Saturday 23 November 1667

Up, and to the office, where all the morning, and at noon home to dinner, and all the afternoon also busy till late preparing things to fortify myself and fellows against the Parliament; and particularly myself against what I fear is thought, that I have suppressed the Order of the Board by which the discharging the great ships off at Chatham by tickets was directed; whereas, indeed, there was no such Order. So home at night to supper and to bed.

5 Annotations

Terry Foreman   Link to this

Today at Arundel House Arthur Coga was transfused in the presence of an assembly of witnesses by Drs. Richard Lower [ http://munksroll.rcplondon.ac.uk/Biography/Deta... ], Sir Edmund King [ http://www.pepysdiary.com/encyclopedia/6768/ ], et al.

For a very complete account of the background, procedure and aftermath of the Arthur Coga transfusions, scroll down to read "The Blood of the Lamb," pp. 94-105 of Simon Shaffer, "Regeneration: The Body of Natural Philosophers in Restoration England" Ch 3 of *Science incarnate: historical embodiments of natural knowledge* By Christopher Lawrence and Steven Shapin (University of Chicago Press, 1998 ). http://is.gd/h8DGJ

Engraving of an early blood transfusion from lamb to man, 1705.
http://www1.sciencemuseum.org.uk/hommedia.ashx?...

Terry Foreman   Link to this

Ormond from Dublin to Ossory his son at Charleville dated 23 November 1667

There is no doubt the King well understands that the drift of a rumoured accusation against the writer is to remove him from this Government, which, at this juncture of his private affairs, could be of irreparable inconvenience & damage. ... The only means of redeeming his estate from the weight of debt that is upon it is the money given by the Acts of Settlement
[ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Act_of_Settlement_... ], which will hardly be brought in, but by his own presence in the Kingdom, or by the great friendship of the Chief Governor of the time.

The King should remember that no opposition, no temptation, ever frightened, or ever allured, the writer, from his duty to the Crown. More might be said, but that is enough.

http://www.rsl.ox.ac.uk/dept/scwmss/projects/ca...

Ruben   Link to this

"Engraving of an early blood transfusion from lamb to man"
Vey small lamb indeed.
Terry: thank you for the references.

Mary   Link to this

"whereas, indeed, there was no such order."

Oh dear, always more difficult to prove beyond doubt that something didn't happen. No wonder that Sam is giving so much effort to getting all his ducks in a row.

Terry Foreman   Link to this

In the House of Commons today constitutional law history is made

Die Sabbati, 23 Novembris, 1667.

Privilege- Freedom of Speech.

The House then resumed the Debate of the Report concerning the Freedom of Speech in Parliament: And the Statute of 4° Hen. VIII, concerning Richard Strode, being read; and the Report again read; and the Matter debated;

Resolved, &c. That the Judgment given, 5° Car', against Sir John Elliott, Denzill Hollis, and Benjamin Vallintine Esquires, in the King's Bench, was an illegal Judgment, and against the Freedom of Privileges of Parliament.

http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?co...

In 1629, in the prosecution of Sir John Eliot (R v. Eliot, Hollis and Valentine), the court held that Strode's Act was a private act and applied to Strode only and not to other MPs. However, in 1667, both the Commons and the House of Lords carried resolutions declaring Strode's Act a general law:

... and that it extends to indemnify all and every the Members of both Houses of Parliament, in all Parliaments, for and touching all Bills, speaking, reasoning, or declaring of any Matter or Matters in and concerning the Parliament, to be communed and treated of, and is only a declaratory law of the antient and necessary Rights and Privileges of Parliament.

This establishes the common law that privilege extends beyond mere protection against action for defamation or treason. The law was subsequently codified as Art. 9 of the Bill of Rights 1689.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strode's_case

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliamentary_priv...

From which follows

The Speech or Debate Clause is a clause in the United States Constitution (Article I, Section 6, Clause 1) . The clause states that members of both Houses of Congress
“ ...shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony, and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their attendance at the Session of their Respective Houses, and in going to and from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speech_or_Debate_C...

Log in to post an annotation.

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