Tuesday 29 March 1664

Was called up this morning by a messenger from Sir G. Carteret to come to him to Sir W. Batten’s, and so I rose and thither to him, and with him and Sir J. Minnes to, Sir G. Carteret’s to examine his accounts, and there we sat at it all the morning. About noon Sir W. Batten came from the House of Parliament and told us our Bill for our office was read the second time to-day, with great applause, and is committed. By and by to dinner, where good cheere, and Sir G. Carteret in his humour a very good man, and the most kind father and pleased father in his children that ever I saw. Here is now hung up a picture of my Lady Carteret, drawn by Lilly, a very fine picture, but yet not so good as I have seen of his doing. After dinner to the business again without any intermission till almost night, and then home, and took coach to my father to see and discourse with him, and so home again and to my office, where late, and then home to bed.

12 Annotations

jeannine   Link to this

"Sir G. Carteret in his humour a very good man, and the most kind father and pleased father in his children that ever I saw. Here is now hung up a picture of my Lady Carteret, drawn by Lilly, a very fine picture, but yet not so good as I have seen of his doing."
As much as Sam may have had his negative opinions about Carteret in the past, he was a very devoted husband and father, and consistent in his devotion to his wife and children throughout his life--- a real achievement in the Courts of Charles II.
(Balleine's "All for the King")

jeannine   Link to this

"Here is now hung up a picture of my Lady Carteret, drawn by Lilly"
I have been trying to find a link to this picture on the web but no luck. Her Lely portrait appears in the book, "All For the King" by Balleine, but I believe it may be privately owned by the Carteret family and therefore not available anywhere on the web (????)as the notation below her portrait reads "printed by permission of R. Malet de Carteret". George's portrait by Lely carries the same notation and I can't find that on the web either.

cape henry   Link to this

"...a very fine picture, but yet not so good as I have seen of his doing." Given that Pepys has shown himself to have a discerning eye - and ear, for that matter - one would think we should take his word for this.

Terry F   Link to this

*Portrait of Lady Elizabeth Carteret* by Charles Lee Myers (Author), T. G. Cutler (Adapter) is rendered in a digital version (PDF).

Book Description
The original of this portrait was painted from life by Sir Peter Lely, the court painter for Charles I and II. A fine copy was made in the 1800s, and was presented to the City of Elizabeth (named in honor of Lady Elizabeth Carteret) in 1925 by the Society of Colonial Wars. Discussion of the Carteret family and its early involvement in the colonization of New Jersey. (NJHS 1926) http://www.amazon.com/Portrait-Elizabeth-Carter...

but the portrait is not freely available online.

MissAnn   Link to this

This examining of accounts regularly seems to be a little like our quarterly BAS (Business Activity Statement) which the ATO (Australia Tax Office) continues to torture us with. Some things never change.

"The Bill for our Office" - would this be a raising of funds for Navy Office or a bill to confirm creation of the Navy Office - I'm a little confused here.

Australian Susan   Link to this

"examine his accounts"
I took this to mean auditing the accounts, which nowadays is done annually not quarterly. "Doing the BAS" (as I do every quarter for my sins) is - for the Brits out there - like doing the VAT returns. Tedious, but you do get something back. But it's not like having accounts audited: it's the rendering unto Caesar. Taxes, taxes, death and taxes - constants.

Terry F   Link to this

"our Bill for our office was read the second time to-day, with great applause, and is committed."

Cf. Michael Robinson's annote for Saturday last, 26 March 1664 http://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/1664/03/26/#c10... re: A Bill for the better enabling the principal Officers and Commissioners of his Majesty's Navy Royal, for the Performance of their Duties in the Service thereof, etc....

Todd Bernhardt   Link to this

"and took coach to my father to see and discourse with him"

Funny to see "discourse" as a verb, but that kind of discovery is just one more pleasure of this site, I suppose...

cumsalisgrano   Link to this

Headline in the Sun-wail 29 march 1664 "MP's says no way" 'Me Lauds agree not to be retired to their estates for ever, must have excuse to see the sights."

a summary of a very important action that could have changed the world by allowing Charles to rule by edict and set total policy and collection of Englands extra cash for pet projects.
Triennial Parliaments.
23 march;
A Bill for Repeal of the Act,
intituled, An Act for the preventing the Inconveniences happening by the long Intermission of Parliaments;
and for the Provision for the Calling and Holding of Parliaments once in Three Years, at least;

was read the First time.

The Question being put, Whether this Question, That the Bill be read on Tuesday, be put;
The House was divided.
The Noes went out.
Yeas 42 noes 129
URL: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.asp?com...

26th Triennial Parliaments.
The House, according to former Order, resolved itself into a Committee of the whole House, to take into Consideration the Bill for Repeal of the Act,.......
committeed;
...And the same, being twice read, were, upon the Question, severally agreed to.
Resolved, That the said Bill, with the Amendments agreed to, be ingrossed.....
Two of them, do repair to the Clerk of the House of Lords; to examine, Whether the Title of an Act, expressed in the Bill for Repeal of the Act, intituled, An Act for the preventing the Inconveniencies happening by the long Intermission of Parliaments; and for the better Provision for the Calling and holding of Parliaments once in Three Years at least; be truly recited; and do agree with the Roll there.
......
28 th march Triennial Parliaments.
The ingrossed Bill for repealing an Act for the Preventing of Inconveniencies happening by the long Intermission of Parliaments, was read.
Resolved, &c.

That these Words, "and holding," be inserted, after the Word "assembling" in the Six-andthirtieth Line of the Bill.
Resolved, &c. That these Words, "the Sitting and Holding of Parliaments," be inserted into the Bill, after the Word "hereafter," in the Thirtieth Line of the Bill.
The Question being put, That these Words, "the last Day of the last Sitting of," be inserted into the Bill;
The House was divided.
The Yeas went out
Yeas 83 noes 140
....And so it passed in the Negative.
A Proviso was tendered to be added to the Bill; and opened.
The Question being put, That the Proviso be read;
The House was divided.
The Yeas went out.

Sir Anth. Cope,Tellers for the Yeas:88.
Sir Cha. Hussey,With the Yeas,
Sir Edm. Pooley,Tellers for the Noes:134.
Sir Wm. Gawdy,With the Noes,

And so it passed in the Negative.

Triennial Parliaments.
A Message from the Lords, by Mr. Justice Tirrell and Mr. Baron Rainsford;

Mr. Speaker, The Lords have sent us to acquaint you, That they have concurred with this House in the Bill, intituled, An Act for the Assembling and Holding of Parliaments once in Three Years at the least; and for the Repeal of an Act, intituled, An Act for the Preventing of Inconveniences happening by the long Intermission of Parliaments.31:
.

Paul Chapin   Link to this

CSG, thank you for posting the journals of the H of C concerning the Triennial Parliaments act. I have followed the link to the original journals, which are a little clearer in their formatting, but I must still confess myself completely baffled. In the recorded votes, it appears that the Noes have it, and the question is decided in the negative; but then the subsequent language sounds as though the act has passed, and the Lords have agreed to it. What am I missing here? Were the "No" votes on amendments to the original bill? Anybody? Bueller?

cumsalisgrano   Link to this

my illegal guess be:
A: they modified the original to make a new Bill
B: No longer an Inter-regnum: Charles still has to have Parliament to keep tabs on his spendings etc..
C: Parlialment said no to removing this Parliamentry power.
This is one of the reasons for the triangle of Power in Washington: all internal angles add up to 180, but still one angle has to be at least a minute [be that minute], before it becomes a monarcy power.
I.E. The repeal failed: King cannot rule without some representation from Barons [all 5 earthly layers and Spiritual] and those that have monies or property ;

The Masterless ones and women will have to wait a few more years to have a say.
See Hobbes. for some some of the current thinking ;Leviathan.
There be more Parliamentary manoverings to come.

Michael Robinson   Link to this

a very fine picture, but yet not so good as I have seen of his doing.

Lely employed an extensive studio organization so that a very large number of portraits could be produced as quickly as possible. He himself worked very hard ... but could not conceivably cope with the demand ... which could only be met by putting the assistants on to painting everything but the head, after the design had been laid out for them ... His patrons became increasingly apprehensive ... and Lely had to write, on 1st December 1677, an attestation for Sir Richard Newdigate that two portraits done for him had been 'from the Beginning to ye end drawne with my own hands'

Oliver Millar 'Sir Peter Lely 1618-80' [London] National Portrait Gallery, 1978 p. 17

Log in to post an annotation.

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