SOME EXTINCT CORNISH FAMILIES. 
325 
1646. The family MS. attributes the burning to the animosity of 
the governor of the castle. There is no proof of this; but, on 
the contrary, a letter written at the time, and quoted in Captain 
Oliver's History of Pendennis, proves that the burning of the 
house was a necessary act of self-defence on the part of the 
governor. It states that Colonel Arundell sallied out and burnt 
Arwenack House, and would also have burnt the town of 
Pennycomequick, as the writer styles it, but for the enemy coming 
sooner than was expected, so that he had only time to burn the 
manor-house. Mr. Jeffery gives confirmatory proof of this. 
When King Charles was imprisoned at Hampton Court, Sir 
Peter, being apprised of the bad intentions of Cromwell, had a 
private interview with the king, and showed him the imminent 
danger he was in, and said that he had provided relays of horses 
and a ship on the coast of Sussex, and with his head would 
answer for carrying him off safely, provided the king would keep 
the secret, especially from his two favourites, whom Sir Peter 
named to the king. (Mr. Worth suggests, and probably correctly, 
that these were Ashburnham and Berkeley.) Charles agreed to 
the proposal, and said he would go to bed as usual, and when all 
was quiet would rise again, and be ready to take horse at 
the time and place appointed in the night. At two o'clock Sir 
Peter was punctual on his part, and waited until daylight, when 
he got off, but not without suspicion and questioning. The two 
favourites took off the king on the following night, as described by 
Clarendon, and went to the coast as if to seek for a ship. Mr. 
Worth seems to think that the king and his two maladroit advisers 
might have misunderstood the time and place. At any rate, this 
attempted escape hastened Charles's end. The MS. says that Sir 
Peter used to relate this anecdote with tears in his eyes — no doubt 
because of his confidence in the success of his own arrangements, 
which had been neglected. 
Sir Peter became bail to the Parliament for his brother-in-law, 
Lord Lucas, in £6000; and through that nobleman's escape would 
have had to forfeit the whole amount — sufficient to have ruined 
almost any man in those times ; but his interest with the 
Parliamentary side was so great that he was able to escape any 
payment in the end. Lord Lucas afterwards again took up arms, 
and was tried by court-martial after the capture of Colchester, 
when he was shot. 
