Thursday 12 December 1661

We lay long in bed, then up and made me ready, and by and by come Will Bowyer and Mr. Gregory, my old Exchequer friend, to see me, and I took them to the Dolphin and there did give them a good morning draft, and so parted, and invited them and all my old Exchequer acquaintance to come and dine with me there on Wednesday next.

From thence to the Wardrobe and dined with my Lady, where her brother, Mr. John Crew, dined also, and a strange gentlewoman dined at the table as a servant of my Lady’s; but I knew her not, and so I am afeard that poor Madamoiselle was gone, but I since understand that she is come as housekeeper to my Lady, and is a married woman. From thence to Westminster to my Lord’s house to meet my Lord Privy Seal, who appointed to seal there this afternoon, but by and by word is brought that he is come to Whitehall, and so we are fain to go thither to him, and there we staid to seal till it was so late that though I got leave to go away before he had done, yet the office was done before I could get thither, and so to Sir W. Pen’s, and there sat and talked and drank with him, and so home.

17 Annotations

First Reading

Robert Gertz  •  Link

"We lay long in bed, then up and made me ready..." Elisabeth exerts her famed charms...But did she help get him ready this am? If so, nice...And a bit unusual unless all maids were sacked recently.

Ah, those petty and somewhat voyeuristic details Sam occasionally bestows or withholds...

vicenzo  •  Link

It wern't Eliza; it were jack hoare that kept 'im a lying. He not not 'aving 'is skates on, 'e waited until the sun thawed the puddles.
Those that be raised in warm central heated homes and never live in 16th century housing would fail to appreciate the beauty of cold , and the damp of a London day, where one take ones clothing to be the near the fire to remove chill and hands warm up to get the circulation a moving and Oh! the chilblains. When that was the norm [SOP],it would never be mentioned.

Second Reading

Terry Foreman  •  Link

"I...invited them and all my old Exchequer acquaintance to come and dine with me there on Wednesday next."
That would be Wednesday 18 December; however they gathered on Monday 30 December:
http://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/1… Pepys did not report the notice of a postponement he must have sent out.

Terry Foreman  •  Link

Commons addresses a not-uncommon case of body-snatching, but this one violating Parliamentary Privilege.

Upon Information given to this House, That Robert Woolrich, of Grayes Inn in the County of Middlesex, Esquire, having made his last Will, and Sir Solomon Swale, a Member of this House, his Executor; and departing this Life last Night, about Seven of the Clock, at his Lodging, at the House of one Mr. Gwillyme, in Baldwins Gardens, Middlesex; the said Sir Solomon repairing thither, and being present at his Death, and leaving some Servant there to attend the Corps; one Cressett, about Twelve of the Clock at Night, with Five or Six other Persons, armed with Swords, by Force took the Corps of Mr. Woolrich from the Persons employed by Sir Solomon Swale to attend the same; and, without putting him into any Coffin, carried the same away to some Place yet not known; whereby Sir Solomon is like to be prevented from the decent burying of the said Corps, according to his Intention, and the Direction of the Will;

Resolved, &c.; That the Serjeant at Arms, attending this House do apprehend the said Cressett, and other the Persons that were assistant to him in carrying away the said Corps; and bring them in Custody, to answer their Breach of Privilege, in taking the same out of the Custody of the said Sir Solomon Swale, a Member of this House, and the Executor of the said Mr. Woolrich: And that the Serjeant at Arms do also make speedy and diligent Search for the said Corps; and, if he can find where it is, to cause the same to be restored unto the said Sir Solomon Swale; to the end the said Corps may be decently interred, according to the said Will.
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/…

Tonyel  •  Link

Fascinating Terry, but what would have been the motive?

Terry Foreman  •  Link

Good question, Tonyel! The body of a wealthy lawyer was not likely seized by force of arms from the servants of an MP to serve as a subject for anatomy research: cadavers could be had otherwise at much less risk.

"Interfering with a grave was a misdemeanour at common law, not a felony, and therefore only punishable with a fine and imprisonment rather than transportation or execution. The trade was a sufficiently lucrative business to run the risk of detection, particularly as the authorities tended to ignore what they considered a necessary evil."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bod…

My guess is the corpse of Robert Woolrich was to be held for ransom.

What's odd is that this was not a regular police matter, but -- presumably because Sir Solomon Swayle raised the point of privilege -- an illustration of the reach of parliamentary jurisdiction. Odder yet, "when the malefactor appeared at the bar on 14 Dec., he was immediately discharged. Moreover, Worledge’s [sic] will never seems to have been proved."
http://www.historyofparliamentonl…

In June 1678, Swayle will be expelled from the House of Commons for recusancy (refusing to attend Church of England services). He will die in the King's Bench prison. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sol…

Third Reading

San Diego Sarah  •  Link

The Conde da Ponte to Sandwich
Written from: Lixbona
Date: 12 December 1661
Shelfmark: MS. Carte 73, fol(s). 643
Document type: Original

States that Captain Manoel de Sousa, Factor of "that town" [Tangier?] remains there to see the King [of Portugal]'s accounts made up; and asks his Lordship's favourable treatment of him.
Portuguese with a translation.

@@@

The King of Portugal = Alfonso VI was the brother of Queen Catherine of Braganza
https://www.pepysdiary.com/encycl…

Captain Manoel de Sousa, Factor -- as so often happens, the real work that makes the world go around is done by underlings, lost to history. This is the only mention I could find of the trusted and responsible Capt. Manoel de Sousa.

San Diego Sarah  •  Link

The Conde da Ponte to Sandwich
Written from: Lixbona
Date: 12 December 1661
Shelfmark: MS. Carte 73, fol(s). 643
Document type: Original

States that Captain Manoel de Sousa, Factor of "that town" [Tangier?] remains there to see the King [of Portugal]'s accounts made up; and asks his Lordship's favourable treatment of him.
Portuguese with a translation.

FROM:
Carte Calendar Volume 32, June - December 1661
Bodleian Library, University of Oxford
Edward Edwards, 2005
Shelfmark: MS. Carte Calendar 32
Extent: 464 pages
https://wayback.archive-it.org/or…

@@@

The King of Portugal = Alfonso VI was the brother of Queen Catherine of Braganza
https://www.pepysdiary.com/encycl…

Captain Manoel de Sousa, Factor -- as so often happens, the real work that makes the world go around is done by underlings, whose names are lost to history. This is the only mention I could find of the trusted and responsible Capt. Manoel de Sousa.

The Conde da Ponte turns out to be the Portuguese ambassador to London from time to time, Dom Francisco de Mello --
https://www.pepysdiary.com/encycl…

San Diego Sarah  •  Link

"What's odd is that this was not a regular police matter, but -- presumably because Sir Solomon Swayle raised the point of privilege -- an illustration of the reach of parliamentary jurisdiction."

And what police force would that be, Terry?
https://www.pepysdiary.com/encycl…

Parliament was privileged to have sergents at arms who would enforce their rulings. The duties of the Serjeant at Arms are partly ceremonial. The Serjeant at Arms carries the mace during the opening of Parliament and is also responsible for maintaining order during debates in the House of Commons, escorting members out of the chamber if ordered to do so by the Speaker.
In rare cases, the Serjeant at Arms may be called upon to enforce the warrants of the Speaker in summoning a witness to testify before a select committee of the house.
The Serjeant at Arms wears traditional court dress and carries a sword, and is traditionally the only person allowed to be armed (with sword or mace) inside the chamber of the House of Commons.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ser…

An example of this, from the adventures of the 2nd Duke of Buckingham:
"... my Lord Duke of Buckingham’s being sent for last night, by a Serjeant at Armes, to the Tower, for treasonable practices, and that the King is infinitely angry with him, and declared him no longer one of his Council."
https://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/…

Sergeant at Arms [presumably to the Commons] during the Stuart century:
1610–: Edward Grimeston
Edward Dendy Senior
c.1645: Edward Dendy Junior
1648–1660: Edward Birkhead
1660–1675: Sir James Norfolk
John Barcroft (Serjeant-at-Arms to the Lords) in 1667
https://www.pepysdiary.com/encycl…
1675–1693: William Bishop
1693–1709: Samuel Powell
1709–1717: Thomas Wybergh[

LKvM  •  Link

Re:
"Those that be raised in warm central heated homes and never live in 16th century housing would fail to appreciate the beauty of cold , and the damp of a London day, where one take ones clothing to be the near the fire to remove chill and hands warm up to get the circulation a moving and Oh! the chilblains. When that was the norm [SOP],it would never be mentioned."
Vincente is right: it IS the norm and SOP for Sam. He rarely mentions this bone-chilling London coldness (he may mention a "fine frost," but favorably), along with rare mentions of other everyday annoyances and discomforts like painful shoes/boots, snow inside his chamber window, and a hostess serving food with filthy hands. He even takes his cellar full of feces in stride. Our Sam was a positive stoic, as most people would have to have been (without realizing they were being stoical) in those days.

San Diego Sarah  •  Link

"and Oh! the chilblains." Don't remind me!

@@@

"From thence to Westminster to my Lord’s house to meet my Lord Privy Seal, who appointed to seal there this afternoon, but by and by word is brought that he is come to Whitehall, and so we are fain to go thither to him, ..."

This is puzzling: why would the Lord Privy Seal plan to seal documents at Sandwich's housing today?
And Sandwich's apartments are part of the Palace of Whitehall, not in Westminster.
Maybe "my lord" refers to someone other than Sandwich and Pepys has failed to tell us the correct name?

"... and there we staid to seal till it was so late that though I got leave to go away before he had done, yet the office was done before I could get thither, ..."

That's the problem with having two jobs, when the House is sitting, and you have meetings with MPs at opposite ends of town.
This afternoon Pepys missed the sitting of the Navy Board, and had to spend his evening with Adm. Penn finding out what's happening. They had a quorum without him, so things were handled probably with Will Hewer monitoring the meeting -- doubtless taking notes.
It probably was an inconsequential meeting anyways; the fleet has as good as sailed for Portugal, and no tax money will arrive for months.

San Diego Sarah  •  Link

It was an interesting day at the Commons!
Terry told you about the scandal of the body snatchers.
Before that a seditious pamphlet was handed out as members arrived:

Privilege-Seditions Publication.
The House taking Notice of a scandalous, seditious printed Pamphlet, which was this Day delivered at the Door of this House, to several Members, as they passed into the House; and of several other seditious Papers, printed, published, and dispersed by divers Persons, who endeavour thereby to disturb the publick Peace;

Resolved, upon the Question, That the Serjeant at Arms attending this House do apprehend the Persons that delivered the said scandalous and seditious Pamphlet; and bring them in Custody, to answer the same:
And that he do also make Search for the Author and Printer of the said Pamphlet; and do apprehend, and bring them in Custody, to answer the same:
And that the Committee who were to examine, and make Inquiry, touching the Authors, Printers, and Publishers of the seditious Pamphlet, called The summary Reasons, be revived:
And Sir Thomas Meres, Sir Solomon Swale, and Mr. Puckering, are added to the said Committee: And they are impowered to send for such Printers, and others, as they shall find necessary for Discovery of the Authors, Printers, Publishers, and Dispersers of the said scandalous and seditious Pamphlet, delivered at the Door of this House; and all other scandalous and seditious Pamphlets.

This is another example of what the Sergeants at Arms were called upon to do.

I googled "December 1661 pamphlets", and learned that
December – convocations at Canterbury and York complete the new Anglican Prayer Book (forcibly imposed in 1662).
Robert Boyle publishes 'The Sceptical Chymist' in London, in which he developed the idea of elements and "corpuscles" (atoms).
John Evelyn's pamphlet 'Fumifugium' is one of the earliest descriptions of air pollution.

No help there!

San Diego Sarah  •  Link

CONCLUSION:

An unlikely candidate:
"The five numbers of the 'Wandring Whore' appeared during 1660 and 1661. John Garfield, the publisher and probably the author, seized the opportunity presented by the licentiousness of the Restoration to exploit the reputation of Pietro Aretino’s 'La puttante errante,' notorious for its illustration of 35 erotic postures. Like most of the literature of this genre the 'Wandring Whore' takes a conversational form, two of the participants, Magdalena, the old bawd, and Julietta, a young whore, echoing Aretino’s model.
"There are many other English examples. The crafty whore or the misery and iniquity of bawdy-houses, laid open in a dialogue between two subtle bawds (London, 1658), adapted from 'Aretino', provided both a precedent and a source.
"Following a tradition established as early as Robert Greene’s ‘coney-catching’ pamphlets of the 1590s, the 'Wandring Whore' relates anecdotes of roguery and includes vignettes of lascivious practices, as usual ostensibly describing foreign manners ...
"Few copies of the 'Wandring Whore' survive. Thomason collected numbers 2 to 4, which he dated 5, 12 and 19 December 1660; the Guildhall Library has copies of numbers 1 to 3; the Huntington holds numbers 1 and 5; and the Bodleian has number 5."
https://ia803406.us.archive.org/3…

On closer inspection I see these 5 pamphlets were dated December 1660 -- last year -- so they don't fit, plus I can't think of any reason to hand out such a publication to MPs -- free of charge! -- nor does it appear seditious. (I'm only leaving the info in the annotation because Pepys is such a boyscout in his choice of reading matter. You need to know his peers were more lecherous.)

Anyone know of a more likely pamphlet?

San Diego Sarah  •  Link

In the Commons today:

Slingsby's Estate.
A Bill to enable a Sale of the Lands of Sir Robert Slingsby, for Payment of his Debts, was this Day read the First time.

Resolved, That this Bill be read again, the Second time, on Monday next.

Hackney Coaches.
Ordered, That the Bill for the restoring and regulating the Abuses of Hackney Coaches be read To-morrow.

But most of their time was devoted to

Confirming Ministers.
The House then resumed the Debate upon the rest of the Amendments to the Bill for confirming the Act for Ministers. ...

The Thirteenth Proviso being, "Provided also, and be it Enacted, That neither this Act, nor the said Act, intituled, An Act for the Confirming and Restoring of Ministers, shall extend to confirm any Person in any Rectory, Benefice, or other Ecclesiastical Promotion, who was not ordained, according to the Rites and Constitutions of the Church of England, before the 25th Day of December, in the Year of our Lord 1660; or who hath omitted to administer the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, in his Parish Church, for Two Years last past together;" the same was also twice read.

Resolved, upon the Question, That the Words "was not ordained, according to the Rites and Constitutions of the Church of England, before the 25th Day of December, in the Year of our Lord 1660," in the Third Line of the said Proviso, be put out; and that there be inserted, instead thereof, these Words, "hath not been, or shall not be, ordained, by some Archbishop, or Bishop, of the Church of England, Scotland, or Ireland, before the 25th Day of March, in the Year of our Lord 1662:"
And that the Words following the Word "Church," in the last Line of the said Proviso, be left out; and that there be inserted, instead thereof, these Words, "or Chapel, according to the Form of the Liturgy of the Church of England, for one whole Year last past." ...

So much trouble for so many parishes. So few Church of England ministers available for so many vacancies.

San Diego Sarah  •  Link

From Sandwich's log, at anchor in Tangier Bay:

December 12, Thursday.
The Majordomo went ashore again to treat with the Governor of Tangier for their captives, and came aboard again at night.

Copied from
The Journal of Edward Mountagu,
First Earl of Sandwich
Admiral and General-at-Sea 1659 - 1665

Edited by RC Anderson
Printed for the Navy Records Society
MDCCCCXXIX

Section III - Mediterranean 1661/62

@@@

The Majordomo was Gayland's representative.

Peter Johnson  •  Link

" "From thence to Westminster to my Lord’s house to meet my Lord Privy Seal, who appointed to seal there this afternoon, but by and by word is brought that he is come to Whitehall, and so we are fain to go thither to him, ..."

This is puzzling: why would the Lord Privy Seal plan to seal documents at Sandwich's housing today?
And Sandwich's apartments are part of the Palace of Whitehall, not in Westminster.
Maybe "my lord" refers to someone other than Sandwich and Pepys has failed to tell us the correct name?" [SDS 13/12/24]

I read "my Lord's house" as referring to the Lord Privy Seal, who had, I think, a house in Westminster where he had done business with SP before. So Pepys arrived there, as arranged, to find the LPS away, and followed him to the Whitehall office.

Log in to post an annotation.

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