Thursday 30 October 1662

Could sleep but little to-night for thoughts of my business. So up by candlelight and by water to Whitehall, and so to my Lord Sandwich, who was up in his chamber and all alone, did acquaint me with his business; which was, that our old acquaintance Mr. Wade (in Axe Yard) hath discovered to him 7,000l. hid in the Tower, of which he was to have two for discovery; my Lord himself two, and the King the other three, when it was found; and that the King’s warrant runs for me on my Lord’s part, and one Mr. Lee for Sir Harry Bennet, to demand leave of the Lieutenant of the Tower for to make search. After he had told me the whole business, I took leave and hastened to my office, expecting to be called by a letter from my Lord to set upon the business, and so there I sat with the officers all the morning. At noon when we were up comes Mr. Wade with my Lord’s letter, and tells me the whole business. So we consulted for me to go first to Sir H. Bennet, who is now with many of the Privy Counsellors at the Tower, examining of their late prisoners, to advise with him when to begin. So I went; and the guard at the Tower Gate, making me leave my sword at the gate, I was forced to stay so long in the ale-house hard by, till my boy run home for my cloak, that my Lord Mayor that now is, Sir John Robinson, Lieutenant of the Tower, with all his company, was gone with their coaches to his house in Minchen Lane. So my cloak being come, I walked thither; and there, by Sir G. Carteret’s means, did presently speak with Sir H. Bennet, who did show and give me the King’s warrant to me and Mr. Leigh, and another to himself, for the paying of 2,000l. to my Lord, and other two to the discoverers. After a little discourse, dinner come in; and I dined with them. There was my Lord Mayor, my Lord Lauderdale, Mr. Secretary Morris, to whom Sir H. Bennet would give the upper hand; Sir Wm. Compton, Sir G. Carteret, and myself, and some other company, and a brave dinner. After dinner, Sir H. Bennet did call aside the Lord Mayor and me, and did break the business to him, who did not, nor durst appear the least averse to it, but did promise all assistance forthwith to set upon it. So Mr. Lee and I to our office, and there walked till Mr. Wade and one Evett his guide did come, and W. Griffin, and a porter with his picke-axes, &c.; and so they walked along with us to the Tower, and Sir H. Bennet and my Lord Mayor did give us full power to fall to work. So our guide demands, a candle, and down into the cellars he goes, inquiring whether they were the same that Baxter1 always had. We went into several little cellars, and then went out a- doors to view, and to the Cole Harbour; but none did answer so well to the marks which was given him to find it by, as one arched vault. Where, after a great deal of council whether to set upon it now, or delay for better and more full advice, we set to it, to digging we went to almost eight o’clock at night, but could find nothing. But, however, our guides did not at all seem discouraged; for that they being confident that the money is there they look for, but having never been in the cellars, they could not be positive to the place, and therefore will inform themselves more fully now they have been there, of the party that do advise them. So locking the door after us, we left work to-night, and up to the Deputy Governor (my Lord Mayor, and Sir H. Bennet, with the rest of the company being gone an hour before); and he do undertake to keep the key of the cellars, that none shall go down without his privity. But, Lord! to see what a young simple fantastique coxcombe is made Deputy Governor, would make one mad; and how he called out for his night-gown of silk, only to make a show to us; and yet for half an hour I did not think he was the Deputy Governor, and so spoke not to him about the business, but waited for another man; at last I broke our business to him; and he promising his care, we parted. And Mr. Leigh and I by coach to White Hall, where I did give my Lord Sandwich an account of our proceedings, and some encouragement to hope for something hereafter, and so bade him good- night, and so by coach home again, where to my trouble I found that the painter had not been here to-day to do any thing, which vexes me mightily. So to my office to put down my journal, and so home and to bed. This morning, walking with Mr. Coventry in the garden, he did tell me how Sir G. Carteret had carried the business of the Victuallers’ money to be paid by himself, contrary to old practice; at which he is angry I perceive, but I believe means no hurt, but that things maybe done as they ought. He expects Sir George should not bespatter him privately, in revenge, but openly. Against which he prepares to bedaub him, and swears he will do it from the beginning, from Jersey to this day. And as to his own taking of too large fees or rewards for places that he had sold, he will prove that he was directed to it by Sir George himself among others. And yet he did not deny Sir G. Carteret his due, in saying that he is a man that do take the most pains, and gives himself the most to do business of any man about the Court, without any desire of pleasure or divertisements; which is very true. But which pleased me mightily, he said in these words, that he was resolved, whatever it cost him, to make an experiment, and see whether it was possible for a man to keep himself up in Court by dealing plainly and walking uprightly, with any private game a playing: in the doing whereof, if his ground do slip from under him, he will be contented; but he is resolved to try, and never to baulke taking notice of any thing that is to the King’s prejudice, let it fall where it will; which is a most brave resolucion. He was very free with me; and by my troth, I do see more reall worth in him than in most men that I do know. I would not forget two passages of Sir J. Minnes’s at yesterday’s dinner. The one, that to the question how it comes to pass that there are no boars seen in London, but many sows and pigs; it was answered, that the constable gets them a-nights. The other, Thos. Killigrew’s way of getting to see plays when he was a boy. He would go to the Red Bull, and when the man cried to the boys, “Who will go and be a devil, and he shall see the play for nothing?” then would he go in, and be a devil upon the stage, and so get to see plays.

  1. Intended for John Barkstead, Lieutenant of the Tower under Cromwell. Committed to the Tower (see March 17th, 1661-62).

31 Annotations

Terry F   Link to this

"the King’s warrant runs for me on my Lord’s part, and one Mr. Lee for Sir Harry Bennet, to demand leave of the Lieutenant of the Tower for to make search."

L&M note: "The treasure (of gold, silver and jewels) was supposed to have been hidden by John Barkstead, a goldsmith of the Strand, who had been Lieutenant of the Tower, 1652-60. Recently he had been arrested in Holland, and in April 1662 had been executed. It was alleged that he had been unable to recover his hoard before he fled abroad at the Restoration. Several attempts have been made since Pepys's time (e.g. in 1958) to find it...."

Robert Gertz was that you?

Terry F   Link to this

"I was forced to stay so long in the ale-house hard by, till my boy run home for my cloak"

L&M note: "When out of doors a gentleman was properly dressed only if he carried a sword or wore an upper garment."

* * *

"Mr. Secretary Morris, to whom Sir H. Bennet would give the upper hand;"

L&M note: "Both were Secretaries of State, but Morice was the senior by appointment."

Glyn   Link to this

According to my computer's word count, this entry is over 1,200 words long (!). Assuming that he's composing this as he goes along and writing at 20 words per minute - he must pause at some point to gather his thoughts - then he took just over an hour to write this. When did he find the time?

On first reading this, I jumped to the conclusion that Mr Wade had "discovered" the buried treasure, but it's clear that he was just passing on information and it's still to be found. On the face of it, it is at least plausible that the previous man in charge of the Tower could have hid his wealth there - it's very burglar proof.

Terry F   Link to this

Mr Coventry "prepares to bedaub [Sir G.C.] and swears he will do it from the beginning, from Jersey to this day."

L&M note: "Carteret was royalist Governor of Jersey, 1643-51. For some of the stories criticising his conduct there, see [Wed. 24 June 1663]."

Judith Boles   Link to this

This reminds me of the Cheapside Hoard discovered in the early 1900's. Any possibility the hiding place was incorrect?

Terry F   Link to this

"Cheapside Hoard" - plausible place; all jewelry; no gold or silver

"The numerous and diverse objects of the Hoard had lain undisturbed in their deeply interred hiding place for some 300 years until they were dug up during excavation work in Cheapside in London [England] in 1912. Thus all the recovered objects date to before the mid-17th century, which was a time when Cheapside had been 'the principle market street in London' and was noted for its goldsmiths' shops." http://www.ganoksin.com/borisat/nenam/cheapside...

Lovely photographs of the jewelry. Thanks for the lead, Judith Boles!

Terry F   Link to this

"Mr. Coventry...did tell me how Sir G. Carteret had carried the business of the Victuallers’ money to be paid by himself, contrary to old practice"

We were introduced to this Thursday 12 June 1662: "But a great difference happened between Sir G. Carteret and Mr. Coventry, about passing the Victualler’s account, and whether Sir George is to pay the Victualler his money, or the Exchequer; Sir George claiming it to be his place to save his threepences. It ended in anger, and I believe will come to be a question before the King and Council."
http://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/1662/06/12/

Pepys, who chose to stay out of it, may prove to have been right.

Bradford   Link to this

What a cock & bull tale of buried treasure, divvied and spent before it's found. Here's a better idea: let's all go be devils on the stage, for All Hallow's Eve!

Robert Gertz   Link to this

"He was very free with me; and by my troth, I do see more reall worth in him than in most men that I do know."

A little sad that Coventry, one of the most able and, I think, sincerely noble men in the government, is working to achieve an efficient technocratic autocracy that would have crushed most of what we hold to be the basic human freedoms...

Of course Charlie and Jamie are not Adolf Hitler and Pepys is not Albert Speer...Yet one does wonder just how blind an eye Sam has and might turn to real oppression of old colleagues and friends. Or how far many of us who consider ourselves decent human beings and supporters, more or less of democracy, etc, might go down the dark path...Sitting in our cushy offices, enjoying our perks, and hoping those who suffer at the orders we pass on will never show on our doorstep.

Terry F   Link to this

The search for the Hoard leads to "the Cole Harbour."

L&M note: "A stone gateway."

In this Richard III Society discussion of investigations into the fate of Edward IV's sons, structures excavated in the Tower are identified (Fig. 1) as "Cole Harbour" and (Fig. 2) "Cole (Cold) Harbour Tower and Gate." http://www.r3.org/bookcase/misc/wigram01.html#e10

There is skull-duggery here....

Cumgranissalis   Link to this

"Discretion 'tis the better part of Valour" one has to decide where the LINE be. Belly must be fed before it rumbles?
Better said by Juvenal in Satirae, 143-144
Quantum quisque sua nummorum servat in arca, tantum habet et fidei.
or in Saxon
the honor of the man is worth as much as the cash he has in his little leather pouch of coin.

JWB   Link to this

Cole Harbours
were wayside shelters for travellors without a fire or innkeeper. Perhaps a Coleharbour attached to the White tower was a hostel for retainers of visitors entertained in the warmer harbour within.

Joe   Link to this

"But which pleased me mightily, he said in these words, that he was resolved, whatever it cost him, to make an experiment, and see whether it was possible for a man to keep himself up in Court by dealing plainly and walking uprightly, with any private game a playing"

Many things to please Pepys: Coventry's bravery, his commitment to open dealing, his scientific bent to "experiment;" perhaps even a touch of "better his experiment than mine," too.

GRC   Link to this

What! No link to Lauderdale? Isn't he the "L" in Cabal?

Terry F   Link to this

GRC, I had the same reaction to linkless Lord Lauderdale; but a search yields two links in 1660, and it turns out that his name is John Maitland http://www.pepysdiary.com/encyclopedia/767/

Terry F   Link to this

And yes, Lauderdale is the L in "cabal"

(Clifford, Arlington, Buckingham, Ashley, Lauderdale) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cabal

MikeCamel   Link to this

Glyn - it is a long entry, but why assume only 20 words a minute? Isn't Sam using shorthand of some type?

adam w   Link to this

Cole Harbour

Thanks, JWB - I've been puzzled by the various Coldharbour place names around Britain - chilly refuges!

But would there really be one of these within the Tower of London - most are in (formerly) rural areas where a refuge by the roadside would be welcome. There is no shortage of inns around the Tower, in Pepys day or now.

If L&M say this is a stone gateway, is this not likely to be where coal was delivered (by river?) - i.e. a coal harbour, not a cold harbour?

Leo Starrenburg   Link to this

The fact that some things simply have not changed over the centuries keeps surprising me. I wonder how many readers can picture someone they know who fits this description:

"But, Lord! to see what a young simple fantastique coxcombe is made Deputy Governor, would make one mad; and how he called out for his night-gown of silk, only to make a show to us; and yet for half an hour I did not think he was the Deputy Governor, and so spoke not to him about the business, but waited for another man".

cheers, Leo.

Cumgranissalis   Link to this

"cole 'arbour"; not too many can afford the delights of the coaching inns, there be many a merchant of the lesser sort that may have digs, but not the farthings to pay the inn keeper especially if lost their wad on the local doings.
harbour [harbor] ME herberwe,ON herberg [army shelter]
which blends nicely for the non linguists of arbor= tree, ship,mast, oar, gallows. [Latin nat.]
Cole [coal, old king etc.]

Terry F   Link to this

harbor

c.1150, from O.E. herebeorg, from here "army, host" (see harry) + beorg "refuge, shelter" (related to beorgan "save, preserve")[Ger. Herberg "hostel"][cf. burg "fortress", bourge, borough, etc.]; perhaps modeled on O.N. herbergi, from P.Gmc. *kharjaz + *berg-. Sense shifted in M.E. to "refuge, lodgings," then to "place of shelter for ships." http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=harbor

Thanks, CGS for directing the analyis back to the Navy!

Australian Susan   Link to this

"I found that the painter had not been here to-day to do any thing, which vexes me mightily."
Things don't change, do they? Bet he had the same excuses as the 21st century painters too.

Glyn   Link to this

MikeCamel - although Pepys uses shorthand, I thought he might still need time to plan what he was going to say - it still must take time to write all this out.

Bradford's right - let's all be devils for All Hallows Eve! Did very many plays require devils in them, or is this something that would be specific to plays put on or around Halloween, which is why they're discussing it?

CGS   Link to this

from the same source for the cockney version----arbor vitae a special new name of fir tree [1664]..

dirk   Link to this

Re - Robert Gertz

"A little sad that Coventry [...] is working to achieve an efficient technocratic autocracy that would have crushed most of what we hold to be the basic human freedoms…"

I understand your point, but let's not forget that these (democratic) human freedoms you mention were something unthinkable in Sam's time. A government with a King who rules as he sees fit, in the name of God - and as such is always right - was the generally accepted standard then. Only the French Revolution (1789) would put an end to this...

Paul Chapin   Link to this

"Only the French Revolution (1789) would put an end to this"
Well, a dozen or so years earlier, there were a few guys on the west side of the Pond who also had a different idea.

Pauline   Link to this

'Only the French Revolution (1789) would put an end to this…'
It is hoped. "...who rules as he sees fit, in the name of God - and as such is always right...." Some contemporary instances to see through first....

Xjy   Link to this

Only the French Revolution (1789) would put an end to this…

dirk on Tue 1 Nov 2005, Re - Robert Gertz

" “A little sad that Coventry […] is working to achieve an efficient technocratic autocracy that would have crushed most of what we hold to be the basic human freedoms…”

I understand your point, but let’s not forget that these (democratic) human freedoms you mention were something unthinkable in Sam’s time. A government with a King who rules as he sees fit, in the name of God - and as such is always right - was the generally accepted standard then. Only the French Revolution (1789) would put an end to this… "

Generally accepted my foot!
Unthinkable my arse!
See Macchiavelli's works The Prince (on Monarchy) and Discourses on Livy (on the Republic), for instance. And many many documents by republicans and egalitarians from the first half of the 17th century. Even Hobbes is unthinkable without the pressures of democracy and equality on the monarchist regime. And don't forget the Taborites in the 16th century! Not just thinking radical republicanism, but doing it.
And Cromwell and the yeomen of England put an end to it as far as this country was concerned decades before. Charles and the Restoration were by no means "generally accepted", as the bourgeois-Orange coup in 1688 demonstrated quite conclusively.
What's more, the French Revolution was just another step in the right direction, nothing conclusive about it. The big step was the English Revolution. The French Revolution widened the road the English pioneered.
Since 1848, the bourgeoisie has given up on improving society for all its members and the torch has passed to the proletariat. History is still happening, with all its twists and turns.
What we are witnessing in Sam's diary is the adaptation of a spectral monarchist regime to a bourgeois revolution. The baby can't be stuffed back in the womb, but it can be dressed up and painted to be what it ain't, and driven around in a gilded coach and four instead of a suitable pram...

CGS   Link to this

Democracy---is somewhere between absolute power [divine right of kings {boss}, birth, me rite ye wrong] and anarchy where every one does it their way.
England has had touch of freedom from King be right, CI lost his head for not being able to bend a little, like a predecessor K. John who angered his power base as did Charley one, Charley two is feeling his way trying not to anger the city ['tis where the money be] unfortunately or fortunately those that had a differing opinion did not unite , but were bribed to start there own version of divine rites [13 {lucky} offshoots]. When Geo III upset them, this group were then united in trying to control their own wealth, so we have the Declaration of ..., whereas the the southern [Spanish/Portuguese] rebels of S.America never united but splintered and are still trying to come up with a constitution to allow some to keep their wealth.[Chile be on its 5 th version, France be on its another versions of freedoms of.... and England refuses to write one]
'Tis bad policy to anger the money men, ye get revolutions that way.
Sir F. Bacon did point the way, where be muck piled up, there be a blow up, and money be like muck it to will blow up when piled up in one pocket.
The revolts, though said to be in the name of the hoi polloi, never in the final analyst be that, just a new group of divine riters.

dirk   Link to this

The big step was the English Revolution.

Re - Xiy -

My ... whatever. I don't agree. The English Revolution with Cromwell was shortlived, and afterwards we find another King on the throne, who can do very much as he pleases really. And we can hardly call Cromwell's britain a democracy, can we?

You're of course right that the French Revolution wasn't the only factor that modernized the way nations would be governed. The American Revolution also played a part, but had less radical ideas, and less impact on Britain's and the continent's views on these matters. The French Revolution was a landmark because it explicitly replaced the monarchy by a government by the people (however imperfect at the time), which is why it's generally accepted as the end of the "ancien régime". The American Revolution was in its origin about independence from a King who was felt to be unjust, at first without the explicit intention to change the system too much.

(Just want to point out that I'm not French, and I'm not being chauvinistic here. If you don't believe me, check any textbook on European history.)

Australian Susan   Link to this

Just another note on this - whilst I agree with dirk, I would like to point out that England was the first European country whose parliament arrested, tried and executed its monarch.

Log in to post an annotation.

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