10th April 1624

Proceedings in Parliament 1624: The House of Commons. Originally published by British History Online, , 2015-18.

This free content was born digital. All rights reserved.

Citation:

'10th April 1624', in Proceedings in Parliament 1624: The House of Commons, ed. Philip Baker( 2015-18), British History Online https://www.british-history.ac.uk/no-series/proceedings-1624-parl/apr-10 [accessed 15 July 2024].

'10th April 1624', in Proceedings in Parliament 1624: The House of Commons. Edited by Philip Baker( 2015-18), British History Online, accessed July 15, 2024, https://www.british-history.ac.uk/no-series/proceedings-1624-parl/apr-10.

"10th April 1624". Proceedings in Parliament 1624: The House of Commons. Ed. Philip Baker(2015-18), , British History Online. Web. 15 July 2024. https://www.british-history.ac.uk/no-series/proceedings-1624-parl/apr-10.

Long title
10th April 1624

In this section

SATURDAY, 10 APRIL 1624

I. JOURNAL OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS, PA, HC/CL/JO/1/13

[CJ 761; f. 124v]

Sabbati, 10 Aprilis 1624

L. 1. An act to enable Vincent Lowe to sell certain lands.

L. 1. An act for repairing of the haven of Colchester.

L. 2. An act for the naturalizing of Sir Robert Anstruther, Sir George Abercromby and [Dr.] John Craig.

Committed to:

[f. 125] Sir George More

Sir Nathaniel Rich

Mr. Lewis

Mr. [Francis] Fetherston[haugh]

Sir Edmund Verney

Sir Roger North

Mr. Spencer

Sir Thomas Cheke

Sir Thomas Holland

Sir Peter Heyman

Sir Thomas Denton

Sir Roland Egerton

Sir Gilbert Gerard

Sir Robert Hatton

Sir Henry Poole

Sir Edward Peyton

Sir Robert More

Monday, 2 [o']clock, Court of Wards.

Mr. [Richard] Godfrey's bailiff arrested. To have the under-sheriff [of Kent] sent for that arrested him to the committee of privileges on Tuesday next.

SIR JAMES PERROT puts in a bill for catechizing of children.

Ministers' leases. All to have voice. Monday next, former place.

Magdalen College. Tuesday next.

[Sir Edward] Engham's bill. Desire to see the bonds. Submission to the award. To have the Speaker to grant Edward Bois and Doctor Bois his warrant for these. Wednesday next to be the day.

[f. 125v] Serjeant [Sir Robert] Hitcham

Mr. [William] Noye

Mr. [John] Selden

Mr. [Henry] Rolle

Mr. [Richard] Taylor added to the bill of Magdalen College.

L. 1. An act for the catechizing and instruction of children.

Speaker went out of his chair, and the House went to a committee about the bill of continuances.

Mr. Solicitor sent up to the Lords with the message he was to have delivered yesterday.

MR. SOLICITOR reports from the Lords. First, acquainted them that their model of the petition, we ready for a conference; and, for the bill of monopolies, desired it as soon as might be. Had this answer. For the first, resolved the number former might confer in the Painted Chamber presently. For the second, Monday, 2[o']clock, in the Painted Chamber, with the same number of committees.

Delivers in that note that he was ordered to bring in writing yesterday touching the dissolution of the treaties. After had set it down, acquainted the Prince with it. He approved it and said it was true.

This to be entered into the book of record.

[Blank]

[f. 126] At a conference of both Houses in the Painted Chamber since Easter, at which the Prince's Highness and the Duke of Buckingham were present, the Duke said to the Lords and Commons then present that after the King's Majesty had declared to both Houses his resolution to dissolve both the treaties, the one of the match and the other of the Palatinate, since the last recess he had actually and really declared himself to the ambassadors for Spain now residing here, and the Prince his Highness, being present, affirmed as much. My Lord Duke further added that his Majesty had since the last recess also made his dispatch for Spain, wherein to the King of Spain himself he did manifest that he did dissolve both these treaties, that he did it upon the humble advice both of the Lords and Commons assembled in Parliament, and that he did never hear nor read that any king had ever refused the advice of his people given in Parliament. And this manifestation, or declaration, the Duke said that himself had seen and read with his own eyes.

And this, I have assured notice given me, is sent away by Mr. [Walsingham] Gresley for Spain 2 days ago.

Agreed, the committee shall go up to a present conference about the petition.

And the committees for the bill of monopolies to attend that conference on Monday, 2 [o']clock.

[Blank]

[Sir James] Ward's bill. Monday, Court of Wards.

A petition from Mr. [Henry] Lovell read.

Ordered, he shall be brought to the bar on Monday next and, acknowledging this submission, to be discharged.

MR. [WILLIAM] MALLORY. To have the committee examine the Clerk's book an hour every day.

[f. 126] And to have Mr. Secretary deliver in writing the explanation of the message concerning my Lord Keeper.

MR. SECRETARY. This no message. Had no command to deliver it. Desired us to be sparing in it.

Ordered, that the committee for the Clerk's book shall examine the book every morning between 6 and 7 [o']clock.

Bill of outlawries to be secondly read on Monday morning.

MR. SOLICITOR reports from the Lords. Have attended the service. 4 points:

  • 1. About the proclamation to be expressed.
  • [Blank]
  • 3. A speedy and certain day.
  • Last, to have it inserted "Jesuits, priests and popish recusants".

Acquainted them with the reasons of this House. Had an answer by Lord Canterbury to the 4. To the first he offered that whereas we desire a proclamation, as in such cases used, they allow the reasons; notwithstanding, desired us to consider this but a [CJ 762] petition; wherefore, not so convenient to chalk out the way. What wanting now might be supplied at our next access. Prince said that he persuaded that we should sooner have it by leaving it out than expressing it. Yielded to the second, the disarming of [the] popish, with reference to the acts of Council. Allowed the other 2; and the fourth referred to us back again.

Resolved by the House to forbear the word "proclamation".

The committee sent up again to the Lords.

[f. 127] MR. SOLICITOR reports from the Lords. Acquainted them with the resolution of this House. Have made the copies agree. Prince said he would move somewhat of himself. Did wish us to consider our offer to the King: 3 subsidies and 3 fifteens. To the end the King may see, we remember this to set in a way for the bill of subsidies that the Prince may so say to the King. Looked into the last bill of subsidy. Not fit. To think upon a committee to consider of a fit preamble and the necessary alterations for the present time.

MR. [EDWARD] ALFORD. Fit to have this debated in the House. Before it comes to a select committee, to draw heads first.

SIR EDWARD COKE. The matter agreed on already; to be given after the public declaration made. The form only now to be considered on. Fit to be presented to the House and then debated.

SIR THOMAS JERMYN. Understands by a common fame that in Spain a great fleet, the greatest force by sea that these many years known there. An infinite great sum of money ready to be brought here. A regiment of Irish under the Archduke. If these should be landed in Ireland, knows not at what rate we shall get them out again.

Sir Edward Coke Mr. [Christopher] Brooke Sir Henry Poole
Mr. Recorder Sir George Chudleigh Sir Thomas Jermyn
Mr. [William] Noye Sir Guy Palmes Sir Francis Barrington
Mr. [John] Selden Mr. [William] Lytton
Mr. [Edward] Alford Sir Alexander St. John
Sir Nathaniel Rich Mr. [Henry] Rolle
Sir Francis Seymour Sir Edwin Sandys
Mr. [John] Bankes [William] Lord Cavendish
Sir Peter Heyman Sir Francis Popham
Sir William Fleetwood Sir Oliver Luke
Serjeant [Sir Robert] Hitcham Sir John Walter
Mr. Solicitor Sir Thomas Trevor

Monday morning, Star Chamber, 7 [o']clock. [f. 127v] These are appointed by the House to prepare a preamble for the bill of subsidy.

[Blank]

MR. [CHRISTOPHER] BROOKE. Lord Treasurer desires a little favour in circumstance of time. Was to answer an accusation above with the Lords that took up all his time. Desires Tuesday afternoon to be heard. Offers no delay, but necessity urges him to it.

[WILLIAM] LORD CAVENDISH. The Lords put off their business that concerns my Lord Treasurer because they heard he was to be heard in this House this afternoon. Qui non est hodie cras minus aptus erit.

Resolved, my Lord shall be heard this afternoon.

Secret offices to be prepared by Sir John Walter and Serjeant [Sir Robert] Hitcham. Tuesday, Court of Wards, [blank] clock.

[Edward] Alcock's bill. Monday next.

Sabbati, 10 Aprilis, post meridiem

L. 1. An act for naturalizing of Philip Jacobson of London, merchant.

L. 2. An act for the inning and gaining of the Erith and Plumstead Marshes, [Kent].

Committed to:

Sir Edward Coke Sir John Cutts
Sir John Eliot Sir Charles Montagu
Sir Henry Spiller Sir John Hippisley
Mr. [Edmund] Dunch Mr. [Francis] Fetherston[haugh]
Sir Francis Popham Knights, burgesses, Kent
Sir Anthony Forest
[f. 128] Sir Edward Cecil
Sir Richard Young
Sir Henry Mildmay
Serjeant [Richard] Digges
Chancellor Duchy
Mr. [George] Garrard
Mr. Vaughan
Serjeant [William] Towse
Mr. [Edward] Montagu
Mr. [William] Boswell

Wednesday next, Court of Wards. All parties to have notice.

L. 2. An act for establishing of 3 lectures in divinity.

Committed to:

Sir Edward Coke Sir Thomas Cheke
Sir George More Sir Henry Anderson
Mr. John Coke Sir Henry Mildmay
Sir Francis Barrington Mr. [Robert] Sutton
Sir Nathaniel Rich Sir Edward Giles
Mr. [John] Drake Mr. Solicitor
Sir Henry Poole Mr. [John] Pym
Sir James Perrot
Sir Walter Earle
Sir Robert Hatton
Sir Richard Harrison
Sir Erasmus Dryden
Sir Benjamin Rudyard
Sir William Masham
Mr. [John] Delbridge
Sir Richard Newport
Knights, burgesses, Kent
Sir John Drake
Sir Thomas Myddelton
Mr. Recorder
Mr. [William] Boswell
Mr. Francis Drake
Sir John Stradling
Mr. [Ralph] Whitfield
Sir Oliver Cromwell

Wednesday next, Exchequer Chamber, 2 [o']clock. Parties to have notice.

[f. 128v] L. 3. An act for confirmation of the assurance of certain lands sold by Sir Thomas Beaumont, kt. and baronet, unto Sir Thomas Cheke, knight.

Upon question, passed for a law.

MR. [JOHN] GLANVILLE reports the bill of fishing. The amendments twice read. Was ordered to acquaint the House with a book set out against the honour and rights of Parliament.

MR. [JOHN] GUY tenders a proviso to this bill, which was read.

The bill, upon question, recommitted. And all that will come to have voice. Wednesday next, Exchequer Chamber, 2 [o']clock.

Speaker went into his chair.

SIR EDWARD COKE reports from the committee of grievances. The committee think fit that my Lord Treasurer should have further time given to make answer until Monday next, 2 [o']clock, afternoon.

Resolved, upon question, that my Lord Treasurer shall have further time given him at his own request to make answer unto his last charge until Monday next at 2 of the clock in the afternoon. The committee to sit then by order of the House.

Continuance statutes. Monday, 8 [o']clock.

[House adjourned]

II. DIARY OF JOHN HAWARDE, WILTSHIRE AND SWINDON ARCHIVES, 9/34/2

[p. 243]

Saturni, 10 Aprilis 1624

Par SIR THOMAS HOBY est chose dangerous in private bill davoir touts qui vener davoir voices car issint ascun poet este vixe hors de son enherytance.

1. L. Bill pur cathechisinge infants et instructing eux.

[Committee of the Whole House]

Mr. [William] Noye now to the chaire pur debate del acte de repeals et contynewances.

III. DIARY OF JOHN HOLLES, BL, HARL. MS 6,383

[f. 128v]

Saturday, 10th of April

The SOLICITOR'S report concerning the petition for recusants. Two things to be added to the Lords' petition:

  • 1. Where we desired by proclamation to banish the priests and revive the laws against papists as in such cases is used, the Lords allowed of our reasons; but being but a petition, we should not chalk out the King his way, and what we wanted now might be supplied at next convention.
  • 2. For disarming them as the laws require, the Lords restrained it to what was used by letters of the Council and acts of state.

And the Prince added at the conference that he might the better further our petition, he would have the bill of subsidies go hand in hand with it.

Herewith SIR JOHN SAVILE concurred for that there were divers and very powerful that did the House ill offices with the King, telling him we would do nothing unless we had all our desires; therefore to stop their mouths, he would proceed with the subsidies.

MR. [EDWARD] ALFORD. These motions come out of their course and ancient way. He would have us presently determine this question.

Hereupon the House making a noise as not allowing of his speech, he said they did sometimes preoccupate men's judgements and make them forget what they would say. He moved to have this business drawn into heads as was that of the union.

SIR THOMAS JERMYN. Whereas [Mr. Edward] Alford propounded some doubts against expediting the bill of the subsidies, he spoke for it for that, said he, there was a great fleet at Calais, Biscay and other ports, and a regiment of Irish with the Infanta, etc. He moved to have it put to question whether the House should put it presently to a committee or no.

[f. 129] MR. [WILLIAM] MALLORY moved for a general committee to consider of it.

At the committee of grievances

Mr. [John] Glanville moved that [Thomas] Lake that had erected a new monopoly and grievance of affidavits and a register of affidavits in the Chancery should have a day assigned him to bring in his patent.

None appearing for the [Lord] Treasurer, Sir Miles Fleetwood moved for the sentence of the committee.

Sir Richard Weston. The Treasurer was not yet ready for answer. He referred himself to the House whether they would transmit him to the Lords or no; and if they did, he desired them in the meantime to suspend their opinions of him.

Weston's own opinion was the proofs were so clear that you might well send it to the Lords.

Sir John Eliot. The Treasurer's charge was short, matter of fact. He moved the Speaker should take the chair and [Sir Edward] Coke to make report.

Sir Edward Coke. Let it keep a parliamentary way. I must first know the opinion of the committee before I can report it.

Sir Edward Giles. There is nothing in his charge but is very sufficiently proved.

Sir William Bulstrode moved that withal the committee should have a sense of his neglect and affront to the House in not answering.

Sir Richard Weston took it upon himself that he should have said in his behalf he was not ready with his counsel.

Sir Edward Coke offering to put it to question whether the proofs were sufficient or no, Mr. [Thomas] Fanshawe said it was not yet clear whether the Treasurer had any shares in the great farms or no.

Sir John Wolstenholmeand [Henry] Garway made a warrant to [John] Williams, their treasurer, dated 29th of July 1615 [sic], to pay £500 for a gratuity to the [f. 129v] Treasurer.

The rent of the great farms of the general customs is £48,000 to the King, divided into 32 parts.

[Mr.] Charles Price. The Treasurer, when he caused the £500 to be transferred from the little to the great farms, was very careful to get in all the copies of every man's share what he had paid.

A gentleman remembering that Sir Arthur Ingram had said he and his company offered £1,000 more for the great farms than he took, Mr. [Thomas] Fanshawe said the King himself was pleased to abate the farmers £1,000, therefore the Treasurer was not to be charged with it.

IV. DIARY OF SIR THOMAS JERVOISE, HAMPSHIRE RECORD OFFICE, 44M69/F4/20/1

[p. 124]

10th April, morning

A committee in the House for continuing of statutes.

At the committee in the afternoon

The Lord Treasurer, being appointed to make his defence, appeared not neither by himself nor counsel.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer made a short speech wherein he said that my Lord was willing to have his cause transferred to the Lords, but desires this House will not censure him before his hearing there.

Sir Edward Giles affirmed that there was nothing complained of the Lord Treasurer but was punctually proved.

V. DIARY OF JOHN LOWTHER, CUMBRIA ARCHIVE CENTRE, CARLISLE, DLONS/L/2/1

[f. 58v]

[10 April 1624]

The King's declaration of the dissolution of the treaties to the ambassadors, and his dispatch into Spain to that purpose, with this addition, that he did it at the desire and advice of his people in Parliament, which he never read nor heard was ever denied. This is entered in writing after it was showed and allowed and [sic] by the Prince. And so it is entered in the House upon record.

[Lord] Canterbury answered our additions to the model. First, for the proclamation, he liked our reasons yet would not have the way chalked out for the King. The Prince thought that to leave it out was to obtain it. For the other three, they were granted as we desired.

SIR FRANCIS NETHERSOLE agrees it and [?retracts].

SIR THOMAS WENTWORTH agrees it but retracts not.

VI. DIARY OF EDWARD NICHOLAS, TNA, SP 14/166

[f. 135]

Saturday, 100 Aprilis 1624

Ordered that the under-shrieve of Kent shall be sent for by the Serjeant of this House to answer before the committee of privileges his contempt to a member of this House for arresting of Mr. Richard Godfrey's man.

An act for catechizing and instructing [f. 135v] of children. 1. L. Preferred by SIR JAMES PERROT.

Committee of the House concerning statutes on continuance

Mr. [John] Glanville says that by the last Parliament or convention he did ever think all statutes on continuance were discontinued. That adjournment makes no Parliament. That if a Parliament meet and pass a bill and the king thereto give his royal assent, he thinks it is a Parliament. That the proviso in the bill of subsidies the last Parliament was put in because that the statutes on continuance by the King's assenting to that bill of subsidies should not determine the bill on continuance, but the dissolution of the Parliament after did discontinue those acts which were on continuance. He would have words put into this bill that might express, revive and strengthen the bills which were on continuance, which he conceives by the last Parliament when 2 subsidies were passed were discontinued.

Mr. [William] Noye satisfies this doubt by reading of a clause in the bill of continuances prepared to pass this Parliament which is to this effect: that all laws which stand on continuance are adjudged and shall stand in as good force as they were in 70 of the King.

Mr. Speaker goes into the chair.

MR. SOLICITOR delivers into this House the note, according to the order of this House, of the words he delivered yesterday concerning the King's dissolution of the 2 treaties. He says he showed the paper which he now delivers this morning to the Prince, who said it was very true.

[f. 136] The paper delivered by MR. SOLICITOR is in haec verba. At a conference of both Houses in the Painted Chamber since Easter, at which the Prince's Highness and the Duke of Buckingham were present, the Duke said to the Lords and Commons then present that after the King's Majesty had declared to both Houses his resolution to dissolve both the treaties, the one of the match, the other of the Palatinate, since the last recess he had actually and really declared himself to the ambassadors for Spain now residing here, and the Prince's Highness, being present, affirmed as much. My Lord Duke further added that his Majesty had since the last recess also made his dispatch for Spain, wherein to the King of Spain himself he did manifest that he did dissolve both those treaties, that he did it upon the humble advice both of the Lords and Commons assembled in Parliament, and that he did never hear nor read that any king had ever refused the advice of his people given in Parliament. And this manifestation, or declaration, the Duke said that himself had seen and read with his own eyes. And this MR. SOLICITOR says he has assured notice given him was sent away by Mr. [Walsingham] Gresley for Spain two days ago.

Mr. Henry Lovell's petition that being committed this day sevennight to the Tower until he should make his submission in this House, he humbly shows that he is ready to acknowledge the justice of this House and to make his humble submission and humbly desires that it may be accepted.

Ordered that he shall make his [f. 136v] submission on Monday morning here in the House and shall be so discharged out of his imprisonment.

Mr. Speaker out of the chair at a committee concerning the repeal and continuance of statutes.

Mr. Solicitor. That he thinks it fit that when corn is so cheap as that by the laws we may transport it, he thinks it good that it might be lawful for such men as have stocks of money to engross corn, for when we transport it the Low Countrymen lay it up in magazines and then when it is a dear year, as it is still once in 3 or 4 y[ears], they sell it again to our own countrymen for great gains.

Mr. [John] Guy says that the reason why all tillages are turned to sheepcotes is because that wool bears a better price than corn, which is occasioned because that all things made of wool are transported at all times and corn cannot be transported but at a very low price. That the clothier makes poor, but the husbandman maintains and relieves poor. In France it is lawful to transport corn when it is under 5s. a bushel. He would have it lawful to transport corn when it is not above 4s. [a] bushel. That the commodity of corn in this kingdom is greater than that of wool. If corn be at 4s. the bushel, then the poor do never want work or [f. 137] are in any great necessity.

Mr. [John] Drake says if the price of corn be not held to a reasonable rate, no husbandmen nor owner of land will bestow the charges of improving of grounds and the maintenance of poor labourers. He would have it lawful to transport corn when it is at 4s. the bushel, which is 32s. the quarter.

Mr. [John] Lowther says that in his country in the north, corn was never under 8s. the bushel but the bushel is double as big as in other places.

Sir John Davies [sic] likes it well that when the price of corn is at 4s. the bushel it may be transported, for this will be a good means to prevent depopulation of villages; but he leaves it to the consideration of this House whether to be raised at once or no.

Sir John Savile would have it lawful to transport corn when it is at 4s. a bushel and also to buy corn up in magazines.

The further debate referred until another time.

Speaker in the chair.

MR. SOLICITOR reports from the conference with the Lords that the Lords did allow of our reasons to have the King to cause by proclamation the laws against papists executed, but the Prince said that we should better attain to our own ends to have it done by proclamation if we did not set [f. 137v] down our desire in our petition to have it so done.

The House, without question, does resolve to have the word "proclamation" left out of the petition.

Mr. Solicitor and the rest of the committee is sent with the petition to the Lords and our consents to it as it was resolved on at the committees of both Houses. Vide petition autre papiers.

Speaker out of the chair.

Committee for continuance of statutes

Sir Edwin Sandys. That having taken away the statutes for tillage, it will be fit to give all encouragement to the husbandmen. That this y[ear] there was brought into one haven in this kingdom 40,000 quarters of corn, which caused the exportation of great sums of money, and therefore he would have it lawful to transport corn also at reasonable rates. He thinks it will be best that it may be lawful to transport corn when it is at 32s. the quarter.

It is resolved by this committee that it shall be lawful to transport wheat when it is not above the price of 32s. the quarter.

Mr. Speaker in the chair.

MR. SOLICITOR reports from the conference that the Prince wishes and desires that when the petition against papists is delivered to the King, that we will take a course to begin with the bill of [f. 138] subsidies that his Highness may say that we are in the way with the bill of subsidies.

SIR JOHN SAVILE says that there are some who by ill office seek to breed jealousies between us and the King and say that we have said we will give subsidies but that we will then have all that we desire. He says it can do no hurt to begin with the bill and would have us be as good as our words. It is time the ships are at sea, for he believes the King of Spain sits not still and talk[s], but is active; and he would have us give over talking and go into action.

MR. [EDWARD] ALFORD says that we have incepta declaratio and he hopes we shall have shortly consummata declaratio. He thinks it will not be unfit to begin with the bill but hopes we shall have a better and a full and public declaration before we pass the bill of subsidies.

SIR EDWARD COKE says that because the clauses and cautions agreed on in the giving of the subsidies are such as have not been this 100 years, would have us appoint a select committee to consider of the form of this bill of subsidies and to expedite it.

SIR THOMAS JERMYN. That there is great preparation by the King of Spain and a great fleet ready for the seas. If we delay the preparing of our fleet until hot weather, beef and pork and such provisions will not take salt. [f. 138v] He would have us refer to a committee the consideration of the form of the preamble of the bill of subsidies.

Ordered that a committee named shall Monday morning consider of the preamble of the bill of subsidies which is to be brought in here to the House.

MR. [CHRISTOPHER] BROOKE moves that the Lord Treasurer humbly desires to have time until Monday or Tuesday to give answer to the 2 charges of bribes against him, and the rather for that he had not his charge until last night, 9 of the clock, and was yesterday to give an answer to the Lords to objections there against him.

[WILLIAM] LORD CAVENDISH. That the bribes charged on the Lord Treasurer is a matter of fact and needs no long advice or deliberation, and the Lords by the reason that he is to give answer here have put off the business against him in that House until another time.

SIR MILES FLEETWOOD says that the Lord Treasurer does labour much in the businesses that are here against him.

It is ordered that the Lord Treasurer shall this afternoon give in his answer to the committee of grievances.

[Afternoon]

Speaker in the chair.

[f. 139] An act for confirmation of lands in comitatu Cambridge sold by Viscount Beaumont and his lady to Sir Thomas Cheke, kt. 3. L., passed this House.

Committee, 100 Aprilis 1624, of grievances concerning the Lord Treasurer

Sir Edward Coke in the chair.

At the motion of Mr. [John] Glanville, ordered that Mr. Thomas Lake shall bring into the committee of grievances on Friday next his patent of registering of affidavits, wherein new fees are exacted, and his table of fees and other writings concerning that business.

Because the Lord Treasurer nor none for him is yet come to give answer before this committee to such bribes as are here objected against him/

Sir Miles Fleetwood desires that, considering the great business of this House, the House will fall into debate and deliberation of those businesses he has delivered here against the Lord Treasurer, and since his Lordship have this day given him to answer, does not send it here, that this House would be pleased to transmit [it] to the Lords of the Higher House, which is the most proper place for the further hearing of it.

Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer says that the Lord Treasurer does desire that this House will suspend the delivering any opinion of his Lordship but transmit it to the Lords as it now here stands.

[f. 139v] Sir Edward Coke says he never knew any business sent to the Lords from this House but the House withal did send their opinions with it.

Sir William Bulstrode thinks the Lord Treasurer does offer an affront to this House by not making an answer here nor sending any to make his excuse here, having by his friends moved here that his answer might be here heard.

Chancellor of the Exchequer says that it [is] his fault that he did not sooner let this House understand that the Lord Treasurer said he could not in so short time instruct his counsel to make his answer.

Mr. Henry [sic] Fanshawe moves that the warrant delivered by Mr. [John] West may be read and considered for that will make it appear whether the Lord Treasurer had anything or part in the grand farms or no.

A warrant read in the House: 290 Julii 1623, to will Mr. [John] Williams to pay unto Mr. [Abraham] Jacob £500 for a gratuity for the Lord Treasurer. This was for the great farms.

Another warrant read: 290 Aprilis 1622, commanding that security should be taken of those of the great farms by Mr. West of the Exchequer for all the parts of the great farms, which accordingly was taken by Mr. West.

Mr. H[enry] [sic] Fanshawe says that this warrant makes it appear that [f. 140] the Lord Treasurer had no right in law to any part of the great farms, for the great farmers had bargained and agreed for all the great farms and they gave security for all, which was £48,000 per annum.

Mr. Charles Price would have us remember that the Lord Treasurer when he first caused the £500 to be transferred from the accounts of the petty farms to the great farms, his Lordship caused that all the copies of the petty farms' accounts should be also called in, which was needless if that his Lordship had done it only to rectify the accounts; but his Lordship was not content to put out only the fire that might burn his fingers but would also have the smoke extinguished.

Mr. Recorder says that to desire to be heard and not to make his answer at the time when the House thinks it fit, that he should be heard is all one or rather worse than not to desire to be heard.

Chancellor of the Exchequer says that the Lord Treasurer does desire to be heard, if by the favour of this House he may, on Monday next, and even now he received this desire from his Lordship.

Sir Miles Fleetwood says that so Monday may be set as a peremptory day for the hearing of the Lord Treasurer's answer, he shall be well content that it may be deferred until that day, for he would not have him surprised.

[f. 140v] Sir Philip Carey says that the Lord Treasurer did reserve for him a 32 part of the great farms because he with others, by bidding for those farms, did help raise the price of it, whereof when he had considered well he thought it best for him not to have any part therein; but he was not a partner in trust for the Lord Treasurer or any other, neither was it intended by him to have been a farmer in trust for any.

Ordered by this committee that the Lord Treasurer shall have time, according to his own desire, until Monday next in the afternoon, 2 o'clock, to give his answer to this committee concerning the 2 bribes.

This order was after confirmed by the House, the Speaker being in the chair.

VII. DIARY OF SIR THOMAS HOLLAND, BODL., MS RAWL. D1,100

[f. 1]

10 April, Saturday

First read. An act to enable Vincent Lowe to sell lands in Derbyshire to pay his debts.

First read. An act for repairing and maintaining the river and haven and channel of Colchester and for the paving of the town.

Committed, Monday, [Court of] Wards. An act for the naturalizing Sir Robert Anstruther, kt., Sir George Abercromby, kt., John Craig, doctor of physic.

Order. The under-shrieve who arrested Mr. [Richard] Godfrey's baily to be sent for to attend the committee of privileges.

First read. An act for the catechizing and instructing of children.

[Blank]

[f. 2v] In the afternoon, the House sitting

First read. An act for the naturalizing of Philip Jacob[son].

Committed, Court [of] Wards. An act for the gaining and dividing Romney, that marsh in Kent.

Committed, [Ex]chequer [Chamber]. An act for the establishing 3 lectures [blank] given by Mr. [Thomas] Whetenhall, esq.

Second [sic] read, passed. An act for confirmation of lands of [Sir] Thomas Cheke, bought of Sir Thomas Beaumont.

The committee to hear the grievance against the Lord Treasurer

[Mr. John] Glanville. There is erected an office of affidavits, and have brought a place of £40 to a matter of [£]300. His name is Lane [sic].

Friday next is given for him to bring in his patent.

The Speaker in his chair.

[MR. JOHN] GLANVILLE reports the bill for free fishing and fishing voyages in Virginia, New England and Newfoundland.

Recommitted.

Committee [of grievances]

[Sir Miles] Fleetwood moves that the House will do itself that right and the state that right that [the] House will enter into consideration of the charge and proof whether it be not fit to transmit it to the Lords. That his opinion is that the proofs are so clear that they shall do him [f. 3] no wrong to transmit it to the House.

[Sir John] Eliot. The matters against my Lord was in fact and therefore did require no long consideration but he might have answered, which he does not, he thinks/

[Sir Edward] Giles. The proofs have been apparent against my Lord Treasurer, for though [Abraham] Jacob did seek to avoid it, yet [Bernard] Hide did justify it to his face.

[Sir William] Bulstrode. That the honour of this House have received a great affront and scorn, and in that the whole kingdom, by his default; therefore he moves that that may be preferred up to the Lords.

[Chancellor of the Ex]chequer. That he must clear my Lord from making the House stay, for he must submit himself for that it was his fault not to come soon enough to deliver to this House how unprovided my Lord was to give yet so full satisfaction.

[Mr. Christopher] Brooke moves for a further time for my Lord Treasurer to answer.

[f. 3v] [Sir Walter] Earle moves that a select committee may be named to gather all the proofs together and Jacob's tergiversation, and so transmit it to the Lords.

Mr. [Thomas] Fanshawe. It does not appear whether my Lord Treasurer had any part in the great farms. There was a note thereof given to Sir Edward Coke to clear that point. He wishes that may be considered of before it be put to the question.

Warrant: 29 July 1623, there was a warrant to Mr. [John] Williams to pay to Jacob £500 to pay to my Lord Treasurer out of the great farms, from Sir John Wolstenholme and Mr. [Henry] Garway.

1622, 29 April, [Sir] John Wolstenholme, [£]6,000; Garway [blank]; [John] West, [£]3,000; Carey, [£]1,000; Knowles, [£]12,500. £48,000. These were under the Great Seal. Warrant that these bonds should be/

[f. 4] [Mr. Thomas] Fanshawe. The estate being passed to 4 patentees, he could not have anything by law. This was quitted both by the letters patents and by this warrant.

[Sir Arthur] Ingram. That after my Lord did claim the 4 parts of 5 which fell off from their security, which he did as he said for Ingram and his friends because Sir Arthur Ingram had first offered a £1,000 more than any, therefore he desired to be satisfied why he offering so much had it not.

[Mr. Thomas] Fanshawe. [Blank]

[Mr. John] Bankes. Why it should not be transmitted up unto the Upper House before further examination, he gives the reasons: that those impositions upon impositions are not yet fully ripe; next, that to send up any to the Lords, everyone is half accused, therefore he moves that my Lord may have a new day.

[f. 4v] [Mr.] Recorder wishes that my Lord would have it made his defence; he should have had as indifferent a hearing as have been made against him. If my Lord would have this afternoon have given some satisfaction for his not performance, then he thinks the House would have take[n] consideration of it. That which have been alleged against my Lord Treasurer, it is not impossible but that my Lord may make an answer with good witnesses to prove it. The charge is two £500, though Jacob would put both together, but £500 from the petty farms came 6 months after agreement, but no warrant before the £500 could be gotten from [Bernard] Hide. For the other £500, might be for parts, but that was paid before any leases was sealed, and after his first contract, for so said [f. 5] Sir John Wolstenholme that the agreement was for the whole from the first. His opinion that neither of the £500 were just. He thinks fit it be transmitted to the Lords.

[Chancellor of the Ex]chequer. That my Lord did even now send to him to let him know that if the House will give him until Monday afternoon, he will answer the objections.

[William, Lord] Cavendish, [Sir Henry] Poole, [Sir Miles] Fleetwood, for my Lord's hearing according to his own desire on Monday in the afternoon.

[Mr.] Solicitor. If the committee do incline to my Lord's desire, Monday morning, the House must be moved, but for Monday in the afternoon the bill of monopolies.

[Sir Henry] Spiller. He desires that order and justice may be now in this House by giving my Lord his desires for Monday in the afternoon.

[Mr. Thomas] Fanshawe. A gentleman is in the House was a feoffee to my Lord, as he has heard. He desire[s] he may speak.

Digges. A great advantage against any for want of an oath. He wish it were otherwise. He would have the honour of the House maintained. He would/

[f. 5v] [Mr. Thomas] Fanshawe. It is so material that it be known whether Sir Philip Carey be a feoffee or no, for if he be, my Lord may blanch it.

[Sir Philip] Carey. That he was no feoffee for my Lord, but only that he was a suitor to my Lord when the 4 parts came into his hands that he might have 1/32 parts, which he granted, but when he found that the farmers should have the managing of all, he relinquished his part, which was all that he was interested in.

Savile. He wishes that those who now desire a further day had spoken it in the House, for it is against the honour of the House so soon to break an order.

VIII. DIARY OF JOHN PYM, NORTHAMPTONSHIRE RECORD OFFICE, FH/N/C/0050

[f. 58]

April 10, 1624

An act for mending the haven and paving the street of Colchester.

Sir Robert Anstruther, Sir George Abercromby and Dr. [John] Craig take the oath of allegiance and the bill for their naturalization is read the second time.

An act for the instruction and catechizing of youth.

The House was turned into a committee for the bill of continuances and repeals.

During the committee the Solicitor returned, who had been sent to desire a conference from the Lords, which was granted presently in the Painted Chamber. Likewise he delivered to the Clerk a writing containing the report made by the Prince and [f. 58v] the Duke of Buckingham concerning the dissolution of the treaties, which was to be entered into the journal.

That conference was for the perfecting our petition touching religion. The Lords still insisted upon forbearing the desire of a proclamation in that clause which was for the execution of penal laws, for which they gave these reasons:

  • 1. The King's exception to the like desire in the last Parliament.
  • 2. That we should be more likely to obtain it if we left it to him and did not prescribe him a way.

In all other points they yielded to our desires.

SIR FRANCIS NETHERSOLE. To move our consent to leave out the proclamations made this [blank]. The King will no doubt understand our desires. If he be unwilling, the denial will be more clearly avoided; if willing, we shall have our wishes with more advantage.

This was opposed by SIR THOMAS WENTWORTH and others; but yet it was ordered by question to be left out.

At this conference, the Prince requested us to proceed with the bill of subsidy that he might take occasion to justify our forwardness therein to the King when he should commend our petition for religion to him.

A committee was desired to prepare the preamble to the subsidy; the usual form would not fit this occasion. Others thought it better the heads should be agreed upon in the House. And whilst the resolution was in some suspense, SIR T[HOMAS] J[ERMYN] made a new show of the former pretences of great preparation in Spain: their mighty fleet; store of money now to be brought from the Indies; the Irish regiment, being the flower of their army in the Low Countries, ready to be sent into Ireland for the troubling of that state.

My Lord Treasurer was a suitor for a longer time for his answer, which was not granted.

Eodem die, at the committee for grievances

Information was given of a new patent for registering of affidavits. Heretofore every man was left free whether he would enter his affidavit or not and the sum for entry was very small, the whole profit not above £40 per annum. Now it is an office, men are compelled to enter and it is worth £300 per annum.

In the House

Whilst there was an expectation of my Lord Treasurer's answer, the Speaker went to the chair.

MR. [JOHN] GLANVILLE reported the bill for free liberty of fishing with 8 alterations.

  • [f. 59] 1. In this title were added words expressing the bill to be for the increase of navigation to give it more countenance.
  • 2. Whereas it was upon the coasts, "seas" were now added.
  • 3. To this word "King" was added "heirs and successors".
  • 4. A clause was inserted that fishing places might be enjoyed as long as any ship remained there to prevent those who stay there all the year from taking up places with boats.
  • 5. Liberty was granted to the fishermen to take timber for repairing of ships and building of boats.
  • 6. The fishermen, their ships and goods made free from arrest.
  • 7. "Unlawful molestation": the word "unlawful" left out because all molestation is unlawful.
  • 8. In the proviso for timber for Newfoundland it is left at large to be taken anywhere, because the fishing there is far more ancient than the plantations; but in New England the liberty is restrained so as it may not be taken within a quarter of a mile of any dwelling house.

To this report he annexed an information that after the last Parliament a book was printed in favour of the plantation, wherein the complaint in Parliament was called malicious and the proceeding scandalous.

SIR JOHN DANVERS. That the interest of fishing places may extend as well to those that have houses as to those that have ships.

MR. [JOHN] GUY. It will be inconvenient to the inhabitants to go far from their dwelling houses and to the natives if hereafter they should get the skill of fishing who have no ships, and for this purpose he offered a proviso.

MR. [WILLIAM] NYELL. The same proviso was offered the last Parliament and rejected. In the first patent was a reservation of the right of all his Majesty's subjects, which is now left out. If the planter may have but one place in every harbour, it will be worth £3,000 per annum, which will turn to the benefit of particular men and to the discouragement of the fishing voyage, by which are maintained 5,000 seamen at the least.

SECRETARY CALVERT. The plantation will be destroyed if you allow not some reasonable benefit to the planters. Neither can one place of 20 be thought an excessive proportion. Where there are people, there must be a government. If the fishermen commit murder, shall they not be stayed? If the words go absolute, "without molestation", you exempt them from all law. Therefore it must be as it was before.

MR. [JOHN] GLANVILLE. The planters shall be left in as good case as the fishers, if they come first with a ship, to have their choice of places. We have a real possession of a fishery, they have [f. 59v] an imaginary expectation of a plantation and they will have their imagination swallow up our reality. The words "without molestation" will not free them from misdemeanours but only such actions as concern fishing and fetching of timber.

The bill was recommitted.

In the committee

My Lord Treasurer not appearing, Sir Miles Fleetwood moved that the business might be transferred to the Lords.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer presented my Lord's desire to be heard before we should deliver any opinion. And for himself, he said though he thought the proofs clear, yet he was doubtful of the nature of the offence. And Sir W[illiam] B[ulstrode] urging that the contempt might be added to his other faults, the Chancellor took that upon himself, for my Lord had requested him to make his excuse, which in the morning he could find no time to do.

It hung some while in debate whether more time or no should be given. In the end, Monday in the afternoon was set peremptory, though it were opposed by the remembrance of an order for conference with the Lords at that time about the bill of monopolies, to which two answers were given:

  • 1. Orders in Parliament are but memorandums as long as the Parliament sits, as orders in the courts of Westminster, which during the same time are alterable.
  • 2. The House had number enough to discharge both this and that service.

IX. DIARY OF SIR WALTER EARLE, BL, ADD. MS 18,597

[f. 129]

Saturday, 3[r]d of April [sic]

Sir Robert Anstruther and 2 other Scottish men sworn before the second reading of their bills [sic] for naturalization. The bills [sic] read and committed.

Complaint made by MR. [RICHARD] GODFREY against the under-sheriff of Kent for arresting his servant.

Ordered the sheriff should be sent for.

Bill for catechizing of children.

The House turned into a committee touching the bill for continuance and repeal of statutes

Question raised whether the statutes upon discontinuance were in force upon the former dissolution.

Mr. [John] Glanville of opinion it was a Parliament [f. 129v] though it were so dissolved. A reason alleged in the commission for dissolution is the clause mentioned in the statute of subsidy, the proviso that the session should not determine by passing that act, which was not put in to that end that if the King should dissolve the Parliament, it should be no Parliament. Therefore fit to have the word "revived" put in and added to the clause of continuance.

The words put in: "shall be adjudged ever since 70 to have been of such force as", etc.

The committee met with the Lords about the petition against recusants. The Lords' answer: whereas we desired the word "proclamation" to be inserted, they allowed our reasons but they desired us to consider it was but a petition, therefore to leave it to the King and not chalk out the way. It would not be long before we should have a new convention, so as etc.

The Prince there said that he thought it would more further our ends to leave out the word "proclamation".

The House ordered it accordingly.

The committee went up again. There the Prince moved it as from himself that the House, to further this business the better, would do somewhat about setting on the bill of subsidy.

[f. 130] MR. SOLICITOR, having made the report upon this speech of the Prince, moved that the House would nominate a committee to consider of the heads for the bill of subsidy.

A committee nominated accordingly.

Saturday afternoon, the committee of grievances

The business concerning the Lord Treasurer appointed by the House, but no man coming on his behalf, the Speaker went to the chair.

The bill of free fishing reported and recommitted and addition made to the committee.

The committee [of grievances] sat again

None coming for the Lord Treasurer, Sir Miles Fleetwood moved that being none came, the House would proceed to deliver their judgements.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer said on the behalf of the Lord Treasurer that he did humbly submit himself to the censure of this House and was well content to be referred to the Lords in case the determination of this House should go that way.

A warrant, 25th of July 1622 [sic], under Sir John Wolstenholme's hand for payment of £500 [f. 130v] to the Lord Treasurer for a gratuity out of the great farm.

A schedule, 29 April 1622, mentioning the names of the lessees of the petty farm that had sealed.

Upon a new motion concerning the Lord Treasurer, time given him until Monday, 2 of the clock, according to his own desire.

The petition of both Houses.

X. JOURNAL OF SIR SIMONDS D'EWES, BL, HARL. MS 159

[f. 102v]

April 10, Saturday

[Committee of the Whole House]

The bill of continuance of statutes, at which there arose a main question whether they be in danger or no that have executed the laws since the last Parliament, seeing they were not then continued, it was diversely argued and order given to put in such words into the bill now as might clear that point.

A conference with the Lords about the petition concerning religion. The Lords were willing to join in all but that one point of expressing the execution of the laws by proclamation, they thought it not yet seasonable.

The Lord Treasurer desired to be respited for his answer, which was to be made this afternoon, because he was to answer in the Higher House, and it was delivered openly that he desired to be respited above because he was to answer below.

In the afternoon

An act for the assurance and conveyance of land sold by Sir Thomas Beaumont, now Lord Swords, to Sir Thomas [f. 103] Cheke. Vide March 30. Passed.

[Committee of grievances]

A motion to call in and view the patent of Thomas Lake, register of the affidavits, who has raised it from £40 to £300 per annum. [Mr. John] Glanville.

The hour was come for the Lord Treasurer to make his answer, but neither himself nor any appeared for him.

Upon report of the bill for free fishing upon the coasts of America, New England and Newfoundland, upon a proviso offered by some of the planters in those parts, the bill was recommitted and endangered.

[Committee of grievances]

Sir Miles Fleetwood moves to hear the judgement of the House upon his charge to the Lord Treasurer and proofs thereof, and so, if the House think it fit, to transmit it to the Lords where it ought to be.

Sir Richard Weston thinks that fit too, and answers that the Lord Treasurer desires further time, for he is not ready now to make answer. If the House will now proceed, he submits himself.

Some think it an affront to the House that, having requested time, he did not appear, the charge being short and only matter of fact, it had been easy in a short time to do it.

A warrant was brought in of July the 29th 1623, from Sir John Wolstenholme and Henry Garway to one [John] Williams for £500 to be given to the Lord Treasurer for the great customs.

There was also read a particular of the farmers' names for the great customs, whereof the Lord Treasurer's being none it appears he had no share, which he seems to lay claim to, and so for them to have the £500 under his own name.

After much agitation, further time was granted him to make his answer until April the 120.