The Catholic threat and the Recusancy laws

On the 25th of February 1570, Pope Pius V, profoundly angered by the continued flowering of the Church of England, issued a Papal Bull excommunicating Queen Elizabeth. The Pope also made it clear that anyone willing to assassinate her could expect a Papal Pardon.
It took a while before the implications of this act began to sink in. And then on the 8th of May 1572, the Queen summoned a new Parliament to meet in order to pass the Recusancy Laws.

The question of the day boiled down to: could a good Roman Catholic also be a good Englishman? Did not the Pope’s injunctions inevitably make English Catholics the enemy within? And if the answer was affirmative, then what steps were the necessary steps to safeguard the Kingdom from this potential fifth column?

Throughout the length and breadth of the Kingdom could be found families of Earls, gentry and poorfolk who had never reconciled themselves to the Church of England and who were determined - no matter what the risk - to maintain their observance of the Catholic rites. In many cases, this profound sense of grievance went beyond the personal issue of conscience - they felt it a sacred duty to call into question the very legitimacy of a Protestant sovereign of England.

And so began the persecution of English Catholics. Fines could be levied on people who refused to attend church, those deemed extremely recalcitrant could end up in gaol or even have their estates taken from them. Over the coming years, as the Catholic threat failed to diminish, the Recusancy laws were strengthened. On the 18th January 1581 Parliament introduced new anti-catholic measures which, for instance, now declared proselytising treason. At the new Parliament of November 1584, among new measures established was an increase in the fine for Recusancy. Since the first law had been passed, only 69 recusants had had to pay fines, totalling £8,938. After the act had been toughened, over the next five years recusancy receipts totalled £36,322.

Josiah C. Wedgwood, in his biography of Sir Walter Aston (Staffordshire Parliamentary History, Vol 1917), sums up rather well the role that some of Staffordshire’s more influential figures had at this time,

“Throughout the struggle of the religions in Staffordshire, Sir Walter Aston, Mr [Richard] Bagot, Mr Gresley and Mr [Thomas] Trentham [III] formed a sort of committee of the Staffordshire bench to carry out the repression of Catholics and their conspiracies. They were in constant communication with the Privy Council from 1576 to 1590, and were the mainstay of the Protestant government.”

In his biography of Thomas Trentham III, he goes further,

“Thomas Trentham [III], with Sir Walter Aston and Richard Bagot, watched over Staffordshire in the Protestant interest. They were in a sense Walsingham’s spies. In [this] period the Privy Council is repeatedly instructing them to hold enquiries into the doings of papists.”

Now, ever since she had returned to Edinburgh on the death of her first husband, the King of France, the Scottish Queen, Mary Stuart, had acted as a magnet to Catholic plotters throughout England - and beyond, in the Spanish and French courts.

It is an interesting fact that throughout her long exile living under house arrest in England, the Scottish Queen was placed firmly in the hands of the Staffordshire Shire Knights. Her permanent exile began in January 1569 when she and her considerable court moved to Tutbury Castle - the dilapidated Staffordshire seat of George Talbot, Earl of Shrewsbury who, in 1585, was appointed Lord Lieutenant of Staffordshire. Walsingham had good reason, over the next few years, to become dissatisfied by the security arrangements there, and so in 1585 the troublesome Queen was moved first to Tixall - the home of the violent Protestant Sir Walter Aston - and finally, in December 1585, to the nearby house of Chartley.

The biography of Thomas Trentham III, in the official ‘History of Parliament - The House of Commons, (Vol II, 1559-1601), contains an interesting note which gives an indication of the absolute trust placed in him by the Privy Council,

“A good deal of his [Thomas Trentham III] local activity consisted of examining suspected recusants and harbourers of Jesuit priests. Sir Ralph Sadler corresponded with him about Mary Stuart and, as one of the ‘principal gentlemen in Staffordshire’, he was ordered to attend Mary on her removal in September 1586 to Fotheringay.”

Oxfordians are well aware of the role that Edward de Vere played at the trial at Fotheringay - according to the contemporary sketch (see photo), first in precedence was Bromley, Lord Chancellor, then Burghley followed by the Earl of Oxford and the Earl of Shrewsbury. It is likely that one of the unidentified gentlemen standing in the foreground of the sketch was Thomas Trentham III.

As for Thomas Trentham’s day-to-day activities following the passing of the recusancy laws, again the archive record gives us a great deal of anecdotal colour. Among the pages of the published Acts of the Privy Council, are such gems as the letter written on 25 February 1578,

“To Sir Walter Aston, knight, Thomas Trentham and Richard Bagot, esquires, Justices of the Peace in the county of Stafford, that whereas their Lordships were enformed that within the said county do lurk certain Masse Priestes disguised in serving men’s apparail, or like other lay persons, and are secretly receyved and entertained in sundry men’s howses, to the perverting and seducing of many of her Majesties subjectes from ther dew obedience to her Majesties lawes and orders established in causes of Religion,...”

There follows detailed instructions about tracking the men down, arresting them and keeping their Lordships informed of all developments.

On 27 July 1579, the Privy Council wrote to Sir Walter Aston, the Dean Of Lichfield, Thomas Trentham and Richard Bagot asking them to enquire into “the Popishe stuffe” said to be within the Cathedral of Lichfield and requiring them to,

“...assemble themselves together in the towne of Lichfield and to cause the said Popishe stuffe to be sought out and brought before them, and thereuppon to deface the same and to cause it to be indifferentlie [a]praised and solde ... and thereof to advertise their Lordships.”

By 3 November 1580, in a letter from the Justices of Staffordshire to the Privy Council, it is clear that Thomas Trentham’s stock had risen still further. During the interregnum prior to George Talbot, the Earl of Shrewsbury, becoming the Lord Lieutenant of the County of Stafford in 1585, Thomas Trentham III had attained the highest position in the county that a commoner could attain, that of Custos Rotulorum - in effect, the stand-in for Lord Lieutenant,

“...state their opinion that John Archpole had been very properly deprived of his office of Clerk of Peace by Thomas Trentham Esq, Custos Rotulorum, and Mr Barell appointed in his place.”

 

Copyright 2006 Jeremy Crick.