Nicholas Knowles, Knollis or Knollys, 3rd Earl of Banbury, (3 January 1631 - 14 March 1674) was an English nobleman who sat in the House of Lords but was excluded from the Long Parliament, thus precipitating the famous “Banbury Case” which remains partly unresolved to this day.

The Banbury case was notorious both for its long duration and for the fact that it involved the bastardisation of children without an accompanying Parliamentary divorce.Nicolas, Sir Harris. A Treatise on the Law of Adulterine Bastardy with a Report of The Banbury Case, and of all other cases bearing upon the subject London 1836 pp. 307 - 554 William Knollys, 1st Earl of Banbury, had died apparently childless, aged 85, in 1632. His widow, the Catholic Lady Elizabeth Howard, over thirty years his junior, had quickly married Edward Vaux, 4th Baron Vaux of Harrowden, also a Catholic, and soon after produced two young children who had undoubtedly been born during her first husband's lifetime and who, she claimed, were William's lawful issue. The case fell into abeyance during the English Civil War and the Commonwealth of England, but when Lady Elizabeth's son Nicholas attempted to take his seat in the Convention Parliament (1660) leading up to The Restoration, his legitimacy was successfully challenged by his peers. There followed the presentation and scrutiny of at least eight petitions by Nicholas and his descendants, before their claim of his legitimacy was finally defeated in 1813, although the Committee merely reported that the petitioner had not discharged the burden of proof that lay upon him and so left the way open for a future claim.

Family and early life

Nicholas was born on 3 January 1631, a second son to The Countess of Banbury, at Harrowden Hall in Northamptonshire, the house of Edward Vaux, 4th Baron Vaux of Harrowden. She was the daughter of Thomas Howard, 1st Earl of Suffolk and granddaughter of Thomas Howard, 4th Duke of Norfolk, a second cousin of Queen Elizabeth I.

Her husband was, William Knollys, 1st Earl of Banbury, whose mother, Catherine Carey was a first cousin of Queen Elizabeth I. Some historians believe that Catherine was the illegitimate child of Henry VIII, which would make her also Elizabeth I's paternal half-sisterVarlow, Sally (August 2007). "Sir Francis Knollys's Latin Dictionary: New evidence for Katherine Carey". Historical Research. 80 (209): 315–323. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2281.2007.00400.x She was also the mother of Lettice Knollys, (married to Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester, favourite of Elizabeth I) and grandmother of Robert Devereux, Earl of Essex, the last favourite of Elizabeth I.

The Earl of Banbury died the following year on 25 May 1632 when he was about eighty-five or eighty-six years of age. According to a physician, Robert Lloyd, who was present at his death, he died at the house of Dr. Grant, in Paternoster Row in London, whom he had consulted during his last illness See the evidence of Robert Lloyd, sworn in a Chancery suit to perpetuate testimony (commenced on 9 Feb. 1641 by Edward, elder son of ' the countess). Five witnesses gave evidence, Printed Evidence, 28, 103, 108. The relevant evidence relating to the Banbury peerage, given during the hearing of the last claim to the peerage in the early 19th cent., is printed among the House of Lords sessional papers as Printed Evidence given before the Committee for Privileges in the Banbury Peerage Case. The printed evidence [hereafter cited as Printed Evidence] is paginated continuously so that it could be bound into a single volume, but sections of it, as issued, are distributed among various volumes of House of Lords Sessional Papers, 1801-1833; see vols. 22 (1808), 31 (1809, 18101, 46B (1811)and 47 (1811). Less than five weeks later the widowed countess married Edward Vaux, 4th Baron Vaux of Harrowden, then aged forty-fourThe date of the marriage is uncertain but she is described as the wife of Edward, 4th Lord Vaux of Harrowden in an indenture dated 2 July 1632, made between herself and Lord Vaux of the one part and Edward, Wilkinson and Christopher Wilton of the other part; see Printed Evidence, 251-55. Edward Vaux was the grandson of William, 3rd Baron Vaux, whom he succeeded in 1595.

It was known that in 1605 Lord Vaux had been on the point of marrying Lady Elizabeth Howard, shortly before she married William Knollys. Indeed, if Vaux's mother can be believed, it was only the Gunpowder Plot that prevented his journey to London to become formally engaged to her; if that be so, she suffered a very sudden change of heart.Anstruther, Vaux of Harrowden, 457. And in March 1630 Vaux was still visiting her, if no more.See Countess of Banbury to Viscount Dorchester [Dudley Carleton], 23 March 1630 (P.R.O., S.P. 16/163/38): "My Lord Vaux will be here tomorrow ....

By 1641 the countess herself appears to have been regarded by parliament as a dangerous recusant. In June 1641 The Countess of Banbury and Nicholas obtained a licence to travel abroad and to take with them twelve servants, £200 in money, and such carriages as she needed.The relevant evidence relating to the Banbury peerage, given during the hearing of the last claim to the peerage in the early 19th cent., is printed among the House of Lords sessional papers as Printed Evidence given before the Committee for Privileges in the Banbury Peerage Case. The printed evidence [hereafter cited as Printed Evidence] is paginated continuously so that it could be bound into a single volume, but sections of it, as issued, are distributed among various volumes of House of Lords Sessional Papers, 1801-1833; see vols. 22 (1808), 31 (1809, 18101, 46B (1811) and 47 (1811). Printed Evidence, 25-28. On 20 January 1642 the House of Commons ordered four justices of the peace to search the house in Northamptonshire of Lord Vaux who was then abroad, "and such other suspected places, for recusancy, as they shall think fit, in that county, for arms.’ In June 1642, the countess again obtained leave to go abroad, apparently to France, and to take with her six coach-horses and three nags.Commons Journals, ii, 387; Lords Journals, v, 156. In 1643 she obtained the Speaker's warrant to go to France once more with twelve servants and her necessary apparel, and that she should have

"a coach and six horses and ten saddle horses to pass to the sea-side, and to return to carry her Ladyship and her servants to the port where she embarks”.Commons Journals, iii, 211-2.

Assumption of the Earldom

Nicholas was known to have travelled to France with his mother in 1644Sidney Lee. DNB, 1885-1900 Vol 31 and may well have been in the party that included his elder brother Edward, the 2nd earl that was robbed in Italy, for John Evelyn notes an entry in his diary for 28 January 1645;

"We dined at Sermoneta, descending all this morning down a stony mountain, unpleasant, yet full of olive trees; and, anon, pass a tower built on a rock, kept by a small guard against the bandetti who infest these parts, daily robbing and killing passengers, as my lord Banbury and his company found to their cost a little before."Bray, William. Diary and Correspondence of John Evelyn Vol1 pp. 153. London 1859

His elder brother, the 2nd earl was however killed returning to England in a quarrel on the road between Calais and Gravelines in or before June 1645, and Nicholas, then aged about fifteen, immediately assumed the title of Earl of Banbury, and he was so described in a deed dated 19 October 1646 by which his step-father, Lord Vaux, settled the manor of Harrowden and other property in Northamptonshire, on the countess for life, with remainder to her son Nicholas: the relevant passage is,

“The Right honourable Nicholas now Earl of Banbury son of the said Countess of Banbury heretofore called Nicholas Vaux, or by whichsoever of the said names or descriptions or any other name or description the said Nicholas be or hath been called reputed or known.For the deed, see Printed Evidence, 219-30.”

That description is of interest, because the fact that Nicholas was known as Nicholas Vaux seemed to confirm the suspicion that he was not the son of the Earl of Banbury. On the other hand, it could be said that the proceedings in Chancery in February 1641 and the inquisition the following April had established the legitimacy of the children of the countess, a contention that was supported by the fact that during the period of almost twenty years that had elapsed since the adverse finding of the inquisition of 1633, her sons had successively borne the title of Earl of Banbury without any question being raised.

The Countess of Banbury died on 17 April 1658, aged seventy-three, and was buried at Dorking in Surrey. Lord Vaux died on 8 April 1661 without issue.

The Convention Parliament (1660) The title assumed by Nicholas was questioned for the first time in the Convention Parliament of 1660. Since Charles II had not then been restored to the throne, writs of summons to the parliament could not be issued by the crown. Nine peers met, however, and appointed the Edward Montagu, 2nd Earl of Manchester to be Speaker of the House pro tempore, and then nominated a committee to determine which lords should receive letters requesting their attendance. The committee reported the names of those peers to whom letters should be sent, and a draft of the letter from Lord Manchester, as Speaker, was entered in the journals of the House. It is not clear whether Nicholas received a letter from Lord Manchester, but it is certain that he took his seat in the House on or before 4 June 1660 and was present on 15 June.Printed Evidence, 37; Lords Journals, xi, 52, 64.

The Convention Parliament (1660) had assembled on 25 April 1660 but Nicholas's right to sit in the Lords was not questioned until some twelve weeks later. On13 July the House resolved "that there being a person that now sits in this House as a Peer, viz. the Earl of Banbury, it is ordered that this business shall be heard at the bar by counsel on Monday come se’ennight [23 July]".

On that day he was present in the House and was appointed a member of a committee on a private bill, but no proceedings relating to his peerage took place. He was present on the three following days, and he was again appointed to a committee; he was in his place on twelve days in July and attended the House frequently until the session ended on 13 September; when the next session began on 6 November he was again in regular attendance until the 21st of that month when he obtained leave to be absent from the House. The Convention Parliament (1660) was dissolved on 29 December without having investigated the earl's title, but the leave of absence granted to him appears to be a tacit admission that he had a right to be present.Printed Evidence, 37, 39, 41.

The Cavalier Parliament

The next parliament, which came to be known as the Cavalier Parliament, was summoned on 18 February 1661 and assembled on 8 May, but no writ was issued to the Earl of Banbury. Nicholas therefore presented a petition to the king, Charles II of England in which he styled himself Earl of Banbury. The petition, after reciting the various titles bestowed on the late earl, the marriage of the late earl to Elizabeth Howard and the birth of her children, stated that Nicholas had sat in the last parliament as Earl of Banbury and had exercised all the privileges accorded to other earls there. The petition concluded with a prayer that a writ of summons might issue to him as Earl of Banbury, and that he might

"enjoy all the precedency and privilege thereunto belonging granted by the letters patent of that dignity.Printed Evidence, 43, 44.”