Tallow chandlers hall. On the north west side of Dowgate hill stands the hall of the company of Tallow chandlers, which is a large handsome building with piazzas, adorned with columns and arches of the Tuscan order.
Skinners hall. Below this hall on the same side is Skinners hall, a fine brick edifice compleatly finished; the hall is elegantly wainscotted with oak, and the parlour with cedar.
Innholders, Dyers, Joyners, Plumbers and Watermans halls.
Cold Harbour. In Great Elbow lane near the church stands the hall of the Innholders company, which is a neat convenient building; and in Little Elbow-lane, is Dyers hall.
In Friars-lane is situated the hall of the company of Joyners; remarkable for a magnificent screen at the entering into the hall-room, having demi-savages, and a variety of other enrichments, carved in wainscot. The great parlour is wainscotted with cedar.
In a dirty place called Chequer yard, is Plumbers hall, a small neat building, which is lett out for a dancing school.
At the south west corner of Cold Harbour-lane is Watermans hall which fronts the Thames.
This Cold Harbour, or as it is now corruptly called Coal Harbour, was formerly a magnificent building named Cold Herbergh or Cold Inn, probably so termed from its cold situation near the Thames; and which was given by Henry IV to his son the prince of Wales.
The name of this ward is derived from Dowgate, one of the 4 original gates of London. It is bounded on the south by the river Thames; on the east by Bridge and Candlewick-wards; on the north by Wallbrook-ward; and on the west by Vintry-ward.
The extent of this ward is from St. Martin's-lane in the east, to Cloak-lane in the west; and from thence both east and west to the river Thames, almost in direct lines; within which track are contained, on the south side of Thames street, Old Swan-lane, Cold-harbour, All hallows-lane, Campion-lane, Friars lane, Cosins-lane, Dowgate-dock, and the Still-yard; St. Laurence Pountney hill, almost as far as St. Laurence's churchyard; Suffolk-lane, as far as the passage into Bush-lane; Bush-lane, almost the whole; Dowgate-hill, as far as Tallowchandlers-hall northward; Chequer-yard; Elbow-lane as far as the church-yard, only the south east side of the way; and Cloak-lane, the south side, to 160 ft west of Dowgate-hill. The whole is divided into 8 precincts.
Thames street. Thames street, which crosses this ward from east to west, is the general passage to the several lanes and alleys leading down to the wharfs; and is therefore continually crouded with carriages loaded with goods.
Stillyard. The most noted of these wharfs is the Stillyard or Steelyard, so often mentioned in the preceding history as being the place originally allotted to the Hanseatic merchants for storing up their wares; and where they had their hall, Guilda Aula Teutonicorum, for the transacting their affairs. It is now chiefly occupied by merchants who trade in iron; of which there are always large quantities in bars to be seen there.
Merchant Taylors school. On the east side of Suffolk-lane stands a celebrated school, founded by the company of Merchant Taylors in 1561, during the mastership of Emanuel Lucar; Richard Hills, a former master of the company, having before given 500/. toward the purchase of an house, called the Manor of the Rose, belonging to the 1st Duke of Buckingham, for that purpose. But that house was destroyed by the great fire in 1666, the present buildings were erected upon the same spot at the charge of the company. This school is a spacious building, supported on the east by many stone pillars, which form an handsome cloister, within which are apartments for the 3 ushers. Adjoining to the school is a library, supported in like manner, by pillars of stone, and well furnished with books. South of the library is the chapel; and contiguous to these is a large house appropriated to the head master.
According to London, Past and Present. H.B. Wheatley, 1891:
General Monck lodged at The Three Tuns near the Guildhall on this memorable occasion in 1660:
"But the next morning early, February 9 (1660), the General commanded the march of his army up into the City, without advising with any of his own officers. And having placed his main guards at the old Exchange, and other convenient places, he retired himself to the Three Tuns Tavern, near Guildhall, where he dispatched his orders." — Skinner's Life of Monk, p. 233.
The House of Commons in 2023 published their massive research on the MPs and their analysis of the House's activities from 1642-1660. It will be a long time before it is available free on line.
Today they also published their recommendation on how to research this period:
"How do you discover what has already been published about the English and British Civil Wars, the Commonwealth and Protectorate or the history of parliament between 1640 and 1660? "Most people will probably turn to online search engines such as Google. Whilst popular search engines will provide you with a lot of results, how can you quickly ascertain their usefulness for your study, teaching or research? The problem with popular search engines is that they search indiscriminately and do not distinguish between the academic and the non-academic, the relevant and the irrelevant. "This is where the Bibliography of British and Irish History can help you: with targeted literature searches that have already been evaluated by expert historians to ensure their relevance to your topic. ..."
More details follow -- and most of it appears to cost money, but less than the books.
If you're doing real research, this could be very helpful to you.
I don't understand why people are so determined that Pepys was an offender when he is paid for doing someone a service. No one is upset that he pays Mr. Pinkny 16/. for working on Montagu's cloakes and coats.
Anyone calling out Montagu for giving the customary silver to Secretary of State Sir Edward Nicholas for his enoblement? No, of course not. It was how people were paid in those days when there were virtually no salaries.
"The English naval intervention in Scandinavian affairs in 1658 and 1659 represented the growing military strength and diplomatic utility of the English navy. Throughout the 1650s, the government had poured many resources into expanding the navy and through engagements against Royalists, the Dutch, and the Spanish created a professional officer corps and gained experienced, veteran sailors. Because of the navy's military capabilities and proven loyalty to the Protectorate, in 1658 the government used it to promote the state's interests overseas. Rather than providing military defense or attacking England's enemies, the navy now used its might to intervene in a foreign conflict and to encourage the combatants and their allies to accept policies that favored English interests. Such actions by the navy would become commonplace after this point. ... Thus, the English naval involvement in Scandinavian affairs during the 1650s represents the first steps into a new era when the state possessed a professional navy, which was used increasingly to express the government's policies abroad."
My guess about what Mr. Powell was doing in the Spring of 1660:
"In February 1660, Charles X Gustavus died and with his death, the impetus to continue the war from the Swedish viewpoint vanished. Because of war weariness and the need to consolidate the regency of the new king, Charles XI, the Swedish Council of the Realm entered into serious peace negotiations with the Danes. Throughout the spring of 1660, the English, Dutch, and French mediators hammered out a treaty based upon the agreements they had concluded at the Hague during the previous summer. The end result was that on 27 May 1660 the Treaty of Copenhagen was signed which, confirming the stipulations of the peace settlement created 2 years earlier at Roskilde, permanently divided geographical control of the Sound and thus produced a balance of power between the Swedish and Danish kingdoms.
"Even though the English squadron was not in the Baltic during the negotiations' last stages, its presence during the crucial period of the summer of 1659 had helped to safeguard both English and Swedish interests. By the summer of 1658, the Dutch naval presence in the Baltic had begun to swing the balance of naval power in the Danes's favor. The English squadron's entrance into the conflict helped to recreate the balance of naval power between the two combatants and their allies and helped to prevent Dutch or Danish attacks upon the Swedish navy or Swedish territory. Even after Montagu's forces sailed back to England, the potential threat that a new English squadron might return to the Baltic helped to legitimize the English mediators' roles at the peace negotiations. As George Downing, the English representative at The Hague wrote to Secretary Thurloe and to the Council of State, the Dutch government encouraged a speedy resolution to the war, during the winter of 1660, partly because it feared that the English Parliament would send another squadron to the Baltic when the weather cleared in the spring, which would hamper its efforts to gain economic advantages from the peace settlement. Additionally, the Dutch rulers feared that if they broke the agreements concluded the previous summer at The Hague, the English and the French would combine forces with the Swedes to attack them, which would entangle them in a more wide-scale conflict. Because all concerned parties knew that the English were willing to use their fleet to intervene in Scandinavian affairs, the English government's concerns and interests were taken into account in the peace settlement. In the end, the balance of power between the two sides allowed the mediators to create a treaty that reconfirmed the existing status quo of a divided Sound, and which thereby served the economic interests of both English and Dutch merchants.
On 25 June, 1660, Pepys records: "Dined with young Mr. Powell, lately come from the Sound, ..."
Paul Brewster on 26 Jun 2003 said "L&M annotate this reference with a discussion of Montagu's service in the Baltic."
I've searched both my 1660 Diary and my Companion and not found any discussion of Montagu's service in the Baltic. In his personal biography there is less detail than I found (above) apart from a reference to this being the time he started communications with Charles II -- no specifics given about that either.
"I spoke with Mr. Coventry about my business, who promised me all the assistance I could expect."
“When the prospect of a restoration appeared in 1660, Coventry hurried to Breda, was appointed secretary to James, Duke of York (who was Lord High Admiral of England) and headed the royal procession when Charles II entered London in triumph." -- Yorke, Philip Chesney (1911), p. 341.
"... after the Restoration he became private secretary to the Duke of York, his commission as Secretary to the Lord High Admiral not being conferred until 1664;" -- footnote to a diary entry in the 1893 edition edited by Henry B. Wheatley.
Maybe the belated paperwork was catch-up from the hectic days of the Restoration? I think the Diary shows Coventry's influence was "official" long before 1664.
Fox died on 28 Oct. 1716, worth over £174,000, and was buried at Farley. He outlived all of his first family, but by his second wife (on 11 July, 1703, he married Christian {d.1718}, da. of Francis Hopes, rector of Aswarby, Lincs. 1682-1705, and they had 2 sons and 2 daughters) his 2 sons had long and successful careers in both Houses of Parliament.
Fox’s career was in several respects the most remarkable of his age: In financial terms, he had by 1686, when his income can be assessed at £14,186, far outstripped the East India magnate, Sir John Banks. A handful of the aristocracy had larger resources, but his had been acquired within a single lifetime. It is remarkable that he lived almost free from envy and with a reputation for integrity that recent research confirms. In this respect the simple Anglican piety of his childhood home stood him in good stead.
Parliament was far from being the most important institution in his career, and he had no aspirations towards swaying its debates by his oratory, although he made serviceable contributions from time to time on supply.
As a placeman his record is notable for independence; he defied the Government on 3 notable occasions -- the impeachments of Clarendon and Danby, and the breach of the Test Act.
By now Fox was reputedly ‘the richest commoner in the three kingdoms’. Although he disparaged the yield on land as compared with other investments, he had acquired a substantial estate in the 1670s in Wiltshire and Somerset at a cost of about £85,000. But he never set up as a country gentleman, his official life making it impracticable for him to reside any further from Whitehall than Chiswick.
Evelyn dined with him in 1680, and wrote: "He is believed to be worth at the least £200,000 honestly gotten, and unenvied, which is next to miracle, and that with all this he still continues as humble and ready to do a courtesy as ever he was; nay, he is very generous, and lives very honourably, of a sweet nature, wellspoken and well-bred, and so very highly in his Majesty’s esteem and useful that being long since made a knight, he is also advanced to be one of the lords commissioners of the Treasury. ... In a word, never was man more fortunate than Sir Stephen; and with all this he is an handsome person, virtuous and very religious, and for whom I have an extraordinary esteem."
By 1682 Fox had been able to install at least 10 of his connections in subordinate posts in the Household, besides those in the Pay Office. His works of charity were particularly notable. He built almshouses and rebuilt the parish church at Farley, and to him should be assigned most of the credit for the founding of Chelsea Hospital, popularly attributed to Nell Gwyn.
On the accession of James II the Treasury was taken out of commission and given to Laurence Hyde, Earl of Rochester.
Fox had acquired his own interest at Salisbury by purchasing the lease of the nearby manor of Pitton and Farley, including his own birthplace, for £5,200, and he was returned for the city at the general election of 1685.
A moderately active Member of this Parliament, he was named to 7 committees.
In the second session he led the revolt of the royal ‘domestics’ against the employment of Roman Catholic officers, but he was not dismissed, although when the post of cofferer became available at the death of Henry Brouncker, the right of reversion -- which he had acquired from Charles II -- was not honoured.
On the other hand, he returned to the Treasury in January 1687 on the fall of Sunderland, and in June 1688 he was recommended for retention on the Wiltshire bench.
At the Glorious Revolution, Fox lost office for a time, but was restored to the Treasury in 1690 when William III found that he ‘must employ such as would advance money’.
His political conduct in the succeeding reigns has been described as ‘habitually discreet’; he usually supported the government of the day, but abstained from controversial divisions.
At the first general election of 1679 Fox was returned for Westminster after a contest, and marked ‘vile’ on Shaftesbury’s list. With the eclipse of Danby he was restored to his place in the Household, and the financial collapse of his successors in the ‘undertaking’ compelled the Government to reappoint him -- and his credit -- as paymaster.
An inactive Member of the first Exclusion Parliament, he was appointed only to 2 committees.
Fox voted against the Exclusion Bill (it is more likely he abstained).
The new Parliament was eager to investigate allegations of wholesale corruption, but Bertie refused to co-operate, and on 23 May, William Sacheverell reminded them that "You have a Member within your walls ... that can discover to whom money and pensions were paid; and if he will not, he is not fit to be here. It is Sir Stephen Fox, who, though he has delivered up the private books, yet has several books that can discover it."
Fox was out of the House at the time, and when he arrived he "seemed resolute, and ... trifled with them; till [Hugh] Boscawen moved that if he would not deal more clearly a bill might be brought in to confiscate his estate and take away his life, language it seems he could not so well relish, and then [he] submitted to answer questions more readily."
Fox pointed out that he had long handed over his official papers, but William Garway and Sir Robert Clayton refused to believe that ‘so great a master of accounts’ had failed to keep duplicates. He was sent back to Whitehall in the custody of Sir John Hotham, Sir Robert Peyton and Sir John Holman to fetch his ledgers, ‘great, vast books’ as he termed them, in an attempt to curb the Commons’ appetite; but Lord Chamberlain Arlington told them that no books could be removed or inspected without the King’s command.
The House then decided to rely on Fox's memory. A list of the Cavalier Parliament was read to him, and he told the House of payments to 27 Members, from the then-Speaker, Edward Seymour. onwards.
He added that secret service expenditure had greatly increased under Danby’s administration, and that 30 other Members had been granted pensions after he had handed matters over to Bertie.
Fox was blacklisted in the ‘unanimous club’, and he failed to win a seat in the second Exclusion Parliament.
At Court his position never stood higher, as ‘the only instrument that has kept things afloat by his credit and supplies’, and his contribution to staving off revolution cannot be exaggerated. Any resentment Charles II felt at his disclosures were quickly forgotten, and in November 1679 Fox was given a seat on the Treasury board, which he occupied for longer than any other contemporary except Sidney Godolphin.
He retained control of the Pay Office through his sons and kinsmen.
Fox's accounts show that before the 3rd Anglo-Dutch war and the 1672 Stop of the Exchequer he ploughed back most of his profits into this undertaking, only diversifying into well-secured loans to fellow courtiers and the purchase of pensions and offices.
Listed as a court dependant in 1664, he was knighted in 1665.
In 1666 Andrew Marvell included Sir Stephen Fox in the government whips: "His birth, his youth, his brokage all dispraise In vain; for always he commands who pays."
Charles II, Fox recorded, expressed satisfaction at the efficiency of the Pay Office during the 2nd Anglo-Dutch war, which contrasted favourably with the chaos of naval finance under Sir George Carteret.
It is also from Fox’s pen that we have an account of his failure to join in the attack on his patron, Edward Hyde, after he was dismissed as Lord Chancellor in 1667: "The King took it ill from me that I went in the Parliament for my lord chancellor against him. I took the liberty to say to his Majesty that I did know my lord chancellor so well that I could not in conscience give my vote against him; at which the King turned from me and left me to myself, saying I was an honest fellow."
He emerged unscathed from the public accounts commission at Brooke House, and was included as a dependant in both lists of government supporters in 1669-71 and the Paston list of 1673/4.
He spoke against the impeachment of the Earl of Danby on 27 Apr. 1675.
His duties now included the disbursement of substantial sums ‘for secret service’, in part at least to avoid the cumbrous, antiquated, and expensive ‘course of the Exchequer’. But Danby regarded his monopoly of public credit with suspicion, and during the long recess Fox was deprived of the paymastership and with it the ‘undertaking’; while the secret service account was transferred to the secretary to the Treasury, Danby’s brother-in-law, Charles Bertie.
Shaftesbury marked Fox ‘thrice vile’ in 1677, and he did not go into open opposition until the last days of the Cavalier Parliament.
As mortgagee of Hungerford House, on which he had advanced £3,000 to the spendthrift Sir Edward Hungerford, Fox enjoyed a substantial interest in Westminster, most particularly as the property was well-situated for high-class commercial redevelopment, and he was named to the committees for bills to establish a ‘court of conscience’ for small claims (2 Apr. 1677) and to build a new church (4 May 1678).
His successors in the ‘undertaking’ [to pay the Guards] had run into difficulties, so on 30 May, Fox was among those ordered to estimate how much pay was owing to the newly-raised forces.
Although he was on both lists of the court party, Fox voted for Danby’s impeachment on 19 Dec., and was immediately removed from the board of green cloth ‘in as severe words as could be expressed’, although the Duke of York intervened to insist he could retain his Whitehall lodgings, which he had rebuilt at his own expense.
Highlights from Sir Stephen Fox' Parliamentary bio:
In his own words ‘a wonderful child of providence’, Fox rose to immense wealth and public prominence from genuinely humble origins. The family status lay between peasantry and gentry; but he received a sound general education as a chorister at Salisbury Cathedral, and his elder brother John (who held a post at Court on the dean’s recommendation), brought him into the household of the royal children as a supernumerary servant and play-fellow.
After acting as page to Lady Stafford, Countess of Sunderland, and the Earl of Leicester, Fox entered the service of Lord Percy, master of horse to Charles, Prince of Wales, and under his ‘severe discipline’ followed the Cavalier army in 1644-5 and then went into exile in France and Jersey.
When the royal stables were dispersed in 1650, Fox returned to the modest family home and on 8 Dec. 1651, he married Elizabeth (d. 11 Aug. 1696), da. of William Whittle of London. They had 7 sons and 3 daughters.
His Wiltshire origins stood him in good stead; first Hobbes obtained him the post of keeper of the privy purse to the Earl of Devonshire, and then, on the recommendation of Sir Edward Hyde, he was appointed to manage the meagre financial resources of the exiled Court, under the modest title of clerk of the kitchen.
Hyde found him "well qualified with languages and all other parts of clerkship, honesty and discretion that were necessary for the discharge of such a trust. ... His great industry, modesty, and prudence did very much contribute to the bringing the family [i.e. Household], which for so many years had been under no government, into very good order."
He was granted arms in 1658, and at the Restoration he was promoted to the board of green cloth and given some small Hampshire leaseholds forfeited by one of the regicides.
The big step in his career was his appointment as paymaster to the guards in January 1661: his job was to maintain the good morale of these troops by paying them without long delays and heavy arrears.
Fox was first returned for Salisbury on the Hyde interest in a by-election at the end of 1661. Farley is only 5 miles from Salusbury, and he acquired a nominal property interest by leasing a vacant plot in the Close. His election expenditure totalled £87 10s., most of which went on ‘an entertainment’ for the corporation and a donation to the municipal poor relief fund.
An inactive Member of the Cavalier Parliament, Fox was appointed to 32 committees, including the committee of elections and privileges in 9 sessions, and he made 3 recorded speeches.
Outside the House his importance was increased by the ‘great undertaking’ of 1662, when he assumed personal responsibility for obtaining credit for the Guards' Pay Office. As he could wait up to 14 months before the Treasury reimbursed him, he was allowed to deduct 8 per cent from the crown and 3-½ per cent from the soldiers.
Sasha Clarkson on 25 June 2013 reminded us that Sir Stephen Fox was a founder of the Royal Hospital, Chelsea. He married his second wife in 1703 at the age of 73, and fathered 2 sons with her, including Henry Fox, father of Charles-James. He died in 1716 at the age of 89. http://www.pepysdiary.com/encyclo…
To which Mary K on 26 June 2013 replied that The Royal Hospital, Chelsea was partly funded by Sir Stephen Fox, who made possible the establishment of the Hospital by his munificent gift of the £13,000 to acquire the site and finance construction. But it is Charles II who is the acknowledged founder of the Hospital, which celebrates its Founder's Day each year on the anniversary of Charles' birthday.
Bumfodder Yes, this is a 17th-century word for toilet paper. According to the OED, a second usage that popped up not long after this one is “Worthless or inferior literature; any written or printed material that is perceived as useless, tedious, or unnecessary.” In other words, pages you could probably use as toilet paper. Ouch.
Comments
Third Reading
About Dowgate
San Diego Sarah • Link
PART 2
Tallow chandlers hall.
On the north west side of Dowgate hill stands the hall of the company of Tallow chandlers, which is a large handsome building with piazzas, adorned with columns and arches of the Tuscan order.
Skinners hall.
Below this hall on the same side is Skinners hall, a fine brick edifice compleatly finished; the hall is elegantly wainscotted with oak, and the parlour with cedar.
Innholders, Dyers, Joyners, Plumbers and Watermans halls.
Cold Harbour.
In Great Elbow lane near the church stands the hall of the Innholders company, which is a neat convenient building; and in Little Elbow-lane, is Dyers hall.
In Friars-lane is situated the hall of the company of Joyners; remarkable for a magnificent screen at the entering into the hall-room, having demi-savages, and a variety of other enrichments, carved in wainscot. The great parlour is wainscotted with cedar.
In a dirty place called Chequer yard, is Plumbers hall, a small neat building, which is lett out for a dancing school.
At the south west corner of Cold Harbour-lane is Watermans hall which fronts the Thames.
This Cold Harbour, or as it is now corruptly called Coal Harbour, was formerly a magnificent building named Cold Herbergh or Cold Inn, probably so termed from its cold situation near the Thames; and which was given by Henry IV to his son the prince of Wales.
About Dowgate
San Diego Sarah • Link
Dowgate-ward.
The name of this ward is derived from Dowgate, one of the 4 original gates of London. It is bounded on the south by the river Thames; on the east by Bridge and Candlewick-wards; on the north by Wallbrook-ward; and on the west by Vintry-ward.
The extent of this ward is from St. Martin's-lane in the east, to Cloak-lane in the west; and from thence both east and west to the river Thames, almost in direct lines; within which track are contained, on the south side of Thames street, Old Swan-lane, Cold-harbour, All hallows-lane, Campion-lane, Friars lane, Cosins-lane, Dowgate-dock, and the Still-yard; St. Laurence Pountney hill, almost as far as St. Laurence's churchyard; Suffolk-lane, as far as the passage into Bush-lane; Bush-lane, almost the whole; Dowgate-hill, as far as Tallowchandlers-hall northward; Chequer-yard; Elbow-lane as far as the church-yard, only the south east side of the way; and Cloak-lane, the south side, to 160 ft west of Dowgate-hill. The whole is divided into 8 precincts.
Thames street.
Thames street, which crosses this ward from east to west, is the general passage to the several lanes and alleys leading down to the wharfs; and is therefore continually crouded with carriages loaded with goods.
Stillyard.
The most noted of these wharfs is the Stillyard or Steelyard, so often mentioned in the preceding history as being the place originally allotted to the Hanseatic merchants for storing up their wares; and where they had their hall, Guilda Aula Teutonicorum, for the transacting their affairs. It is now chiefly occupied by merchants who trade in iron; of which there are always large quantities in bars to be seen there.
Merchant Taylors school.
On the east side of Suffolk-lane stands a celebrated school, founded by the company of Merchant Taylors in 1561, during the mastership of Emanuel Lucar; Richard Hills, a former master of the company, having before given 500/. toward the purchase of an house, called the Manor of the Rose, belonging to the 1st Duke of Buckingham, for that purpose.
But that house was destroyed by the great fire in 1666, the present buildings were erected upon the same spot at the charge of the company. This school is a spacious building, supported on the east by many stone pillars, which form an handsome cloister, within which are apartments for the 3 ushers.
Adjoining to the school is a library, supported in like manner, by pillars of stone, and well furnished with books. South of the library is the chapel; and contiguous to these is a large house appropriated to the head master.
About Thursday 9 February 1659/60
San Diego Sarah • Link
According to London, Past and Present. H.B. Wheatley, 1891:
General Monck lodged at The Three Tuns near the Guildhall on this memorable occasion in 1660:
"But the next morning early, February 9 (1660), the General commanded the march of his army up into the City, without advising with any of his own officers. And having placed his main guards at the old Exchange, and other convenient places, he retired himself to the Three Tuns Tavern, near Guildhall, where he dispatched his orders." — Skinner's Life of Monk, p. 233.
https://www.pepysdiary.com/encycl…
In short, no one knows what's going on.
About Oliver Cromwell
San Diego Sarah • Link
The House of Commons in 2023 published their massive research on the MPs and their analysis of the House's activities from 1642-1660. It will be a long time before it is available free on line.
Today they also published their recommendation on how to research this period:
https://thehistoryofparliament.wo…
"How do you discover what has already been published about the English and British Civil Wars, the Commonwealth and Protectorate or the history of parliament between 1640 and 1660?
"Most people will probably turn to online search engines such as Google. Whilst popular search engines will provide you with a lot of results, how can you quickly ascertain their usefulness for your study, teaching or research? The problem with popular search engines is that they search indiscriminately and do not distinguish between the academic and the non-academic, the relevant and the irrelevant.
"This is where the Bibliography of British and Irish History can help you: with targeted literature searches that have already been evaluated by expert historians to ensure their relevance to your topic. ..."
More details follow -- and most of it appears to cost money, but less than the books.
If you're doing real research, this could be very helpful to you.
About Tuesday 26 June 1660
San Diego Sarah • Link
I don't understand why people are so determined that Pepys was an offender when he is paid for doing someone a service. No one is upset that he pays Mr. Pinkny 16/. for working on Montagu's cloakes and coats.
Anyone calling out Montagu for giving the customary silver to Secretary of State Sir Edward Nicholas for his enoblement? No, of course not. It was how people were paid in those days when there were virtually no salaries.
About Thursday 26 January 1659/60
San Diego Sarah • Link
Mr. Downing's departure on a diplomatic mission is explained at:
https://www.pepysdiary.com/encycl…
About Monday 25 June 1660
San Diego Sarah • Link
I take a guess at what Mr. Powell was involved in concerning the Baltic:
https://www.pepysdiary.com/encycl…
About Baltic ("The Sound")
San Diego Sarah • Link
PART 2
"The English naval intervention in Scandinavian affairs in 1658 and 1659 represented the growing military strength and diplomatic utility of the English navy.
Throughout the 1650s, the government had poured many resources into expanding the navy and through engagements against Royalists, the Dutch, and the Spanish created a professional officer corps and gained experienced, veteran sailors.
Because of the navy's military capabilities and proven loyalty to the Protectorate, in 1658 the government used it to promote the state's interests overseas.
Rather than providing military defense or attacking England's enemies, the navy now used its might to intervene in a foreign conflict and to encourage the combatants and their allies to accept policies that favored English interests.
Such actions by the navy would become commonplace after this point. ...
Thus, the English naval involvement in Scandinavian affairs during the 1650s represents the first steps into a new era when the state possessed a professional navy, which was used increasingly to express the government's policies abroad."
FROM https://www.thefreelibrary.com/Sh…'s+naval+aid+to+Sweden...-a0135466407
Mr. Powell appears to have been involved, along with George Downing, in the 27 May, 1660, signing of the Treaty of Copenhagen.
About Baltic ("The Sound")
San Diego Sarah • Link
My guess about what Mr. Powell was doing in the Spring of 1660:
"In February 1660, Charles X Gustavus died and with his death, the impetus to continue the war from the Swedish viewpoint vanished.
Because of war weariness and the need to consolidate the regency of the new king, Charles XI, the Swedish Council of the Realm entered into serious peace negotiations with the Danes.
Throughout the spring of 1660, the English, Dutch, and French mediators hammered out a treaty based upon the agreements they had concluded at the Hague during the previous summer.
The end result was that on 27 May 1660 the Treaty of Copenhagen was signed which, confirming the stipulations of the peace settlement created 2 years earlier at Roskilde, permanently divided geographical control of the Sound and thus produced a balance of power between the Swedish and Danish kingdoms.
"Even though the English squadron was not in the Baltic during the negotiations' last stages, its presence during the crucial period of the summer of 1659 had helped to safeguard both English and Swedish interests.
By the summer of 1658, the Dutch naval presence in the Baltic had begun to swing the balance of naval power in the Danes's favor. The English squadron's entrance into the conflict helped to recreate the balance of naval power between the two combatants and their allies and helped to prevent Dutch or Danish attacks upon the Swedish navy or Swedish territory.
Even after Montagu's forces sailed back to England, the potential threat that a new English squadron might return to the Baltic helped to legitimize the English mediators' roles at the peace negotiations.
As George Downing, the English representative at The Hague wrote to Secretary Thurloe and to the Council of State, the Dutch government encouraged a speedy resolution to the war, during the winter of 1660, partly because it feared that the English Parliament would send another squadron to the Baltic when the weather cleared in the spring, which would hamper its efforts to gain economic advantages from the peace settlement.
Additionally, the Dutch rulers feared that if they broke the agreements concluded the previous summer at The Hague, the English and the French would combine forces with the Swedes to attack them, which would entangle them in a more wide-scale conflict.
Because all concerned parties knew that the English were willing to use their fleet to intervene in Scandinavian affairs, the English government's concerns and interests were taken into account in the peace settlement. In the end, the balance of power between the two sides allowed the mediators to create a treaty that reconfirmed the existing status quo of a divided Sound, and which thereby served the economic interests of both English and Dutch merchants.
About Baltic ("The Sound")
San Diego Sarah • Link
On 25 June, 1660, Pepys records: "Dined with young Mr. Powell, lately come from the Sound, ..."
Paul Brewster on 26 Jun 2003 said "L&M annotate this reference with a discussion of Montagu's service in the Baltic."
I've searched both my 1660 Diary and my Companion and not found any discussion of Montagu's service in the Baltic. In his personal biography there is less detail than I found (above) apart from a reference to this being the time he started communications with Charles II -- no specifics given about that either.
Can anyone fill in the gap?
About John Powell (c)
San Diego Sarah • Link
L&M say they may be the same person.
About John Powell (a)
San Diego Sarah • Link
L&N also says he may be the same man as the John Powell who was a messenger to the Admiralty Office, who had served under the Commonwealth.
About Monday 25 June 1660
San Diego Sarah • Link
"I spoke with Mr. Coventry about my business, who promised me all the assistance I could expect."
“When the prospect of a restoration appeared in 1660, Coventry hurried to Breda, was appointed secretary to James, Duke of York (who was Lord High Admiral of England) and headed the royal procession when Charles II entered London in triumph." -- Yorke, Philip Chesney (1911), p. 341.
"... after the Restoration he became private secretary to the Duke of York, his commission as Secretary to the Lord High Admiral not being conferred until 1664;" -- footnote to a diary entry in the 1893 edition edited by Henry B. Wheatley.
Maybe the belated paperwork was catch-up from the hectic days of the Restoration? I think the Diary shows Coventry's influence was "official" long before 1664.
About Sir Stephen Fox
San Diego Sarah • Link
PART 5
Fox died on 28 Oct. 1716, worth over £174,000, and was buried at Farley. He outlived all of his first family, but by his second wife (on 11 July, 1703, he married Christian {d.1718}, da. of Francis Hopes, rector of Aswarby, Lincs. 1682-1705, and they had 2 sons and 2 daughters) his 2 sons had long and successful careers in both Houses of Parliament.
Fox’s career was in several respects the most remarkable of his age:
In financial terms, he had by 1686, when his income can be assessed at £14,186, far outstripped the East India magnate, Sir John Banks.
A handful of the aristocracy had larger resources, but his had been acquired within a single lifetime.
It is remarkable that he lived almost free from envy and with a reputation for integrity that recent research confirms.
In this respect the simple Anglican piety of his childhood home stood him in good stead.
Parliament was far from being the most important institution in his career, and he had no aspirations towards swaying its debates by his oratory, although he made serviceable contributions from time to time on supply.
As a placeman his record is notable for independence; he defied the Government on 3 notable occasions -- the impeachments of Clarendon and Danby, and the breach of the Test Act.
For the whole thing, see https://www.historyofparliamenton…
About Sir Stephen Fox
San Diego Sarah • Link
PART 4
By now Fox was reputedly ‘the richest commoner in the three kingdoms’. Although he disparaged the yield on land as compared with other investments, he had acquired a substantial estate in the 1670s in Wiltshire and Somerset at a cost of about £85,000. But he never set up as a country gentleman, his official life making it impracticable for him to reside any further from Whitehall than Chiswick.
Evelyn dined with him in 1680, and wrote: "He is believed to be worth at the least £200,000 honestly gotten, and unenvied, which is next to miracle, and that with all this he still continues as humble and ready to do a courtesy as ever he was; nay, he is very generous, and lives very honourably, of a sweet nature, wellspoken and well-bred, and so very highly in his Majesty’s esteem and useful that being long since made a knight, he is also advanced to be one of the lords commissioners of the Treasury. ... In a word, never was man more fortunate than Sir Stephen; and with all this he is an handsome person, virtuous and very religious, and for whom I have an extraordinary esteem."
By 1682 Fox had been able to install at least 10 of his connections in subordinate posts in the Household, besides those in the Pay Office. His works of charity were particularly notable. He built almshouses and rebuilt the parish church at Farley, and to him should be assigned most of the credit for the founding of Chelsea Hospital, popularly attributed to Nell Gwyn.
On the accession of James II the Treasury was taken out of commission and given to Laurence Hyde, Earl of Rochester.
Fox had acquired his own interest at Salisbury by purchasing the lease of the nearby manor of Pitton and Farley, including his own birthplace, for £5,200, and he was returned for the city at the general election of 1685.
A moderately active Member of this Parliament, he was named to 7 committees.
In the second session he led the revolt of the royal ‘domestics’ against the employment of Roman Catholic officers, but he was not dismissed, although when the post of cofferer became available at the death of Henry Brouncker, the right of reversion -- which he had acquired from Charles II -- was not honoured.
On the other hand, he returned to the Treasury in January 1687 on the fall of Sunderland, and in June 1688 he was recommended for retention on the Wiltshire bench.
At the Glorious Revolution, Fox lost office for a time, but was restored to the Treasury in 1690 when William III found that he ‘must employ such as would advance money’.
His political conduct in the succeeding reigns has been described as ‘habitually discreet’; he usually supported the government of the day, but abstained from controversial divisions.
About Sir Stephen Fox
San Diego Sarah • Link
PART 3
At the first general election of 1679 Fox was returned for Westminster after a contest, and marked ‘vile’ on Shaftesbury’s list.
With the eclipse of Danby he was restored to his place in the Household, and the financial collapse of his successors in the ‘undertaking’ compelled the Government to reappoint him -- and his credit -- as paymaster.
An inactive Member of the first Exclusion Parliament, he was appointed only to 2 committees.
Fox voted against the Exclusion Bill (it is more likely he abstained).
The new Parliament was eager to investigate allegations of wholesale corruption, but Bertie refused to co-operate, and on 23 May, William Sacheverell reminded them that "You have a Member within your walls ... that can discover to whom money and pensions were paid; and if he will not, he is not fit to be here. It is Sir Stephen Fox, who, though he has delivered up the private books, yet has several books that can discover it."
Fox was out of the House at the time, and when he arrived he "seemed resolute, and ... trifled with them; till [Hugh] Boscawen moved that if he would not deal more clearly a bill might be brought in to confiscate his estate and take away his life, language it seems he could not so well relish, and then [he] submitted to answer questions more readily."
Fox pointed out that he had long handed over his official papers, but William Garway and Sir Robert Clayton refused to believe that ‘so great a master of accounts’ had failed to keep duplicates.
He was sent back to Whitehall in the custody of Sir John Hotham, Sir Robert Peyton and Sir John Holman to fetch his ledgers, ‘great, vast books’ as he termed them, in an attempt to curb the Commons’ appetite; but Lord Chamberlain Arlington told them that no books could be removed or inspected without the King’s command.
The House then decided to rely on Fox's memory. A list of the Cavalier Parliament was read to him, and he told the House of payments to 27 Members, from the then-Speaker, Edward Seymour. onwards.
He added that secret service expenditure had greatly increased under Danby’s administration, and that 30 other Members had been granted pensions after he had handed matters over to Bertie.
Fox was blacklisted in the ‘unanimous club’, and he failed to win a seat in the second Exclusion Parliament.
At Court his position never stood higher, as ‘the only instrument that has kept things afloat by his credit and supplies’, and his contribution to staving off revolution cannot be exaggerated.
Any resentment Charles II felt at his disclosures were quickly forgotten, and in November 1679 Fox was given a seat on the Treasury board, which he occupied for longer than any other contemporary except Sidney Godolphin.
He retained control of the Pay Office through his sons and kinsmen.
About Sir Stephen Fox
San Diego Sarah • Link
PART 2
Fox's accounts show that before the 3rd Anglo-Dutch war and the 1672 Stop of the Exchequer he ploughed back most of his profits into this undertaking, only diversifying into well-secured loans to fellow courtiers and the purchase of pensions and offices.
Listed as a court dependant in 1664, he was knighted in 1665.
In 1666 Andrew Marvell included Sir Stephen Fox in the government whips: "His birth, his youth, his brokage all dispraise In vain; for always he commands who pays."
Charles II, Fox recorded, expressed satisfaction at the efficiency of the Pay Office during the 2nd Anglo-Dutch war, which contrasted favourably with the chaos of naval finance under Sir George Carteret.
It is also from Fox’s pen that we have an account of his failure to join in the attack on his patron, Edward Hyde, after he was dismissed as Lord Chancellor in 1667: "The King took it ill from me that I went in the Parliament for my lord chancellor against him. I took the liberty to say to his Majesty that I did know my lord chancellor so well that I could not in conscience give my vote against him; at which the King turned from me and left me to myself, saying I was an honest fellow."
He emerged unscathed from the public accounts commission at Brooke House, and was included as a dependant in both lists of government supporters in 1669-71 and the Paston list of 1673/4.
He spoke against the impeachment of the Earl of Danby on 27 Apr. 1675.
His duties now included the disbursement of substantial sums ‘for secret service’, in part at least to avoid the cumbrous, antiquated, and expensive ‘course of the Exchequer’. But Danby regarded his monopoly of public credit with suspicion, and during the long recess Fox was deprived of the paymastership and with it the ‘undertaking’; while the secret service account was transferred to the secretary to the Treasury, Danby’s brother-in-law, Charles Bertie.
Shaftesbury marked Fox ‘thrice vile’ in 1677, and he did not go into open opposition until the last days of the Cavalier Parliament.
As mortgagee of Hungerford House, on which he had advanced £3,000 to the spendthrift Sir Edward Hungerford, Fox enjoyed a substantial interest in Westminster, most particularly as the property was well-situated for high-class commercial redevelopment, and he was named to the committees for bills to establish a ‘court of conscience’ for small claims (2 Apr. 1677) and to build a new church (4 May 1678).
His successors in the ‘undertaking’ [to pay the Guards] had run into difficulties, so on 30 May, Fox was among those ordered to estimate how much pay was owing to the newly-raised forces.
Although he was on both lists of the court party, Fox voted for Danby’s impeachment on 19 Dec., and was immediately removed from the board of green cloth ‘in as severe words as could be expressed’, although the Duke of York intervened to insist he could retain his Whitehall lodgings, which he had rebuilt at his own expense.
About Sir Stephen Fox
San Diego Sarah • Link
Highlights from Sir Stephen Fox' Parliamentary bio:
In his own words ‘a wonderful child of providence’, Fox rose to immense wealth and public prominence from genuinely humble origins.
The family status lay between peasantry and gentry; but he received a sound general education as a chorister at Salisbury Cathedral, and his elder brother John (who held a post at Court on the dean’s recommendation), brought him into the household of the royal children as a supernumerary servant and play-fellow.
After acting as page to Lady Stafford, Countess of Sunderland, and the Earl of Leicester, Fox entered the service of Lord Percy, master of horse to Charles, Prince of Wales, and under his ‘severe discipline’ followed the Cavalier army in 1644-5 and then went into exile in France and Jersey.
When the royal stables were dispersed in 1650, Fox returned to the modest family home and on 8 Dec. 1651, he married Elizabeth (d. 11 Aug. 1696), da. of William Whittle of London. They had 7 sons and 3 daughters.
His Wiltshire origins stood him in good stead; first Hobbes obtained him the post of keeper of the privy purse to the Earl of Devonshire, and then, on the recommendation of Sir Edward Hyde, he was appointed to manage the meagre financial resources of the exiled Court, under the modest title of clerk of the kitchen.
Hyde found him "well qualified with languages and all other parts of clerkship, honesty and discretion that were necessary for the discharge of such a trust. ... His great industry, modesty, and prudence did very much contribute to the bringing the family [i.e. Household], which for so many years had been under no government, into very good order."
He was granted arms in 1658, and at the Restoration he was promoted to the board of green cloth and given some small Hampshire leaseholds forfeited by one of the regicides.
The big step in his career was his appointment as paymaster to the guards in January 1661: his job was to maintain the good morale of these troops by paying them without long delays and heavy arrears.
Fox was first returned for Salisbury on the Hyde interest in a by-election at the end of 1661. Farley is only 5 miles from Salusbury, and he acquired a nominal property interest by leasing a vacant plot in the Close.
His election expenditure totalled £87 10s., most of which went on ‘an entertainment’ for the corporation and a donation to the municipal poor relief fund.
An inactive Member of the Cavalier Parliament, Fox was appointed to 32 committees, including the committee of elections and privileges in 9 sessions, and he made 3 recorded speeches.
Outside the House his importance was increased by the ‘great undertaking’ of 1662, when he assumed personal responsibility for obtaining credit for the Guards' Pay Office. As he could wait up to 14 months before the Treasury reimbursed him, he was allowed to deduct 8 per cent from the crown and 3-½ per cent from the soldiers.
About Sir Stephen Fox
San Diego Sarah • Link
Sasha Clarkson on 25 June 2013 reminded us that Sir Stephen Fox was a founder of the Royal Hospital, Chelsea.
He married his second wife in 1703 at the age of 73, and fathered 2 sons with her, including Henry Fox, father of Charles-James.
He died in 1716 at the age of 89. http://www.pepysdiary.com/encyclo…
To which Mary K on 26 June 2013 replied that The Royal Hospital, Chelsea was partly funded by Sir Stephen Fox, who made possible the establishment of the Hospital by his munificent gift of the £13,000 to acquire the site and finance construction.
But it is Charles II who is the acknowledged founder of the Hospital, which celebrates its Founder's Day each year on the anniversary of Charles' birthday.
About House of office
San Diego Sarah • Link
Bumfodder
Yes, this is a 17th-century word for toilet paper.
According to the OED, a second usage that popped up not long after this one is “Worthless or inferior literature; any written or printed material that is perceived as useless, tedious, or unnecessary.”
In other words, pages you could probably use as toilet paper. Ouch.
https://www.mentalfloss.com/artic…