[Norris Correspondence in India Office, extending over nearly the whole period of the mission (except 23 Aug. 1700 to 5 March 1701, when Norris was on his way from Masulipatam to Burhánpúr); Bruce's Annals of East India. Company, iii. 343-7, 374-9, 390, 394-406, 426; 456-75 (which requires verification with original authorities); Norris Papers, ed. T. Heywood (Chetham Soc. vol. ix.), pp. xvi-xviii, and letters from Norris, pp. 28-35, 40-5 ; information from. Mr. W. Foster of the India Office.]
the emperor's mind as to which was the real English company, and to make him adhere the more resolutely to a stipulation which appeared to elicit so much jealousy among the merchants, and to promise considerable profits in bribes to the mogul authorities. When Norris held firmly to his refusal to give the necessary engagement, he was told 'that the New English knew whether it was best for them to trade or noe, . . . and that if the English Embassador would not give an obligation for the sea, he knew the way to return.' Norris accepted this dismissal, and without taking formal leave of the emperor departed, 5 Nov. 1701, from the mogul camp, which he had been following from place to place after the fall of Panalla, over the Kistna to 'Cattoon,' and finally to 'Murdawnghur ' (Mardangarh), where the camp had been fixed since July. The mission had been almost doomed to failure from the first, and its chances of partial success had been further diminished by the action of Sir Nicholas Waite, by the difficulties placed in Norris's way by want of adequate funds for bribes, and by the incompetence of his interpreter, Adiell Mill, who is stated to have been ignorant of Persian, the official language of the mogul empire. The ambassador himself appears to have been wanting in tact and suppleness, and his conduct was generally censured by English opinion in India; but it may be doubted whether any other man could have succeeded in the circumstances in which he was placed. His troubles were not over when he was dismissed by Aurangzíb, for he was forcibly detained for two months at Burhánpúri, probably in the hope of extorting the required engagement about piracy, and was not suffered to proceed until 8 Feb. 1701-2, when Aurangzíb sent him a letter and sword for the king, and a promise that, after all, the firmans would be sent. On the following day the ambassador resumed his journey, and arrived on 12 March in the neighbourhood of Súrat, where he immediately entered upon an acrimonious dispute with Sir Nicholas Waite, to whose action he ascribed the failure of the mission. On 5 May 1702 he sailed for England in the Scipio, paying ten thousand rupees for his passage. His brother and suite embarked in the China Merchant, with a cargo valued at 87,200 rupees on Norris's account (whence derived it is not stated), and sixty thousand rupees belonging to the company. The former proved a fertile source of litigation among his relatives. At Mauritius the two ships met on 11 July, but soon afterwards the Scipio parted company, and when she came to St. Helena it was ascertained that Norris had been attacked with dysentery, and had died at sea on 10 Oct 1702. He married the widow of a Pollexfen but left no issue.
NORRIS, WILLIAM (1719–1791), secretary to the Society of Antiquaries, was apparently son of John Norris, Nonsuch, Wiltshire, and matriculated from Merton College, Oxford, on 12 March 1735–6. Robert Norris [q. v.] was his brother. He was elected F.S.A. on 4 April 1754, and that year commenced to assist Ames as secretary to the society. On Ames's death, in 1759, Norris became sole secretary, and held the post till 1786, when he retired on account of ill-health. His secretaryship was characterised by great diligence and energy. Gough speaks of his ‘dragon-like vigilance’ (Nichols, Lit. Anecd. vi. 128). He was for several years corrector for the press to Baskett, the royal printer. In 1766 he appears to have been residing in Chancery Lane. He died in Camden Street, Islington, in November 1791, and was buried in the burial-ground of St. James's, Pentonville, on 29 Nov. Letters by him, written in 1756 to Philip Carteret Webb, are in the British Museum (Lansdowne MS. 841, ff. 86, 87).
[Gent. Mag. 1792, pt. i. p. 88; Foster's Alumni Oxon.; Nichols's Lit. Anecd. vi. 127; Hist. MSS. Comm. 5th Rep. p. 359; registers of St. James's, Pentonville, per the Rev. J. H. Rose.]
NORTH, BROWNLOW (1741–1820), bishop of Winchester, was the elder son of Francis North, first earl of Guilford [q. v.], by his second wife, Elizabeth, only daughter of Sir Arthur Kaye, and widow of George, viscount Lewisham. He was born in London on 17 July 1741, and educated at Eton and Oxford, matriculating 11 Jan. 1760 as a fellow-commoner of Trinity, the college founded by his ancestor, Sir Thomas Pope [q. v.] Here he graduated B.A. in 1762; and some verses which he wrote as ‘Poet Laureate’ of the bachelors' common-room are preserved in manuscript. He was elected fellow of All Souls' as founder's-kin in 1763 (Stemmata Chicheleana, i. No. 125); he proceeded