Tuesday 12 May 1668
Up, and to the office, where we sat, and sat all the morning. Here Lord Anglesey was with us, and in talk about the late difference between the two Houses, do tell us that he thinks the House of Lords may be in an error, at least, it is possible they may, in this matter of Skinner; and he doubts they may, and did declare his judgement in the House of Lords against their proceedings therein, he having hindered 100 originall causes being brought into their House, notwithstanding that he was put upon defending their proceedings: but that he is confident that the House of Commons are in the wrong, in the method they take to remedy an error of the Lords, for no vote of theirs can do it; but, in all like cases, the Commons have done it by petition to the King, sent up to the Lords, and by them agreed to, and so redressed, as they did in the Petition of Right. He says that he did tell them indeed, which is talked of, and which did vex the Commons, that the Lords were “Judices nati et Conciliarii nati;” but all other judges among us are under salary, and the Commons themselves served for wages; and therefore the Lords, in reason, were the freer judges.
At noon to dinner at home, and after dinner, where Creed dined with me, he and I, by water to the Temple, where we parted, and I both to the King’s and Duke of York’s playhouses, and there went through the houses to see what faces I could spy that I knew, and meeting none, I away by coach to my house, and then to Mrs. Mercer’s, where I met with her two daughters, and a pretty-lady I never knew yet, one Mrs. Susan Gayet, a very pretty black lady, that speaks French well, and is a Catholick, and merchant’s daughter, by us, and here was also Mrs. Anne Jones, and after sitting and talking a little, I took them out, and carried them through Hackney to Kingsland, and there walked to Sir G. Whitmore’s house, where I have not been many a day; and so to the old house at Islington, and eat, and drank, and sang, and mighty merry; and so by moonshine with infinite pleasure home, and there sang again in Mercer’s garden. And so parted, I having there seen a mummy in a merchant’s warehouse there, all the middle of the man or woman’s body, black and hard. I never saw any before, and, therefore, it pleased me much, though an ill sight; and he did give me a little bit, and a bone of an arme, I suppose, and so home, and there to bed.
19 Annotations
First Reading
Robert Gertz • Link
Sam, don't you know taking a mummy's body part brings the curse of...Well, the Mummy...Upon you?
And say, with vamps and zombies rather passe now in our time, the day of the Mummy is surely at hand.
Terry Foreman • Link
[A News-Letter, addressed to Sir George Lane]
Written from: [Whitehall]
Date: 12 May 1668
The impeachment of Mr Brouncker [in MS.: "Brunkard"]; various proceedings in relation to matters of trade, and to the rebuilding of the City of London; the contention between the Lords and Commons, on the subject of a Petition of the East-India Company, declared by the Lords to be "scandalous"; and other parliamentary business, are noticed.
Late advices from France are added.
http://www.rsl.ox.ac.uk/dept/scwm…
gingerd • Link
Mummy was for centuries thought to have medicinal properties and there was a thriving trade in them. When the usual sources dried up (no pun intended!) people started using parts of freshly dead bodies (hanged criminals were favourite)in their medicinal concoctions.
Sam was always willing to experiment with "alternative medicicne" and I bet he wanted the mummy for this purpose.
Horace Dripple • Link
Can someone tell us what the Latin phrase means, and explain it in context?
Kate Bunting • Link
At an educated guess, "Judges and councillors by birth", i.e. members of the House of Lords are born to be legislators, while other judges and MPs are paid by the state.
Christopher Squire • Link
'nascor nasci natus : to be born, spring forth.' . So '“Judices nati et Conciliarii nati;”' = 'judges born and councillors born' as Kate B surmises.
Second Reading
Terry Foreman • Link
"in all like cases, the Commons have done it by petition to the King, sent up to the Lords, and by them agreed to, and so redressed, as they did in the Petition of Right."
Petition of Right is a major English constitutional document that sets out specific liberties of the subject that the king is prohibited from infringing. Passed on 7 June 1628, the Petition contains restrictions on non-Parliamentary taxation, forced billeting of soldiers, imprisonment without cause [suspension of habeas corpus], and the use of martial law. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pet…
L&M note the 1628 Petition of Right was the only occasion on which the method had been used. Anglesey was referring to the Commons' resolutions of 8 and 9 May declaring that anyone aiding or abetting the execution of the Lords' sentence in the present case should be deemed 'a betrayer of the Rights and Liberties of the Commons': Milward, p.303 n.
Terry Foreman • Link
"" Here Lord Anglesey was with us, and in talk about the late difference between the two Houses, do tell us that he thinks the House of Lords may be in an error, at least, it is possible they may, in this matter of Skinner; and he doubts they may, and did declare his judgement in the House of Lords against their proceedings therein, he having hindered 100 originall causes being brought into their House, notwithstanding that he was put upon defending their proceedings:"
L&M: Anglesey, a lawyer with a particular interest in jurisdictional matters, had acted as one of the managers of the inconclusive conferences recently held between the Lords and Commons in the case of Skinner v. E. India company:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ski…
Terry Foreman • Link
"He says that he did tell them indeed, which is talked of, and which did vex the Commons, that the Lords were “Judices nati et Conciliarii nati;” but all other judges among us are under salary, and the Commons themselves served for wages;"
L&M: Sc. in medieval parliaments. For parliamentary wages, see https://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/…
Terry Foreman • Link
"I took them out, and carried them through Hackney to Kingsland, and there walked to Sir G. Whitmore’s house, "
L&M: Baumes House, Hoxton, which Pepys had known as a child: see
https://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/…
San Diego Sarah • Link
Uh-oooh
May 12. 1668
Portsmouth.
—–––– to Williamson.
A Spanish man-of-war has come in for water, having 400 men in her, bound for Flanders.
Another ship of 400 men came out of Vigo with her, but they were separated by the storm.
They say that Don John is at the Groyne, ready to come forth with 6,000 men and 4 ships.
[S.P. Dom., Car. II. 239, No. 216.]
May 12. 1668
Plymouth Fort. —––––– to Williamson.
The St. Ignatius from Vigo in Galicia, has arrived with 550 men on board;
two ships came out with her, having 700 men in each.
The Milford frigate has sailed for Portsmouth,
and the Francis is waiting to take in provisions, intending to return to her station off the Lizard.
[S.P. Dom., Car. II. 239, No. 217.]
@@@
[Vigo is a port on Spain’s northwest coast. The mouth of the nearby Vigo Estuary is sheltered by the Cíes Islands. Where would they be sending 2,350 "men" now the Peace Treaties have all been signed?]
The Francis isn't on watch at the Lizard any more ... for want of food.
All these letters are from
'Charles II: May 1668', in Calendar of State Papers Domestic: Charles II, 1667-8, ed. Mary Anne Everett Green (London, 1893), pp. 369-418. British History Online
https://www.british-history.ac.uk…
San Diego Sarah • Link
May 12. 1668
Edinburgh.
Rob. Mein to Williamson.
A Nonconformist minister, coming from Ireland, held a conventicle on a moor, and preached to 100, speaking against episcopacy,
on which the Council sent troops to keep that country in order, and to find out the preacher if possible.
One of the Lord Chancellor’s troop exacting money where he was quartered, was seized by the Earl of Caithness.
Peter Roy McGregor, a notorious thief and murderer, and 3 of his associates, are to have their right hands cut off alive, and then to be hanged and left in chains, between Edinburgh and Leith.
[2 pages. S.P. Dom., Car. II. 239, No. 211.]
@@@
May 12. 1668
Totnes. Devon
Thos. Brooking to Sir Thos. Clifford.
I have had two bales of double baize, which cost me 44/. 16s. 6d. per bale, stolen out of the St. Peter of Dartmouth on her way to Crosick, by an Ostend man-of-war, whose captain beat and wounded the master, and two of his company.
I beseech you to acquaint the Spanish ambassador with the business, so that he may make the captain of the man-of-war suffer for the robbery, and that I may have satisfaction.
A vessel has just arrived at Dartmouth from Portugal, which has been also plundered of a great many barrels of oil, boxes of sweetmeats, &c.
[2 pages. S.P. Dom., Car. II. 239, No. 212.]
Annexing,
Certificate by Henry Crue, mayor and water bailiff of Dartmouth, Devon,
that Andrew Stocker of Kingswear, master, And Hannafords, master’s mate, and John Adggener, all belonging to the ship St. Peter of Dartmouth, voluntarily deposed before him
that in sailing from Dartmouth to Crosick, they were met, 21 April, by an Ostend man-of-war, commanded by Adrian Vyack, who ordered the master and two of the company of the St. Peter aboard his ship, abused them with threatenings and blows,
and took 2 packs of fine baize, belonging to Thos. Brooking of Totnes, merchant, which had been shipped on board their vessel by Tristram Couch of Dartmouth, merchant, and also 3/. in money belonging to the captain.
— 9 May 1668.
[2 pages. S.P. Dom., Car. II. 239, No. 212I.]
(I went to college with some Hannafords ... the family is still running things in the same neck of the woods.)
San Diego Sarah • Link
Adm. Allin is trying to get food from another source:
May 12. 1668
M. Wren to Navy Commissioners.
They represented the Stadthaus of Haarlem as fit to be kept from sale for the service;
the Duke moved the King in Council for directions about the other 2 prize ships;
thinks there is a Council order for a privy seal for their sale;
supposes Lord Anglesey will appoint some person to get out the privy seal.
They will receive the Duke’s order for suspending the boatswain of the Anne, and the carpenter of the Kent;
he will also give order to the marshal of the Admiralty to apprehend Mason, late boatswain of the Pearl, for embezzlement.
Sir Thos. Allin informs him that the victualler at Dover has orders to victual the Diamond for 120 men only,
and the Deptford ketch for 25,
whereas the former — being one of the winter guard — is to be victualled for the complement appointed her on a foreign voyage, and the other had 5 men added. Desires them to set this right,
and to direct that the Constant Warwick and Capt. Beach may be supplied at Dover or in the Downs;
asks when the vessel that is to carry the victuals to Capt. Poole will be ready, that he may have the orders prepared that are to go with her.
[2 pages. S.P. Dom., Car. II. 239, No. 210.]
@@@
And Henry Bennet, Lord Arlington gets a letter from a 5-year-old:
May 12. 1668
Glentworth.
Earl of Ogle to Williamson.
Requests him to present a letter enclosed to Lord [Arlington].
[2 pages. S.P. Dom., Car. II. 239, No. 213.]
Henry Cavendish, Earl of Ogle (19 January 1663 – 1 November 1680), was the only son and heir of Henry Cavendish, 2nd Duke of Newcastle and his wife Frances Pierrepont, but died before his father at the age of 17.
San Diego Sarah • Link
I'm wrong about the Earl of Ogle:
Henry Cavendish Snr. was the 4th but only surviving son of the 1st Duke of Newcastle, known as Viscount Mansfield from 1659-1665, and Earl of Ogle from 1665-1676.
https://www.nottingham.ac.uk/manu…
That makes more sense than a 5 year old writing to Arlington. I think the Henry Jnr., Earl of Ogle (incorrect annotation above to the letter) is Henry Snr.'s son (Snr. becomes the Duke of Newcastle in 1676), so Jnr. was Earl of Ogle for his final four years.
Now to find out why a Royalist like Henry Cavendish Snr. was at Glentworth, Lincs. ... Glentworth Hall belonged to the Wray family (not very Royalists), and I haven't found another Big House in the area. If he was a guest, that may account for why he requested the mail be held in the village and not sent to the house. All very intriguing.
Stephane Chenard • Link
Those 2,350 Spanish men may have been on a cruise to nowhere now that the Peace is signed, but the ink is still fresh, and it will take weeks for the news to reach everywhere. They may have left Vigo a week ago on orders two weeks old, just in case things fell through, and unless Sig. Marconi travels back in time there is no way to recall a ship at sea. In fact all sorts of French misbehaviour is still reported, due to outdated orders or indiscipline, so they could have their uses (as... peacekeepers? Soldiers to enforce peace, what a droll concept has just entered our minde). They may be part of Don Juan de Austria's entourage, as apparently he still hasn't shown up. They also have every right to be sent, if not to Flanders, at least to Brugge, or other parts of the Netherlands which, aside from the bits and pieces now ceded to the French, are still Spanish for several decades.
Stephane Chenard • Link
A mummy! Just what Sam needs to decorate his closet. Imagine how the surprize will delight Bess when she returns.
If it's a piece of bone, we doubt somewhat that Sam took it as medicine (or for the mummies' other use, to make the pigment painters call Egyptian brown), because for that you need part of the mummy's tummy, where the asphalt was put. If he did he will be disappointed because ground bone would only give you a sneeze, and anyway as medicine it's expensive and Sam isn't sick. So he must have taken it as a curio. Sam the bibliophile hadn't been known to collect such knick-knacks before, but, what with reading Athanasius Kirchner, all this disposable income and his access to the sea trade, he is well placed and should absolutely be encouraged to start a cabinet of curiosities now, unicorn horns and all. As a showpiece it will go beautifully with the Stone.
Stephane Chenard • Link
And McGregor, whose execution we read of! An infamous name, and how seeing it made the very hair on our periwig stand up! We were just reading, in the Newgate Calendar (www.exclassics.com/newgate/ngcont…) how the rebel Clan Gregor had committed such terrible felonies earlier in the century for their very name to "be abolished", under an Act of 1633 that also ruled "that no minister should baptize a child (...) under the name of McGregor under pain of deprivation".
But you know what? "This Act was rescinded at the restoration". See what happens under a womanizing, semi-Catholick king? See? See?
San Diego Sarah • Link
You are a jewel, Stephane. More rabbit holes to explore. Thank you.
Stephane Chenard • Link
Why, thankee, your humble servant, Madam. We hope to be, of this Society's rock collection, the mummy bone, if not the carbuncle.