by his second wife, Janet, sister of Sir Walter Scott of Buccleuch. He accompanied James I as page to England, but being then discharged from the royal service, sought for a time to make his fortune in France.Returning to England at age 17 he happened to break his arm at a tilting match, at which James was present, and was recognized by the king. According to the Earl of Suffolk, Thomas Howard, King James fell in love with the young man, taught him Latin, and helped nurse him. As the years progressed James showered the man with gifts, till 1615 when the two men had a falling out and Carr was replaced by George Villiers. James wrote a letter that year detailing a list of complaints he now had against Carr, including Carr withdrawing himself from James' chamber despite the King's "soliciting to the contrary."
Lady Raleigh received some compensation, apparently inadequate, and Carr at once entered on possession.His influence was already such that in 1610 he persuaded the king to dissolve the parliament, which had shown signs of attacking the Scottish favourites. On March 24, 1611 he was created Viscount Rochester, and subsequently a privy councillor, while on Lord Salisbury’s death in 1612 he began to act as the king’s secretary. On the November 3, 1613 he was advanced to the earldom of Somerset, on December 23 was appointed Treasurer of Scotland, and in 1614 Lord Chamberlain.
Ten days before the court gave judgment, Sir Thomas Overbury, who apparently knew facts concerning Lady Essex which would have been fatal to her success, and had been imprisoned in the Tower, was poisoned. No idea seems to have been entertained at the time that Lady Essex and her future husband were implicated. The crime, however, was not disclosed until January 1615. Coke and Bacon were set to unravel the plot. After four of the principal agents had been convicted and punished, the Earl and Countess of Somerset were brought to trial. The latter confessed, and of her guilt there can be no doubt. Somerset’s share is far more difficult to discover, and probably will never be fully known. The evidence against him rested on mere presumption, and he consistently declared himself innocent. Probabilities are on the whole in favour of the hypothesis that he was not more than an accessory after the fact. James, who had been threatened by Somerset with damaging disclosures, let matters take their course, and both earl and countess were found guilty. The sentence was not carried into effect against either culprit. The countess was pardoned immediately, but both remained in the Tower till January 1622. The earl appears to have refused to buy forgiveness by concessions, and it was not till 1624 that he obtained his pardon. He only once more emerged into public view when in 1630 he was prosecuted in the Star Chamber for communicating a paper of Sir Robert Dudley’s to the earl of Clare, recommending the establishment of arbitrary government. He died in July 1645, leaving one daughter, Anne, the sole issue of his ill-fated marriage, afterwards wife of the 1st Duke of Bedford.