Martin P-L writes:

1648 born at Snitton, second son to THOMAS of HENLEY and our most distinguished English ancestor.  By his first wife he was ancestor to the Lords of Lilford, by his second wife to ourselves.
1663 at Shrewsbury school, as were his brothers Littleton and Edward, as well as neighbours such as the Powell, Charlton and Baldwin brothers, and Francis Walter.  Other old boys (not exact contemporaries) who became prominent in the law were Sir Wm. Williams (Solicitor General to Sir Thomas at the trial of the Seven Bishops), Lord Halifax, Sir George Jefferies.
1664 matriculated at Queen's college, Oxon.
1673 called to the bar at Lincoln's Inn.
c. 1685 married Sarah, daughter of Ambrose Holbech, by whom he had 3 sons, Thomas, Edward, Ambrose and 3 daughters, Sarah, Anne and Jane.
1686 made Solicitor General and knighted.  According to Burnett this was because he was a compliant, young aspiring lawyer.  He had argued in favour of the King's dispensing power, and had issued warrants - which others had refused to do - authorising Roman Catholics to hold office as, for example, lawyers or churchmen.
1687 made Treasurer and Bencher of Lincoln's Inn, and promoted to Attorney General.
1688 prosecuted the Seven Bishops, among them the Archbishop of Canterbury.  They had refused to comply with an order of the King, who was trying to re-introduce Roman Catholicism.  The actual charge, however, was a technical one of libel, in that the seven had presented a petition to the King which, by questioning his acts, was alleged to bring his government into scandal - regardless of the truth or falsity of their assertions.  The defence, equally technical. was a) that it was not proved that they were the authors of the petition, b) it was not in any case a libel, not being of seditious intent. Thomas, by virtue of his position and the seniority of the defendants, had to lead the prosecution. A verbatim account of it may still be read, from which it is clear that - as was said at the time - he made the best of a bad job.  He acted his part in the trial as fairly as his post could admit (Burnett).  The attorney was pretty moderate, but the solicitor was violent and mighty zealous in prosecution (Luttrell).   The bulk of the examining was done by the Solicitor General, but Sir Thomas intervened at times, in a dignified and sensible - not petty - manner.  He argued clearly, and with good sense and humanity.  (At one point in the trial he examined Pepys.)
King James was inspecting his troops when sections of them broke out into cheers, which spread and grew in volume.  He asked what it was about, and was told that the news had just come through that the bishops had been acquitted.  The trial sealed his unpopularity, and he was soon sent packing. Sir Thomas wrote to the Archbishop of Canterbury: It was the most uneasy thing to me that ever in my life I was concerned in.  But there was no help for it: James was replaced by William of Orange (vociferously welcomed by Littleton), and Thomas was out of his job after only one year in it.   He remained, however, fully employed as a barrister, mostly in civil suits in the House of Lords, eg. the Duke of Norfolk's divorce petition.
1695 & 97  as Lord of the Manor  (which manor I do not know) he repaired the bridge at Ludlow and the chapel at Middleton (see Bitterley parish register).  [The chapel still stands, an enchanting Norman building. The wooden bridge has been replaced.]
1701 elected MP for Ludlow, remaining in that position till 1713, when he had to stand down on being made a judge.  He was conjointly MP for Truro during some of this period.  I have been unable to discover what, if anything, he achieved as an MP - except that in 1710 he spent £400 buying votes (of 300 electors) .  The other candidates spent more.  For much of this time his fellow MP for Ludlow was his old schoolmate, Baldwin.
1702 Queen's Sergeant (= chief prosecutor for the Crown).
c.1702 married Elizabeth Meadows, daughter of Sir Philip Meadows, of whom more later.
1707 with two others, he proposed a bill to beautify and preserve Lincoln's Inn Fields (Journal of House of Commons, vol.xv, Feb.1)
1707-19  Recorder of Ludlow (ie. chief judicial authority - see Oxford Dictionary)
1711 bought the manors of Lilford and Wigsthorpe from the Elwes (or Elmes) family, who had built Lilford in 1635.   He also owned houses at Sion near Isleworth, and in Lincoln's Inn Great Fields, the latter being left to PHILIP.
1713 made judge in Queen's Bench.  After this, according to Thorpe's Lincoln's Inn Men, his arms were emblazoned in the the old hall, opposite his brother's, with the inscription Miles Unus Justicianorum de Banco Reginae 1713.  The shield is preserved in the ancient glass in the new building.
1714 On Lord Chancellor Cowper's advice, at the accession of George 1, he was removed from the Queen's Bench, partly because he was said to be still devoted to the Pretender, partly because he always voted with his brother on the board.  He reverted to King's Sergeant.

Sir Thomas  contd.
1719 died, at Lincoln's Inn Fields, late of Sergeants Inn.  He was buried at Lilford.  When the church was pulled down, his tomb was moved to the nearby Thorpe Archard, nr. Oundle.  The epitaph was composed by Matthew Prior, and I shall let you off with an extract.

He studied, practised and governed the law in such a manner that nothing equalled his knowledge except his eloquence, nothing excelled both except his Justice; and whether he was greater, as an advocate or a judge, is the only cause he left undecided.

If you want more, the full text is in the Diaries or in Collins's Peerage of England, 1812 edition.  If you would like an antidote, written by the same Matthew Prior, try

A Reasonable Affliction

On his death bed poor Lubin lies;
His spouse is in despair.
With frequent cries and mutual sighs
They both express their care.

"A different cause," says Parson Sly,
"The same effect may give.
Poor Lubin fears that he may die,
His wife that he may live."

His will is in the PRO, ref. PCC 17 April 1719, Browning 69.  A transcription is in the Powys box at the Genealogists' Library.  He left land in Salop, Northants, Middx. and Lincoln's Inn Fields, plus £20,000 in money, of which £12,000 was for PHILIP to buy land.  Because he was only 15 at the time, his inheritance was put in trust.
He left his portrait to his son Thomas.  A.P-L has a portrait of him, but whether this is a different one I do not know.  It shows him in the dress of a gentleman in the time of William and Mary.  His seal is in the British Library (CLIII), as is a book with his signature in it (of which I made a copy in the first edition).

Bibliography:

Dictionary of National Biography
Foss's Judges of England
State Trials xii 279
Luttrell's Brief Relations
Burnett's Own Time  iii 91 & 223
Thorpe's Lincoln's Inn Men
Lincoln's Inn Black Book
Also (though I have not found them)
Clarendon Correspondence ii 507
Raymond's Reports
Foster's Parliamentary Dictionary
Rawl. xxi 79
________________

His burial transcription:

First name(s)                       Thomas
Last name                           Powys
Death year                          1719
Burial year                         1719
Burial date                         12 Apr 1719
Parish                              St Peter
Place                               Lilford
Denomination                        Anglican
Residence                           NTH
County                              Northamptonshire
Country                             England
Notes                                Sir Kt., d. 4 Apr
Extra text                          Date of death given.
Repository                          Northamptonshire Archives
Event type                          Burial
Burial unique reference identifier  B0536
Archive reference                   194p/1
Record set                          Northamptonshire Burials
______________

Nov 2017, TFPL:

From the list of all Ludlow MPs in TSANHS, 2nd Series, vol 7, pp. 1-54, he was MP for 1700-1, 1701-2, 1702-3, 1705-8, 1708-10, 1710-13.

On June 8 1713 a new Writ was issued in place of Sir T Powys made a judge of the Court of Queen’s Bench, but it being the end of the Parliament, no return was made.
_______________

TFPL, Feb 2021: Having found that, for six of the eight baptisms of his children, their and his surname was given as Powis, I turned to the records of Lincoln’s Inn to see how they spelled it.  From the index of the Black Book vol III, he appeared 12 times:

p. 29:  1663:  Powis   Called to bench
p. 36:  1664:  Powis,  on a Committee
P. 53:  1667:  Powis,  appointed next Autumn Reader
p. 54:  1667   Powis,  Autumn Reader
p. 62:  1668:  Powis,  paid £36 as Autumn Reader
p. 65:  1669:  Powys,  on Council as Serjeant-elect
p. 67:  1669:  Powys,  paid as Serjeant-at-law

P. 88:  1673:  Powis,  called to bar            <—-  If this was him, then the previous six were his father
p. 156: 1686:  Powis,  Sir T., HM Sol Gen, called to Bench
p. 158: 1687:  Powis.  Treasurer of Lincoln’s Inn
p. 161: 1687:  Powis,  His accounts for Lincoln’s Inn
p. 196: 1697:  Powis,  Trustee of will of William Martyn
p. 467: 1707,  Powys,  On team for a Bill to Beautify Lincoln’s Inn’s Great Fields

10 for Powis and 2 for Powys.
_____________________

All the above Black Book entries were of course made by third parties who would have spelled as they heard or thought.  The document that he would have signed are:

His two marriage allegations,
Possibly his two marriage registers (though I don’t think the practice then was to sign this)
His will, but all we have is a copy transcribed by the CPP and they are not known for their accuracy.

Sounds like I need to find some originals with his signature on them.
_________________

TFPL, Feb 2021: From Alumni Oxoniensis, 1500-1714, vol 3, p. 1197:

Powys, (Sir) Thomas, s. Thomas of henley, Salop, arm. Queen’s COLL., matric. 20 May 1664, aged 15; of Lilford, Northants, bar-at-law, Lincolns’s Inn, 1673, treasurer 1687, solicitor-general 1686, and knighted 25 April 1686, attorney-general 1687-8, serjeant-at-law and queen’s serjeant 1702, king’s serjeant 1714; licenced (V.G.) 4 June to marry Sarah, daughter of Ambrose Holbech, of Mollington, co. Warwick, gent.; recorder of Ludlow, and M.P. in 6 parliaments 1700, until a judge of queen’s bench June, 1713-Oct. 1714; died 4 April 1719.  See Foster’s Parliamentary Dictionary; & Rawl. xxi. 79.
_________________

Burial notices

First is this notice in the burial register of St Giles in the Fields, High St, Holburn (where his half brother Rev Dr Henry may have been vicar or rector):

“                 Burials
“                   1719
“                  April
“. . . .
“10 Sr Thomas Powis Card Away”

It is not clear to me whether this was his death date or his date of being carried off to Lilford.  Other accounts have said he died on the 4th April so we might surmise that his body rested in this church until the 10th.
__________

Second is this burial at Lilford, from the Bishop’s Transcriptions as the Register entry has not been found:

“A True Coppy of ye Register Book of Lilford, for 1719
“Sr Tho: Powys Kt. was buried Apr.12.1719.”

Note that at the bottom of the page there is also this entry:

“Thomas Powys Esqr eldest Son of Sr Tho: was buried Mar:9 1719.”

This burial was clearly eleven months after his father’s, in 1719/20.
_____________________

Will of Sir Thomas Powys, His Majesty's Sergeant at Law 17 April 1719 PROB 11/568

Frome the Northants FHS bookllet of Mon Inscriptions for St John the Baptist, Thorpe Achurch, pub 2015:

On an ornate marle memorail on south wall of transept - below inscription is a reclining figure in his judge’s robes:
“M.S. Here lyeth interr’d Sr THOMAS POWYS Knt second son of THOMAS POWYS of Henley in the County of Salop, Serjeant at Law & of Anne daughter of Sr ADAM LITTLETON of Stoke Milburgh in the said county, Bart. By his first wife SARAH, daughter of AMBROSE HOLBECH of Mottingham in the County of Warwick, Esqr he had three sons, THOMAS, EDWARD and AMBROSE, and three daughters, SARAH, ANNE and JANE.  By his second ELIZABETH, daughter of Sr Philip MEADOWS Knt he had two sons, both named PHILIP.  He was appointed Solicitor General 1686, Attorney General 1687, Premier Serjeant at Law, 1702, one of the judges of the Queen’s Bench 1712. He dyed the 4th of April 1719 aged 70.  As to his profession, in accusing cautious, in defending vehement, in all his pleadings sedate, clear, strong.  In all his decisions imprejudiced and equitable.  He studied, practiced, and govern’d the law in such a manner that nothing equall’d his knowledge, except his eloquence, nothing excell’d both, except his justice.  And whether he was greater as an advocate or as a judge is the only cause he left undecided.  As to his life he possessed by a natural happyness all those civil virtues which form the perfect gentleman, and to those by divine goodness were added that fervent zeal and extensive charity which distinguish the perfect Christian.  “The tree is known by his fruit.”  He was a loving husband and an indulgent father, a constant friend and a charitable patron, frequenting the devotions of the Church, pleading the cause and relieving the necessities of the poor.  What by his example he taught throughout his life, at his death he recommended to to his family and his friends, to fear God and live uprightly. Let whosoever reads this stone by be wise and be instructed.
THOMAS POWYS of Lilford Esqr eldest son of Sr THOMAS POWYS Kt succeeded his father, as in estate, so in virtue.  He married CATHERINE daughter and co-heir of THOs RAVENSCROFT of Broadlane in the County of Flint Esqr and by her left one son named, as his father and grandfather THOMAS.  As by his last will and testament his piety ordered that this monument should be sacred to the ashes of his father.  His humility forbad that any other memorial should be raised to himself.  He dyed the 3rd of March 1719/20 aged 32.”
_____________________

The same arms of Powys.

C of A omitted the quarterings of his grandfather from the Shropshire Visitation...  The problem here is why?
1. This visitation record does not quite seem to have been a visitation from my examination of it.  Visitation records usially include people who have had their arms refused, certainly the earlier Shropshire ones did.  But this record book did not include such.  I think it was merely a list of armorial families, documenting whatever they claimed.
2. When were the Powys arms first authorised?  I can find no record of this at all.  

Dec 2005, TFPL: The arms grant appears in Foster’s “Grantees of Arms to the end of the 17th century”  for his father, Thomas of Henley, p. 204.  Obviously further details can be supplied by the College of Arms.

Or a Lionís Gamb bendwise between two Cross crosslets fitchy Gules.

Powys, Sir Thomas 1649-1719

Name: Powys, Sir Thomas
Dates: 1649-1719
Active Date: 1689
Gender: Male

Field of Interest: Law
Occupation: Judge
Place of
    Education: Shrewsbury school,   Lincoln's Inn
    Burial: Lilford in Northamptonshire
Spouse: Sarah, daughter of Ambrose Holbech,  
Elizabeth, daughter of Sir Philip Meadows
Sources: Foss's Judges of England; Clarendon
Correspondence, ii...
Contributor: J. A. H. [JOHN ANDREW HAMILTON]

Article
Powys, Sir Thomas 1649-1719, judge, second son of Thomas Powys of Henley, Shropshire, and younger brother of Sir Littleton Powys [q.v.], was born in 1649. He was educated at Shrewsbury school, and was called to the bar at Lincoln's Inn in 1673. He became solicitor-general, and was knighted on 23 April 1686, when Finch was dismissed. Burnet (Own Time, iii. 91) calls him a compliant young aspiring lawyer. Having acquiesced in the appointment of Roman catholics to office, and argued in favour of the king's dispensing power, he was promoted to be attorney-general in December 1687. He accordingly conducted the prosecution of the seven bishops in June 1688, and acted with such conspicuous moderation and fairness (ib. iii. 223) as to show his own personal disapproval of the proceedings. During the reign of William III he acquired a fair practice, especially in defence of state prisoners, among whom was Sir John Fenwick, and at the bar of both houses of parliament. He sat in parliament for Ludlow from 1701 to 1713, was made serjeant and queen's serjeant at the beginning of Anne's reign, and on 8 June 1713 a judge of the queen's bench; but as he and his brother Sir Littleton Powys too frequently formed judgments in opposition to the rest of the court, he, as the more active and able of the two, was removed, on Lord-chancellor Cowper's advice, when King George I came to England (14 Oct. 1714). His rank of king's serjeant was restored to him.
He died on 4 April 1719, and was buried at Lilford in Northamptonshire. He was twice married: first to Sarah, daughter of Ambrose Holbech of Mollington, Warwickshire; and secondly, to Elizabeth, daughter of Sir Philip Meadows [q.v.]. He had issue by both; and his great-grandson Thomas Powys was created Lord Lilford in 1797.

Sources:
Foss's Judges of England; Clarendon Correspondence, ii. 507; State
Trials, xii. 279; Raymond's Reports; Collins's Peerage, viii. 579; Luttrell's
Brief Relation.

Contributor: J. A. H.

PUBLISHED  1896

From the Transactions of the Shropshire Archaeological and Natural History Society, 2nd Series, vol 7, p. 38:

The article on the Members of Parliament for Lodlow, by Henry T Weyman (resident of Ludlow and Member of the Society).  In this article he gives a biographical outline of each MP in the entry for the year they were first elected.

...

1700-1. (71) SIR THOMAS POWYS, Knight, and (72) William Gower
Elected January, 1700-1
(71) Thomas Powys was the second son of Thomas Powys, Serjeant-at-law, of Henley, near Ludlow.  He was scholar of Shrewsbury School 1663, matric, Queen’s Coll., Oxford, 1664, Barrister-at-law Lincoln’s Inn 1673, Treasurer 1687, was made Solicitor-General 1685, Knighted 1686, and became Attorney-General 1687, in which capacity he conducted the prosecution of the seven Bishops.  Historians differ widely as to his merits, for whil Macauley says of him that he was “an obscure barrister who had no qualifications for high employment, except servility.” Prior says that “nothing equalled his knowledge except his eloquence; nothin both except his justice, and whether he was greater as an advocate or a judge is the only cause he left undecided.”  he was made Queen’s Serjeant 1702, and was Recorder of Ludlow 1707-1719.  He was appointed Judge of the Court of Queen’s Bench, 1713, but was superseded by George I. in 1714.  He dided 4th April 1719, aged 70.  His descendant was made Lord Lilford, taking his title from property purchased by Sir Thomas Powys.
_________________

And this is what is to be found in The History of Parliament:

POWYS, Sir Thomas (c.1649-1719), of Henley, nr. Ludlow, Salop and Lilford cum Wigsthorpe, Northants.

Published in The History of Parliament: the House of Commons 1690-1715, ed. D. Hayton, E. Cruickshanks, S. Handley, 2002

Constituency  Dates
LUDLOW        Feb. 1701 - 3 June 1713

Family and Education

b. c.1649, 2nd s. of Thomas Powys of Henley by his 1st w. Anne, da. of Sir Adam Littleton, 1st Bt., of Stoke St. Milborough, Salop.  educ. Shrewsbury sch. 1663; Queen’s, Oxf. matric. 20 May 1664, aged 15; L. Inn 1663, called 1673, bencher 1686, treasurer 1686–7.  m. (1) lic. 4 June 1685, Sarah (d. Mar. 1694), da. of Ambrose Holbech of Mollington, Oxon., 3s. 3da.; (2) 2 Oct. 1698, Elizabeth, da. of Sir Philip Meadowes of Chattisham, Suff., sis. of Philip Meadowes*, 2s.  Kntd. 25 Apr. 1686.

Offices Held

Freeman, Ludlow 1677, Portsmouth 1700; recorder, Ludlow 1707–d.1

Attorney-gen. Denb. and Mont. 1680–6; solicitor-gen. 1686–Dec. 1687, attorney-gen. Dec. 1687–8, prime serjeant 1702–June 1713; j. Qb June 1713–Oct. 1714; King’s serjeant 1714–d.2

Biography

Writing of Powys' appointment as solicitor-general, Bishop Burnet described him as ‘a compliant, aspiring young lawyer, though in himself he was no ill-natured man’. In 1685 it had been ‘confidently said’ that he was a Catholic, but there is no evidence that he was ever other than a Protestant. As solicitor-general he gained notoriety through leading the defence in the case of Godden v. Hales, and when he was made attorney-general in 1687 critics of the government assumed that his only qualfication for promotion was a readiness to comply with royal policy. He was chief prosecuting counsel in the trial of the Seven Bishops in June 1688, where, according to a hostile observer, he ‘acted his part as fairly as his post could admit of’. Subsequently he himself confessed to Archbishop Sancroft that ‘acting in that unhappy prosecution was the most uneasy thing to me that ever in my life I was concerned in’. He did not resign, however. On 8 Sept. 1688 Lord Sunderland wrote to convey the King's wish that Powys return to London as soon as possible ‘but that you take care to secure your election either at Wales or in Wallingford’.3

Removed from office immediately after the Revolution, Powys proceeded to build up a lucrative private practice at the bar. In 1696 he acted as a defence counsel for Sir John Fenwick†, and also for Lord Ailesbury (Thomas Bruce†) and James Grahme*, who had both been arrested on suspicion of treason. Ailesbury wrote that, in his own case, Powys and the other defence counsel ‘did their part becoming great lawyers as they, besides as well wishers’. Among his other clients were Charles Duncombe*, whom he defended before Parliament in 1699 and in court the following year against charges of peculation, and Thomas Watson, the deprived bishop of St. Davids, for whom he appeared several times between 1698 and 1705. Powys was one of the counsel retained by the Old East India Company in June 1698 to argue before Parliament the case against the bill setting up the new company. He acted for Charles Montagu* in December 1698 at a hearing before the Commons committee of elections, concerning a disputed election at Westminster at which the other candidate had been Sir Henry Dutton Colt, 1st Bt.* In April 1700 he was ‘talked of’ as a possible successor to Lord Chancellor Somers (Sir John*).4

Powys stood for Parliament for the first time in January 1701 - as his brother said, ‘our family [have] never yet had one turn in our neighbour[ing] town of Ludlow’ - and was returned at the top of the poll after a three-cornered contest with two Tories, one of whom had accused him of not being well affected to the government. According to his brother, he ‘behaved himself exceedingly well in this ... Parliament, and with great reputation and to the satisfaction of all people’. He was forecast as likely to support the Court on 22 Feb. 1701 on the question of making good the deficiencies of public funds. His high profile and expertise as a lawyer were reflected in his parliamentary activity, many of his numerous committee appointments being to committees of address and drafting committees. On 15 Apr. he spoke in the debate on the punishment of Samuel Shepherd*, recommending impeachment. The next day he joined in calls for an address to the King critical of the late ministry, which some took to be an effort to promote himself with the new ministry. He spoke on 5 May against taking £100,000 from the civil list and applying to public uses, and on 3 June, offering advice to the House on the proceedings against the impeached Whig Lords. On the promotion of Sir Thomas Trevor* in June, Powys was one of several lawyers who allegedly ‘put in to be attorney-general’. Listed among those who had opposed making preparations for war with France, he appeared in November as a counsel in the court of King's bench against one of the Kentish Petitioners in a civil case arising out of the Commons' proceedings on the petition.5

Returned for Ludlow again at the general election in December 1701, when he also stood unsuccessfully at Cardigan Boroughs, Powys was listed as supporting the motion of 26 Feb. 1702 vindicating the Commons' impeachments of the Whig ministers. He continued to take an active part in the business of the Commons, introducing a bill in March to oblige Jews to maintain their Protestant children. He also reported the address of thanks to the Queen for her contribution of £100,000 to public uses on 31 Mar., taking the occasion to find fault with the phrase ‘unparalleled goodness’ in the address, as an implied criticism of William III.6

In June 1702 Powys was given office, as prime serjeant. He had gained a reputation in Parliament as well as in the legal profession. William Pittis' poem ‘The Patriots’ (1702), a panegyric on the leaders of the New Country Party, assigned him a place among the foremost orators in the Commons: his eloquence was held to be such that

          every period falling from his tongue
          reveals a knowledge like his reasons strong.

Defoe, on the other hand, satirized Powys as pompous and long-winded:

          in thought profound, and in contrivance vast,
          speaks best to every question when ’tis past.7

At the general election in July 1702 Powys was returned at both Truro and Ludlow, choosing to serve for the latter. On 23 Dec. he was appointed to the committee to bring in a qualification bill for MPs, and he was one of the Commons' managers at the 11 Jan. 1703 conference with the Lords over the first occasional conformity bill. In the next session, as a defence counsel for William White in the Aylesbury election case, he appeared before the Lords in December. According to Sir William Trumbull*, Powys and some other Tory MPs, including (Sir) Simon Harcourt I*, John Grobham Howe* and Henry St. John II*, had at about this time formed a ‘secret committee’ in the Commons. On 19 Jan. 1704 Powys and two other members of the ‘committee’ intervened in a debate on a report from the committee of accounts. The report contained allegations against Lord Halifax, but these were not followed up. ‘Mr [John] Howe, desiring notice might be taken how much greater moderation was now used than formerly, Sir Thomas Powys and Mr Solicitor [Harcourt] contributed to the letting it drop’. Six days later, Powys made the opening speech in a debate on the Aylesbury case in a committee of the whole, arguing that the Commons alone had the power to determine election cases.8

Powys seems to have supported the ministry after its reorganisation in 1704. In March he was forecast as a supporter of the government's actions over the Scotch Plot, and at the trial of the Jacobite David Lindsay in April he was one of the prosecuting counsel, together with the attorney- and solicitor-general. Having been listed as a probable opponent of the Tack, he was included on Robert Harley's* lobbying list and was then named among those who voted against the Tack or were absent on 28 Nov. 1704, although he was listed as a ‘Sneaker’ in 1705. He assisted in the prosecution of the Whig newsman John Tutchin in November, and in January he and Solicitor-General Harcourt appeared as counsel for John Grobham Howe in a case arising out of the Gloucestershire election of 1702. Listed as a placeman in 1705, Powys was re-elected that year for Ludlow. His attitude to the contest for the Speakership on 25 Oct. 1705 was one of neutrality: he would vote neither for the Court candidate, the Whig John Smith I, nor for the Tory candidate, William Bromley II, and withdrew from the House before the question was put, being named as absent in the list of the division. But in the debates on the regency bill in December and January he spoke on the Court side, and he voted against the ‘place clause’ on 18 Feb. 1706. In 1707 he subscribed £500 to the Bank annuity loan. On 22 Dec. 1707 he was appointed to a committee to bring in a bill to prevent bribery at elections.9

On the resignation of Harley and his friends in February 1708 Powys reverted to opposition, speaking on 9 Mar. against the cathedrals bill, which was widely recognised as a party cause. On 11 Mar. he was named to the committee to bring in a bill discharging Scotsmen of their obligations to clan chiefs in the event of a rebellion. Classed as a Tory and as a Court Tory in two lists of 1708, Powys was returned once more at Ludlow in May. He does not seem to have been as active in the new Parliament as he had been formerly, but he served on the committee appointed on 29 Jan. 1709 to prepare the bill for improving the Union (the treasons bill), and when the bill was debated on 3 Apr. 1709 he joined various ministerial spokesmen in arguing for its acceptance. In his own words he ‘appeared in Parliament for Dr S[acheverell]’, voting in 1710 against the impeachment, and on 7 May 1710 presented to the Queen an address in Sacheverell's favour from the corporation of Ludlow.10

When Robert Harley returned to power Powys expected advancement. It was said in September 1710 that he was ‘likely to be one of the commissioners of the great seal, and is hearty in the interest of the new ministry’, and there was a rumour that ‘some persons above’ had interposed to settle his difference with Humphrey Walcot* over the impending parliamentary election at Ludlow and to persuade Walcot to withdraw his candidature. Powys wrote to Harley on 16 Oct., putting forward his own claims to higher office:

"If Sir Simon Harcourt should take the great seal, I hope you will not wonder at me, if I should desire to be attorney-general, which is a place I could make easy, by wholly applying myself to the execution of that office, and be thereby something freed from the constant attendance at the bar, which I have so long laboured under. I ... hope you will place this freedom of request to the claim I make of some relation, neighbourhood of birth, and above all ... of true friendship and service for you.11"

Despite this appeal, Powys remained as prime serjeant. Classed as a Tory in the ‘Hanover list’ of the 1710 Parliament, he was one of the ‘worthy patriots’ who in the first session exposed the mismanagements of the previous ministry. His activities during this session included the management of a bill to prevent bribery at elections, and he was also involved at the drafting stage of eight bills connected with supply. In the next session, in addition to similar involvement in seven more bills, Powys acted as counsel in December 1711 in the Lords for the Duke of Hamilton, who was vainly endeavouring to establish his right to sit in Parliament by virtue of a newly conferred British title. Although unsuccessful, Powys presented the Duke's case with great skill, and dealt with matters so thoroughly that Hamilton's second counsel was left with little to say. He also spoke on the Court side on 24 Jan. 1712 against the Duke of Marlborough (John Churchill†).12

In September 1712 Powys renewed his request to Harley, now Lord Oxford, for promotion to some greater office. He wrote:

"I having some time since unfortunately, and to my very great surprise, received in the House of Commons a public disgrace from a great minister, for whom I had the greatest honour, I soon found the effect of it; for they who judge by outward signs conclude me under the disgust of the present ministry, as I have been under that of the old: and I have accordingly met with such treatment from some persons, as I should not otherwise have had. This hath made me too importunate ... that I might receive some mark of esteem from the government ... and since you were pleased, with very kind expressions, to take notice of it to my brother of the Treasury, I could not forbear giving you this trouble."

His wish was not granted immediately, and he continued his labours in the Commons and elsewhere on behalf of the government. He was one of the prosecuting counsel at the trial for libel of the Whig journalist George Ridpath in February 1713. In May he introduced into the House a bill for the better regulation of the press. Promotion eventually came in June 1713, when he was given a place as a judge of the Queen's bench, alongside his brother Sir Littleton Powys.13

Two months after the accession of George I, he was removed from the bench. In a memorandum sent to the King in August or September 1714 Lord Cowper (William *) had recommended that one of the Powys brother be dismissed. He noted,

"The court in which they sat has great influence on corporations. The two brothers generally act, in those matters, in opposition to the Ch[ief] Justice [Sir Thomas Parker*] and Mr J[ustice] Eyre [Robert*], therefore it would be of greater use if any one of their places was supplied by another fit man.
"Sir Littleton, the elder brother, is a man of less abilities and consequence, but blameless. Sir Thomas [is] of better abilities, but more culpable; having been attorney-general to the late King James to his abdication, and zealously instrumental in most of the steps which ruined that prince and brought those great dangers on the kingdom. Besides having from that time practised the law with great profit, he lately, when the hopes of the Pretender’s party were raised, laid down his practice of near £4,000 a year to be a judge, not worth £1,500 a year, for no visible reason; but if the Pretender had succeeded he would have made, and that very justly, a merit of this step."

Powys was, however, restored to his rank of King’s serjeant. He returned to his practice at the bar, and did not stand again. He died on 4 Apr. 1719, aged 70, and was buried at Lilford cum Wigsthorpe, where he had purchased an estate in 1711. Matthew Prior* composed a eulogistic epitaph, which described Powys as ‘a charitable patron frequenting the devotions of the church, pleading the cause and relieving the necessities of the poor’ and paid a special tribute to his skill as a lawyer: ‘nothing equalled his knowledge except his eloquence, nothing excelled both except his justice: and whether he was greater as an advocate or a judge was the only cause he left undecided’.14

Ref Volumes: 1690-1715
Author: D. W. Hayton

Notes
1. Salop RO, Ludlow bor. recs. adm. of freemen; R. East, Portsmouth Recs. 372.
2. Vernon–Shrewsbury Letters, ii. 190; W. R. Williams, Gt. Sess. Wales, 81; Cal. Treas. Bks. xxvii. 268; xxix. 137, 347.
3. Burnet, iii. 97, 234; Luttrell, Brief Relation, i. 375-6; State Trials, xi. 1102-5; xii. 183-431; Reresby Mems. ed Browning, 423-4; Ellis Corresp. ii. 3; Clarendon Corresp. ed. Singer, ii. app. xxix; CSP Dom. 1687-9, p. 267.
4. Poems on Affairs of State ed. Ellis, vii. 123-4; State Trials, xiii. 546-649, 1062-1100; xiv. 454-62; Ailesbury Mems. 426; HMC Downshire, ii. 639; CSP Dom. 1698, pp. 91-92; 1703-4, p. 456; HMC Lords, n.s. iii. 235-6; iv. 115-17; Luttrell, iv. 388, 589, 619; v. 511; Bodl. Carte 228, f. 253; Bodl. Ballard 10, f. 40.
5. Salop RO, Bishop mss, Sir Littleton Powys to Henry Mitton, 26 Dec. 1700, 15 Nov. 1701; Cumbria RO (Carlisle), Lonsdale mss D/Lons/W2/2/4, James Lowther* to Sir John Lowther, 2nd Bt. I*, 1 July 1702; Luttrell, v. 112.
6. Cocks Diary, 261.
7. Luttrell, v. 187; W. Pittis, The Patriots, 11; Poems on Affairs of State, vii. 123-4.
8. HMC Lords, n.s. v. 259-62; HMC Downshire, ii. 817; Vernon-Shrewsbury Letters, iii. 244; Cobbett, Parlty. Hist. vi. 239-50.
9. State Trials, xiv. 987-1035, 1097-1195; HMC Lords, n.s. vi. 55-57; Nicolson Diaries ed. Jones and Holmes, 278; Luttrell, v. 512-13; Add. 4743, f. 47; Bull. IHR, xxvii. 23; Cam. Misc. xxiii. 45-46, 59, 61, 65, 67, 71, 78; P. G. M. Dickson, Financial Revol. 267.
10. Nicolson Diaries, 461, 494; Add. 70026, f. 163; A Coll. of the Addresses ... Presented to the Queen since the Impeachment of Rev. Henry Sacheverell, i. 23.
11. Huntington Lib. Stowe mss 57(4), p. 133; Add. 70263, Salwey Winnington* to Robert Harley, 25 Sept. 1710; HMC Portland, iv. 614-15.
12. Cobbett, vi. 1021-3; HMC Lords, n.s. ix. 173; Burnet, v. 86-87; Boyer, Pol. State, iii. 244; BL, Trumbull Add. mss 136, Ralph Bridges to Sir William Trumbull, 25 Jan. 1712.
13. HMC Portland, v. 220; Boyer, v. 99.
14. Campbell, Lives, ix. 349–50; Cal. Treas. Bks. xxxi. 9–10; Bodl. Hearne’s diaries 138, ff. 73–75.
___________________

The Abp of Canterbury may have issued a Licence for their marriage on 4th June 1685, for marriage at Mollington.

Boyd’s marriages has a record for an entry in the Vicar-gebneral’s marriage licences.

And indeed in “Allegations for Marriage Licences issued by the Vicar-general of the Archbishop of Canterbury”, ed by George J Armytage, F.S.A., pub in London in 1890 by The Harleian Society, Vol 3, p. 203 there is this transcript:

1685…
June 4 Thomas Powys, of Lincoln’s Inn, Esqr, Bachr, abt 30, & Mrs Sarah Holbech, of Mollington, co. Warw., Spr, abt 19, with consent of her father Ambrose Holbech, Gent.; at Mollington.
_____________________

In the Marriage Register for Mollington church, Oxon / Warks, the entry (transcript by me) was:

“             Marriages Ano 1685          [ page ] 61
“Thomas Powys esq and Sarah Holbech were married at Mollington ye 11th day of June 1685”
_____________________

The Middlesex Faculty Office may have issued a licence on the 1st Oct 1698.

The Cantab faculty office did issue a Licence on 1st October 1698:
“Sir Thomas Powys, Kt, of Lincoln’s Inn, Wodr, & Elizabeth Meddowes, Spr, about 30, dau. of Sir Philip Meddowes, Kt, of St Anne’s Westminster, who consents; alleged by the Revd Hesenry Powys, of St Giles in the Fields, Middx, Dr of Laws; at St Anne’s Westminster, on [blank]”

The same text is in Chester’s Marriage Licences.  I wonder if Henry married them?
___________________

There was also a marriage of a Thomas Powyes and an Eliz Greaves on 21 Feb 1798 at Stanton Lacy, Shropshire.