« PreviousContinue »
Fuller d says, that Sir Thomas Lake's dexterity of dispatch and secrecy in business were incredible.
were notoriously false and scandalous, and confirm it by receiving their eucharist, in assurance of her hovour and his innocency.
“ Besides, several letters of her hand, compared with this writing, cond cluded it counterfeit.
“ l'hen the King tells the mother and daughter, that this writing being denied by her, their testimonies as parties would not prevail, without ado ditional witness.
"They then adjoin one Sarah Wharton, their chambress, who, they affirm, stood behind the hangings, at the entrance of the room, and heard the Countess read over what she had writ. And to this she swears before the King.
“ But after a hunting at New Park, the King, entertained at Wimbledon, and in that room, observes the great distance from the window to the lower end, and placing himself behind the hanging, and so other Lords in their turn) they could not hear a loud voice from the window. Besides, the hangings wanted two feet of the ground, and might discover the woman, if hidden behind; the King saying, “ oaths cannot deceive my sight.” And the hangings had not been removed that room in thirty years before.
“ Nay, more than all these, the mother and daughter counterfeit a con. fession in writing of one Luke Hutton, that for forty pounds the Countess should hire him to poison them, which man with wonderful providence was found out, and privately denies it to the King.
“ And, thus prepared, the King sends for Lake, whom in truth he valued, tells him the danger to embark himself in this quarrel, advising him to leave them to the law ; being ready for a star-chamber business.
“ He humbly thanked his Majesty, but could not refuse to be a father, and a husband; and so put his name with theirs in a cross bill, which at the hearing took up five several days, the King sitting in judgment. But the former testimonies, and some private confessions of the Lady Roos, and Sarah Wharton, which the King kept in secret, made the cause for some days of trial appear doubtful to the court, until the King's discovery, which concluded the sentence, pronounced, upon several censures; Lake and his Lady fined 10,cool, to the King, 5ocol. to the Countess, 501, to Hutton ; Sarah Wharton to be whipped at a cart's tail about the streets, and to do penance at St. Martin's church. The Lady Roos for confessing the truth and ploty in the midst of the trial, was pardoned by the most voices from penal sena tence.
" The King, I remember, compared their crimes to the first plot of the first sin in Paradise, the Lady to the serpent, her daughter to Eve, and Sir Thomas to poor Adam, whose love to his wife, the old sin of our father, had beguiled him. I am sure he paid for all, which, as he told me, cost him 30,000l. the loss of his master's favour, and offices of honour and gain; but truly with much pity and compassion at court, he being held an honest man."
* Saunderson's Reign of James I. p. 447---449.
He died at his seat of Canons, in Whitechurch, com. Middlesex, (which he bought in 1604) on September 17th, 1630.
He married Mary, daughter and heir of Sir William Ryther, Lord Mayor of London, which Lady was buried at Whitchurch, February 25th, 1642. Of his children,
Elizabeth, wife of Lord Roos, has been already mentioned.
Sir Arthur Lake, a younger son, was buried at Whitchurch, December 19th, 1633.
Sir Thomas Lake, of Canons, eldest son of Sir Thomas, was buried at Whitchurch, May 13th, 1653.e
Sir Lancelot Lake, of Canons, eldest son and successor of the last, was buried at Whitchurch, May 4th, 1680; having had a large family by Frances his wife, who was buried at Whitchurch, February 22d, 1678. Of these,
Essex Lake, a daughter, was baptised there, August 20th, 1638.
Lancelot Lake, baptized August 19th, 1646; buried August 22d.
Lætitia, baptised June 19th, 1650.
Charles, baptised April 15th, 1655; buried October 10th, 1711.
Another Lancelot, buried October 20th, 1656.
Warwick, baptized April 13th, 1661, of whom presently, as grandfather to the late Lord Lake.
Another Lancelot, buried May 4th, 1680.
Sir Thomas Lake, of Canons, eldest son, married Rebecca, daughter of Sir James Langham, Bart, and was buried at Whitchurch, April 24th, 1673, having had issue by her, who was buried there January 14th, 1681.
First, William Lake, died an infant, and was buried December 220, 1661.
Second, Thomas, buried September 11th, 1662.
Fifth, James, baptized November 1671, buried March 18th, 1673-4.
Sixtb, Thomas, baptized July 30th, 1670, buried April 15th, 1672.
e His son Thomas was buried there in 1633, and his daughter Grace in 1648.
Seventh, Rebecca, baptized April 26th, 1673, buried March 19th, 16so.
Mary Lake, only surviving daughter and heir, married the Honourable James Brydges (son and heir of James, eighth Lord Chandos), afterwards Duke of Chandos, to whom she carried the seat of Canons. ! She was buried at Whitchurch, December 23, 1712, having had a large family by him. The Duke was buried at Whitchurch, August 23d, 1744.
WARWICK Lake, Esq. born 1661, younger brother of the last Sir Thomas, married Elizabeth, only daughter and heir of Sir Charles Gerard, Bart. of Flambards in Harrow-on-the-Hill, coin. Middlesex, who surviving him, re-married Miles Stapleton, Esq. h
LANCELOT-CHARles Lake, Esq. his son, baptized at Whitchurch, June 12th, 1711, married Letitia, daughter and coheir i of John Gumley, Esq. of Isleworth, com. Middlesex, commissarygeneral to the army. By her be bad two sons; viz.
First, Warwick Lake, Esq. one of the commissioners of the Stamp Office.
Second, GERARD, FIRST VISCOUNT Lake, who was born July 27th, 1744, and embracing a military life obtained a commission in the first regiment of foot-guards, in which he succeeded to a company. On May 28th, 1790, he was promoted to the rank of major-general; on January 26th, 1797, to that of lieutenantgeneral; and April 29th, 1802, to that of general.
On May 2d, 1794, he was promoted to the command of the fifty-third regiment of foot; whence on November 20, 1796, he
f All from Lysons's Environs, vol. iii. p.413,414. g About 1912, the Duke of Chandos, rebuilt the seat at Canons, in so magnificent a manner, that it is said to have cost, with the furniture, nearly 200,000l. Hence it became so celebrated ; and Pope is supposed to have alluded to it in his description of Timon's Villa, in his well known satire against False Taste. After the Duke's death it was pulled down; and the materials sold by auction in 1747. The site, with part of the park, and demesne lands, was purchased by Mr. Hallet, who built a villa on it; which with the estate was sold by his grandson to Dennis OʻKelly.
h Flambards was sold in 1767 by Sir Thomas Stapleton, Bart. Gerard Lake, Esq and others, to Francis Herne, Esq. Lysons's Environs, vol. ii.
i One of the other coheirs married the celebrated William Pulteney, Earl of Bath. She inherited Gumley-House; which afterwards came to General Lake, who sold it. Mary, the other coheir of Mr. Gumley, married Francis Colman, Esq. by whom she was mother of the celebrated George Colman, Esq. the dramatic writer, who was buried at Kensington, August 24th, 1794, aged sixty-two. Lysons, ut supra. vol. iii. p. 224.
obtained the seventy-third; and on February 14th, 1800, the eightieth regiment.
At the commencement of the late war, he served under the Duke of York in Flanders, &c.
In 1797, he had a principal command in Ireland during the rebellion there.
In August 1798, when a small French force under Humbert landed in the North of Ireland at Killala, General Lake was stationed at Castlebar, where on the 27th of that month he was attacked by the French before he had yet collected his forces, and was obliged to retreat with the loss of six pieces of cannon, and a few men. The force under General Lake has been variously stated; it was at first represented as amounting to 6,000 men, which number was afterwards reduced to about 1000, After this success, the French advanced towards Tuam, but their triumph was not of long duration ; for on the 7th of September, the Marquis Cornwallis came up with them in the vicinity of Castlebar, and obliged them to make a retrogade movement before day-break the following morning. The French General made a circuitous march to favour the flight of the rebel Irish, the majority of whom escaped by this manœuvre. A column of General Lake's army, however, under the command of Lieutenant-Colonel Crawford, overtook the rear-guard of the French, at Ballinamuck, at about seven o'clock in the morning of the 8th, and summoned them to surrender ; but as they did not attend to the summons, they were attacked by the British forces, when about 200 of the French infantry threw down their arms, expecting their example to be followed by the rest of their comrades. Oa General Craddock, and some other British officers advancing towards them, however, the enemy commenced a fire of cannon and musquetry, which wounded General Craddock, upon which General Lake ordered up a fresh reinforcement, and commenced an attack on every part of their position. The action then lasted half an hour, when the remainder of the British column making its appearance, the French surrendered at discretion. General Lake adds, “ that the rebels who fled in all directions suffered severely." The loss of the British, in this action, was only three killed, and about sixteen wounded and missing. k
i See a curious account of the proceedings of the French on their first land. ing here by Doctor Stock, Bishop of Killala, who remained a captive in his own palace till their surrender to Lord Cornwallis's army,
Annual Register, 1798.
In 1800, General Lake was appointed COMMANDER IN CHIEF IN INDIA. This was at a most critical period, when the GovernorGeneral, the Marquis Wellesley, was displaying all tbe energies of a great mind in counteracting the deep-laid intrigues of France among the native powers of Hindostan.
Between 1792 and 1799, the rapacity and ambition of Dowlut Rao Scindiah bad impaired the authority of the PershwAH, whose authority had for some years before been acknowledged by all the Marhatta States to such a degree, as to have frustrated every benefit which Lord Cornwallis intended to secure to the British interests by the alliance with the Peishwah. Dowlut Rao Scindiah had absolutely usurped the government of Poonah, and had established himself in the vicinity of that city with a powerful army, the regular infantry and artillery of which, had been disciplined and were then commanded principally by French officers.
It has always been a principal object of the British government to prevent the sovereign power of the Marhatta State, or the power of any great branch of the Marhatta empire, from passing into the hands of France. The danger of this was imminent from the disturbed state of the Marhatta empire, which afforded the pretence for the introduction of a military force for the purpose of aiding the cause of one of the contending parties.
In June 1802, the Governor-General resolved to renew his negotiations for the conclusion of an improved system of alliance with the court of Poonab. The successes of Holkar against the forces of Scindiah, which threatened ruin to Scindiah's affairs, as well as to the Peishwah's government, seemed to favour the opportunity. The draft of a treaty was agreed to by the Peishwah on Dec. 18th, 1802. On March 18th, 1803, the Peishwah received the counterpart of the treaty itself, ratified by the Governor General in council. The British troops were now to advance into the Marhatta territories, for the restoration of the Peishwah to the Musnud at Poonah. The command of the advanced detachment was committed to Major General Wellesley, now Viscount Wellington, under which title an account will be given of his share in these important transactions.
The advices received by the Governor-General, now induced his Lordship to entertain suspicions, that Scindiah, notwithstanding bis specious professions, meditated an accommodation with Holkar, and a confederacy with that chieftain, and the Raiah of