sion in favour of his legitimacy was again considered soon after James's accession (see Sir Julius Cæsar's report of proceedings in Cotton MS. Caligula, C. xvi. f. 412, which is mutilated), but apparently without success; and on 14 May 1608 Beauchamp obtained a patent in which Hertford was not mentioned as his father, to the effect that he and his heirs should become earls of Hertford and barons of parliament immediately on Hertford's death. Beauchamp, however, predeceased his father in July 1612, being buried at Wick on the 21st, and afterwards removed to a tomb in Salisbury Cathedral (Epitaphs, p. 37). He had three sons: (1) Edward (1587–1618), who matriculated from Magdalen College, Oxford, on 16 April 1605, graduated B.A. 9 Dec. 1607, married on 1 June 1609 Anne, third daughter of Robert Sackville, second earl of Dorset [q. v.], was made K.B. 3 Nov. 1616, but predeceased his grandfather without issue, and was buried on 15 Sept. 1618; (2) William, afterwards second duke of Somerset [q. v.]; and (3) Francis, baron Seymour of Trowbridge [q. v.]
[Wilts Archæol. Mag. xv. 150 sq. prints various letters of Hertford and his first wife; Ellis's Original Letters, 2nd ser. vol. ii. passim; Cal. State Papers, Dom. 1547–1623; Cal. Hatfield MSS.; Lords' Journals; Lit. Remains Edward VI (Roxburghe Club); Machyn's Diary and Chamberlain's Letters (Camden Soc.); Camden's Elizabeth; Naunton's Fragmenta Regalia; Mrs. Murray Smith's Arabella Stuart, 1889; Collins's and G. E. C.'s Peerages; Bloxam's Reg. Magdalen Coll. Oxford; Hallam's Const. Hist.; Froude's Hist.]
SEYMOUR, Sir EDWARD (1633–1708), speaker of the House of Commons, born in 1633, was eldest son of Sir Edward Seymour (1610–1685), third baronet, who was great-grandson of Sir Edward Seymour (1529–1593), second son of the Protector [see Seymour, Edward, first Duke of Somerset]. Henry Seymour (1612–1686) [q. v.] was his uncle. The father's house of Berry Pomeroy, near Totnes, was plundered by the roundheads at the outset of the civil war; he sat in the king's parliament at Oxford in 1643, compounded with the parliament at Westminster for 1,200l., and was discharged on 23 Oct. 1649. He recovered most of his local influence at the Restoration, and represented Totnes in parliament from 1660 until his death in December 1685. He left by his wife Anne, daughter of Sir John Portman, first baronet of Orchard-Portman, and aunt of Sir William Portman (1641?–1690) [q. v.], Edward, the speaker; John, who obtained a commission in 1673, served in Flanders as captain in the first foot-guards in 1694, and rose to be lieutenant-colonel; Hugh, a captain in the navy, ‘killed in the Dutch wars;’ William, who became a gentleman of the bedchamber to Prince George of Denmark; and Henry, who inherited the Portman estates.
Edward, who entered the House of Commons as member for Gloucester in 1661, was soon known as an apt speaker, and signalised himself by bringing into the house the impeachment of the Earl of Clarendon on 1 Nov. 1667. Seymour's court influence had already obtained for him the post of commissioner of prizes in the navy, and in this capacity he had in 1665 met Pepys, who found him ‘very high,’ ‘proud and saucy.’ He was soon afterwards appointed treasurer of the navy with a salary of 3,000l. a year. In the meantime, on 18 Feb. 1672–3, upon the serious indisposition of Sir Job Charlton [q. v.], the House of Commons, upon the nomination of Sir William Coventry [q. v.], unanimously elected Seymour as speaker. During the ensuing summer the king created him a privy councillor, an elevation which elicited much unfavourable comment upon the part of independent members. On 27 Oct. 1673 Sir Thomas Littleton gave expression to this feeling. ‘You are too big,’ he said to the speaker, ‘for that chair and for us, and you that are one of the governors of the world, to be our servant, is incongruous.’ Clarges maintained the same view, with the rider that no speaker should be permitted to go to court without leave. Seymour declined to vacate the chair while his own behaviour was being debated, and at the close of the debate, which turned in his favour, ‘complimented the house to the effect that he held no employment a greater honour to him than that which he had in their service’ (Parl. Hist. iv. 593). He was still suspected of partisanship with the court when on 4 Nov. the commons hurried him into the chair that he might put to the vote the motions that the French alliance and the evil counsellors about the king were a grievance. Black Rod ‘knocked earnestly’ at the door before the question could be put, and some spoke of holding the speaker in his chair, but he leapt out ‘very nimbly,’ says Reresby, and the house rose in confusion. Subsequently by his courage and an assumption of dignity, which frequently amounted to arrogance, he gained the respect of the house. No one probably ever understood the constitution or the mood of the house better than he, and—at a period before parties were so organised as to determine votes—it was said that by merely looking about him he could tell the fate of any question under discussion. On 4 June 1675 he earned much applause by causing Serjeant Pemberton to
