Wednesday 19 February 1661/62

Musique practice: thence to the Trinity House to conclude upon our report of Sir N. Crisp’s project, who came to us to answer objections, but we did give him no ear, but are resolved to stand to our report; though I could wish we had shewn him more justice and had heard him. Thence to the Wardrobe and dined with my Lady, and talked after dinner as I used to do, and so home and up to my chamber to put things in order to my good content, and so to musique practice.

14 Annotations

Pedro   Link to this

J Evelyn's entry for this day..

19. at our Assembly, discourses of Vegetation without Earth, for which I was ordered to prepare some experiments: It was therefore affirmed of an English Lady, who sweate so excessively, that a quart of water, might at any time be taken out of the Palmes of her hands, not smelling ill, & prop-ortionably from the rest of her body: Also of a little Woman at Rome who pissed about 200 weight of Water every 24. hours and dranke nothing, upon which were divers discourses & conjectures of the resolution of aire.

http://www.geocities.com/Paris/LeftBank/1914/ed...

The Italian lady dranke nothing, but what happend with Mrs. Shippman on the 3rd Feb who drank " the greatest draft that ever I did see a woman drink in my life. "

Sam's entry on 3rd Feb
http://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/1662/02/03/#ann...

JWB   Link to this

Sir N. Crisp
Sir Nicholas makes an appearance in Defoe's "The Memoirs of a Cavalier". Also in the same curious work is this line apropos yesterday's annotations: "About this Time it was that we first began to hear of one Oliver Cromwell, who, like a little Cloud, rose out of the East, and spread first into the North, 'till it shed down a Flood that overhelmed the three Kindoms".

Australian Susan   Link to this

Sam feels uneasy about the treatment meted out to Sir Nick. Who were the others in "our"? And why would they have been so firm about not letting Sir N discuss points? A time factor? Protocol and precendence?

Pauline   Link to this

"...I could wish we had shewn him more justice..."
For the previous diary entry about this see:
http://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/1662/01/25/

Sam sympathizes with the inventive and forward-thinking Crisp; but the land in question has been given to a powerful loyalist to Charles II.

Xjy   Link to this

Expediency vs justice
The reason they wouldn't listen was cos Sir Nick was right, and they couldn't overturn the king's will now, could they? Let's have measure in all things... justice is a tyrant, too, if it gets out of hand... I mean, all this nonsense about habeas corpus and due process that's being bandied about today when our "kings" have more important matters to deal with... And low-lifes making songs like "I don't want no peace, I need Equal Rights and Justice..."
"...How shall the world be served?
Let Austin have his swinke to him reserved"

A. De Araujo   Link to this

"low-lifes"
Xjy,are you talking about the "untouchables" or "the lower depths"?

JWB   Link to this

Zeitgeist
Who's to say what's just? The loyalist are out to get their due. Justice? For them it is to get back their property with interest and reward for time served in war & exile. Brown got his. Crisp did OK too. Many Cavaliers' still howling for justice. That's why the English prisons are overflowing & New England's filling-up.

David A. Smith   Link to this

"could wish we had shewn him more justice and had heard him"
With the greatest respect to Xjy and even Pauline, I believe the passage boils down to this:
* The committee's hands are tied: the land belongs to another, so the potential merit of Sir Nicholas's scheme is irrelevant to the question before Sam.
* That said, the scheme may have merit, and in any case good procedural administration dictates that Sir Nicholas, as a claimant, should be heard, even if he is rejected on the bureaucratic equivalent of summary judgment.

It may well be that forward-thinking Sam would in fact like the record to reflect parole evidence in favor of Sir Nicholas, so as to create grounds for a royal revisiting of the land grant ... but this would read a great deal into a few words.

Pauline   Link to this

"..could wish we had…heard him"
I just thought, knowing that Sam beomes a reknowned naval administrator, that he’s regretting this pass on the wet dock idea and location.

Stolzi   Link to this

Lady Sanderson? Lady Saltonstall?

Pepys' text yesterday says that "Lady Sanderson" was the one killed by the storm.

Josselin says "Lady Saltonstall." Who is right, I wonder?

Since the dates for the Saltonstalls caused trouble, and since Pepys actually lived in London and Josselin didn't, I tend to put my money on Pepys, unless someone knows that his "Lady Sanderson" is an error of Pepys or the transcriber?

About the dates - the second site about the painting says "Painted 1636-1637."

Australian Susan   Link to this

Josselin would know about Lady Saltonstall because she was local to him. Maybe we are talking about two ladies??

Mary   Link to this

Lady Saltonstall/Lady Sanderson.

We've been discussing Lady Saltonstall because the L&M edition states that 'Sanderson' should properly read 'Saltonstall'. However, the editors offer no reason for the note.

Pauline   Link to this

"the editors offer no reason for the note"
"...a person of quality in Covent Garden, was killed by the fall of the house, in her bed, last night..."
Pretty descriptive report from Sam for L&M to base their research for her name on.

vicenzo   Link to this

This day the the Commons did put forth a bill banning of self grandisement:
Wearing Gold and Silver Lace.
Ordered, That a Bill be brought in against the Wearing of Gold and Silver Lace, Buttons, Ribbands, or any other Trimmings for Cloaths, of Gold or Silver, and against Gilding of Coaches and Signs; and all Things else that may waste the Coin of the Kingdom: And it is recommended to Mr. Birch, to . . care of the Bringing in of this Bill.

From: British History Online
Source: House of Commons Journal Volume 8: 19 February 1662. Journal of the House of Commons: volume 8, (1802).
URL: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.asp?com...
Date: 08/03/2005

Log in to post an annotation.

If you don't have an account, then register here.