A HISTORY OF RUTLAND The garrison at Burley, then consisting of ' three troops of horse in good condition ' under Layfield, Collins, and Clarke, with Captain Hatcher, Christopher Browne, and John Osborne as representatives of the county- committee, ** appear to have set lire to the house because they felt themselves too weak to hold it.*' Evers Armyn, who had gone to London at Easter, complained that on his return in August he found his goods and papers, and a book kept to check the receivers of sequestration money, destroyed ; ^ and the Rutland Sub-Committee of Accounts were obliged to betake themselves to the stables,*' which were the only portion of the building remaining intact, but which, judging by the description given of them by Fuller, and also by Wright — who says that in his day they were still some of the noblest in England *' — must have been of exceptionally fine dimensions." The fortifications seem also to have suffered little damage, for in April 1646 the Committee of Both Kingdoms ordered that they should be ' slighted,' and that the two troops of Major Babbington and Captain Warden should be disbanded on the ground that, as Belvoir had been taken and Newark was closely besieged, there was no longer any need for the garrison at Burley.** In September 1645, since by the defection of ' both of its members the county had been for some three years unrepresented in the House of Com- mons, a proposal was made for a new election. Nothing, however, was done for some months, and in January 1 645—6 rival petitions were presented to the House, one urging that the writ should be sent down, and the other, from the county committee and others, asking that it should be delayed until the difference between Colonel Waite and the committee should be settled.*' In June 1646 there was a recurrence of disorder in the county, and Waite and Mr. Barker were summoned to London to meet a charge of miscarriage brought by the committee.'" This particular dispute was no doubt connected with the election, for on 2 July a double return was made, one giving Sir James Harington and Waite as elected, while the other gave Harington and Christopher Browne. Waite was again exonerated from blame, and his election was accepted by the House as valid,'^ while in January 1647 it was ordered that he should receive ;r2,i66 out of the fines levied on Royalists in the county, on account of money disbursed in the Parliamentary service.'* In December 1647 Waite was sent down to Rutland to arrange for the pay and disbanding of supernumerary forces, and for the relief of the county from the burden of free quarter. But as he was at the same time to arrange for the payment of Rutland's share of the monthly assessment of ^60,000, his con- stituents must have met him with mixed feelings." " Cal. of Com. for Compounding, 559. ^ Wright, Hist. Rut. 32. " Cal. of Com. for Compounding, 193, 559. " Ibid. " Hist. Rut. loc. cit. " Cf. Hist. Burley on the Hill, 7, 8. Fuller, Worthies (ed. 181 1), ii, 241, says that in these stables 'horse* (if their pabulum so plenty as their stabulum stately) were the best accommodated in England.' They still exist, but were repaired and slightly altered by the second Earl of Nottingham, who purchased Burley from the second Duke of Buckingham. " CaL S.P. Dom. 16+5-7, p. 419. ^ Commons' Joum. iv, 295, 408. It is noticeable that 'iscount Campden is described as ' Lord Noel,' the House refusing to recognize the title to which he had succeeded in 1643. " Ibid. 565 ; Cal. S.P. Dom. 1645-7, P- +40. " Ret. ofMeml. of Pari. , 492, and note. " Commons' Joum. v, 48. " Ibid. 400. The monthly assessment was afterwards raised to £-jo,ooo, of which Rutland's share was £,^^^ 4f. 6d. ; Grose, Milit. Antij. i, 28. 194
