text:
Page:Origin of Species 1859 facsimile.djvu/408

 a certain degree on the lapse of time, and as during changes of level it is obvious that islands separated by shallow channels are more likely to have been continuously united within a recent period to the mainland than islands separated by deeper channels, we can understand the frequent relation between the depth of the sea and the degree of affinity of the mammalian inhabitants of islands with those of a neighbouring continent,—an inexplicable relation on the view of independent acts of creation.

All the foregoing remarks on the inhabitants of oceanic islands,—namely, the scarcity of kinds—the richness in endemic forms in particular classes or sections of classes,—the absence of whole groups, as of batrachians, and of terrestrial mammals notwithstanding the presence of aërial bats,—the singular proportions of certain orders of plants,—herbaceous forms having been developed into trees, &c.,—seem to me to accord better with the view of occasional means of transport having been largely efficient in the long course of time, than with the view of all our oceanic islands having been formerly connected by continuous land with the nearest continent; for on this latter view the migration would probably have been more complete; and if modification be admitted, all the forms of life would have been more equally modified, in accordance with the paramount importance of the relation of organism to organism.

I do not deny that there are many and grave difficulties in understanding how several of the inhabitants of the more remote islands, whether still retaining the same specific form or modified since their arrival, could have reached their present homes. But the probability of many islands having existed as halting-places, of which not a wreck now remains, must not be


text:
Page:Origin of Species 1859 facsimile.djvu/409

. I will here give a single instance of one of the cases of difficulty. Almost all oceanic islands, even the most isolated and smallest, are inhabited by land-shells, generally by endemic species, but sometimes by species found elsewhere. Dr. Aug. A. Gould has given several interesting cases in regard to the land-shells of the islands of the Pacific. Now it is notorious that land-shells are very easily killed by salt; their eggs, at least such as I have tried, sink in sea-water and are killed by it. Yet there must be, on my view, some unknown, but highly efficient means for their transportal. Would the just-hatched young occasionally crawl on and adhere to the feet of birds roosting on the ground, and thus get transported? It occurred to me that land-shells, when hybernating and having a membranous diaphragm over the mouth of the shell, might be floated in chinks of drifted timber across moderately wide arms of the sea. And I found that several species did in this state withstand uninjured an immersion in sea-water during seven days: one of these shells was the Helix pomatia, and after it had again hybernated I put it in sea-water for twenty days, and it perfectly recovered. As this species has a thick calcareous operculum, I removed it, and when it had formed a new membranous one, I immersed it for fourteen days in sea-water, and it recovered and crawled away: but more experiments are wanted on this head.

The most striking and important fact for us in regard to the inhabitants of islands, is their affinity to those of the nearest mainland, without being actually the same species. Numerous instances could be given of this fact. I will give only one, that of the Galapagos Archipelago, situated under the equator, between 500 and 600 miles from the shores of South America. Here

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Page:Origin of Species 1859 facsimile.djvu/410

 almost every product of the land and water bears the unmistakeable stamp of the American continent. There are twenty-six land birds, and twenty-five of these are ranked by Mr. Gould as distinct species, supposed to have been created here; yet the close affinity of most of these birds to American species in every character, in their habits, gestures, and tones of voice, was manifest. So it is with the other animals, and with nearly all the plants, as shown by Dr. Hooker in his admirable memoir on the Flora of this archipelago. The naturalist, looking at the inhabitants of these volcanic islands in the Pacific, distant several hundred miles from the continent, yet feels that he is standing on American land. Why should this be so? why should the species which are supposed to have been created in the Galapagos Archipelago, and nowhere else, bear so plain a stamp of affinity to those created in America? There is nothing in the conditions of life, in the geological nature of the islands, in their height or climate, or in the proportions in which the several classes are associated together, which resembles closely the conditions of the South American coast: in fact there is a considerable dissimilarity in all these respects. On the other hand, there is a considerable degree of resemblance in the volcanic nature of the soil, in climate, height, and size of the islands, between the Galapagos and Cape de Verde Archipelagos: but what an entire and absolute difference in their inhabitants! The inhabitants of the Cape de Verde Islands are related to those of Africa, like those of the Galapagos to America. I believe this grand fact can receive no sort of explanation on the ordinary view of independent creation; whereas on the view here maintained, it is obvious that the Galapagos Islands would be likely to receive colonists, whether by occasional means of transport or


text:
Page:Origin of Species 1859 facsimile.djvu/411

 by formerly continuous land, from America; and the Cape de Verde Islands from Africa; and that such colonists would be liable to modification;—the principle of inheritance still betraying their original birthplace.

Many analogous facts could be given: indeed it is an almost universal rule that the endemic productions of islands are related to those of the nearest continent, or of other near islands. The exceptions are few, and most of them can be explained. Thus the plants of Kerguelen Land, though standing nearer to Africa than to America, are related, and that very closely, as we know from Dr. Hooker's account, to those of America: but on the view that this island has been mainly stocked by seeds brought with earth and stones on icebergs, drifted by the prevailing currents, this anomaly disappears. New Zealand in its endemic plants is much more closely related to Australia, the nearest mainland, than to any other region: and this is what might have been expected; but it is also plainly related to South America, which, although the next nearest continent, is so enormously remote, that the fact becomes an anomaly. But this difficulty almost disappears on the view that both New Zealand, South America, and other southern lands were long ago partially stocked from a nearly intermediate though distant point, namely from the antarctic islands, when they were clothed with vegetation, before the commencement of the Glacial period. The affinity, which, though feeble, I am assured by Dr. Hooker is real, between the flora of the south-western corner of Australia and of the Cape of Good Hope, is a far more remarkable case, and is at present inexplicable: but this affinity is confined to the plants, and will, I do not doubt, be some day explained.

The law which causes the inhabitants of an


text:
Page:Origin of Species 1859 facsimile.djvu/412

, though specifically distinct, to be closely allied to those of the nearest continent, we sometimes see displayed on a small scale, yet in a most interesting manner, within the limits of the same archipelago. Thus the several islands of the Galapagos Archipelago are tenanted, as I have elsewhere shown, in a quite marvellous manner, by very closely related species; so that the inhabitants of each separate island, though mostly distinct, are related in an incomparably closer degree to each other than to the inhabitants of any other part of the world. And this is just what might have been expected on my view, for the islands are situated so near each other that they would almost certainly receive immigrants from the same original source, or from each other. But this dissimilarity between the endemic inhabitants of the islands may be used as an argument against my views; for it may be asked, how has it happened in the several islands situated within sight of each other, having the same geological nature, the same height, climate, &c., that many of the immigrants should have been differently modified, though only in a small degree. This long appeared to me a great difficulty: but it arises in chief part from the deeply-seated error of considering the physical conditions of a country as the most important for its inhabitants; whereas it cannot, I think, be disputed that the nature of the other inhabitants, with which each has to compete, is at least as important, and generally a far more important element of success. Now if we look to those inhabitants of the Galapagos Archipelago which are found in other parts of the world (laying on one side for the moment the endemic species, which cannot be here fairly included, as we are considering how they have come to be modified since their arrival), we find a considerable amount


text:
Page:Origin of Species 1859 facsimile.djvu/413

 of difference in the several islands. This difference might indeed have been expected on the view of the islands having been stocked by occasional means of transport—a seed, for instance, of one plant having been brought to one island, and that of another plant to another island. Hence when in former times an immigrant settled on any one or more of the islands, or when it subsequently spread from one island to another, it would undoubtedly be exposed to different conditions of life in the different islands, for it would have to compete with different sets of organisms: a plant, for instance, would find the best-fitted ground more perfectly occupied by distinct plants in one island than in another, and it would be exposed to the attacks of somewhat different enemies. If then it varied, natural selection would probably favour different varieties in the different islands. Some species, however, might spread and yet retain the same character throughout the group, just as we see on continents some species spreading widely and remaining the same.

The really surprising fact in this case of the Galapagos Archipelago, and in a lesser degree in some analogous instances, is that the new species formed in the separate islands have not quickly spread to the other islands. But the islands, though in sight of each other, are separated by deep arms of the sea, in most cases wider than the British Channel, and there is no reason to suppose that they have at any former period been continuously united. The currents of the sea are rapid and sweep across the archipelago, and gales of wind are extraordinarily rare; so that the islands are far more effectually separated from each other than they appear to be on a map. Nevertheless a good many species, both those found in other parts of the world and those confined to the archipelago, are common to


text:
Page:Origin of Species 1859 facsimile.djvu/414

 the several islands, and we may infer from certain facts that these have probably spread from some one island to the others. But we often take, I think, an erroneous view of the probability of closely allied species invading each other's territory, when put into free intercommunication. Undoubtedly if one species has any advantage whatever over another, it will in a very brief time wholly or in part supplant it; but if both are equally well fitted for their own places in nature, both probably will hold their own places and keep separate for almost any length of time. Being familiar with the fact that many species, naturalised through man's agency, have spread with astonishing rapidity over new countries, we are apt to infer that most species would thus spread; but we should remember that the forms which become naturalised in new countries are not generally closely allied to the aboriginal inhabitants, but are very distinct species, belonging in a large proportion of cases, as shown by Alph. de Candolle, to distinct genera. In the Galapagos Archipelago, many even of the birds, though so well adapted for flying from island to island, are distinct on each; thus there are three closely-allied species of mocking-thrush, each confined to its own island. Now let us suppose the mocking-thrush of Chatham Island to be blown to Charles Island, which has its own mocking-thrush: why should it succeed in establishing itself there? We may safely infer that Charles Island is well stocked with its own species, for annually more eggs are laid there than can possibly be reared; and we may infer that the mocking-thrush peculiar to Charles Island is at least as well fitted for its home as is the species peculiar to Chatham Island. Sir C. Lyell and Mr. Wollaston have communicated to me a remarkable fact bearing on this subject; namely, that Madeira and the adjoining islet of


text:
Page:Origin of Species 1859 facsimile.djvu/415

 Porto Santo possess many distinct but representative land-shells, some of which live in crevices of stone; and although large quantities of stone are annually transported from Porto Santo to Madeira, yet this latter island has not become colonised by the Porto Santo species: nevertheless both islands have been colonised by some European land-shells, which no doubt had some advantage over the indigenous species. From these considerations I think we need not greatly marvel at the endemic and representative species, which inhabit the several islands of the Galapagos Archipelago, not having universally spread from island to island. In many other instances, as in the several districts of the same continent, pre-occupation has probably played an important part in checking the commingling of species under the same conditions of life. Thus, the south-east and south-west corners of Australia have nearly the same physical conditions, and are united by continuous land, yet they are inhabited by a vast number of distinct mammals, birds, and plants.

The principle which determines the general character of the fauna and flora of oceanic islands, namely, that the inhabitants, when not identically the same, yet are plainly related to the inhabitants of that region whence colonists could most readily have been derived,—the colonists having been subsequently modified and better fitted to their new homes,—is of the widest application throughout nature. We see this on every mountain, in every lake and marsh. For Alpine species, excepting in so far as the same forms, chiefly of plants, have spread widely throughout the world during the recent Glacial epoch, are related to those of the surrounding lowlands;—thus we have in South America, Alpine humming-birds, Alpine rodents, Alpine plants, &c., all of strictly American forms, and it is obvious


text:
Page:Origin of Species 1859 facsimile.djvu/416

 that a mountain, as it became slowly upheaved, would naturally be colonised from the surrounding lowlands. So it is with the inhabitants of lakes and marshes, excepting in so far as great facility of transport has given the same general forms to the whole world. We see this same principle in the blind animals inhabiting the caves of America and of Europe. Other analogous facts could be given. And it will, I believe, be universally found to be true, that wherever in two regions, let them be ever so distant, many closely allied or representative species occur, there will likewise be found some identical species, showing, in accordance with the foregoing view, that at some former period there has been intercommunication or migration between the two regions. And wherever many closely-allied species occur, there will be found many forms which some naturalists rank as distinct species, and some as varieties; these doubtful forms showing us the steps in the process of modification.

This relation between the power and extent of migration of a species, either at the present time or at some former period under different physical conditions, and the existence at remote points of the world of other species allied to it, is shown in another and more general way. Mr. Gould remarked to me long ago, that in those genera of birds which range over the world, many of the species have very wide ranges. I can hardly doubt that this rule is generally true, though it would be difficult to prove it. Amongst mammals, we see it strikingly displayed in Bats, and in a lesser degree in the Felidæ and Canidæ. We see it, if we compare the distribution of butterflies and beetles. So it is with most fresh-water productions, in which so many genera range over the world, and many individual species have enormous ranges. It is not meant that in


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 57.djvu/228

 1672. They conclude with an expression of his opinion: ‘But the French king shall find no more security herein than the Dutch and Spaniards did in the king's joining in the Tripple League’ (, Hist. of Engl. iii. 289).

According to his colleague Sir Joseph Williamson [q. v.], Trevor had nonconformist leanings (Cal. State Papers, Dom. 1671, p. 569). Yet he had to send instructions to inquire into, and if necessary suppress, sectarian meetings in the eastern counties and Northamptonshire (ib. 1668–9, p. 294). On 18 Jan. 1671 he was named a member of the committee to report upon the petition of Irish owners dispossessed by Cromwell and not restored; and on 2 July a commissioner to report upon the settlement of Ireland (ib. 1671, pp. 30, 358). In June he himself claimed a title to lands at Moira sold and mortgaged by his relative, the late Marcus Trevor, first viscount Dungannon [q. v.] (ib. pp. 313, 558). On 5 April he was associated with Ashley, Clifford, and Arlington in negotiations with the States-General ‘concerning a defensive unlimited alliance’ (ib. p. 172).

Trevor died of fever on 28 May 1672, and was buried at St. Bartholomew's, Smithfield.

He married Ruth, fourth daughter of John Hampden, by whom he had five sons and a daughter. The second son, Thomas, first baron Trevor of Bromham [q. v.], is separately noticed. The eldest, John Morley-Trevor, M.P. for Sussex and Lewes in several parliaments, died in April 1719. He married a sister of George Montagu, second earl of Halifax, and had a son, John Morley Trevor (d. 1743), who was M.P. for Lewes and a lord of the admiralty. The third, Richard (d. 1676), was a physician (cf., Fasti, ii. 251; , Coll. of Phys. i. 308).

[In addition to authorities cited, see Le Neve's Pedigrees of Knights (Harl. Soc.); Noble's Memoirs of the House of Cromwell, ii. 111–20; Ret. Memb. Parl.; Sir W. Temple's Corresp. ed. Swift, passim; Mignet's Négociations relatives à la Success. d'Espagne, ii. 364, 608–11, 626–30; Foster's Alumni Oxon. The instructions for the embassy of 1668, signed by Charles II and countersigned by Arlington, as well as letters of Trevor to Lord Coventry (1671–2), are at Longleat (Hist. MSS. Comm. 4th Rep. p. 231).]

TREVOR, JOHN (1637–1717), judge and speaker of the House of Commons, second son of John Trevor of Brynkinalt, Denbighshire, by Margaret, daughter of John Jeffreys of Acton in the same county, was born in 1637. His father, a judge on the North Wales circuit, is said to have been a descendant of the Tudor Trevors. Through his maternal grandfather he was first cousin to George Jeffreys, first baron Jeffreys of Wem [q. v.] He read law in the chambers of his cousin, Arthur Trevor, a member of the Inner Temple, where he was admitted a student in November 1654, called to the bar in May 1661, elected a bencher in 1673, treasurer in 1674, and reader in 1675. He is said to have been a great gamester, and particularly proficient in the law of gambling transactions. He was knighted on 29 Jan. 1670–1. On 10 Feb. 1672–3 he was returned to parliament for Castle Rising, Norfolk. He sat for Beeralston, Devonshire, in the parliaments of 1678–9 and 1679–81. In parliament he at first courted the protestant interest, and was chosen chairman of a committee appointed to discuss with the lords the burning question of the growth of popery, of which he brought in the report on 29 April 1678. The result was the appointment of another committee, of which Trevor was also chairman, to frame an address to the king for the removal of popish recusants from London (23 Oct. 1678). In May 1679 he presided over the committee deputed to confer with the peers on the case of the five popish lords, on whose impeachment he appears as one of the managers of the evidence. On the motion for the removal of Jeffreys from the recordership of London on 13 Nov. 1680, Trevor's was the only voice raised on his behalf; and his advancement to the rank of king's counsel in 1683, the year of Jeffreys's appointment to the chief-justiceship, was probably the reward of his courage.

In the Oxford parliament of 1681 Trevor sat for Denbighshire, and in James II's parliament he represented Denbigh borough. On the meeting of the latter assembly on 19 May 1685 he was chosen speaker by a unanimous vote. The choice was made on the recommendation of Charles Middleton, earl of Middleton in the peerage of Scotland; was supposed, and probably with truth, to have been advised by Jeffreys, and was highly acceptable to the king. Bramston (Autobiography, Camden Soc. p. 196) describes him as ill-versed in the forms of the house, which his past record renders unlikely, and as almost tongue-tied. On 20 Oct. following he was appointed to the mastership of the rolls, vacant by the death of Sir John Churchill. Sworn of the privy council on 6 July 1688, he was present at Windsor when the king came to the decision to call a new parliament, and at the extraordinary meeting held to certify the birth of the Prince of Wales (22 Oct.). He was also one of the faithful eight who obeyed the king's


text:
Page:Origin of Species 1859 facsimile.djvu/417

 genera all the species have a wide range, or even that they have on an average a wide range; but only that some of the species range very widely; for the facility with which widely-ranging species vary and give rise to new forms will largely determine their average range. For instance, two varieties of the same species inhabit America and Europe, and the species thus has an immense range; but, if the variation had been a little greater, the two varieties would have been ranked as distinct species, and the common range would have been greatly reduced. Still less is it meant, that a species which apparently has the capacity of crossing barriers and ranging widely, as in the case of certain powerfully-winged birds, will necessarily range widely; for we should never forget that to range widely implies not only the power of crossing barriers, but the more important power of being victorious in distant lands in the struggle for life with foreign associates. But on the view of all the species of a genus having descended from a single parent, though now distributed to the most remote points of the world, we ought to find, and I believe as a general rule we do find, that some at least of the species range very widely; for it is necessary that the unmodified parent should range widely, undergoing modification during its diffusion, and should place itself under diverse conditions favourable for the conversion of its offspring, firstly into new varieties and ultimately into new species.

In considering the wide distribution of certain genera, we should bear in mind that some are extremely ancient, and must have branched off from a common parent at a remote epoch; so that in such cases there will have been ample time for great climatal and geographical changes and for accidents of transport; and consequently for the migration of some of the species into all


text:
Page:Origin of Species 1859 facsimile.djvu/418

 quarters of the world, where they may have become slightly modified in relation to their new conditions. There is, also, some reason to believe from geological evidence that organisms low in the scale within each great class, generally change at a slower rate than the higher forms; and consequently the lower forms will have had a better chance of ranging widely and of still retaining the same specific character. This fact, together with the seeds and eggs of many low forms being very minute and better fitted for distant transportation, probably accounts for a law which has long been observed, and which has lately been admirably discussed by Alph. de Candolle in regard to plants, namely, that the lower any group of organisms is, the more widely it is apt to range.

The relations just discussed,—namely, low and slowly-changing organisms ranging more widely than the high,—some of the species of widely-ranging genera themselves ranging widely,—such facts, as alpine, lacustrine, and marsh productions being related (with the exceptions before specified) to those on the surrounding low lands and dry lands, though these stations are so different—the very close relation of the distinct species which inhabit the islets of the same archipelago,—and especially the striking relation of the inhabitants of each whole archipelago or island to those of the nearest mainland,—are, I think, utterly inexplicable on the ordinary view of the independent creation of each species, but are explicable on the view of colonisation from the nearest and readiest source, together with the subsequent modification and better adaptation of the colonists to their new homes.

Summary of last and present Chapters.—In these chapters I have endeavoured to show, that if we make due allowance for our ignorance of the full effects of all


text:
Page:Origin of Species 1859 facsimile.djvu/419

Rh the changes of climate and of the level of the land, which have certainly occurred within the recent period, and of other similar changes which may have occurred within the same period; if we remember how profoundly ignorant we are with respect to the many and curious means of occasional transport,—a subject which has hardly ever been properly experimentised on; if we bear in mind how often a species may have ranged continuously over a wide area, and then have become extinct in the intermediate tracts, I think the difficulties in believing that all the individuals of the same species, wherever located, have descended from the same parents, are not insuperable. And we are led to this conclusion, which has been arrived at by many naturalists under the designation of single centres of creation, by some general considerations, more especially from the importance of barriers and from the analogical distribution of sub-genera, genera, and families.

With respect to the distinct species of the same genus, which on my theory must have spread from one parent-source; if we make the same allowances as before for our ignorance, and remember that some forms of life change most slowly, enormous periods of time being thus granted for their migration, I do not think that the difficulties are insuperable; though they often are in this case, and in that of the individuals of the same species, extremely grave.

As exemplifying the effects of climatal changes on distribution, I have attempted to show how important has been the influence of the modern Glacial period, which I am fully convinced simultaneously affected the whole world, or at least great meridional belts. As showing how diversified are the means of occasional transport, I have discussed at some little length the means of dispersal of fresh-water productions.


text:
Page:Origin of Species 1859 facsimile.djvu/420

 If the difficulties be not insuperable in admitting that in the long course of time the individuals of the same species, and likewise of allied species, have proceeded from some one source; then I think all the grand leading facts of geographical distribution are explicable on the theory of migration (generally of the more dominant forms of life), together with subsequent modification and the multiplication of new forms. We can thus understand the high importance of barriers, whether of land or water, which separate our several zoological and botanical provinces. We can thus understand the localisation of sub-genera, genera, and families; and how it is that under different latitudes, for instance in South America, the inhabitants of the plains and mountains, of the forests, marshes, and deserts, are in so mysterious a manner linked together by affinity, and are likewise linked to the extinct beings which formerly inhabited the same continent. Bearing in mind that the mutual relations of organism to organism are of the highest importance, we can see why two areas having nearly the same physical conditions should often be inhabited by very different forms of life; for according to the length of time which has elapsed since new inhabitants entered one region; according to the nature of the communication which allowed certain forms and not others to enter, either in greater or lesser numbers; according or not, as those which entered happened to come in more or less direct competition with each other and with the aborigines; and according as the immigrants were capable of varying more or less rapidly, there would ensue in different regions, independently of their physical conditions, infinitely diversified conditions of life,—there would be an almost endless amount of organic action and reaction,—and we should find, as we do find, some groups of beings greatly, and some only slightly modified,—some


text:
Page:Origin of Species 1859 facsimile.djvu/421

 in great force, some existing in scanty numbers—in the different great geographical provinces of the world.

On these same principles, we can understand, as I have endeavoured to show, why oceanic islands should have few inhabitants, but of these a great number should be endemic or peculiar; and why, in relation to the means of migration, one group of beings, even within the same class, should have all its species endemic, and another group should have all its species common to other quarters of the world. We can see why whole groups of organisms, as batrachians and terrestrial mammals, should be absent from oceanic islands, whilst the most isolated islands possess their own peculiar species of aërial mammals or bats. We can see why there should be some relation between the presence of mammals, in a more or less modified condition, and the depth of the sea between an island and the mainland. We can clearly see why all the inhabitants of an archipelago, though specifically distinct on the several islets, should be closely related to each other, and likewise be related, but less closely, to those of the nearest continent or other source whence immigrants were probably derived. We can see why in two areas, however distant from each other, there should be a correlation, in the presence of identical species, of varieties, of doubtful species, and of distinct but representative species.

As the late Edward Forbes often insisted, there is a striking parallelism in the laws of life throughout time and space: the laws governing the succession of forms in past times being nearly the same with those governing at the present time the differences in different areas. We see this in many facts. The endurance of each species and group of species is continuous in time; for the exceptions to the rule are so few, that they may


text:
Page:Origin of Species 1859 facsimile.djvu/422

410 fairly be attributed to our not having as yet discovered in an intermediate deposit the forms which are therein absent, but which occur above and below: so in space, it certainly is the general rule that the area inhabited by a single species, or by a group of species, is continuous; and the exceptions, which are not rare, may, as I have attempted to show, be accounted for by migration at some former period under different conditions or by occasional means of transport, and by the species having become extinct in the intermediate tracts. Both in time and space, species and groups of species have their points of maximum development. Groups of species, belonging either to a certain period of time, or to a certain area, are often characterised by trifling characters in common, as of sculpture or colour. In looking to the long succession of ages, as in now looking to distant provinces throughout the world, we find that some organisms differ little, whilst others belonging to a different class, or to a different order, or even only to a different family of the same order, differ greatly. In both time and space the lower members of each class generally change less than the higher; but there are in both cases marked exceptions to the rule. On my theory these several relations throughout time and space are intelligible; for whether we look to the forms of life which have changed during successive ages within the same quarter of the world, or to those which have changed after having migrated into distant quarters, in both cases the forms within each class have been connected by the same bond of ordinary generation; and the more nearly any two forms are related in blood, the nearer they will generally stand to each other in time and space; in both cases the laws of variation have been the same, and modifications have been accumulated by the same power of natural selection.


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 57.djvu/229

 last summons to council on his return to Whitehall on 16 Dec.

As an equity judge Trevor was a conspicuous success, and he continued in the most exemplary manner to dispense justice at the rolls court until the accession of William III, when he was displaced.

To the convention parliament he was returned for Beeralston, Devonshire, on 21 May 1689, and to the following parliament for Yarmouth, Isle of Wight, on 4 March 1689–1690. On the meeting of the latter parliament he was again chosen speaker (20 March), and on 1 Jan. 1690–1 he was sworn of the privy council. He was also chief commissioner of the great seal in the interval (14 May 1690 to 23 March 1692–3) between its surrender by Sir John Maynard (1602–1690) [q. v.] and its delivery to Lord-keeper Somers [see or ]. On 13 Jan. 1692–3 he was reinstated in the mastership of the rolls. He continued to hold the speakership until, being detected in the acceptance of 1,100l. from the common council of London for promoting the orphans bill, he was voted guilty of a high crime and misdemeanour (12 March 1694–5). This resolution he himself put from the chair on the report of a committee by which he was incriminated (Add. MS. 17677 PP. f. 192 b). On the following day he absented himself from the house, sending the mace with a letter alleging that a fit of colic prevented his attendance. As his indisposition continued, the house, with the king's leave, elected Paul Foley [q. v.] speaker in his room. On 16 March Trevor was expelled the house; nor was he re-elected. He was not, however, deprived of the mastership of the rolls, which he continued to hold until his death.

On the accession of Queen Anne, Trevor recovered credit. He was sworn of the privy council on 18 June 1702, and in April 1705 was appointed constable of Flint Castle. He was also custos rotulorum of Flint.

Trevor had ‘a pretty seat’ near Pulford, Denbighshire (Diary of Dean Davies, Camden Soc. p. 110). His town house was in Clement's Lane, where he died on 20 May 1717, leaving personalty to the amount of 60,000l. His remains were interred in the Rolls chapel.

By his wife, Jane (d. 1704), daughter of Sir Roger Mostyn, bart., of Mostyn, Flint, relict of Roger Puliston of Emerall in the same county, Trevor had issue four sons and a daughter. The sons died without issue. The daughter, Anne, married, first, Michael Hill of Hillsborough, Ireland; secondly, Alan Brodrick, viscount Midleton [q. v.] By her first husband she was mother of: (1) Trevor Hill, who was created on 21 Aug. 1717 Viscount Hillsborough in the peerage of Ireland, and was father of Wills Hill, first marquis of Downshire [q. v.]; (2) Arthur Hill, who assumed the additional surname Trevor, was created on 17 Feb. 1766 Viscount Dungannon in the peerage of Ireland, and was great-grandfather of Arthur Hill-Trevor, third viscount Dungannon [q. v.]

Trevor was a lawyer of no small learning and ability, and apparently as upright on the bench as he was unscrupulous in the House of Commons (, Own Time, fol. edit. ii. 42). He squinted, and, though fond of his bottle, was otherwise as penurious as avaricious. His ecclesiastical views may be inferred from the fact that he regarded Tillotson as a fanatic. A portrait in oils by J. Allen is at Brynkinalt. An engraved portrait is at Lincoln's Inn.

A paper by Trevor on the state of factions on the eve of the dissolution of William III's first parliament is printed in Dalrymple's ‘Memoirs’ (App. ii. 80). His decisions are reported by Vernon, Peere Williams, and Gilbert.

[G. E. C[okayne]'s Complete Peerage, ‘Trevor of Brynkinalt;’ Le Neve's Pedigrees of Knights (Harleian Society), p. 245; Burke's Peerage, ‘Trevor;’ Inner Temple Books; Official Lists of Members of Parl.; Parl. Hist. iv. 1116, 1124; Parl. Debates, iii. 13, 16; Comm. Journ. ix. 465, 519, 713, x. 347, xi. 269–74; Lords' Journ. xiv. 21; Cobbett's State Trials; Hone's Year Book, p. 618; Secret Services of Charles II and James II (Camden Soc.); Mackintosh's Rebellion in 1688, p. 546; Ellis Corresp. i. 264, ii. 6; Hatton Corresp. (Camden Soc.) ii. 218; Diary of Bishop Cartwright (Camden Soc.), pp. 80, 84; Cal. State Papers, Dom. 1689–90, pp. 367, 441; Luttrell's Relation of State Affairs; Shrewsbury Corresp. ed. Coxe, p. 427; Clarendon and Rochester Corresp. ii. 180, 221; Lexington Papers, pp. 22, 69; North's Lives, i. 218; Hist. Reg. Chron. Diary 1717, 20 May; Addit. MSS. 5540 ff. 45–6, 28053 f. 118; Hist. MSS. Comm. 11th Rep. App. ii. 31, iv. 143, vii. 12, 12th Rep. App. iii. 116, vi. 105, ix. 108, 13th Rep. App. v. 371, 399, 450; Birch's Life of Tillotson, p. 322; Woolrych's Life of Jeffreys, pp. 324–9; Williams's Welshmen, and Parl. Hist. of Wales; Yorke's Royal Tribes of Wales, pp. 108–9; Macaulay's Hist. of England, ed. 1855, ix. 373, 460, 548–51; Nicholas's Annals of the Counties and County Families of Wales, i. 418; Manning's Lives of the Speakers; Foss's Lives of the Judges; Macmillan's Mag., October 1898.]

TREVOR, JOHN HAMPDEN-, third (1749–1824), diplomatist, was the second son of Robert Hampden-


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 57.djvu/230

 Trevor, first viscount Hampden and fourth baron Trevor [q. v.], by his wife Constantia, daughter of Peter Anthony de Huybert, lord of Van Kruyningen in Holland. He was born on 24 Feb. 1748–9 in London, and baptised on 26 March at St. George's, Hanover Square.

Hampden-Trevor was educated at Westminster school, and matriculated from Christ Church, Oxford, 28 Jan. 1767. He graduated B.A. 20 Oct. 1770, and was created M.A. 9 July 1773. Following his father's career, he was appointed, 8 April 1780, minister-plenipotentiary at Munich to the elector palatine, and minister to the diet at Ratisbon. By the instructions given him, 28 April 1780, by Lord Stormont, he was ordered to be particularly watchful with regard to any treaty of subsidy that the court of Versailles might attempt to negotiate in any part of the empire for the purpose of securing troops; he was also to make it his duty to understand thoroughly all the grievances under which the protestants in the empire laboured (State Papers, Foreign Office, German States, 1780). Having given satisfaction at Munich, he was appointed minister to the Sardinian court at Turin in succession to Lord Mountstuart (February 1783). At Turin, where he arrived on 15 Oct. 1783 and remained till 1798, Hampden-Trevor spent the rest of his official career. He was here again instructed to give his best assistance to the Vaudois and other protestants within the king's dominions, and deputies from the Vaudois actually waited on him (27 Dec. 1783). He was at first (January 1785) ordered to maintain a strict neutrality in the approaching struggle between France and Austria, and his numerous despatches exhibit the difficulties of the Sardinian kingdom owing to its position between two great powers. In December 1786 he made an ineffectual attempt to secure promotion to Florence. Subsequently, however, he was offered and refused missions to both Russia and Vienna (State Papers, Foreign Office Sardinia 104, 1 May 1789). The title of plenipotentiary, with additional pay, was conferred on him on 16 June 1789; for this he had asked in 1783, urging the ‘very spare diet of his last two stations,’ in which he declared he had spent 4,000l. more than he received from government. From 1793 to 1796 the critical position of affairs kept him constantly at his post. The French occupation of Turin on 3 July 1798 compelled his retirement. He succeeded his elder brother, Thomas, in the peerage as third Viscount Hampden on 20 Aug. 1824, and died without issue on 9 Sept. 1824 in Berkeley Square. He was buried at Glynde in Sussex.

Hampden-Trevor married, 5 Aug. 1773, Harriot (1751–1829), only child of the Rev. Daniel Burton, canon of Christ Church, who survived him. By his death and the failure of issue male of Robert Hampden-Trevor, the Hampden estates passed under the will of John Hampden to the Hobart family.

Hampden-Trevor edited and published at Parma ‘Poemata Hampdeniana,’ a splendid folio edition of some of his father's Latin poems, which was dedicated to George III, under date 1 Jan. 1792.

[Gent. Mag. 1824, ii. 465; Lipscomb's Buckinghamshire; Coxe's Life of Lord Walpole; Collins's Peerage of Great Britain, ed. Brydges, vi. 304; G. E C[okayne]'s Complete Peerage; Hampden-Trevor's Despatches in the Record Office.]

TREVOR, MARCUS, first of the first creation, and  in the peerage of Ireland (1618–1670), born on 15 April 1618, was son of Sir Edward Trevor of Rostrevor, co. Down, and Brynkinalt, Denbighshire, by his second wife, Rose, daughter of Archbishop Ussher, primate of Ireland. When the Irish rebellion of 1641 broke out, Sir Edward was imprisoned in Narrowater Castle, Newry, by the rebels, till April 1642, and died soon after his release (Cal. State Papers, Dom. 1641–2, p. 326;, Contemp. Hist. of Ireland, i. 421–8).

Marcus Trevor was one of the ‘commanders’ in co. Down to whom the rebel Con Magennis addressed a letter threatening reprisals in October 1641 (ib. i. 364). At the close of 1643 he came to England, probably with the division despatched by Ormonde under the command of Colonel Robert Byron, who made Chester his headquarters (, Ormonde, iii. 41). On 12 Jan. 1644 he narrowly escaped being taken prisoner at Ellesmere, when Colonel Thomas Mytton [q. v.] surprised the royalists in a night attack (A True Relation of a Notable Surprise at Ellesmere). He afterwards received command of a regiment of horse, and was present at the battle of Marston Moor in July, when he is said by Burke (on what authority is not clear) to have wounded Cromwell.

After the battle Trevor again served in the north-west, and in October defended Ruthin against Middleton (Cal. State Papers, Dom. 1644–5, p. 81). In the winter of 1645–6 he was in Cornwall under Hopton. After having fought with Fairfax at Torrington, ‘the last action in the west,’ the royalist army was disbanded, and Trevor probably went with most of the officers to Oxford. Three months afterwards, in May 1646, he


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 57.djvu/231

 and Sir Joseph Vaughan ‘came in’ to Fairfax at Oxford.

Trevor soon after took service under the parliament against the Irish rebels, and in October 1647 was in Louth (Hist. MSS. Comm. 10th Rep. iv. 86). In June 1649 he deserted Monck on account of his treaty with Owen Roe O'Neill [q. v.], which he probably divulged, and joined the royalists under Ormonde (, Commonwealth, i. 104 n.) He helped to beleaguer Drogheda, and on 15 July routed Lieutenant-general Ferral, who was carrying ammunition for O'Neill to Dundalk. He afterwards helped to defend Drogheda. On the night of 26 Sept. he surprised Colonel Robert Venables [q. v.] at Dromore, but the parliamentarians rallied at daybreak and compelled him to retire on the Bann (cf. A Brief Chronicle of the Irish Warre, 1650). In November 1649 he was in the south, and in an engagement near Wexford was shot through the belly and carried to Kilkenny. Cromwell, who calls Trevor ‘one of their great ranters,’ and describes him as ‘very good at this work,’ wrote news of the affair to Lenthall (cf., Memoirs, i. 309). In March 1649–50 Trevor was chosen by the Irish lieutenant-general of horse, but soon afterwards deserted and came in to Colonel Hewson ‘upon mercy’ (W. Basil to Speaker Lenthall, ib.) For the next few years he played a shifting game, and Cromwell in November 1654 describes him to his son Henry as a very dangerous person who was to be secured in some very safe place.

In September 1658 Henry Cromwell, who professed himself satisfied with Trevor's resolution ‘to live as an honest man under the present government,’ requested a favour for him from Secretary Thurloe (Thurloe State Papers, vii. 410); but Carte says that Trevor subsequently tried to induce the lord deputy himself to declare for Charles II. It is at any rate clear that Trevor had returned to his allegiance before the Restoration; for on 6 Dec. 1660 he was made ranger of Ulster, and received a grant of twelve hundred acres in the liberty of Dundalk and six hundred near Carlingford (Deputy-Keeper of Irish Records, 32nd Rep. App. i. pp. 566, 656, 750). He was also sworn of the Irish privy council, and on 28 Aug. 1662 was created Baron Trevor of Rostrevor and Viscount Dungannon of Tyrone. He acted as one of the commissioners for the execution of the first act of settlement and explanation. In 1664 he was made lord-lieutenant of co. Down. Sir George Rawdon [q. v.] told Conway that Dungannon's government of Ulster brought him much trouble and little profit (State Papers, Dom. 1671, p. 584). He was active in hunting down the tories, and Ormonde in a letter written in 1668 commends Dungannon for setting distrust and enmity betwixt the Irish (, Ireland from the Restoration to the Revolution, p. 107).

Dungannon died at Dundalk on 3 Jan. 1670 (N.S.), and was buried in Clanallin church, near Rostrevor. He was twice married: first, to Frances, daughter and coheir of Sir Marmaduke Whitechurch of Loughbrickland; and, secondly, to Anne, daughter of John Lewis of Anglesey, and widow of John Owen of Orieltown, Pembrokeshire. Two of his sons by the second wife matriculated on the same day, 27 March 1686, at Christ Church, Oxford. On 31 Dec. 1687 John, the elder, was accidentally shot by his younger brother, Marcus Trevor (Alumni Oxon.) Lewis Trevor, who succeeded as second Viscount Dungannon, died in Spring Gardens, and was buried at Kensington on 3 Jan. 1692. His name is among the subscribers to the fourth edition of ‘Paradise Lost’ (, Milton, vi. 785). His son, Marcus Trevor, third viscount, dying in Spain without male issue on 8 Nov. 1706, the peerage became extinct. The property eventually passed to Arthur Hill-Trevor, viscount Dungannon [q. v.]

[The only exact statement of the birth, parentage, and death of Dungannon is in a manuscript book (F. 4. 18) in the library of Trinity College, Dublin. Approximate pedigrees are given in Le Neve's Knights, Burke's Extinct Peerage, and G. E. C[okayne]'s Peerage. A letter of H. Puckering to the Duchess of Beaufort of 30 Nov. 1685, giving an account of Dungannon's services in the English civil war, is printed in full in Hist. MSS. Comm. 12th Rep. ix. 38–45. See also Carte's Life of Ormonde and Original Letters; Carlyle's Cromwell, letters 115, 207; O'Hart's Irish Landed Gentry; Whitelocke's Memorials, pp. 203, 412, 417, 450; Rawdon Papers, pp. 217–218, 222–5.]  TREVOR, MICHAEL (d. 1471), arch-bishop of Dublin. [See .]

TREVOR, RICHARD (1707–1771), successively bishop of St. David's and of Durham, born on 30 Sept. 1707, was second surviving son of Thomas Trevor, baron Trevor of Bromham [q. v.], by his second wife, Anne, daughter of Colonel Robert Weldon, and widow of Sir Robert Bernard, bart. Richard was educated at Bishop Stortford in Hertfordshire, and afterwards at Westminster school. On 6 July 1724 he matriculated from Queen's College, Oxford, graduating B.A. on 13 May 1727 and M.A. on 28 Jan.


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 57.djvu/232

 1730–1. In November 1727 he was elected a fellow of All Souls' College. In 1732 his half-brother, Sir John Bernard, presented him to the living of Houghton with Wilton in Huntingdonshire, and on 8 Nov. 1735 he was appointed a canon of Christ Church, retaining his prebend till 1752. On 10 June 1736 he proceeded to the degree of D.C.L., and on 1 April 1744 he was consecrated bishop of St. David's, whence he was elected to the see of Durham on 9 Nov. 1752. In 1759 he competed for the office of chancellor of Oxford University against George Henry Lee, third earl of Lichfield [q. v.] and John Fane, seventh earl of Westmorland [q. v.], and had the advantage of his competitors singly, but was defeated by Lichfield giving his interest to Westmoreland. Trevor died unmarried at Bishop Auckland in Durham on 9 June 1771, and was buried at Glynde in Sussex. He was a munificent patron of merit, a man of considerable learning and exceptional benevolence. By his will he left large sums for charitable purposes. A monument was erected to him in the antechapel at Auckland. His portrait, drawn by Robert Hutchinson and engraved in 1776 by Joseph Collyer, was prefixed to a memoir by George Allan [q. v.] published in that year. A portrait in oils is preserved at Glynde Place near Lewes, the seat of Viscount Hampden. Trevor was the author of several published sermons.

[Allan's Sketch of the Life of Richard Trevor, Darlington, 1776, reprinted in Nichols's Lit. Anecdotes, ix. 241–50; Nichols's Lit. Anecdotes, passim; Hist. MSS. Comm. 14th Rep. ix. 153–4, 296; Letters of Radcliffe and James, ed. Evans (Oxford Hist. Soc.), p. 13; Notes and Queries, 7th ser. ix. 208, 257, 338; Gent. Mag. 1777, pp. 224, 625; Surtees's Hist. of Durham, vol. i. p. cxxiii.]  TREVOR, ROBERT HAMPDEN-, first and fourth  (1706–1783), born on 17 Feb. 1705–6, was third son of Thomas Trevor, baron Trevor of Bromham [q. v.], being his first son by his second wife, Anne, daughter of Colonel Robert Weldon, and widow of Sir Robert Bernard, bart. He was educated privately and at Queen's College, Oxford, whence he matriculated as gentleman-commoner on 21 Feb. 1723, and graduated B.A. on 20 Oct. 1725. He was nominated fellow of All Souls' 20 Nov. 1725. He was appointed clerk in the secretary of state's office in 1729, and from 1734 to 1739 acted as secretary to the legation at The Hague under Horatio Walpole. In September 1739 he was appointed envoy extraordinary, and in 1741 was raised to the rank of minister plenipotentiary. In February 1736–7 he stood as parliamentary candidate for Oxford University, but was defeated by William Bromley (1699?–1737) [q. v.] (An Exact Account of the Poll, &c., 12mo, 1736), and in 1743 he was offered a seat in the house by the Duke of Newcastle, but declined (Newcastle to Trevor, 25 Oct. 1743, Trevor Corresp.)

During the whole period of Trevor's residence in Holland from 1734 to 1746 he kept up a regular and almost weekly correspondence with Horatio Walpole. These letters are preserved in the Trevor collection in the possession of the Earl of Buckinghamshire (Hist. MSS. Comm. 14th Rep. pt. ix.), which also includes a considerable correspondence between Trevor and the British representatives at foreign courts.

The difficulties attending Trevor's position as minister became greatly increased in 1744, and are well described in a long letter to Henry Pelham on 15 May 1744 (ib. p. 95), in which he explained that the real discouragement to vigour in the conduct of the war by the government of Holland was ‘its want of a due reliance upon our royal master through its discovery of the prevalency of his electoral bias;’ he complained that he was reproached by the government of Holland with the perpetual dodging between the king's two qualities. ‘When any guaranty or advantage is the question, all the allies of the British crown are to be deemed allies of the electorate; but when any danger or onus is the question, Hanover is a distinct independent state and no wise involved in the measures nor even fate of England’ (Trevor to Henry Pelham, 26 May 1744, Trevor Corresp.) These candid communications on the part of Trevor were well received by the ministers at home. In July 1745 some delicate negotiations with regard to the bribery of the ministers of the elector of Cologne and the elector himself were placed in Trevor's hands, Pelham instructing him that he might venture to engage 20,000l. on this account (ib. 20 July 1745). In August 1745 Trevor expressed himself strongly in favour of opening negotiations with France: ‘the only string left to our bow … before Europe is absolutely flung off its old hinges, is to try whether there may still be a party left in the French cabinet for peace’ (ib. 3 Aug. 1745). He drew up a plan for ‘a general accommodation by means of a preliminary treaty between France and the maritime powers.’ This was generally approved by the ministers, but was not adopted and led to no results, and Trevor's position became almost untenable. ‘In public conferences which I cannot avoid I am baited unmercifully, and am told that if every time


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 57.djvu/233

 France pleases to send over a single battalion to Scotland she can operate a diversion of thirty thousand men in England's quota to the combined army, England is not an ally for the republic’ (ib. 25 Feb. 1745–6). It was at first intended that Trevor should act as the British plenipotentiary at Breda (Weston to Trevor, 14 Aug. 1746, p. 146 ib.), but Lord Sandwich was ultimately sent. On the arrival of the latter's credentials in November 1746, Trevor sent in a request for his recall. On 22 Nov. he was promised a commissionership of the revenue in Ireland, which he received in 1750.

Trevor, whose great-grandmother, Ruth, was the daughter of John Hampden, the patriot, succeeded to the estates of John Hampden of Great Hampden, Buckinghamshire, in 1754, and took the name of Hampden by royal license on 22 Feb. 1754. On 2 June 1759 he was appointed joint-postmaster-general, and held the office till 19 July 1765. On the death of his half-brother, John Trevor, on 27 Sept. 1764, he became fourth Baron Trevor of Bromham, Bedfordshire. He was created Viscount Hampden on 8 June 1776. He died on 22 Aug. 1783 at Bromham, where he was buried.

Trevor married, on 6 Feb. 1743, at The Hague, Constantia, daughter of Peter Anthony de Huybert, lord of Van Kruyningen, by whom he left four children—Constantia, Thomas, second viscount Hampden, John Hampden-Trevor, third viscount Hampden [q. v.], and Anne.

Trevor was a good scholar and a collector of drawings and prints. He was elected a fellow of the Royal Society on 13 Dec. 1764. He was the author of Latin poems entitled ‘Britannia,’ ‘Lathmon,’ and ‘Villa Bromhamensis,’ written between 1761 and 1776. These poems were published, under the title ‘Poematia Hampdeniana,’ by his son John in sumptuous style at Parma in 1792, and dedicated to George III. There is a vignette portrait of him prefixed to the volume. A portrait in oils, ascribed to Opie, is at Bromham Hall.

[Gent. Mag. 1783, ii. 718; Doyle's Official Baronage, s.v. ‘Hampden;’ Hist. MSS. Comm. 14th Rep. pt. ix., 10th Rep. pt. i.; Coxe's Memoirs of Horatio, Lord Walpole; Trevor's Despatches at the Record Office.]  TREVOR, SACKVILL (fl. 1632), naval commander, third son of John Trevor of Trevalyn, Denbighshire, was probably born about 1580. His younger brother, Sir Thomas [q. v.], is noticed separately. An elder brother, Sir John, knighted in 1603, was surveyor of the navy (, Visitations of Wales, ii. 354), and was grandfather of Sir John Trevor (1626–1672) [q. v.] In 1602 Sackvill Trevor commanded the Adventurer in the squadron on the coast of Spain under Sir Richard Leveson [q. v.] and Sir William Monson [q. v.], and, on their return to Plymouth, commanded the Mary Rose in the second expedition in the same year, under Monson. He remained behind on the coast of Spain, and took and brought in four Spanish vessels, which were condemned as prizes. Their cargo, principally naval stores, was estimated to be worth 4,500l., out of which the queen ordered him a reward of 500l. She died before it was paid, and her successor cut the amount down to 300l., which was ordered to be paid, 26 April 1605 (State Papers, Dom. James I, xiii. 77). In 1603 he commanded the Rainbow, again with Leveson and Monson. On 4 July 1604 he was knighted. In 1623 he commanded the Defiance, one of the squadron sent to Santander, under the Earl of Rutland, to escort Prince Charles and his expected bride to England. On 12 Sept. Charles arrived at Santander without the bride, and went off immediately to see Rutland on board the Prince. As he was returning to the shore after dark, it began to blow hard, and the wind and tide were sweeping the boat out to sea against the exertions of the rowers. In passing astern of the Defiance, a buoy fast to a rope was floated down to them, and the prince was thus got on board, rescued from a position of some danger (, Epist. Ho-elian. § iii. 92, v. 12).

In 1626 he is named in a list of able and experienced sea captains (State Papers, Dom. Charles I, xxx. 64), and in 1627 was in command of a squadron in the North Sea, employed during the summer in blockading the Elbe, so as to prevent contraband of war being sent to Spain, as also in carrying over recruits to be landed at Bremen or Stade. In September he was at Harwich, and was ordered to go over to the Texel, there to seize, burn, or destroy three French ships which were fitting out there. On the night of 27 Sept. Trevor with his squadron went into the Texel, and, with very little resistance, took possession of one of the ships, the Saint Esprit of eight hundred tons. The captains under him wrote that the others might have been taken as easily, as they had very few men on board, but Trevor thought that in attempting the others he would lose the first, as his force was not sufficient to leave her properly guarded (ib. lxxviii. 62, lxxx. 2, 13, 26). Howell, who addressed him as ‘Noble Uncle,’ wrote that, ‘without complimenting you, it was one of


text: Template:Oxon1715 lkpl

title: Template:Oxon1715 lkpl


text:
Page:Men-at-the-Bar.djvu/194

 Flemyng, William Westropp, M.A. Trin. Coll., Dublin, a student of the Middle Temple 3 May, 1872, called to the bar there 7 June, 1875, called to the bar at King's Inns, Dublin, Hilary, 1873 (eldest son of Rev. Robert Flemyng, of Dublin); born,.
 * 18, Upper Fitzwilliam Street, Dublin.

Cuddon-Fletcher, Bernard James, J.P. Norfolk and Argyll, assumed the additional surname of Fletcher 1870, a student of the Middle Temple 2 Jan., 1862, called to the bar 18 Nov., 1867 (only son of James Cuddon, of London, conveyancer); born, 1846; married , 1869, Harriet, only surviving child and heir of late Angus Fletcher, of Dunans, N.B., and has issue.
 * Somerton Hall, near Great Yarmouth; Dunans House, Colentraive, N.B.

Fletcher, Charles, B.A., S.C.L., Christ Church, Oxon, 1872, a member of the Northern circuit, assumed the name of Fletcher in lieu of his patronymic 14 Dec., 1882, a student of the Inner Temple 2 Nov., 1871 (then aged 22), called to the bar 7 June, 1875 (eldest son of late Charles Jack, of Liverpool, merchant); born, 1849.
 * 18, Freegrove Road, N.; 2, Pump Court, Temple, E.C.

Fletcher, Charles Melbourne, B.A., Jesus Coll., Camb., 1872, a member of the Northern circuit, a student of the Inner Temple 29 Dec., 1871 (then aged 21), called to the bar 7 June, 1875 (2nd son of William Fletcher, Esq., of Cheltenham); born, 1850.

Fletcher, Frederick Brandstrom, B.A., Pembroke Coll., Camb., 1879, scholar and prizeman, 2nd class classical tripos, a member of the Oxford circuit, a student of the Inner Temple 19 Nov., 1877 (then aged 22), called to the bar 17 Nov., 1881 (youngest son of Rev. Henry Fletcher, M.A., vicar of Thornton Curteis, co. Lincoln); born, 1855.
 * 69, George Street, Portman Square, W.; 2, Paper Buildings, Temple, E.C.

Fletcher, John Dunnington, M.A., Christ Coll., Camb., 1843, a member of the Northern circuit, assistant barrister at Liverpool sessions 1876–9, chairman of the second court of the Middlesex sessions since 1879, J.P. Middlesex, a student of the Inner Temple 22 Jan., 1838 (then aged 18), called to the bar 2 May, 1845 (eldest son of John Fletcher, Esq., of St. Michael's Mount, Liverpool); born 1820; married 16 Oct., 1851, Mary Eliza, youngest dau. of Charles Tee, Esq., of Pindar Oaks, near Barnsley, Yorks.
 * 12, Westbourne Terrace, Hyde Park. W.; 1 Essex Court, Temple, E.C.

Fletcher, John Henry, matric. London Univ. 1879 from Rugby, a student of the Middle Temple 9 Nov., 1881, called to the bar 17 Nov., 1884 (2nd son of John Fletcher Esq., of Ashton-under-Lyne); born,.
 * Springfield, Ashton-under-Lyne.

Fletcher, John Martineau, M.A. (fellow), Caius Coll., Camb., 1857, equity draftsman and conveyancer, a student of the Inner Temple lo Nov., 1856 (then aged 24), called to the bar 26 Jan., 1860 (eldest son of Francis Fletcher, Esq., of Hornsey, Middlesex); born, 1832; married 9 Jan., 1868, Jane, only dau. of Samuel Carter, Esq., of Quarry Hill, Battle, Sussex.
 * 9, Stanhope Street, Hyde Park Gardens, W.; 8, New Square, W.C.

Fletcher, John Samuel, M.A., Christ Church, Oxon, 1868, J.P. Middlesex, a student of Lincoln's Inn 29 Jan., 1864 (then aged 22), called to the bar 17 Nov., 1868 (2nd son of Samuel Fletcher, Esq., late of Broomfield, co. Lanc., dec.); born, 1842.
 * Treherne House, West End, Hampstead, N.W.

Fletcher, Col. Thomas William, M.A., Trin. Coll., Dublin, 1852, M.A. (ad eundem) Oxon 1853, M.R.I., F.R.S., J.P., D.L. cos. Worcester and Stafford, formerly col. 1st (king's own) Stafford militia, a student of the Inner Temple 4 June, 1859 (then aged 50), called to the bar 30 April, 1862 (eldest son of late Thomas Fletcher, late of Handsworth, co. Staff.); born, 1810; married 13 Sept., 1831, Jane M., dau. of James Russell, Esq., of Bescot Hall, co. Staff., and has issue.
 * Lawneswood House, near Stourbridge; Carlton Club

Flintoff, Albert Nevins, M.A. Trin. Coll., Oxon, a member of the Northern circuit, a student of Lincoln's Inn 3 April, 1856 (then aged 23), called to the bar 6 June, 1860 (2nd son of John FlintofT, Esq., of Witton-le-Wear, co. Durham); born, 1833.
 * 10, Castelnau Villas, Barnes, S.W.

Flood, Frederick Solly, attorney-general of Gibraltar 186 –77, M.A., Trin. Coll., Camb., 1828, from Harrow, J.P. co. Wexford, assumed the additional surname of Flood, 1820, a student of Lincoln's Inn 28 Jan., 1824, called to the bar 6 May, 1828 (only son of Richard Solly, Esq., of London); born 7 Aug., 1801; married 21 Aug., 1824, Mary, dau. of Rev. Thomas Williamson, of Stoke Damerel, Devonport; she died, 1864, leaving issue (see Foster's Baronetage, ).
 * Gibraltar; Slaney Lodge, Enniscorthy; New House, Ormond, Kilkenny; University and Oxford & Cambridge Clubs.

Flood, John Charles Henry, a member of the Western circuit, matric. London Univ. 1863, author of A Treatise on the Law of Wills, of Personal Property, The Pitfalls of Testators, A Treatise on the Law of Slander and Libel, editor of Broom's Primer of Legal Principles, a student of the Middle Temple 22 Oct., 1863, called to the bar 11 June, 1867 (only surviving son of Henry Flood, of Newport, Essex, superintendent of constabulary); born, ; married 10 Aug., 1869, Georgina H., widow of Capt. G. Warburton, 3rd buffs, only dau. of John Hampden, Esq., brother of the bishop of Hereford.
 * 2, St. Stephen's Road, Westbourne Park, W.; 3, Plowden Buildings, Temple, E.C.

title: Page:Men-at-the-Bar.djvu/194


text:
Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 57.djvu/234

 the best exploits that was performed since these wars began’ (Epist. Ho-elian. v. 12). In April 1632 he was appointed on a commission to decide on the number of men to be allowed to the ships of the navy. As there is no further mention of him, it would seem probable that he died shortly after. He married Eleanor, daughter of Sir John Savage of Clifton, Cheshire, and widow of Sir Henry Bagnall.

[Monson's Naval Tracts; Collins's Peerage (Brydges), vi. 294; Coke MSS. (Hist. MSS. Comm.), i. 323–8, 335; State Papers, Dom.]  TREVOR, THOMAS (1586–1656), judge, born at Trevalyn in Denbighshire on 6 July 1586, was the fifth son of John Trevor of that place, by his wife Mary, daughter of Sir George Bruges of London. His elder brother, Sir Sackvill Trevor [q. v.], is separately noticed. Thomas was admitted a member of the Inner Temple at an unusually early age in November 1592, was called to the bar in 1603, and became reader of his inn in 1620. He was knighted at Whitehall on 19 June 1619, and was appointed solicitor to Prince Charles. On 28 April 1625 he was nominated serjeant-at-law, and on 12 May he was advanced to a seat in the exchequer in the place of George Snigge. On 17 Dec. 1633 he was placed on the commission to exercise ecclesiastical jurisdiction in England and Wales. On 7 Feb. 1636–7 Trevor was one of the twelve judges who returned an answer favourable to the right of the crown to collect ship-money, and he followed up his opinion in 1638 by delivering judgment in favour of the government in the case of Hampden (Cal. State Papers, Dom. 1636–7, pp. 416–18). On the meeting of the Long parliament proceedings were taken against the judges for their declaration in regard to ship-money, and in December 1640 Trevor and four others were required to give security in 10,000l. each that they would appear for judgment whenever called for (Lords' Journals, iv. 115;, Memorials, p. 47). He was impeached in July following with Sir Humphrey Davenport [q. v.] and Richard Weston (1620?–1681) [q. v.], when Edward Hyde (afterwards Earl of Clarendon) opened the case against them (Mr. E. Hyde's Speech at a Conference between both Houses, London, 1641). On 19 Oct. 1643 he was fined 6,000l. and sentenced to imprisonment at the pleasure of the House of Lords. The fine was immediately paid, and Trevor was released and allowed to resume his place in the exchequer (Lords' Journals, vi. 261–5;, p. 76). He was finally freed from his impeachment on 20 May 1644 (Lords' Journals, vi. 562; Commons' Journals, ii. 154, 194, 196–8, 200, iii. 251, 280, 282).

On the outbreak of the civil war Trevor was content to recognise the authority of parliament. He was one of the three judges who remained in London, presiding at the exchequer, while Sir Francis Bacon (1587–1657) [q. v.] was alone in the king's bench and Edmund Reeve (1585?–1647) [q. v.] at the common pleas. At Michaelmas 1643 he and Reeve were served with writs from Charles requiring their attendance at Oxford, but instead of complying they committed the messengers, one of whom was afterwards executed as a spy (, History of the Rebellion, 1888, iii. 252). The execution of the king, however, aroused his displeasure, and on 8 Feb. 1648–9 he refused to accept the new commission offered him by the authorities. He died on 21 Dec. 1656, and was buried at his manor of Leamington Hastings in Warwickshire. Trevor was twice married: first, to Prudence, daughter of Henry Boteler; and, secondly, to Frances, daughter and heiress of Daniel Blennerhasset of Norfolk. By the former he had an only son Thomas, who was created a baronet in 1641, and died without issue on 26 Feb. 1675–6, when his estate descended to Sir Charles Wheler, bart., grandson of Trevor's sister Mary.

[Foss's Judges of England, vi. 367–9; Dugdale's Hist. of Warwickshire, i. 309; Cobbett's State Trials, iii. 1125; Collins's Peerage, ed. Brydges, vi. 294; Gardiner's Hist. of England, vii. 129, viii. 278; Gardiner's Great Civil War, i. 244; Williams's Eminent Welshmen; Smyth's Obituary (Camden Soc.), p. 44.]  TREVOR, THOMAS, of Bromham (1658–1730), judge, second son of Sir John Trevor (1626–1672) [q. v.], by Ruth, fourth daughter of John Hampden, the patriot, was baptised on 6 March 1657–8. He was educated with Robert Harley (afterwards first Earl of Oxford) [q. v.] at Birch's school, Shilton, Oxfordshire, and at Christ Church, Oxford, whence he matriculated on 7 July 1673. In 1672 he was admitted a student at the Inner Temple, where he was called to the bar on 28 Nov. 1680, elected autumn reader in 1687, and bencher and treasurer on taking silk in 1689. In 1692 he succeeded Somers as solicitor-general (3 May), was knighted (21 Oct.), and returned to parliament for Plympton, Devonshire (9 Nov.), which seat he retained until the dissolution of 7 July 1698. He acted with Somers (then attorney-general) in the prosecution of Charles, Lord Mohun [q. v.], for the murder of William Mountford [q. v.], 31 Jan.–1 Feb. 1692–3, and succeeded to the attorney-gene-


text:
Page:Men-at-the-Bar.djvu/275

Rh

Jackson, Charles William Leathley, B.A., Trin. Coll., Camb., 1872, clerk and sealer of the insolvent debtors' court Bombay, a student of the Inner Temple 5 April, 1869 (then aged 20), called to the bar 18 Nov., 1872 (eldest son of late Sir Charles Robert Mitchell Jackson, Knt., dec.); born, 1849.
 * Bombay.

Jackson, Edward Dudley, B.A., Queen's Coll., Oxon, 1859, Bridgman exhibitioner 1855, a student of the Inner Temple 2 Nov., 1860 (then aged 24), called to the bar 17 Nov., 1863 (only son of Rev. Edward Dudley Jackson, LL.B., rector of Heaton Norris, co. Lanc.); born 15 Aug., 1836; unmarried.
 * 13, Cambridge Road, Brighton; 2, Harcourt Buildings, Temple, E.C.; Oxford and Cambridge Club, S.W.

Jackson, Eugenius Charles, a student of the Middle Temple 7 Jan., 1874, called to the bar 26 Jan., 1877 (3rd son of John Henry Jackson, of Hamilton, Bermuda); born, ; married 17 March, 1880, Mary Margaret, eldest dau. of Samuel T. Vincent, Esq., of Southall, Middlesex.
 * Hamilton, Bermuda.

Jackson, Frank Stather, deputy registrar of Lord Mayor's Court since 1880, sometime a solicitor, educated at Rugby and Sherborne, a student of the Middle Temple 24 Jan., 1882, called to the bar 25 June, 1884 (2nd son of John J. Harding Jackson, dec., of Salisbury, Wilts); born 28 Nov., 1852.
 * 16, Maitland Park Road, N.W.; 2, Essex Court, Temple.

Jackson, Sir Henry Mather, Bart., M.A., Trin. Coll., Camb., 1881, J.P. co. Monmouth, a student of Lincoln's Inn 26 Jan., 1878 (then aged 22), called to the bar 17 Nov., 1881 (eldest son of late Sir Henry Mather Jackson, Bart., a judge of High Court of Justice); born 19 Oct, 1855.
 * Llantilo Court, Abergavenny; 32, Portman Square, W.; 3, Temple Gardens, E.C.; Oxford and Cambridge Club.

Jackson, John Alexander, a student of the Middle Temple 25 Oct, 1847, called to the bar 22 Nov., 1850 (eldest son of John Serocold Jackson, of Sydney, New South Wales, "Legati"); born,.
 * Sydney, New South Wales

Jackson, John Alexander, undergrad. Queen's Coll., Oxon, a student of the Middle Temple 3 Nov., 1864, called to the bar 6 June, 1868 (youngest son of John Alexander Jackson, of Tasmania, architect and surveyor); born,.
 * Melbourne.

Jackson, Lawrence Colvile, a member of the Oxford circuit, qualified for a solicitor in 1875, a student of Lincoln's Inn 26 June, 1876 (then aged 25), called to the bar 7 May, 1879 (2nd son of Sir Charles Robert Mitchell Jackson, late auditor to the India Office and puisne judge supreme court of Calcutta, dec.); born, 1851.
 * Devereux Buildings, Devereux Court, Temple, W.C.; 3, Dr. Johnson's Buildings, Temple, E.C.

Jackson, Thomas Witter, puisne judge supreme court Gold Coast Colony since 1876, a magistrate at the Gambia 1869–76, B.A. London Univ. 1865, a student of the Inner Temple 20 Oct., 1859 (then aged 20), called to the bar 30 April, 1866 (eldest surviving son of Thomas Witter Jackson, stipendiary magistrate Portland, Jamaica); born, 1839.
 * Gold Coast Colony.

Jackson, William, practises before the High Court of Calcutta, a student of the Middle Temple 29 Oct., 1862, called to the bar 9 June, 1865 (only son of late William Jackson, Esq., of Ceylon); born,.
 * Calcutta.

Jackson, William Bottomley, B.A., Christ Coll., Camb., 1869, goes the North-eastern circuit, a student of the Inner Temple 25 April, 1874 (then aged 25), called to the bar 25 April, 1877 (only son of Samuel Bottomley Jackson, late of Barnsley, Yorkshire, dec.); born, 1849.
 * 3, Westfield Terrace, Scarborough; 2, Plowden Buildings, Temple, E.C.

Jacomb, Thomas Pearce, M.A., Jesus Coll., Camb., 1884, LL.B. 1881, a student of the Inner Temple 28 Jan., 1880 (then aged 20), called to the bar 17 Nov., 1884 (eldest son of Thomas Jacomb, of Woodends, Hollington, Sussex); born 2 Dec., 1859.
 * Woodend, Hollington, Sussex; 1, Paper Buildings, Temple, E.C.

Jacques, Joseph Barratt, undergrad. Brasenose Coll., Oxon, a member of the Midland circuit, a student of the Inner Temple 2 Nov., 1859 (then aged 19), called to the bar 30 April, 1864 (2nd son of James Jacques, Esq., of Birstall House, co. Leic.); born, 1840.
 * 11, King's Bench Walk, Temple, E.C.

James, Alfred Augustus, a student of the Inner Temple 10 March, 1851 (then aged 20), called to the bar 1 May, 1854 (5th son of late John James, a secondary of the city of London), born, 1831.
 * 19, Marlborough Place, St. John's Wood, N.W.

title: Page:Men-at-the-Bar.djvu/275