CHAPTER IX

TWO BROTHERS: THE FIRST MARQUESS OF HERTFORD AND FIELD-MARSHAL CONWAY

'The defects of each being taken away, their virtues might have made one excellent man.'-HEYLYN.

Or the two sons of the Speaker by his first wife, Margaret, daughter of Sir William Wale, knight, of London, Edward, the elder, became fifth baronet, on his father's death, but being devoid of any ambition, preferred a quiet life at Maiden Bradley to the excitements of court or Parliament. Certainly, on his father's death, he once represented Totnes in Parliament, and twice (1710 and 1713) served for Great Bedwyn. But he was a silent member at the best, and after 1713, retired to Maiden Bradley, where he died, in 1740, at the age of eighty or thereabouts. His son, Edward, became sixth baronet and eighth Duke of Somerset. His brother, General William Seymour, had a more eventful life, commanding at the sieges of Namur and Landen in 1693, serving under the Duke of Ormond in the expedition to Cadiz in 1702, and being made Lieutenant-General of the Forces in 1706. He died, unmarried, in February 1728.

The second wife of the Speaker was Letitia, daughter of Francis Popham of Littlecote, Wilts, by whom he had six sons and one daughter. Of these, the eldest son was, as we have seen, killed in 1699. Francis, the second son, with whose descendants this chapter is principally concerned, was created Baron Conway in March 1702, and was the ancestor of the subsequent Marquesses of Hertford. Three other sons, Charles, Henry, and Alexander, died young; the

sixth, John, became a colonel in the army, and was appointed Governor of Maryland. Anne, the daughter, married William Berkeley of Pill, in Somerset.

The death of Popham Conway Seymour in 1699 gave his brother Francis the estates of the late Earl of Conway, who, dying without heirs in 1683, had willed them to Popham Seymour as the eldest son of his first cousin, Letitia Popham, or in case of his death to his brother Francis. Tradition has it that Popham Seymour was engaged to be married to the only daughter and heir of the Earl of Conway, but that she died on the weddingday. Her father then summoned Mr. Seymour to his bedchamber, and after deploring the incident, bade him still to consider himself as his son-in-law and heir to his estates, providing he assumed the additional name of Conway. Francis Seymour therefore became Francis Seymour Conway, and when in 1702 his father declined a peerage for himself (see supra), he was created Baron Conway of Ragley (in Warwickshire). On the 16th of October 1712 he was further created Baron Conway and Killultagh (co. Antrim).1

Ragley Hall, which now passed with the Conway inheritance to Francis Seymour, was to become the chief residence of his descendants, the Marquesses of Hertford. According to Horace Walpole, who was much struck with Ragley,' the house was far beyond anything he had seen of that bad age,' referring to the late seventeenth century, for, as he found by an old letter in the library at Ragley, the house as it then stood (1751) had been begun in 1680. His friend Francis, second Baron Conway (of the Seymour creation), and afterwards first Marquess of Hertford, made great improvements and alterations in the house, and is generally credited with having built it. In 1758 Walpole

1 He possessed a large estate in Antrim, as part of the inheritance of Edward, Earl of Conway.

wrote he had just returned from Ragley, which has had a good deal done to it since I was there last . . . there are no striking faults, but it wants a few Chute [referring to the Chute mansion, 'The Vine,' near Basingstoke, where he had just been visiting] or Bentley touches. . . . I have recommended some dignifying of the salon with Seymours and Fitzroys, Henry the eighth's, etc. . . . They will correspond well to the proudest situation imaginable. I have already dragged some ancestors out of the dust there, and written their names on their portraits.' Indeed the situation of the house on high ground in the midst of fine scenery was to Walpole, and is still, its chief charm. Ragly is superb,' he wrote, 'that is, the situation and the dimensions of the house, but it has nothing else to occupy or detain one a moment.'

Later the house was altered by Wyatt.1 It has four fronts, with a chief entrance from the east. The large hall, 80 feet long, 40 feet broad, and 45 feet high, is one of its best features, and has a richly carved ceiling. There are also two fine staircases of polished oak. The surrounding park is 500 acres in extent, and contains a broad lake covering about ten acres. Herds of deer wander at will in the park, and there is a heronry of ancient date. In the church of the Holy Trinity, Arrow, in which parish Ragley is situated, are many monuments to the Conway-Seymours, and several of the Marquesses of Hertford.

Little is known of the life of Francis, first Baron Conway, except that in 1723 he was made a Privy Councillor for Ireland, and in 1728 was appointed Governor of Carrickfergus. He was three times married, first, to Lady Mary Hyde, third daughter of the Earl of Rochester, by whom he had four daughters who all died young; secondly, to Jane, daughter of Mr. Bowden of Drogheda, by whom he

1 James Wyatt, architect (1746-1813).

? The manors of Arrow, Alcester, Beauchamp Court, etc., belong to the Marquess of Hertford, in this county.

had a son and daughter who both died young; thirdly, to Charlotte, daughter of Sir John Shorter, Lord Mayor of London, and sister to Catherine, wife of Sir Robert Walpole.1 By this third wife he had four sons and three daughters. Of the four sons the two youngest died young, the eldest, Francis, afterwards became Marquess of Hertford, and the second, Henry, was to become Field-Marshal Conway. Of the three daughters, two, Charlotte and Arabella, died young; the third, Anne, became the wife of John Harris of Haine, in Devonshire, Master of His Majesty's household, after whose death she was appointed housekeeper of Somerset House, remaining in office until her death in 1774. Francis Seymour Conway died in February 1732, at Lisburn in Ireland. His body was brought to England to be buried at Ragley. His third wife, Charlotte, survived him for two years, dying in February 1734.

Francis Seymour Conway, his eldest son, thus became second Baron Conway, and afterwards Earl of Hertford. The first few years after his father's death were spent abroad, chiefly in Italy and in Paris. On his return to London he took his seat among the Peers in November 1739. On the 29th of May 1741 he married Lady Isabella Fitzroy,

1 Hence by this marriage sprang the relationship between Horace Walpole, and the first Marquess of Hertford. In 1741, Walpole was writing to Henry Conway, 'My dear Harry, will you take care and make my compliments to that charming Lady Conway [wife of Francis Seymour Conway, second Baron Conway], who I hear is so charming. . . . As for Miss Anne and her love as far as it is decent: tell her decency is out of the question between us, that I love her without any restriction. I settled it yesterday with Miss Conway, that you three [Anne, Francis and Henry] are brothers and sister to me, and that if you had been so, I could not love you better. I have so many cousins and uncles and aunts, and bloods that grow in Norfolk, that if I had portioned out my affections to them as they say I should, what a modicum would have fallen to each! So, to avoid fractions, I love my family in you three, their representatives' (Walpole, Letters, i. 133). The references to Walpole's Letters throughout are to the Clarendon Press edition (1903-4).

second daughter of the Duke of Grafton, the 'charming Lady Conway' of whom, as Lady Hertford, we hear so much in Horace Walpole's Letters. Indeed, if it were not for Horace Walpole, garrulous though he be, we should know little of Francis, Earl of Hertford and second Baron Conway and his wife, or of his brother, Henry Seymour Conway. As it is, through the intimate nature of his friendship for the two brothers, we have a picture of their lives and characters which, though undoubtedly biassed, is certainly unique.1

By means of characteristic temporising Walpole tried always to keep amiable with both brothers even in the moments of their most strained relations. Yet his preference for Henry Conway was inevitable, in the first place, because Conway appeared to him to be a most remarkable and magnificent man, for whom he had a sincere if unbalanced affection; and in the second place, this ' remarkable man' in reality lacked decision and firmness, and being easily influenced by his friends, allowed himself to be the unconscious instrument of Walpole's inconsistent political views and personal caprices. His brother, on the other hand, less pleasing in person and manner, less imbued with an almost too delicate sense of honour, and far more selfish, cared little for Walpole's advice and pleasures, but much for his own aggrandisement, and had, what Henry Conway lacked, very decided views of his own which he could keep to himself. There is often a marked irritation in Walpole's letters to Conway at this secrecy, which being so utterly alien from his own gossiping nature he could not understand or forgive. Thus, for example, in the spring of 1765, after having addressed

1 A collection of Conway's private letters was made by C. Knight, with the intention of publishing a memoir, but the idea was never realised. The letters, not yet discovered, are apparently hidden away in some private collection.