Wednesday 8 January 1667/68

Up, and it being dirty, I by coach (which I was forced to go to the change for) to White Hall, and there did deliver the Duke of York a memorial for the Council about the case of Tangiers want of money; and I was called in there and my paper was read. I did not think fit to say much, but left them to make what use they pleased of my paper; and so went out and waited without all the morning, and at noon hear that there is something ordered towards our help, and so I away by coach home, taking up Mr. Prin at the Court-gate, it raining, and setting him down at the Temple: and by the way did ask him about the manner of holding of Parliaments, and whether the number of Knights and Burgesses were always the same? And he says that the latter were not; but that, for aught he can find, they were sent up at the discretion, at first, of the Sheriffes, to whom the writs are sent, to send up generally the Burgesses and citizens of their county: and he do find that heretofore the Parliament-men being paid by the country, several burroughs have complained of the Sheriffes putting them to the charge of sending up Burgesses; which is a very extraordinary thing to me, that knew not this, but thought that the number had been known, and always the same.

Thence home to the office, and so with my Lord Brouncker and his mistress, Williams, to Captain Cocke’s to dinner, where was Temple and Mr. Porter, and a very good dinner, and merry. Thence with Lord Brouncker to White Hall to the Commissioners of the Treasury at their sending for us to discourse about the paying of tickets, and so away, and I by coach to the ’Change, and there took up my wife and Mercer and the girl by agreement, and so home, and there with Mercer to teach her more of “It is decreed,” and to sing other songs and talk all the evening, and so after supper I to even my journall since Saturday last, and so to bed.

Yesterday Mr. Gibson, upon his discovering by my discourse to him that I had a willingness, or rather desire, to have him stay with me, than go, as he designed, on Sir W. Warren’s account, to sea, he resolved to let go the design and wait his fortune with me, though I laboured hard to make him understand the uncertainty of my condition or service, but however he will hazard it, which I take mighty kindly of him, though troubled lest he may come to be a loser by it, but it will not be for want of my telling him what he was to think on and expect. However, I am well pleased with it, with regard to myself, who find him mighty understanding and acquainted with all things in the Navy, that I should, if I continue in the Navy, make great use of him.


12 Annotations

Terry Foreman  •  Link

"he do find that heretofore the Parliament-men being paid by the country, several burroughs have complained of the Sheriffes putting them to the charge of sending up Burgesses; which is a very extraordinary thing to me, that knew not this"

From the earliest days of the English parliament it had been an accepted premise that the representatives of the shires and boroughs of England should not have to attend at their own expense, but should be paid wages by the communities that [they represented].

In 1951 R.C. Latham commented that a definite history of the payment of parliamentary wages in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries could only be compiled "by the massed attack of some Wedgwood Committee of the future" (R.C. Latham, "Payment of Parliamentary Wages—the Last Phase" http://ehr.oxfordjournals.org/content/LXVI/CCLVII… )

-- Parliamentary History, Vol. 26, pt. 3 (2007), pp. 281?300 "The Payment of Members of Parliament in the Fifteenth Century" Hannes Kleineke http://muse.jhu.edu/login?uri=/journals/parliamen…

Terry Foreman  •  Link

"Up, and it being dirty, I by coach (which I was forced to go to the change for) to White Hall"

Evidently (unsurprisingly) the Royal Exchange had a hack-stand.

Robert Gertz  •  Link

Sam as considerate and thoughtful employer with an appreciation for talent, very nice.

I see Abigail's stock has fallen with Sam this week.

Terry Foreman  •  Link

"did ask him about the manner of holding of Parliaments, and whether the number of Knights and Burgesses were always the same? "

Number of Westminster MPs
Over the history of the House of Commons, the number of members of parliament (MPs) has varied for assorted reasons, with increases in recent years due to increases in the population of the United Kingdom.

In the 16th century there were around 310 members of parliament, including representation at various points from Calais and Wales.
In 1654 the First Protectorate Parliament included elected representation from Scotland and Ireland. After the Third Protectorate Parliament in 1659 the Scottish and Irish members disappeared from Westminster until the unions of 1707 and 1801 respectively.
In 1654 England and Wales saw its first systematic redistribution of parliamentary seats ever. However, in 1659 the representation of England and Wales reverted to the pre-Civil War pattern. When the Rump Parliament was recalled, later the same year, and the full Long Parliament was reinstated the following year its composition was exactly the same as before the Protectorate.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_of_Westminst…

Terry Foreman  •  Link

William Prynne, note L&M, was a lawyer and antiquarian; M.P. for Bath; author of what was then the primary book on the history of parliamentary elections, the Brief Register, Kalendar and Survey of the several Kinds, Forms of all Parliamentary VVrits (1659-64) :
The first part of a brief register, kalendar and survey of the several kinds, forms of all parliamentary vvrits comprising in 3. sections, all writs ... illustrated with choice, usefull annotations ... / by William Prynne ...
Prynne, William, 1600-1669.
London: Printed for the author, and sold by Edward Thomas ... and Henry Brome ..., 1659
Early English Books Online [full text]
http://quod.lib.umich.edu/e/eebo/A56164.0001.001/…

Terry Foreman  •  Link

" I by coach...to White Hall, and there did deliver the Duke of York a memorial for the Council about the case of Tangiers want of money; "

L&M: 'Upon a Memoriall of Mr. Pepys . . . concerning his Maties Garrison of Tangier (this day read at the Board) It was Ordered . . . That the seventy thousand pounds per Annum formerly Established . . . be continued till the 25th of March': PRO, PC 2/60, p. 112. The memorandum has not been traced.

Terry Foreman  •  Link

"Thence with Lord Brouncker to White Hall to the Commissioners of the Treasury at their sending for us to discourse about the paying of tickets, "

L&M: The Navy Board was asked at this meeting to draw up rules for the issue of pay-tickets and to submit them to the Treasury: CTB, ii. 220. The government had been especially troubled about this matter since the enquiries of the Commons' Committee on Miscarriages into trhe conduct of the war: cf. https://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/1667/10/19/ and https://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/1667/10/17/#c538…
https://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/1667/11/17/ and https://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/1667/11/19/#c547…
https://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/1667/11/24/ and https://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/1667/11/24/#c547…

Terry Foreman  •  Link

"Yesterday Mr. Gibson, upon his discovering by my discourse to him that I had a willingness, or rather desire, to have him stay with me, than go, as he designed, on Sir W. Warren’s account, to sea, he resolved to let go the design and wait his fortune with me, though I laboured hard to make him understand the uncertainty of my condition or service, but however he will hazard it, which I take mighty kindly of him, though troubled lest he may come to be a loser by it, but it will not be for want of my telling him what he was to think on and expect. However, I am well pleased with it, with regard to myself, who find him mighty understanding and acquainted with all things in the Navy, that I should, if I continue in the Navy, make great use of him."

L&M: Richard Gibson (Pepys's clerk since 1667) had been a purser. He stayed in the service of the Navy, becoming Purser-General to the Straits fleet (1670-2), chief clerk to three successive Clerks of the Acts (1672-7), and Pepys's clerk at te Admiralty (1680-9). His handwriting (perhaps significantly) was very like that of Pepys.

Stephane Chenard  •  Link

The slightly confused appearance of today's visit to HRH ("deliver [to] the Duke ... was called in ... and so went out and waited without") is perhaps explained by this note which Matt. Wren, the Duke's secretary, wrote on this day:

-- Jan. 8, Whitehall: M. Wren to Sam Pepys. I appointed you, by mistake, to attend the Duke, but the business is not to be transacted with you, but with the committee of the Council (Calendar of State Papers, shorturl.at/ayAB6, page 160).

This could relate to another appointment, and tomorrow (Jan. 9) Sam will indeed visit the Duke for naught, but it looks more like counter-orders that a runner could have been sent with to catch Sam on his way. Ah well, it was still a productive morning. It also suggests that Sam doesn't turn up every morning at the Duke's chambers just in case he's needed, but by invitation and with an agenda, of which we wonder if any are extant.

San Diego Sarah  •  Link

"Up, and it being dirty, ..."

Jan. 8. 1668
Yarmouth. Rich. Bower to Williamson.
The stormy weather has prevented vessels putting to sea.
The people are high for liberty of conscience, blown up by books scattered among them, one called “A Peace Offering,” another “A Discourse of the Religion of England,” and others. Conscience is made a cloak for ignorance, willfulness, and treachery.
One of these holders forth refused the oath of supremacy, but when it was read to him, thinking it was the oath of allegiance, he took it.
These people are children in understanding, but men in malice.
They report that the Queen, wishing to change her religion, sent for the Bishop of Canterbury, but he has advised her to forbear, as we were coming over to her way.
[Ibid. No. 70.]

https://www.british-history.ac.uk/cal-state-paper…

"These people are children in understanding ..."
These books are hardly for beginners who can't tell the Oath of Allegiance from the Oath of Supremacy. I suspect the sailors and fishermen were holding Book Club readings at the local Innes or coffee shoppes with knowledgeable people leading the readings and conversations.

The Archbishop of Canterbury and Queen Catherine maligned again. This will go on for years (partly thanks to George Villiers, 2nd Duke of Buckingham).

"A discourse of the religion of England asserting that reformed Christianity setled in its due latitude, is the stability and advancement of this kingdom."
By John Corbet, 1620-1680. Published in London in 1667.
https://ota.bodleian.ox.ac.uk/repository/xmlui/ha…

"A peace-offering in an apology and humble plea for indulgence and liberty of conscience by sundry Protestants differing in some things from the present establishment about the worship of God."
By John Owen, 1616-1683. LONDON, Printed in the Year 1667
https://quod.lib.umich.edu/e/eebo/A53717.0001.001…

San Diego Sarah  •  Link

"The people are high for liberty of conscience, blown up by books scattered among them, one called “A Peace Offering,” another “A Discourse of the Religion of England,” and others. Conscience is made a cloak for ignorance, willfulness, and treachery.
"One of these holders forth refused the oath of supremacy, but when it was read to him, thinking it was the oath of allegiance, he took it."

In 1660, the Oath of Allegiance and Supremacy declaring it unlawful on any pretense whatever to take up arms against the king, was imposed on all soldiers and persons holding military offices (14 Car. II., c. 3, as, 17, 18).

Pepys possibly took it twice, once from Sandwich on July 19, 1660, and again on 23 July, 1660 before both Secretaries of State Nicholas and Morice, so it included the Navy Board as well as soldiers.

This proved not to be enough for Parliament, so The Act of Uniformity (14 Car. II., c. 4, s. 6) of July 1663 contained a like declaration, but added a declaration against the Solemn League and Covenant.

(A similar provision in the corporation act was overlooked at the Glorious Revolution, and escaped repeal until the reign of King George I.)

By 1668 we find people suspected of being non-conformists, and members of Charles II's Guards being discharged for not taking the Oath, so there were consequences for not swearing ... as James, Duke of York also experienced later on.

In 1672 there was a revival of anti-Catholic agitation following Charles II's attempts to dispense with the existing statutes regarding Catholics and Dissenters by a declaration of liberty of conscience, which resulted in new restrictions which fed into the Popish Plot.

This new oath added a declaration against transubstantiation to the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy, authorized by a new penal statute entitled "An act for preventing dangers which may happen from popish recusants," (25 Car. II., c. 2).

After the Glorious Revolution of 1688 William III and Mary II authorized a rewrite.

For the exact wordings and a more complete history, see
https://oll.libertyfund.org/page/pollock-on-the-o…

Log in to post an annotation.

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