POLITICAL HISTORY 



lest it be put on record as a precedent.'^ There were also difficulties about armour, those that had 

 any refusing to lend it for common use, so that in 1588 corslets had to be bought in London and 

 sent down," while in 1596 the gentry were with difficulty persuaded to buy arms on the 

 assurance that they should be treated as their own property and not recorded on the muster books. 

 This lack of arms in the county had been urged in 1584 as a reason for not supplying more than 

 6,000 troops when the council considered that on a muster roll of 42,000 able men Yorkshire 

 ought to provide 10,000 soldiers.^ To amend this it was proposed in 1600 to establish a central 

 magazine or armoury at York ; by this means the weapons would be kept much better and there 

 would be the additional advantage that the armament of the county would be in the hands of the 

 president, and would not be available for intending insurgents.^ So far as the Yorkshire troops had 

 any definite uniform at this time it would seem to have been blue, as in 1575 the light horsemen 

 for Ireland were to be equipped with ' a good plate coat, a scull or sallet with a blue covering, a 

 convenient doublet and hose, a pair of boots, a sword and a dagger and blue cloak," and in 1587 

 the troops sent up to Berwick from Ryedale and Pickeringlythe wore ' cassocks and breeches of 

 blue cloth guarded with yellow.'* The quality of these levies sent up to the Scottish borders left 

 much to be desired ; Lord Scrope described them as ' the wretchediste creatures that could be sent, 

 and as ill furnisht' ; and when Captain Ellis 'requierd handsome men and to have them better furnisht, 

 the justices aunserid him that hee must take them or none ' ; ° from which we may perhaps 

 conclude that the loyalty of the Yorkshire gentry at this time did not go as deep as their pockets. 



On the accession of James VI of Scotland to the throne of England, vacant by the death of 

 Elizabeth on 24 March 1603, York was again honoured by a royal visit. King James on his way 

 to London was met on the borders of the county by the sheriff and a band of gentry on 1 5 April, 

 and conducted to Topcliffe, where he spent the night. Next day he was met at the northern 

 bounds of York by the sheriff of the city, and at Micklegate Bar he was received by the lord 

 mayor and aldermen. That day and the next, which was Sunday, the king spent at York, and 

 after much feasting, speech-making, and giving of presents, he was escorted on the Monday to the 

 southern limits of the city, at Tadcaster Bridge, and thence rode to Grimston, where he knighted the 

 lord mayor.® The following June the queen and Prince Henry and the Lady Elizabeth, her children, 

 were also entertained at York on their way south.' Next year a less welcome visitor came to the 

 city; the plague, which had raged in London, reached York, and in a short time slew 3,500 persons.* 



From 1620 to 1630 the great feature of Yorkshire history was the struggle between the factions 

 of Sir John Savile of Howley and Sir Thomas Wentworth, afterwards famous as the Earl of 

 Strafford. The return of Sir Thomas and Sir George Calvert as knights of the shire on Christmas 

 Day 1620 was petitioned against by Sir John Savile, who alleged that the sheriff. Sir Thomas 

 Gower, had excluded a great number of voters who were in his interest, and had accepted 

 votes given for his opponents without inquiring whether the voters were freeholders, and also that 

 Wentworth, through two of the high constables, had intimidated voters. The constables were 

 censured, but the election was not upset.' At the election three years later, however. Sir John, 

 who had great influence in the clothing districts, secured his own return, and that of his son. Sir 

 Thomas Savile, and Wentworth had to be content with representing Pontefract, to which borough 

 the privilege of returning members had been restored in 1620, after a lapse of nearly 200 years.^° 

 On the dissolution of Parliament at the death of King James on 27 March 1625, Wentworth and 

 Sir Thomas Fairfax ousted the Saviles, but on evidence being brought that the sheriff had displayed 

 gross partiality, and had manipulated the poll to the disadvantage of Sir John, the election was 

 declared void. At the renewed election in August the same two candidates were returned, and 

 took their seats on 8 August,^^ but the Parliament was dissolved four days later, Wentworth, who 

 was then in opposition to the king, was appointed high sheriff, so as to prevent his standing for 

 Parliament, and soon afterwards the office of Gustos Rotulorum was taken from him and given to 

 Sir John Savile.^^ King Charles at this time, unable to obtain funds through Parliament, was 

 endeavouring to raise money by forced loans, and Sir Thomas Wentworth, refusing to pay the sum 

 demanded of him in 1627, was committed to prison, while about the same time Savile was made 

 Comptroller of the Household. At the election early in 1628, however, Wentworth defeated Savile 

 and soon afterwards he became a strong supporter of the king. The two rivals received grants of 

 baronies on the same day, 21 July 1628, and shortly afterwards Wentworth became Lord President 

 of the North." 



" Var. Coll. (Hist. MSS. Com.), ii, 106. " Ibid. 103. 



"" Cal. S.P. Dom. 1595-7, p. 165. 1 Ibid. Jdd. 1580-1625, pp. 119, 126. 



• Ibid. 1598-1601, p. 390. » Far. Coll. (Hist. MSS. Com.), ii, 93. 



* Ibid. loi. ' Cal. Border Papers, 1560-94, p. 282 ; Acts efP.C. 1587-8, p. 267 

 «Whelkn,Hw/. 9/ nri, 1,207-9. 'Ibid. 209. 'Ibid. 



' Cartwright, Chapters in the Hist. ofTorks. 198-212. 10 ibid 215-14 



"Ibid. 220-6. "Ibid. 231-2. "Ibid. 



3 ' 417 'sz 



