Wednesday 21 April 1669

Up; and with my own coach as far as the Temple, and thence sent it to my cozen Turner, who, to ease her own horses, that are going with her out of town, do borrow mine to-day. So I to Auditor Wood’s, and there to meet, and met my Lord Bellassis upon some business of his accounts, and having done that did thence go to St. James’s, and attended the Duke of York a little, being the first time of my waiting on him at St. James’s this summer, whither he is now newly gone and thence walked to White Hall; and so, by and by, to the Council-Chamber, and heard a remarkable cause pleaded between the Farmers of the Excise of Wiltshire, in complaint against the justices of Peace of Salisbury: and Sir H. Finch was for the former. But, Lord! to see how he did with his admirable eloquence order the matter, is not to be conceived almost: so pleasant a thing it is to hear him plead. Then at noon by coach home, and thither by and by comes cozen Turner, and The., and Joyce, in their riding-clod: they being come from their lodgings to her husbands chamber, at the Temple, and there do lie, and purpose to go out of town on Friday next; and here I had a good dinner for them. After dinner by water to White Hall, where the Duke of York did meet our Office, and went with us to the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury; and there we did go over all the business of the state I had drawn up, of this year’s action and expence, which I did do to their satisfaction, and convincing them of the necessity of providing more money, if possible, for us. Thence the Duke of York being gone, I did there stay walking with Sir H. Cholmly in the Court, talking of news; where he told me, that now the great design of the Duke of Buckingham is to prevent the meeting, since he cannot bring about with the King the dissolving, of this Parliament, that the King may not need it; and therefore my Lord St. Albans is hourly expected with great offers of a million of money,1 to buy our breach with the Dutch: and this, they do think, may tempt the King to take the money, and thereby be out of a necessity of calling the Parliament again, which these people dare not suffer to meet again: but this he doubts, and so do I, that it will be to the ruin of the nation if we fall out with Holland. This we were discoursing when my boy comes to tell me that his mistress was at the Gate with the coach, whither I went, and there find my wife and the whole company. So she, and Mrs. Turner, and The., and Talbot, in mine: and Joyce, W. Batelier, and I, in a hackney, to Hyde Park, where I was ashamed to be seen; but mightily pleased, though troubled, with a drunken coachman that did not remember when we come to ’light, where it was that he took us up; but said at Hammersmith, and thither he was carrying of us when we come first out of the Park. So I carried them all to Hercules-Pillars, and there did treat them: and so, about ten at night, parted, and my wife, and I, and W. Batelier, home; and he gone, we to bed.

32 Annotations

First Reading

Terry Foreman  •  Link

"by and by comes cozen Turner and The and Joyce in their riding-clothes:" (L&M)

Terry Foreman  •  Link

"but this he doubts [ = fears ], and so do I"

Andrew Hamilton  •  Link

Why would Sam be ashamed to be seen in Hyde Park with his wife and female cousins? Was it because they were riding in a hackney?

Andrew Hamilton  •  Link

Correction: with Batelier and Joyce Norton, the other ladies going in Sam's and Elizabeth's coach. But the question remains, why ashamed?

Chris Squire  •  Link

Yes, it was the hackney he was ashamed of, I think, because not everyone who saw him in it would realise that his coach was in front full of his friends and relations so that there was no room for him. He was eminent enough to be the object of gossip, much of it then as now deliberately malicious.

OED doesn't know about 'riding clods' and doesn't give the 'clods' = 'clothes' sense of clod. This may be a misreading of the original shorthand diary.

Terry Foreman  •  Link

"met my Lord Bellassis upon some business of his accounts"

L&M note this case was due to be heard at 9 a.m. The excise-farmers accused three aldermen of Salisbury of helping three brewers of the city to evade payment of the highly unpopular excise duty on beer by giving twenty-two 'erroneous and false judgments. Those aldermen were discharged from custody on the 23rd

Linda F  •  Link

Re: "riding-clod" and "riding clothes" could there have been an eth (lower case d with a stroke through the top, sound of soft "th") somewhere in the etymological history?

Today's entry is how I want to remember SP. I pray that the diary will end on such a note, and not with his skulking about courting/ creating disaster for himself and Bess.

Australian Susan  •  Link

Millions from Louis. Hmm. All this before the secret Treaty of Dover!

ONeville  •  Link

There used to be a saying "Don't cast a clout 'til May (blossom) is out". Clout being a singular item of clothing. The word was used widely in Lancashire when I was a lad.

Mary  •  Link

"eth"?

Neither 'eth' (voiced, not unvoiced) nor 'thorn' (it's unvoiced partner) would have had any place at all in Sam's orthography.

tld  •  Link

It was feared the boy (Jack) had smallpox yesterday. Today he's answering the door or hanging with Sam's wife?

Linda F  •  Link

TF and Mary,

Many thanks; was just wondering, having learned of the use of, for example, "fader" for "father" in earlier spoken English, tied to the eth (yes, the "th" today in "clothes" is much softer). Wondered if anything like this survived into SP's day, and made it into written Engish in connection with clod/clothes. A transcription error makes sense.

john  •  Link

"riding clod"

The modern term is "riding clogs" (always heard in the plural).

Mary  •  Link

Riding clog(s)

John, could you please specify where this is heard in Modern English?

DiPhi  •  Link

Where is Language Hat when we need him?

Jenny  •  Link

In New Zealand we call clothes "clobber" colloquially. Maybe that's where clogs comes from.

Jenny  •  Link

I've done it again. Riding clod not clogs. I take that as being clad in their riding clothes.

Mary  •  Link

This question of riding-clod"

The first annotation in this sequence (thank you, Terry) showed that the L&M reading at this point is "riding-clothes." There is no editorial note that this reading is an emendation or substitution, nor that the Pepys shorthand is unclear in this instance, so perhaps we would do best to accept L&M's scholarship and settle on their version. To quote Dellboy Trotter (for UK readers), "You know it makes sense."

Australian Susan  •  Link

@Mary. Good ol' Delboy. Now I wonder what Sam would have made of that particular Cockney shyster?! Deeply suspicious, but maybe drawn to one of Del's amazing deals.......

john  •  Link

"Riding clogs" I have heard used in riding stables in eastern Canada (but nowhere else, in truth). Elsewhere, "riding togs" is the common phrase.

languagehat  •  Link

I agree with Mary: it's “riding-clothes,” so there's no point speculating about other phrases.

Second Reading

Terry Foreman  •  Link

Conflated two topics' footnotes above:

"met my Lord Bellassis upon some business of his accounts"

As ex-Governor of Tangier.

Terry Foreman  •  Link

L&M:The French Ambassador to England Colbert de Croissy) was said to have brought 800,000 crowns with him in August 1668: CSPVen. 1666-8, p. 263.

San Diego Sarah  •  Link

"L&M:The French Ambassador to England Colbert de Croissy) was said to have brought 800,000 crowns with him in August 1668: CSPVen. 1666-8, p. 263."

Remembering that much of the US Constitution was written with the Stuart misadventures in mind, I'd like to introduce you to:
"The Foreign Emoluments Clause is a provision in Article I, Section 9, Clause 8 of the United States Constitution, that prohibits the federal government from granting titles of nobility, and restricts members of the federal government from receiving gifts, emoluments, offices or titles from foreign states and monarchies."

Louis' money doubtlessly improved many Stately Homes we enjoy today.

San Diego Sarah  •  Link

Louis XIV wasn't the last head of state to decide that buying the politicians of another country was cheaper and more effective than invading that country. You don't mess up the infrastructure, and you make friends instead of enemies.

Look at Ukraine ... sigh.

Our globalized economy is the outgrowth of that philosophy. We are trying not to make war on each other any more. As usual, not everyone seem to have read the memo.

Stephane Chenard  •  Link

The Most Christian, himself hardly adverse to war or to messing up the infrastructure, does of course buy his way when it's cheaper or more convenient. Why, every serious power does this. Our friend Venetian ambassador Piero Mocenigo, who keeps a close eye on these machinations in general and on Ambassador Colbert in particular, wrote on the 12th current in his weekly report to the Doge and Senate (at https://www.british-history.ac.uk…) of how Spain is currently paying Sweden to stay in the Triple Alliance. He threw in, however, a comment on the French method, which suggests that not everyone in London is impressed:

"[Sweden] cannot disown the pledge involved in the acceptance of the money paid by the Spaniards (...) Such is the opinion of the Secretary Arlington, who enlarged on the subject with me. He pointed out that Sweden alone, as distinguished from the other allies enjoyed the advantage of being paid by the Spaniards for what, in the event of a rupture [by Spain] with France, she would contribute for guaranteeing the states of the Catholic [Spain]. He said that she would arrive at having an army on foot at the expense of Spain, whereas from France she [Sweden] could expect nothing but liberal promises of pensions which would be a long time in taking shape."

Stephane Chenard  •  Link

But mere "liberal promises of pensions" is not what the "million of money" rumor seems to be about. It's not the 800k in Colbert's strong-box either, that was for daily spraying and expenses. Hmm. And then, there's this: You'll remember that the Duke of York's apartments were broken into last month, prompting much speculation about a black-bag job. Mocenigo felt the matter was sensitive enough to encrypt this part of his dispatch of April 5:

"The first unvarnished reports untrammeled by ulterior considerations, were that although the closet contained a lot of money, a quantity of jewels and a good number of rare and precious things, only the papers were missing. These reports being subsequently edited (regolate) the notion was put about by the Court that the duchess, jealous of the duke's affection and impatient to ferret out some correspondence, had opened the closet. But this report is discredited from pure lack of evidence, and now they wish to have it believed that a lot of money is missing. With all sorts of opinions being expressed one circumstance gives rise to the gravest reflection. This is the modest behaviour of the duke of York, who is suspending further search. This is an indication that he has discovered that the rifling was the work of a superior hand, one beyond the reach of fear. This would indicate that his Highness had fallen under suspicion of secret intelligencies outside the kingdom. The most plausible conclusion is that these are with the lord chancellor, the father of his wife. The other idea, of some understanding with France, is a baseless absurdity. It is encouraged by the expected appearance here of St. Albans, sent over by the queen mother; but he will have no other business beyond the private matter of the queen's assignments and such correspondence would require a solid basis and lead to consequences of too great moment."

So, we don't know, everyone is much embarrassed and wants the affair buried, but now the corridors of power (in the person of Cholmley) are buzzing.

Stephane Chenard  •  Link

On today's meeting with the Treasury there is much less intrigue, but just so we have the numbers here's the summary from their minutes (at https://www.british-history.ac.uk…)

*********************
The Duke of York came in with the Commissioners of the Navy and Sir Denys Gauden about his 28,000l. orders. [Yes, Gauden was there too] He [Gauden, the Victualler] says he desires no orders, but that he may have his money according to his contract, which my Lords say he shall. Write the Customs Farmers and Mr. Meynell to attend on Friday next about lending money for the Victualler. Mr. Pepys opens the present occasions of the Navy for money. The Duke of York says the principal officers shall send to my Lords a letter of the particulars by which there will be necessary above 220,000l. more than the 200,000l. appointed for the Navy for this year: of which 117,000l. [will be] for finishing the ships on the stocks, and [for] the fleet to go to the Straits and other necessary extraordinaries for docks and other charges in harbour, which yet needs not to be all ready money: and the remaining 103,000l. for other matters to be provided as occasion arise. (...) The Duke of York also moves that the Navy officers be encouraged to go on with repairing the ships burned, &c. My Lords said they would make the best provision they could.
*********************

"We'll do what we can". So ordered.

Stephane Chenard  •  Link

Oh, and the Ukraine, since it's mentioned. The gazettes of London and Paris indicate that it's currently at war. Against the Tartars. It's helped by its good friend, the king of Muscovy (whom we understand to have taken to a local title, the "Tsar of Russia"). For now at least, because it seems that since last year a Mr. Stenka Razin (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ste…) is leading a revolt against Russian control, notably to liberate a province called the Donbass. Newes of this particular guerilla have yet to make it into the gazettes, though torrents of blood are shed on both sides.

But we disgress. And surely they'll find a lasting solution. More chocolate, anyone?

Log in to post an annotation.

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