Monday 4 May 1668

Up betimes, and by water to Charing Cross, and so to W. Coventry, and there talked a little with him, and thence over the Park to White Hall, and there did a little business at the Treasury, and so to the Duke, and there present Balty to the Duke of York and a letter from the Board to him about him, and the Duke of York is mightily pleased with him, and I doubt not his continuance in employment, which I am glad of. Thence with Sir H. Cholmly to Westminster Hall talking, and he crying mightily out of the power the House of Lords usurps in this business of the East India Company. Thence away home and there did business, and so to dinner, my sister Michell and I, and thence to the Duke of York’s house, and there saw “The Impertinents” again, and with less pleasure than before, it being but a very contemptible play, though there are many little witty expressions in it; and the pit did generally say that of it. Thence, going out, Mrs. Pierce called me from the gallery, and there I took her and Mrs. Corbet by coach up and down, and took up Captain Rolt in the street; and at last, it being too late to go to the Park, I carried them to the Beare in Drury Lane, and there did treat them with a dish of mackrell, the first I have seen this year, and another dish, and mighty merry; and so carried her home, and thence home myself, well pleased with this evening’s pleasure, and so to bed.


5 May 2011, 12:53 a.m. - Robert Gertz

"Thence, going out, Mrs. Pierce called me from the gallery..." "Hey, what's the CofA doin' out of the office at this hour?!! And who's the pretty dame not his wife on his arm?!!!" "Brother?" "A practical jokress of a friend, Esther."

5 May 2011, 12:56 a.m. - Robert Gertz

So we may conclude Esther is either safely above the Pepysian social barrier or has politely made it clear to Sam it's hands off?

5 May 2011, 1:36 a.m. - Terry Foreman

"the power the House of Lords usurps in this business of the East India Company" Privileges of the House [of Lords] to be vindicated. ORDERED, That (excepting the Bill intituled, "An Act for raising Three Hundred and Ten Thousand Pounds on Wines or other Liquors") no other Business shall intervene in this House, till the Privileges of this House be fully vindicated and settled. http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=12592#s4 The story of the case that provoked the order and the back-and-forth of it: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=40342#n1

5 May 2011, 1:41 a.m. - Terry Foreman

Today in the House of Commons Sir Wm. Penn's Impeachment.... Ordered, That it be referred to the Committee formerly appointed to bring in an Impeachment against Sir Wm. Penn, to consider of the Articles of Impeachment, and the Answer of Sir Wm. Penn, and the Evidence from the Committee of Accounts; and to draw up a Replication upon the whole Matter, to be sent up to the Lords. Ordered, That Mr. Speaker do issue a Warrant of Summons to Cooke, Clarke, and *Grey to attend the House on Wednesday Morning, to answer their Failure and Contempt, in not attending the Committee of Privilege upon the Summons to them directed. http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=27121#s15

5 May 2011, 1:45 a.m. - Terry Foreman

Also today in the House of Commons Impeachment of Pett..... Resolved, &c. That the whole Articles, as now amended, be agreed to: And that Mr. George Weld do carry up the Articles of Impeachment against Peter Pett, to the Lords. http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=27121#s19

5 May 2011, 1:50 a.m. - Terry Foreman

Finally, today in the House of Commons Brunckard's [sc. Mr. Henry Brouncker's) Impeachment. Ordered, That Sir Robert Brookes do bring in the Articles of Impeachment against Mr. Brunckard, Tomorrow. http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=27121#s20

6 May 2011, 8:51 a.m. - Kate Bunting

Perhaps Esther, as the wife's sister-in-law, was safe from unwanted attentions? The taboo against relations with the close family of a previous partner was still very strong ("marriage with deceased wife's sister" was only legalised, after much debate, in the late 19th century.)

8 Jan 2017, 4:05 a.m. - Terry Foreman

"a very contemptible play, though there are many little witty expressions in it; and the pit did generally say that of it." L&M note, but Downes records (p. 29) that the play 'had wonderful Success, being Acted 12 days together', and on 24 June Pepys describes it as as 'a pretty good play'. Roscius Anglicanus by Downes, John, fl. 1661-1719 https://archive.org/details/rosciusanglicanu00downuoft John Downes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Downes_(prompter)

29 Jun 2019, 2:44 a.m. - San Diego Sarah

I read it that Pepys had dinner with Esther. There is no hint of her being included in the afternoon's frolics. Which also means that she may have been ... but somehow I doubt it, not without Balty.

29 Jun 2019, 5:54 p.m. - San Diego Sarah

"Perhaps Esther, as the wife's sister-in-law, was safe from unwanted attentions?" At their earliest meetings Pepys records that Esther was a little thing, resembling the 12-year-old fiance of the Duke of Monmouth. NOT HIS TYPE, to quote an American celebrity recently. My take is that Pepys mostly likes his women well endowed (little Miss Tooker to the contrary???).

10 Nov 2019, 1:13 a.m. - Terry Foreman

"so to the Duke, and there present Balty to the Duke of York and a letter from the Board to him about him, and the Duke of York is mightily pleased with him, and I doubt not his continuance in employment" L&M: Cf. https://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/1668/04/09/#c540027

21 May 2021, 4:22 a.m. - San Diego Sarah

On 4 May, 1668 Charles Stuart, 3rd Duke of Richmond and 6th Duke of Lennox was made lord lieutenant and vice admiral of Kent jointly with Heneage Finch, 2nd/3rd Earl of Winchilsea.[2] 2 Dictionary of National Biography, p. 73 This acknowledgement might be an excuse for a party in the near future? Will Frances Stuart invite Charles II and Catherine? No, probably not. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Stewart,_3rd_Duke_of_Richmond#:~:text=of%20Lennox%2C%20KG-,Charles%20Stewart%2C%203rd%20Duke%20of%20Richmond%2C%206th%20Duke%20of%20Lennox,England%2C%20both%20being%20descended%20in