Wednesday 22 August 1660

Office, which done, Sir W. Pen took me into the garden, and there told me how Mr. Turner do intend to petition the Duke for an allowance extra as one of the Clerks of the Navy, which he desired me to join with him in the furthering of, which I promised to do so that it did not reflect upon me or to my damage to have any other added, as if I was not able to perform my place; which he did wholly disown to be any of his intention, but far from it.

I took Mr. Hater home with me to dinner, with whom I did advise, who did give me the same counsel.

After dinner he and I to the office about doing something more as to the debts of the Navy than I had done yesterday, and so to Whitehall to the Privy Seal, and having done there, with my father (who came to see me) to Westminster Hall and the Parliament House to look for Col. Birch, but found him not. In the House, after the Committee was up, I met with Mr. G. Montagu, and joyed him in his entrance (this being his 3d day) for Dover. Here he made me sit all alone in the House, none but he and I, half an hour, discoursing how things stand, and in short he told me how there was like to be many factions at Court between Marquis Ormond, General Monk, and the Lord Roberts, about the business of Ireland; as there is already between the two Houses about the Act of Indemnity; and in the House of Commons, between the Episcopalian and Presbyterian men.

Hence to my father’s (walking with Mr. Herring, the minister of St. Bride’s), and took them to the Sun Tavern, where I found George, my old drawer, come again. From thence by water, landed them at Blackfriars, and so home and to bed.

19 Annotations

First Reading

vincent  •  Link

Rules were already in place,.still sharing the pie is a bit upsetting.
Clerks of the Privy Seal c. 1537-1851
"The four Clerks of the Privy Seal were appointed by the crown by letters patent under the great seal from 1537....".
http://www.history.ac.uk/office/p…
see Diary at "Government and Law > Government > Privy Seal Office four Clerkes>"
Any ideas on "old drawer"

vincent  •  Link

"...Act of Indemnity ..." A very good piece of Legislation. It kept the country from falling apart and into more bloodshed. It allowed those with opinions that were not extremely opinated to manouver without coming blows.( of the Principals (no not principles) were able to keep a title or two and some cash and some skin and precious necks.)

chip  •  Link

Again lots of L&M notes which I will try to keep brief. Thomas Turner, Clerk-General to the office, had held the same post under the commonwealth, and had been a claimant to the Clerkship of the Acts at the Restoration. He now became clerk to the Comptroller receiving an extra L30 p.a. by order of the Duke of York (22 Sept.). The Act of Indemnity, dealing with regicides was to occupy much parliamentary time. Four conferences between the Houses were held before they could agree on its terms, the last beginning on the 24th. Finally they mention that the bill concerning the church livings had been debated this day.
Any English majors out there, I am curious about what seems to me the use of the subjunctive at this time. L&M have Mr. Turner doth intend which here appears do. Is this subjunctive? Also, I notice that L&M have much different spellings from day to day of proper names. Eg. Monck yesterday and Monke today. Robartes yesterday and Roberts today. I know spelling was not fixed at this time, but one would think that proper names would be more consistent. Thanks for any observations.

Mary  •  Link

"so that it did...."
= provided that it did.

L&M make no comment on their change of 'Mr. Turner do intend' to 'Mr. Turner doth intend'. Certainly the 3rd person singular 'do' looks like a subjunctive form, but I should be a little surprised to find such a construction in this grammatical context of factual report, so perhaps the Wheatley/Gutenburg reading is incorrect.

Roger Miller  •  Link

Drawer

Draw"er\, n. 1. One who, or that which, draws; as: One who draws liquor for guests; a waiter in a taproom. --Shak.

Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary

Jenny Doughty  •  Link

'Doth' is normally the earlier version of 'does', which is the third person singular form of 'do', but I don't think usage was quite so fixed in the 17th century. The 'he do' form survived a long time in rural speech. Spelling, including that of proper names, was not fixed in the seventeenth century - Shakespeare spelled his own name in any of about five different ways, so it's not surprising that Sam writes other people's names in different ways.

David A. Smith  •  Link

"did not reflect upon me or to my damage"
Whether naturally cautious or a quick study, Our Sam once again demonstrates political dexterity:
He gives a favor promptly ... *without* asking anything for it.
He predicates his favor on a condition.
He extracts a pledge ("did wholly disown to be any of his intention").
He quickly obtains a second opinion ("did give me the same counsel").
Folks, that's real skill, and he's making it look easy (and this from a young lad of only 26!).
Meanwhile, it may seem that he doesn't work much ("office, which done") but if his life is political, it is both personal and social, so that the *only* time he is not at work will be when he's "so home, and to bed." Whew!

JonTom Kittredge  •  Link

"Sharing the pie"
In his annotation, Vincent refers to the provision by law for four Clerks of the Privy Seal, but surely what SP is referring to in today's entry is his *other* (official) job as Clerk of the Acts to the Navy. Apparently SP has been asked to to support a move to appoint another clerk. He is concerned that that should be taken as implying that he isn't doing his job.

vincent  •  Link

more on the act of indemity1660, Charles II and Parliament agreed to pass the Act of Indemnity and Oblivion. This resulted in the granting of a free pardon to anyone who had supported the Commonwealth government. However, the king retained the right to punish those people who had participated in the trial and execution of Charles I .
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co…

Second Reading

Bill  •  Link

"I met with Mr. G. Montagu, and joyed him in his entrance (this being his 3d day) for Dover."

To JOY.
1 To congratulate; to entertain kindly.
2 To gladden; to exhilarate.
3 [Jouir de, French] To enjoy; to have happy possession.
---A Dictionary Of The English Language. Samuel Johnson, 1756.

Sasha Clarkson  •  Link

As in German, the present subjunctive was used for a reported, hypothetical or conditional action. (Not as in French where conditional and subjunctive are different.)

Eg. "He does intend" becomes "I believe he DO intend" Although archaic, it still survives, mainly in legalese.

"If all BE true that I do think, there are five good reasons we should drink: good wine, good friends, or being dry; or lest we should be by and by; or any other reason why."

Bill  •  Link

Sasha, doth = do in all the online dictionaries so is there no change of meaning in the two diary versions? And is it indeed present subjunctive (conditional) and not a definite statement?

Dick Wilson  •  Link

as between:
"Mr. Turner doth intend"
"Mr. Turner do intend"
"Mr. Turner intends"
The meanings are the same. The first is obsolete. The second is old-fashioned. The third is current usage.

Sasha Clarkson  •  Link

Actually, "doth" = "does", third person singular indicative. The present subjunctive is largely but not completely gone; I say that it BE true, rather than I say that it IS true is one example.

The imperfect subjunctive is clinging on, but under pressure; eg Rupert Brooke: "εἴθε γενοίμην, would I were in Grantchester ...." (Or I wish I were, not I wish I was). Again, it's used in hypothetical or conditional circumstances.

Chris Squire UK  •  Link

OED has:

‘drawer, n.1 . .
2. spec. One who draws liquor for customers; a tapster at a tavern . .
. . 1597 Shakespeare Romeo & Juliet iii. i. 9 He drawes it on the drawer, when indeed there is no need.
. . 1750 Johnson Rambler No. 16. ⁋5 Thundering to the drawer for another bottle . . ‘

Terry Foreman  •  Link

"I notice that L&M have much different spellings from day to day of proper names. Eg. Monck yesterday and Monke today. "

I find L&M transcribe Pepys' having written "Moncke" both days; they write "Monck" in their own footnotes when they are not quoting.

Terry Foreman  •  Link

"Robartes yesterday and Roberts today."

chip, "Robartes" is the man's name, "Roberts" how Pepys wrote and probably spoke it. L&M do nor vary, though Pepys sometimes will.

Third Reading

Stephane Chenard  •  Link

Sam makes "doing something (...) as to the debts of the Navy" look almost easy, but we suspect this understates what must have been quite a paper chase. Surprise, a lot of records disappeared during the Interregnum. But the State Papers do provide a few fossils that seem to come from that exercise, some showing up a bit late, as if claimants were still rushing in with their old invoices long after the bell was rung, or had been advised at the last minute: On August 20, the Victualling Commissioners write to the Navy Commissioners to "request an imprest of 9,000L. or 10,000L" - the imprecision must have brought a few sighs - as "there are bills in the Excise Office value nearly 5,000L. imprested to Mr. Gawden" - a victualler Sam will get to know well, and who then may have had about a 50% market share. On this day the 22nd, a smaller victualler's claim shows up, for £3,399 3s. of butter, cheese and peas in "Mr. Chaplin's account". A lot of invoices are apparently stuck in the Excise Office, yet another place to search, and of course victualling is not the biggest bit of the Debt.

Why this sudden interest in evening out the books? We believe that next week, H.M. himself will come to Parliament with full pump and circumstance to promulgate the Act of Oblivion, which will surely get most of the attention, and just after that, before the klieg lights go out, an "Act for a speedy Provision of Money to pay off and disband all the Forces of this Kingdom, both by sea and land". This "Act for Poll-money" has been making its way through Parliament since at least July (e.g. at https://www.british-history.ac.uk…) but now the message will clearly go out to the multitude of unpaid men with guns: "Go back to the farm, but before that, we'll pay your wages". They'll cheer and throw their hats, then it could become a dangerous moment. So Sam may be under a bit more pressure than the Diary conveys.

Also, a prince, new to power, always enjoys having a dossier on what a shambles the previous Government has left him. The more methodical the dossier, the better it looks.

Log in to post an annotation.

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