year 1479, the former being written just before Sir John Paston’s death, and the latter after it.]

[Footnote 310-2: No. 998.]

[Sidenote: Death of Margaret Paston.] Margaret Paston survived her son Sir John five years, and died in 1484, in the reign of Richard III.[310-3] In her very interesting will, made two years before her decease, a number of bequests of a religious and charitable kind show how strongly she felt the claims of the poor, the sick, and the needy, as well as those of hospitals, friars, anchoresses, and parish churches. From the bequests she makes to her own family, it appears that not only John Paston, her eldest surviving son, but his brother Edmund also, was by that time married, and had children. To Edmund she gives ‘a standing piece white covered, with a garlick head upon the knop,’ ‘a gilt piece covered, with a unicorn,’ a feather bed and a ‘transom,’ and some tapestry. To his wife Catherine she leaves a purple girdle ‘harnessed with silver and gilt,’ and some other articles; and to their son Robert, who must have been quite an infant, all her swans marked with ‘Daubeney’s mark,’ to remain with him and his heirs for ever. Various other articles are left to her daughter Anne, wife of William Yelverton, to her son William, to John and Margery Paston, and to their son William and to their daughter Elizabeth (apparently Christopher Paston, the eldest child, was by this time dead), and also to Constance, a natural daughter of Sir John Paston. She also left £20 to John Calle, son of her daughter Margery, when he should come to be twenty years of age, and if he died before that, it was to be divided between his brothers William and Richard when they grew up. To Margery Calle herself and her husband Richard she left nothing.[311-1]

[Footnote 310-3: The exact date is given as the 4th November 1484 in a calendar prefixed to an old MS. missal in the possession of the late Mr. C. W. Reynell.]

[Footnote 311-1: No. 978.]

_Times of Richard III. and Henry VII._

[Sidenote: Richard III.] The personal interest of the correspondence is not altogether exhausted, although, as we have already remarked, it is very greatly diminished after the death of Sir John Paston. But the political interest of the remaining letters is so great, that they are almost more indispensable to the historian than the preceding ones. The brief and troubled reign of Richard III. receives illustration from two letters of the Duke of Norfolk to John Paston. The first was written in anticipation of Buckingham’s rebellion, requiring him to make ready and come to London immediately with ‘six tall fellows in harness,’ as the Kentish men were up in the Weald, and meant to come and rob the city.[311-2] Again, on the Earl of Richmond’s invasion, the duke desires Paston to meet him at Bury with a company, to be raised at the duke’s expense.[311-3] There is also a copy of King Richard’s proclamation against Henry Tudor,[311-4] of which, however, the text is preserved in other MSS.

[Footnote 311-2: No. 994.]

[Footnote 311-3: No. 1002.]

[Footnote 311-4: No. 1001.]