“Here’s a health to my Lady Brouncker, and the best card in her hand;
And a health to my Lord her husband, with ne’er a foot of land.”[243]
These were some of the men who helped to
carry on the work of the English navy. It
would have been well for the fame of most of
them if Pepys had never put pen to paper.
FOOTNOTES:
[188]
Vol. iii. There is a MS. copy of these “Tracts” in the
Pepysian Library.
[189]
Thus Amir-al-moumenim is the Arabic for Commander
of the Faithful.
[190]
It is to Colonel Pasley’s kindness that I owe the greater
portion of the information contained in this chapter. That
officer, who is Director of Works at the Admiralty, has made
large collections relating to the early history of the administration
of the navy, and to him I am also indebted for the
valuable lists in the Appendix, which he has compiled for me
with great labour from original sources. No such lists were
previously in existence. Colonel Pasley has further kindly
supplied me with the notes that follow which are signed in
each instance “C. P.”
[194]
State Papers, Dom. Eliz. vol. xv. No. 4. There is a
copy of these regulations in the British Museum, Add. MS.
9295, fol. 17.
[195]
The number of principal officers was afterwards fixed
at four, viz.:—1. Treasurer; 2. Comptroller; 3. Surveyor;
4. Clerk of the Acts.
[196]
These amounts were made up of the “Fee out of the
Exchequer” (or salary proper); the Allowance for one or
more Clerks; “Boat-hire,” and “Riding Costs” (or travelling
expenses).—C. P.
[198]
The emoluments of the Treasurer arose chiefly from
“poundage” on all sums passing through his hands. In
time of war his profits were often very large.—C. P.
[200]
In the “Succession of the Lords High Admiral,” &c.,
in Pepys’s “Naval Collections,” it is stated that on the Restoration
the existing Commissioners of the Admiralty and
of the Navy respectively were temporarily continued in
office by order in council of the 31st May, 1660. By a
subsequent order (7th July following) a Board of Principal
Officers and Commissioners of the Navy on the ancient
model was appointed, and the Duke of York was directed
to revoke the authority he had granted “unto the former
Treasurer, Officers, and Commissioners of the Navy.” It
would appear, therefore, that the Admiralty Commissioners
had been suppressed, and the Duke appointed Admiral at
some intermediate date between the 31st May and the 7th
July, 1660; although, according to Pepys’s list, quoted
above, his patent under the Great Seal bore date the 29th
January, 1660–61.—C. P.
[206]
“The Duke’s Reflections on the severall Members of
the Navy Boards Duty,” dated “St. James, 28 Aug., 1668.”
“The Duke’s Answer to their severall Excuses,” dated
“Whitehall, 25 Nov., 1668” (both in Harleian MS. 6003).
[214]
The letter, signed “S. Pepyes,” and dated “Greenwich,
1st January, 1665,” is in the British Museum (Add. MS.
6287). There is also a copy in Harl. MS. 6003.
[215]
The “Englishmen on board the Dutch ships” were
heard to say, “We did heretofore fight for tickets; now we
fight for dollars!”—“Diary,” June 14, 1667.
[217]
Gibson was a contemporary of Pepys, and a clerk in
the Navy Office. He was somewhat of a laudator temporis
acti, and fonder of drawing his illustrations from events of
Queen Elizabeth’s time than from those of more recent
days. See his paper in praise of “Seamen Captains,”
printed in the preface to Charnock’s “History of Marine
Architecture,” pp. lxxiv.-xcv.—C. P.
[222]
“Diary,” April 10, 1661. This house (of which there
is a plan in King’s MS. 43) was pulled down in 1703, and
the house now occupied by the Admiral Superintendent of
Chatham Dockyard was built in its place.—C. P.
[223]
A plan, with front and side elevations of the Hill-house
as it was in 1698, is in King’s MS. 43. The ground on
which it stood is now included in the Marine Barracks.—C.
P.
[229]
Dummer was Assistant to the Surveyor of the Navy
when he designed these works. The improvement of Portsmouth
and the foundation of a dockyard at Plymouth were
called for by the political changes arising out of the Revolution.
Previously our great naval wars had been waged
against the Dutch, and the Thames and Medway were then
the most convenient localities for fitting and repairing ships
of war. After the Revolution, the Dutch became our allies,
and the French our most formidable enemies. The naval
ports on the Channel then became more important than
those on the east coast.—C. P.
[230]
King’s MS. 43 (Brit. Mus.) contains plans of all the
dockyards in 1688 and 1698, and detailed drawings of the
principal buildings as they were in the latter year, as well
as of the Navy Office in Seething Lane, and the Hill-house
at Chatham.—C. P.