Wednesday 30 October 1667
All the morning till past noon preparing over again our report this afternoon to the Committee of Parliament about tickets, and then home to eat a bit, and then with Sir W. Pen to White Hall, where we did a very little business with the Duke of York at our usual meeting, only I perceive that he do leave all of us, as the King do those about him, to stand and fall by ourselves, and I think is not without some cares himself what the Parliament may do in matters wherein his honour is concerned. Thence to the Parliament-house; where, after the Committee was sat, I was called in; and the first thing was upon the complaint of a dirty slut that was there, about a ticket which she had lost, and had applied herself to me for another. … I did give them a short and satisfactory answer to that; and so they sent her away, and were ashamed of their foolery, in giving occasion to 500 seamen and seamen’s wives to come before them, as there was this afternoon. But then they fell to the business of tickets, and I did give them the best answer I could, but had not scope to do it in the methodical manner which I had prepared myself for, but they did ask a great many broken rude questions about it, and were mightily hot whether my Lord Bruncker had any order to discharge whole ships by ticket, and because my answer was with distinction, and not direct, I did perceive they were not so fully satisfied therewith as I could wish they were. So my Lord Bruncker was called in, and they could fasten nothing on him that I could see, nor indeed was there any proper matter for blame, but I do see, and it was said publicly in the House by Sir T. Clerges that Sir W. Batten had designed the business of discharging men by ticket and an order after the thing was done to justify my Lord Bruncker for having done it. But this I did not owne at all, nor was it just so, though he did indeed do something like it, yet had contributed as much to it as any man of the board by sending down of tickets to do it. But, Lord! to see that we should be brought to justify ourselves in a thing of necessity and profit to the King, and of no profit or convenience to us, but the contrary.
We being withdrawn, we heard no more of it, but there staid late and do hear no more, only my cozen Pepys do tell me that he did hear one or two whisper as if they thought that I do bogle at the business of my Lord Bruncker, which is a thing I neither did or have reason to do in his favour, but I do not think it fit to make him suffer for a thing that deserves well. But this do trouble me a little that anything should stick to my prejudice in any of them, and did trouble me so much that all the way home with Sir W. Pen I was not at good ease, nor all night, though when I come home I did find my wife, and Betty Turner, the two Mercers, and Mrs. Parker, an ugly lass, but yet dances well, and speaks the best of them, and W. Batelier, and Pembleton dancing; and here I danced with them, and had a good supper, and as merry as I could be, and so they being gone we to bed.
16 Annotations
First Reading
Terry Foreman • Link
Ormond to Orrery
Written from: Kilkenny
Date: 30 October 1667
Barker's appeal to the Council in England having been dismissed he has drawn in some 'Adventurers' to join with him in Articles against the Writer.
[ http://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/1… ]
Probably, an inquiry will shew that the 'Adventurers' have been very fairly dealt with. If otherwise even, the Duke has had little to do therewith.
http://www.rsl.ox.ac.uk/dept/scwm…
Terry Foreman • Link
The ellipsis above is gratuitous: L&M show no more text than the Gutenberg edition of SP's Diary.
Christopher Squire • Link
Re: ‘ . . I do bogle at the business of my Lord Bruncker .. ‘
‘Boggle v. app. f. boggle, var. of BOGLE a spectre, (such as horses are reputed to see) . .
. . 2. To raise scruples, hesitate, demur, stickle . .
. . 1692 R. LESTRANGE Josephus' Ant. V. x. (1733) 125 He never shrunk or boggled for the matter.
a1734 NORTH Exam. II. iv. 115 He boggled at first against testifying at all . .
3. ‘To play fast or loose’ J.; to palter, quibble, equivocate.
. . a1674 CLARENDON Hist. Reb. (1704) III. XI. 206 He boggled so much in his answer, that they would be of opinion that, etc. . . ‘ [OED]
cum salis grano • Link
Ah!the bain of all in power- money- ,
where is the money, who spent it, to whom did the coin go, this is a major scandal of the time, like the modern banking scandal, each and every decade lessons forgot then returned, this one make men sail with no money in the till, promise a nice reward [prizes for senior staff ala bonuses] meanwhile jewels galore for the mothers of the Charles's progeny.
Where be there be money there be a thief, legal and illegal.
At least Charles stop the petty theft of gold and silver scrapings by knurling.
So where is the money for the sailing of his majesty's ships. Who has the temerity to ask the King to get monies from his mistresses account, priorities????
Michael Robinson • Link
" ...he did hear one or two whisper as if they thought that I do bogle at the business of my Lord Bruncker, ..."
If SP was behaving as a horse does when 'spooked' must have been quite a sight!
GrahamT • Link
I guess the everyday phrase "The mind boggles" or "mind-boggling" (OED: a., that causes the mind to boggle or be overwhelmed;) is not as common in the US as it is here in the UK.
Pepys, though, says he wasn't that boggled. "..which is a thing I neither did or have reason to do.."
Terry Foreman • Link
"guess the everyday phrase “The mind boggles” or “mind-boggling” (OED: a., that causes the mind to boggle or be overwhelmed;) is not as common in the US as it is here in the UK."
Oh, 'tis, indeed GrahamT. 'tis very common.
JWB • Link
Ticket stubs:
30 N0v, '60
"To the office, where Sir G. Carteret did give us an account how Mr. Holland (John Holland,Surveyor of the Navy, 1649-52) do intend to prevail with the Parliament to try his project of discharging the seamen all at present by ticket, and so promise interest to all men that will lend money upon them at eight per cent., for so long as they are unpaid; whereby he do think to take away the growing debt, which do now lie upon the kingdom for lack of present money to discharge the seamen. But this we are troubled at as some diminution to us."
3 Dec,'60
"Sir G. Carteret did begin again discourse on Mr. Holland’s1 proposition, which the King do take very ill, and so Sir George in lieu of that do propose that the seamen should have half in ready money and tickets for the other half, to be paid in three months after, which we judge to be very practicable."
Note the new-come King was opposed to paying by ticket, or maybe just the interest bearing part, and that a good deal of the animus in parliament & elsewhere I take to be the interest going the other way-the sailors selling @ discount to speculators.
Terry Foreman • Link
Thank you, JWB, for the reminders of the history of it all.
Can't help but notice how perennial is "the growing debt, which do now lie upon the kingdom for lack of present money."
Mind-boggling.
nix • Link
Budget busting isn't the only perennial feature of this entry.
"I did give them the best answer I could, but had not scope to do it in the methodical manner which I had prepared myself for, but they did ask a great many broken rude questions about it" --
Legislative committees haven't changed much in 343 years. No patience for any answer that contradicts the day's talking points. "Nuance, Mr. Pepys? Sounds FRENCH to me!"
When I worked for a U.S. Congressman, the stock line was that the most dangerous place in Washington was between (another Congressman) and a TV camera.
Australian Susan • Link
Boggling horses
It is my experience that a horse (especially a chestnut mare) will trot contentedly past a tractor (with anxious rider prepared for the worst behaviour) and then suddenly get the fantods and skedaddle about the road rolling her eyes and dancing around over a piece of litter lying by the side of the road. [sigh]. Actually Sam does go in for the eye-rolling.....
Andrew Hamilton • Link
"but had not scope to do it in the methodical manner which I had prepared myself for"
cf any Congressional hearing where the members want to find fault and have no patience waiting for testimony to unroll.
Second Reading
Marquess • Link
Pity that we shall never know what Sam said about the woman he called a slut.
San Diego Sarah • Link
Marquess: "another. … I did give them"
According to my recently-acquired copy of L&M for 1667, there is nothing omitted. They show the narrative as: "... another. I did give them ..."
Nothing to figure out here.
Scube • Link
Wonder how he knew she was a slut . . .
San Diego Sarah • Link
She was poor, ergo she was probably not as clean as Mr. Pepys. And she was inconvenient ... therefore she was dismissed as being a slut.
Same thing often happens in court today: a woman challenges even a mildly influential man who can afford an attorney, and she should expect to have her entire life exposed in the worst possible light as part of the proceedings.