|
| May 4. |
55. [Sec. Conway] to Sir John Peyton. The King has declared
his pleasure about the entertainment due by patent to M. de St.
Sauveur. The jurats certify that the receivers can only pay him for
the future, with the arrears due till Midsummer 1621, having paid
the same ever since to you or your lieutenant. The King wishes
you to pay the said arrears to M. de St. Sauveur, or give reasons for
the refusal. [2/3 page, copy.] |
| May 4. |
Minute of the above. [Conway's Letter Book, p. 120.] |
May 5.
London |
56. Sir John Peyton to Sec. Conway. Not wishing my affairs to
rob a minute of your time, I have written about the interim payment to M. St. Sauveur, from his suspension till the late orders
thereon. |
|
Soon after he came to England, I was ordered to establish a judge
delegate till the King's pleasure were known; then Sir Wm. Parkhurst was to be sworn bailiff and have all the fees, &c. This order
I obeyed. I hope, though the King issues that pension out of
the Governor's entertainment, we may know to whom to pay it.
[1page.] |
| May 6. |
57. Notes of business to be transacted on Thursday, 6 May 1624,
[in the Court of Wards]. Petitions to be ordered, wardships to
be compounded for, and compositions made with sundry persons in
counties named. [1 page.] |
| May 7. |
58. Account of the debts owing by William Lord Willoughby
of Parham, with interest due till their payment by the executors,
Robert Lord Willoughby, Sir George Manners, and Sir Wm. Pelhas, sen. With note that the Lady allows such as are marked.
[5½ pages, damaged.] |
May 8.
Greenwich. |
59. Sec. Conway to Sir John Peyton. You are to pay to M. de
Sauveur all monies appointed for the bailiff which you have not
paid to Sir Wm. Parkhurst, and continue the same till the report of
a commission appointed to consider the whole case, and the reason
of his sequestration form office. [1 page.] |
| May 28. |
60. John Earl of Bristol to Sec. Conway. The Padre Maestro,
having visited my wife, desired to see me. He made great professions of his master's desire of giving His Majesty satisfaction,
and that the Ambassadors and he had propositions to make, but
could not be admitted to deliver them. I told him I no longer had
anything to do in those affairs, but if the propositions would give
His Majesty satisfaction, he should apply to those most acceptable
to him, as I conceived personal exasperations had been in great part
the cause of the disordering of the affairs; and therefore it would be
wisdom particularly to apply to the Duke. I would do nothing in
this kind without giving His Majesty an account thereof, so pray
inform him. |
|
P.S.—I want His Majesty's order concerning my manner of examination. The Ambassadors desired to see my wife, but I have made
her put off the visit until I understand whether it may be displeasing.
[¾ page.] |
| May ? |
61. Petition of the Eastland Merchants to Sir John Suckling,
comptroller of the household, and the other commissioners for soap.
A new course has been propounded by you and the other undertakers, to make soap of materials in the kingdom. It concerns us,
1st., as to the disposal of the ashes now on our bands; 2nd., as to
compensation, if ashes, which are a quarter of our returns, are taken
away. We have had many conferences with Sir John Bourchier and
the soap boilers, but we beg some settlement, as the time is come in
which we should provide cloth, and order return of our last year's
exports. [2/3 page. See Domestic Calendar, 10 and 17 June 1624.] |
| [May.] |
62. Collection of cases relating to the election of burgesses of
Parliament, by Serj. Glanville, viz.: Winchelsea, election controverted between Sir Alex. Temple and John Finch (p. 1); Stafford,
between Mat. Craddock and Sir William Walter and Rich. Diott
(p. 17); Blechingley, co Surrey, between Hen. Lovel, Sir Miles
Fleetwood, and John Heyward (p. 21); Chippenham, between John
and Charles Maynard and John Pym and Sir Fras. Popham (p. 40);
Dover, petition against the return of Sir Edw. Cecil and Sir Rich.
Younge (p. 58); Arundel, election controverted between Sir George
Chaworth and Rich. Mill (p. 67); Newcastle-under-Line, between
John Keeling and Rich. Leviston and Sir Edm. Vere (p. 71);
Cambridgeshire, between Sir John Cutts and Tobias Palavicini
and Sir Edw. Peyton and Sir Simon Steward (p. 74); also the
case of Agmondisham, alias Amersham, in reference to its right of
returning burgesses (p. 81); being the proceedings before the election
committee of the House of Commons on the above cases. [85 pages,
modern copy.] |
