Monday 14 October 1667

Up, and by water to White Hall, and thence walked to St. James’s, and there to Mr. Wren’s; and he told me that my business was done about my warrant on the Maybolt Galliott; which I did see, and though it was not so full in the reciting of my services as the other was in that of Sir W. Pen’s, yet I was well pleased with it, and do intend to fetch it away anon. Thence with Sir Thomas Allen, in a little sorry coach which he hath set up of late, and Sir Jeremy Smith, to White Hall, and there I took water and went to Westminster Hall, and there hear that the House is this day again upon the business of giving the King the thanks of the House for his speech, and, among other things, for laying aside of my Lord Chancellor. Thence I to Mrs. Martin’s, where by appointment comes to me Mrs. Howlett, which I was afraid was to have told me something of my freedom with her daughter, but it was not so, but only to complain to me of her son-in-law, how he abuses and makes a slave of her, and his mother is one that encourages him in it, so that they are at this time upon very bad terms one with another, and desires that I would take a time to advise him and tell him what it becomes him to do, which office I am very glad of, for some ends of my own also con sa fille, and there drank and parted, I mightily satisfied with this business, and so home by water with Sir W. Warren, who happened to be at Westminster, and there I pretty strange to him, and little discourse, and there at the office Lord Bruncker, W. Pen, T. Hater and I did some business, and so home to dinner, and thence I out to visit Sir G. Carteret and ladies there; and from him do understand that the King himself (but this he told me as a great secret) is satisfied that this thanks which he expects from the House, for the laying aside of my Lord Chancellor, is a thing irregular; but, since it is come into the House, he do think it necessary to carry it on, and will have it, and hath made his mind known to be so, to some of the House. But Sir G. Carteret do say he knows nothing of what my Lord Bruncker told us to-day, that the King was angry with the Duke of York yesterday, and advised him not to hinder what he had a mind to have done, touching this business; which is news very bad, if true. Here I visited my Lady Carteret, who hath been sick some time, but now pretty well, but laid on her bed. Thence to my Lord Crew, to see him after my coming out of the country, and he seems satisfied with some steps they have made in my absence towards my Lord Sandwich’s relief for money: and so I have no more to do, nor will trouble myself more about it till they send for me. He tells me also that the King will have the thanks of the House go on: and commends my Lord Keeper’s speech for all but what he was forced to say, about the reason of the King’s sending away the House so soon the last time, when they were met, but this he was forced to do. Thence to Westminster Hall, and there walked with Mr. Scowen, who tells me that it is at last carried in the House that the thanks shall be given to the King — among other things, particularly for the removal of my Lord Chancellor; but he tells me it is a strange act, and that which he thinks would never have been, but that the King did insist upon it, that, since it come into the House, it might not be let fall. After walking there awhile I took coach and to the Duke of York’s House, and there went in for nothing into the pit, at the last act, to see Sir Martin Marrall, and met my wife, who was there, and my brother, and W. Hewer and Willett, and carried them home, still being pleased with the humour of the play, almost above all that ever I saw. Home, and there do find that John Bowles is not yet come thither. I suppose he is playing the good fellow in the town. So to the office a while, and then home to supper and to bed.


15 Annotations

Robert Gertz  •  Link

"...desires that I would take a time to advise him and tell him what it becomes him to do, which office I am very glad of, for some ends of my own also con sa fille..."

"You know what you are, Baxter? You're a cutie-pie. Yes, you are. A real...Cutie-pie." -Dr. Dreyfus, "The Apartment".

Robert Gertz  •  Link

"Home, and there do find that John Bowles is not yet come thither. I suppose he is playing the good fellow in the town."

John does seem to be taking his time in getting back to Hinchingbrook. But we might be excused to call it, "playing the Pepys in the town".

Terry Foreman  •  Link

"Address on the King's Speech.

"Sir Wm. Lowther reports from the Committee appointed to draw up . . . Address of Thanks, to be presented to his Majesty, the Draught of the said Address: Which, being twice read, was, upon the Question, agreed to; and is as followeth; viz.

"WE Your Majesty's loyal and faithful Subjects, the Commons, in Parliament assembled,...find ourselves bound in Duty to return Your Majesty our humble and hearty Thanks,...And particularly, that Your Majesty hath been pleased to disband the late raised Forces; and to dismiss the Papists from out of the Guards, and other military Employments: For Your Majesty's Care in quickening the Execution of the Act for restraining the Importation of Irish Cattle; For causing the Canary Patent to be surrendered and vacated: And more especially, that Your Majesty hath been pleased to displace the late Lord Chancellor, and remove him from the Exercise of publick Trust and Employment, in Affairs of State."
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?comp…

Terry Foreman  •  Link

Interesting what the House of Commons "particularly" care about; somehow the six items seem not of the same gravity.

James Warnock  •  Link

The great joy about this whole enterprise is that, every day for seven years, I've been able to dip in, not just to daily life chez Samuel, but also to an erudite, funny and truly international community of friends. So strong are the connections between author and readers that for a few moments I wondered why Samuel hadn't noted the passing of 'an annotator above all aothers, to my mind, in the world'. It feels like time for a lurker to record my thanks to every single one of you.

JWB  •  Link

"I suppose he is playing the good fellow in the town."

With gold pieces?

Australian Susan  •  Link

"...in a little sorry coach which he hath set up of late, ..." A 17th century Reliant Robin?

Hmm. Sam obviously hankers after a Porsche......

Australian Susan  •  Link

"...and to dismiss the Papists from out of the Guards, and other military Employments: ....." foreshadowing the Popish Plot paranoia?? (I'm reading The Plot against Pepys at the moment, so that is very much in my mind. It's an excellent, easy read. And if anyone is interested in the book, do read Jeannine's review elsewhere on this site.

Terry Foreman  •  Link

"to the Duke of York’s House, and...went in for nothing into the pit, at the last act,"

L&M note one could see one act of a performance gratis.

Terry Foreman  •  Link

"For Your Majesty’s Care in quickening the Execution of the Act for restraining the Importation of Irish Cattle"

This Act had the double effect of (1) indirectly subsidizing the cattlemen of the West-country of England and (2) hobbling the administration of Clarendon's friend and ally James Butler (Duke of Ormond, Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland) http://www.pepysdiary.com/encyclopedia/1221/

San Diego Sarah  •  Link

"...and to dismiss the Papists from out of the Guards, and other military Employments: ....." foreshadowing the Popish Plot paranoia??

Not really. We approach November 5, the anniversary of the Gunpowder Plot of 1604 in which the Royal Family and Parliament would all have been blown to smithereens. The constant nagging worry about what the Catholics (Irish, French, Italian and homegrown) were up to ... including whether or not they were responsible for setting fire to the City of London last year ... lasted for generations. The Popish Plot was part of that on-going paranoia.

And as I posted recently, Charles II did find ways to keep his homegrown Catholics "over there" and fighting, so when he needed a standing army, he could find one.
https://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/1667/10/04/#c550…
https://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/1667/10/04/#c550…

San Diego Sarah  •  Link

Meanwhile in Italy, Father Oliva, General of the Society of Jesus, receives a letter:
Charles II directs the letter to Father Oliva, dated August 29/September 9, 1667. The letter say he is anxious Queen Christina should not meet James [Stuart, his eldest son, known as de la Cloche du Bourg]; if she knows Charles' design of changing his creed, she will not keep it secret, and Charles fears for his life.

With this letter there is another, written when the first had been sealed. Charles insists that de la Cloche du Bourg must not be accompanied, as novices were, when travelling, by a Jesuit socius or guardian. Queens Catherine and Henrietta Maria have just heard that this is the rule, but the rule must be broken. Further, James, who is to travel as “Henri de Rohan,” and must not come by way of France. Father Oliva should supply James with funds.

On the back of this correspondence Father Oliva wrote the draft of his brief reply to Charles II from Leghorn, dated October 14, 1668. He merely says that the bearer, a French gentleman (de la Cloche du Bourg spoke only French), will inform the king that his orders have been executed.

Besides these two letters is one from Charles II to James de la Cloche du Bourg, dated August 4/14, 1668. It is addressed to “Le Prince Stuart”. James is told that he may desert the clerical profession if he pleases. In that case “you may claim higher titles from us than the duke of Monmouth.” (There was no higher title, save Prince of Wales.) If Charles II and James, Duke of York, die childless, “the kingdoms belong to you, and parliament cannot legally oppose you, unless as, at present, they can only elect Protestant kings.”

These letters not only fooled Father Oliva, but historians including Lord Acton who all accept the myth of James de la Cloche du Bourg. Charles II never gave the title of Prince to any of his bastards. He would never have said that the crown of England was elective, that there was no Exclusion Act. There were already legal heirs should he and James died without issue. Also in all the letters he writes as if his mother, Queen Mother Henrietta Maria, were in London, and frequently in his company. We know she left England in 1665, and never returned.

Also note that “Charles” never paid a penny to James de la Cloche du Bourg or to Secretary Oliva. Oliva gives his letter to de la Cloche du Bourg's messenger.
All of “Charles'” letters are forgeries.

James de la Cloche du Bourg was an impostor. His aim was to get money from Oliva, and to pretend to travel to England – but actually to enjoy himself.

But Father Oliva didn’t play along: he sent a socius with de la Cloche du Bourg via France. The precautions to avoid meeting Queen Christina was necessary, as she knew nothing about him, and would have exposed the scam.

San Diego Sarah  •  Link

PART 2

James de la Cloche du Bourg reached Rome in December 1668.

In January 1669 someone called “Prince James Stuart” appeared in Naples, accompanied by a socius styling himself as a French knight of Malta. Both were on their way to England, but Prince James falls ill and stays in Naples, while his companion departs. The knight of Malta might have been the Jesuit. In Naples, Prince James marries a girl of no position, and is arrested on suspicion of being a coiner. To his confessors (he had two) he says he is a son of Charles II.

Our sources are the despatches of Kent, the English agent at Naples, and the Lettere, vol. iii., of Vincenzo Armanni (1674), who had his information from one of the confessors of the “Prince.”

The viceroy of Naples communicated with Charles II, who disowned the impostor; "Prince James" was released, and died at Naples in August 1669, leaving a will in which he claims for his unborn son the “apanage” of Monmouth or Wales, “which it is usual to bestow on natural sons of the king.”

The son lived until about 1750, a penniless pretender, and writer of begging letters.

From this I gather Charles II’s intent to turn Catholic was known to Oliva by August 1667, and rumored abroad enough for the scam to be plausible.

https://books.google.com/books?pg=PA51&dq=1667+sw…

Log in to post an annotation.

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