And by the nearer relation he has to my Lady (Rachel Russell), who is his cousin-german, and the particular friendship which father and son have with Mr William Russell, he is to be introduced into a great commerce with the mal-contented members of Parliament, and insinuate what they shall think fit to cross your measures at court, if they shall prove disagreeable to them here; whilst Monsieur Barillon goes on in his smooth, civil way.’
Following the revocation of the Edict of Nantes in 1685 Ruvigny came to London. He then was a Major General under William of Orange and fought for him in Ireland, distinguishing himself at the Battle of Aughrim in 1691. In 1692 he was made Baron Portarlington and Viscount Galway (Earl in 1697), and was granted 36,000 acres in Ireland. On 27.1.1692 he was appointed Lieutenant General of all forces in Ireland, to operate independently of Henry Sidney. Given his father’s involvement in 1674-6 of the French funding of Charles II and his close ministers, and Ruvigny’s own subsequent mission to Charles in 1678, one has to assume that both father and son knew at least some of the details relating to the routing of the French funding of Charles via the merchants. We must not forget that Henri de Ruvigny also knew Philibert de Gramont, who was probably involved in this on the French side. It was probably Sir John Thompson who organised the routing of the funds during his visit to France in 1670.
In Nottingham’s letter to Jurieu in April 1692 it was a John Thompson who was the Bordeaux merchant on whom the bill of exchange for expenses was drawn. Was this Anne Thompson’s 1670 contact there? Her letter was to Viscount Conway and his brother-in-law was Nottingham, and according to her letter it was Nottingham that received wine from her relation in Bordeaux. One has to assume that this was the John Thompson who was the merchant/paymaster for Nottingham’s spies. (If she was William Despard’s sister then this would link to John Despard’s trading activity with Bordeaux, and substantially increase the probability that Desarres was Despard. Given Sir John Thompson’s marriage to Arthur Annesley’s daughter, it would also provide some logic to the Annesley Queen’s County and Bantry property grants to Despards.)