JOSIAH WILLARD’S SECOND COMMISSION as SECRETARY OF THE PROVINCE OF THE MASSACHUSETTS BAY
28 March, 1728
[COMMISSION FROM HIS MAJESTY KING GEORGE THE SECOND TO JOSIAH WILLARD ESQR TO BE SECRETARY OF THE PROVINCE OF THE MASSACHUSETS BAY]
George the Second by the Grace of God [of Great Britain France & Ireland King Defender of the Faith] &c. To all to whom these Presents shall come Greeting
Whereas Our late Royall Father George the First King of Great Britain &c Did by his letters Patents vnder his Great Seal of Great Britain bearing date at Westminster the sixteenth Day of June in the third Year of his Reign Give and Grant vnto his Trusty & Welbeloved Josiah Willard Esquire the Office or place of Secretary of his Province of Massachusetts Bay in New England in America To have hold Exercise and Enjoy the said Office or Place unto the said Josiah Willard by himself or his sufficient Deputy or Deputies (for Whom he should be Answerable) for and during his Pleasure and his Residence within the said Province with all Fees Rights Profits Priviledges and Advantages Whatsoever thereunto belonging As by the said recited letters Patents (relation being thereunto had) may [more] [now] fully and at large appear In which said Office by Virtue of the Statute in such Case made and Provided he [was] [has] continued for the Space of Six Months from the Time of the Demise of his said late Majesty and by virtue of our Royall Proclamation for that purpose Issued bearing date the Fifth Day of July in the First Year of Our Reign He is continued untill Our Pleasure be further known or other Provision be made concerning the said Office Now know Yee that Wee have Revoked and Determined And by these Presents do Revoke and Determine the said recited Letters Patents and every Clause Article and thing therein contained And Further Know yee that Wee of our Especiall Grace certain Knowledge and meer motion have Given and Granted and by these Presents do Give and Grant unto Our Trusty & Welbeloved the said Josiah Willard the said Office or place of Secretary of Our Province of Massachusetts Bay in New England in America and him the said Josiah Willard Secretary of Our said Province of Massachusetts Bay in New England in America Wee do make Ordain and Constitute by these Presents To have hold Exercise and Enjoy the said Office or Place vnto the said Josiah Willard by himselfe or his Sufficient Deputy or Deputyes (for whom he shall be answerable) For and during Our Pleasure and his Residence within Our said Province with all Fees Rights Profits Priviledges and Advantages whatsoever thereunto belonging in as full and ample manner as he the said Josiah Willard or any other Secretary of Our said Province hath formerly held and Enjoyed or of Right Ought to have held and Enjoyed the same In Witness [&c] [whereof We have caused these our Letters to be made Patents] Witness Our Selfe at Westminster the [eight &] Twentieth [Eighth] Day of March [In the first year of our Reign]
By Writt of Privy Seal
[COCKS]
[Prov. of the Massachusets Bay Sworn before me in Council June 18. 1728.
WM Dummer
Examined per J Willard Se͞c͞r͞y]
— Public Record Office, Patent Roll, 1 George II, Part 4, No. 14 Compared with the record of Royal Commissions (Crown Commissions, 1628–1663, p. 34) in the office of the Secretary of the Commonwealth.205
JOSIAH WILLARD ESQR SECRETARY OF THE MASSACHUSETS BAY 1727
George R.
Our Will and Pleasure is, that you prepare a Bill for Our Royal Signature to pass Our Great Seal, containing Our Grant of the Office or Place of Secretary of Our Province of Massachusets Bay in New England in America unto Our Trusty and Welbeloved Josiah Willard Esqr to have, hold, exercise and enjoy the same by himself or his sufficient Deputy or Deputies (for whom he shall be answerable) for and during Our Pleasure and his Residence within Our said Province, with all Fees, Rights, Profits, Privileges and Advantages whatsoever thereunto belonging, in as full and ample manner as he the said Josiah Willard or any other Secretary of Our said Province hath formerly held and enjoyed the same; And you are to insert in the said Bill a clause for revoking the Letters Patents whereby We constituted the said Josiah Willard Secretary of Our said Province. And for so doing this shall be your Warrant. Given at Our Court at St James’s the 29th Day of February 1727. In the first year of Our Reign.
By His Majesty’s Command,
HOLLES NEWCASTLE.
To Our Attorney or Sollicitor General 
— Public Record Office, Colonial Office, Class 324, Vol. 50, pp. 53–54
1 Later Mr. Goodell gave copies of the Commissions of Vice-Admiral.
2 In an Instruction issued to Addington on December 11 it is stated that “His Majesty” has “been Graciously pleased, by his Letters Patents under the Great Seal of England, to Grant unto you the Office and Place of Secretary of their Majesties Province of the Massachusetts Bay in New England” (Public Record Office, Colonial Office, Class 5, Vol. 905, p. 404). Hence Addington’s Commission must have been issued on or before December 11, 1691.
3 Stoughton’s Commission was presumably issued in December, 1691.
4 This Commission of Tailer was presumably issued in the spring or summer of 1711, as he was sworn on October 4th (Council Records, v. 456).
5 The exact date of this Commission has been obtained from the Council Records (vi. 379) for September 24, 1715.
6 Dummer’s Commission was presumably issued in the spring or summer of 1716, as he was sworn on October 5th (Boston News Letter, October 8, 1716, p. 2/1).
7 The Commission of Burges (1715).
8 These two volumes, it may be added, contain many documents besides Royal Commissions. The volume labelled “Crown Commissions, 1677–1774” has no index. The volume labelled “Crown Commissions, 1628–1663” has an index, doubtless made many years ago, but this index is worthless since it wrongly describes some of the documents and omits others altogether. Consequently, in order to ascertain exactly what documents are in the two volumes, the latter must be examined page by page. Moreover, the documents in the two volumes are not included in the Index volumes to the Archives. Hence an adequate index to the two volumes would be serviceable.
9 As already stated in the text, however, copies of two earlier Commissions (1685 and 1686) are in the Massachusetts Archives, cxxvi. 95–96, 7–16.
10 Council Records, iii. 325.
11 Council Records, ix. 83.
12 There are two pieces of evidence to support the statement in the text. First, the words “Old volume 3” are written in ink on the recto of the first leaf, unnumbered and otherwise blank, of the volume labelled “Crown Commissions, 1677–1774.” That volume contains, besides the leaf just mentioned, two leaves unnumbered and blank; seventy-nine leaves containing records, the folios numbered from 1 to 158; and then forty-nine unnumbered and blank leaves.
Second, on pp. 45–48 of the volume labelled “Crown Commissions, 1628–1663” is recorded the “Commission of William Burnet &c Commissioners for the trial of Pirates,” dated December 13, 1728. After the Commission is written (on p. 48) “Examined pr J Willard Se͞c͞r͞y,” the words “J Willard Se͞c͞r͞y” being in the hand of Willard himself. Then follow these words, not in the hand of Willard: “Recorded in the Secretary’s Office in Boston in the Book of Commissions &ca from the Crown, from Page 297, to Page 303. — ꝑ J Willard Sec̄ry Decr 23. 1729.” This “Book of Commissions &ca from the Crown,” which must have been in existence in 1729, is not now extant. Following the entry dated December 23, 1729, are these entries:
Recorded the 6th of October 1738 ꝑ Jas Martin Sec͞ry
The fifteen preceeding Pages make a true Copy of his Majesty’s Commission for the Trial of Pirates &c. as the Same stands on the Publick Records of the English Colony of Rhode Island &c. taken therefrom & duly Examined this first day of April 1748 By Tho Ward Sec͞ry.”
It is obvious, therefore, that this Commission of December 13, 1728, was not entered in “Crown Commissions, 1628–1663” before April, 1748. Cf. the note immediately below.
13 The fire of 1747 occurred on the morning of December 9. The same afternoon a committee was appointed in the Legislature to consider what should be done with regard to the loss of documents, and on the 11th —
Josiah Willard Esqr from the Committee of both Houses appointed to consider the Circumstances of the Province in relation to the Desolation of the Court House, gave in the following report, vizt
The Committee . . . Report as their Opinion . . . That the Secretary record in his Office the first or old Charter of this Province & the Charter of King William & Queen Mary with the Commissions of the Governour, Lieut Governour Justices of the Superiour Court & his own (Court Records, xviii. 275–276).
Now the first forty-five pages of “Crown Commissions, 1628–1663” contain, in the order named, the Colony Charter (1629), the Province Charter (1691), the Explanatory Charter (1725), Secretary Willard’s First (1717) and Second (1728) Commissions, Lieutenant-Governor Phips’s Commission (1732), and Shirley’s Commissions (1741) as Governor and as Vice-Admiral. All these, with the exception of the last two, are in the hand of Willard, and even the last two are attested by Willard. The inference is irresistible that this particular volume, which in no event could have been begun later than 1756 (in which year Willard died), must have been begun soon after the fire of 1747 in response to the report of the committee made December 11, 1747. The three Charters were saved and so could be copied, while the Commissions were doubtless in the possession of the three officials and not in the Town House. Cf. p. xviii note 4, ante. It may be added that on December 11, 1747, the house “Voted, That his Excellency the Governour be desired . . . to appoint a Day of Humiliation and Prayer throughout this Province . . . on Occasion of the great Difficulties the Province Labours under, and the Frowns of Divine Providence, more especially in Regard of the Destruction of the Court-House in Boston, and great Part of the publick Records by Fire” (House Journal, p. 186). Whoever has had occasion to search in vain for documents that must once have been in the State House realizes how fearful was the loss occasioned by the fire of 1747.
14 None of the Commissions in Vice-Admiralty previous to 1741 are in the State House, and consequently those from 1685 to 1730 are printed from copies obtained from the Royal Courts of Justice. The Commissions from 1741 to 1774 are in the State House and are here printed from copies obtained from that source. But copies of these Commissions are also in the Royal Courts of Justice, Admiralty Registry, Muniment Books, the references being as follows: Shirley (1741), Vol. 8, p. 182; Pownall (1757), Vol. 9, p. 114; Bernard (1760), Vol. 9, p. 127; Bernard (1761), Vol. 9, p. 139; Hutchinson (1771), Vol. 10, p. 128; Gage (1774), Vol. 10, p. 155.
15 The figures within parentheses, here and elsewhere in these extracts, of course refer to the twelve stages mentioned in the text, pp. xxi–xxii.
16 Second Report of the Deputy Keeper of the Public Records, London, 1841, pp. 26–27, 28, 30, 32–33, 40, 41.
17 Ibid. pp. 41, 43, 44, 46.
18 Statutes at Large (1734), vi. 307. The Act of 4 George II, Ch. 26, was in 1733 extended to Wales by the Act of 6 George II, Ch. 14 (Statutes at Large, vi. 485).
19 For this information, the Editor is indebted to Miss Lucy Drucker.
20 Some Notes on the Commissions are in preparation and will be printed in a later volume of Publications.
21 All dates in the Preface, in these Lists, and in the Index, are New Style.
22 This date is approximate: see p, xvi note 2, ante.
23 His Commission is not extant.
24 This date is approximate: see p. xvi note 1, ante.
25 His Commission is not extant.
26 The exact date of this Commission is not known: see p. xvii note 1, ante.
27 His Commission is not extant.
28 His Commission is not extant: see p. xvii note 2, ante.
29 The exact date or this Commission is not known: see p. xvii note 3, ante.
30 His Commission is not extant.
31 His Commission is not extant.
32 This date is approximate: see p. xvi note 1, ante.
33 His Commission of 1716 is not extant.
34 The exact date of this Commission is not known: see p. xvii note 3, ante.
35 His Commission is not extant.
36 This date is approximate: see p. xvi note 2, ante.
37 His Commissions of 1711 and 1715 are not extant.
38 The exact date of this Commission is not known: see p. xvii note 1, ante.
39 This List is based on data obtained from the Council Records, the Court Records, the Massachusetts House Journals, the Boston newspapers, and other contemporary sources.
40 Stoughton held this office not by Royal commission, but by appointment from President Dudley.
41 The Andros government was overthrown on April 18, 1689.
42 The Andros government was overthrown on April 18, 1689.
43 The Andros government was overthrown on April 18, 1689.
44 The names or Acting-Governors are printed in italics, as is also the Council when the government devolved upon the latter.
45 Stoughton died July 7, 1701.
46 Burges never came to this country.
47 Burnet died September 7, 1729.
48 Spencer Phips died April 4, 1757.
49 The outbreak or the Revolution makes it impossible to say exactly when Gage, Thomas Oliver, and Flucker left office.
50 This date is approximate: see p. xvi note 2, ante.
51 Stoughton died July 7, 1701.
52 This date is approximate.
53 The exact date of this Commission is not known: see p. xvii note 1, ante.
54 The exact date of this Commission is not known: see p. xvii note 3, ante.
55 Tailer died March 1, 1732.
56 Spencer Phips died April 4, 1757.
57 Andrew Oliver died March 3, 1774.
58 See p. xxxiv note 6, ante.
59 This date is approximate: see p. xvi note 1, ante.
60 Addington died March 19, 1715. On March 26, 1715, Gov. Dudley appointed Addington Davenport and Paul Dudley to keep the Seals.
61 This date is approximate.
62 Willard died December 7, 1756.
63 Andrew Oliver was appointed Secretary by Lt.-Gov. Phips on December 13 and took office December 15, 1756. He was sworn under his Royal Commission June 1, 1758.
64 See p. xxxiv note 6, ante.
65 See Province Laws, i. 753, footnote †, respecting the change in enumerating the Year occasioned by the death of Queen Mary which occurred 28 December, 1694.
66 Sic.
67 These words occur in the printed copies, but are not in the original. See also Colony Charter.
68 Omitted in the original.
69 Sic.
70 Sic.
71 Sic.
72 Liberties.
73 Narragansett.
74 Sic.
75 Sic.
76 In printed copies this is “the,” but the omission in the original seems better supplied as above.
77 Sic.
78 Sic in the original, but “for” in the printed copies.
79 profession.
80 Sic.
81 Sic.
82 rejected.
83 Sir John Trevor, Sir William Rawlinson, and Sir George Hutchins were appointed Lords Commissioners of the Great Seal, 15 May, 1690; and were succeeded by Lord Somers as Chancellor, 3 May, 1693.
84 This heading, as throughout the volume, is not a part of the Commission, having been inserted for convenience by the Editor. A short rule always separates the heading from the Commission.
85 Sic.
86 Sic.
87 Sic.
88 Sic.
89 Sic.
90 Sic: our high.
91 Sic: settle.
92 The copy of Dudley’s Commission as President recorded in the Public Record Office, Colonial Office, Class 5, Vol. 904, pp. 252–258, bears date 27 September; but the copy on the Patent Roll bears date 8 October: see p. 43, ante.
93 In the Commissions of which there are copies both in the Public Record Office in London and in the office of the Secretary of the Commonwealth, words and letters in brackets are such as appear in the Record Office copies, but not in the copies in the Secretary’s office; and words in brackets, italicized, occur in the copies in the Secretary’s office, but not in the copies in the Record Office. Trivial differences — such as the use of the ampersand, punctuation, initial capital letters, and spelling (as “Massachusetts” or “Massachusets,” “mere” or “meer,” “tried” or “tryed,” “shore” or “shoar,” “well beloved” or “welbeloved,” “Lieutenant” or “Lieut,” “territories” or “territorys,” etc.) — are not noted.
94 Sic: on.
95 Sic: any.
96 Sic.
97 Sic: and grant.
98 Sic: the same.
99 Sic: by you.
100 Sic.
101 Sic.
102 Dudley’s Commission of 13 February, 1701–2, of which a copy came too late for insertion in its proper place, will be found in the Appendix, pp. 391–396, post.
103 The final “e” or “æ” is omitted for lack of space on the parchment.
104 This paragraph is in the Exemplification, but not in the copy in the Patent Roll.
105 These words are in the copy in the Patent Roll, but not in the Exemplification.
106 What follows is found in the Exemplification only.
107 This Exemplification, which was given to the Massachusetts Historical Society about 1810, is the only document of the sort (among the Commissions printed in this volume) that is now known to be extant. It is engrossed on three sheets of parchment (the initial letter containing a representation of George I), and appending is the Great Seal of England (now broken).
108 The differences between the Exemplification and the copy in the Patent Roll are noted in footnotes.
109 Sic: further Pleasure.
110 Sic.
111 Sic: if it.
112 Sic: same or.
113 Sic.
114 Sic: the Third.
115 Sic.
116 Sic.
117 Sic: Province.
118 Sic: which shall.
119 Sic: to.
120 See footnote, p. 56, ante.
121 Sic.
122 See footnote, p. 56, ante.
123 Gov. Bernard was created a Baronet 5 April, 1760.
124 See footnote, p. 56, ante.
125 See footnote, p. 56, ante.
126 See footnote, p. 56, ante.
127 Doubtless a clerical error for “twenty eighth:” see p. 173, ante.
128 See footnote, p. 56, ante.
129 In our texts of Latin documents, abbreviations are expanded in italics, and letters omitted without marks of abbreviation are placed within square brackets.
130 Sic: Portorico.
131 Sic: per.
132 Sic: eorum.
133 Sic: eorum.
134 Sic: eorum.
135 Sic: assistentium.
136 Sic: repertis.
137 Sic: Forisfactis.
138 Sic: Poenis.
139 Sic: ad.
140 Sic: commissa.
141 Sic: eorum.
142 Sic: dependentibus.
143 Sic: Potestate.
144 Sic: eorum.
145 Sic: earundem.
146 Sic: eorum.
147 Sic: eorum.
148 Sic: eaque.
149 Sic: et.
150 Sic: exiget.
151 Sic: eorundem et eorum.
152 Sic: provisorum.
153 Sic: earundem et earum.
154 Sic: eorundem et eorum.
155 Sic: eorundem et eorum.
156 A translation of this Commission will be found in the Appendix, pp. 357–368, post.
157 Sic: quadraginta.
158 “Lord” omitted by mistake.
159 See pp. 187–198, ante. A translation of this Commission will be found in. the Appendix, p. 369, post.
160 See pp. 187–198, ante.
161 Sic: quadraginta.
162 Sic: but the letters doubtless belong to the next entry.
163 See pp. 187–198, ante. A translation of this Commission will be found in the Appendix, pp. 370–371, post.
164 Sic: observata.
165 Sic: exigendam.
166 Sic: positorum sive poneudorum.
167 Sic: flumiua.
168 Sic: crassitudinem.
169 Sic: nostra.
170 Sic: nostra.
171 Sic: nostra.
172 Sic: contingente.
173 Sic: nostra.
174 Sic: duraturas.
175 Sic: receperis.
176 A translation of this Commission will be found in the Appendix, pp. 372–380, post.
177 The Commission of Sir William Beeston, Governor of Jamaica, dated 15 September, 1692, is entered in Royal Courts of Justice, Admiralty Registry, Muniment Books, Vol. 4, p. 98. It is identical with that of Sir William Phips (pp. 206–215, ante) except as regards the names and date and that against the words “(Judice Registrario et Mariscallo exceptis)” (p. 213, ante) there is written in the margin “This clause was by order of Sir Ch. Hedges ye Judge left out in this patent.”
178 This Commission and the five following Commissions were not enrolled in full, the Commissions to Beeston, Crow, etc., mentioned therein having numbers put in to correspond with the numbers in the margin to show where the differences lay. This was a common practice in these Admiralty Muniment Books to save time in enrolling.
179 The Commission of Mitford Crow, Governor of Barbados, dated 26 February, 1701–2, is entered in Royal Courts of Justice, Admiralty Registry, Muniment Books, Vol. 5, p. 58. It is identical with that of Sir William Phips (pp. 206–215, ante) except as regards names and date, and as follows: The words “(Judice Registrario et Mariscallo exceptis)” (p. 213, ante) do not appear, nor is there any note about them. Also, at the end, where Phips’s Commission reads “decet sub pena Juris et periculo incumbenti” (p. 215, ante), Crow’s Commission reads “decet sub poena contemptua Literarum patentium ipsius Regiae Majestatis de et super premissis omnibus et singulis Nobis factarum et concessarum et periculo incumbente Datum” etc. And at the end is this note:
This I approve of as a standing forme of a vice Admirall’s Patent for the Forreigne Plantations.
|
Feb. 23 1701–2 |
HEN: NEWTON. |
|
19° Feb. 1701° |
Jurat sub valore 50ɫ ꝑ annum |
180 The Commission of Robert Lowther, Governor of Barbados, dated 12 February, 1714–5, is entered in Royal Courts of Justice, Admiralty Registry, Muniment Books, Vol. 6, p. 161b, and is identical with that of Sir William Phips (pp. 206–215, ante) except as regards the names and date and that the words “(Judice Registrario et Mariscallo exceptis)” (p. 213 ante) do not appear, nor is there any note about them.
181 See the note to Elizeus Burges’s Commission, page 225, ante.
182 The Commission of Robert Hunter, Governor of Jamaica, dated 11 September, 1727, is entered in Royal Courts of Justice, Admiralty Registry, Muniment Books, Vol. 7, p. 120, and is identical with that of Sir William Phips (pp. 206–215, ante) except as regards names and date and that the words “(Judice Registrario et Mariscallo exceptis)” (p. 213, ante) do not appear, nor is there any note about them.
183 The Commission of George, Lord Forbes, Governor of the Leeward Islands, dated 8 January, 1729–30, is entered in Royal Courts of Justice, Admiralty Registry, Muniment Books, Vol. 8, p. 10b, and is identical with that of Sir William Phips (pp. 206–215, ante) except as regards names and date and that the words “(Judice Registrario et Mariscallo exceptis)” (p. 213, ante) do not appear, nor is there any note about them.
184 Sic: Rowers.
185 Sic.
186 Sic: wont.
187 Sic: forfeitures.
188 Sic.
189 Sic.
190 Sic.
191 Sic: Treasures.
192 See pp. 257–266 ante.
193 Sic.
194 Sic: artificers.
195 Sic: our.
196 Sic.
197 Sic: Sentence.
198 Dummer’s First commission (1716) is not know to be extant.
199 Tailer’s First Commission (1711) and his Second Commission (28 April, 1715) are not known to be extant.
200 See footnote, p. 56, ante.
201 See footnote, p. 56, ante.
202 See footnote, p. 56, ante.
203 Sic.
204 See footnote, P. 56, ante.
205 See footnote, p. 56, ante.
206 See footnote, P. 56, ante.
207 Sic: to be.
208 See footnote, p. 56, ante.
209 See footnote, P. 50, ante.
210 Sic: New England.
211 The late Mr. R. E. G. Kirk of London, to whom we were indebted for collating our copy of this Commission with the Patent Roll, stated that this enrolment is a transcript from the original letters patent, which may still be extant, perhaps in the Registry of the Bishop of London. As usual in enrolments, the first and last clauses are abbreviated. The letters patent no doubt began thus: “Georgius, Dei gratia Rex Magne Britannie,” etc.; and ended thus:
In cuius rei testimonium presentes has literas nostras fieri fecimus patentes. Teste meipso, apud Westmonasterium, nono die Februarij, anno regni nostri terciodecimo.
With respect to this Commission, see the Publications of this Society, v. 112–115, where will be found an English translation of a part of the Commission and a letter from Mr. Goodell relating to it. A translation of the Commission in full will be found in the Appendix to this volume, pp. 381–385, post. This Commission was revoked and a new Commission, which follows, was issued to Gibson by George II on 29 April, 1728.
212 Mr. Kirk, who furnished us with a copy of this Commission from the Patent Roll, stated that in the printed copy “ꝑtiñ ꝑagenđ” are said to be inserted in the original, “as it seems by mistake of the clerk.”
213 Mr. Kirk stated that the original, in Colonial Office, Class 323, Volume 9, No. 10, begins thus: “Georgius Secundus, Dei gratia Magnæ Britanniæ, Franciæ, et Hiberniæ, Rex, fidei defensor, &c. Reverendo,” etc.; and ends thus:
In cujus rei Testimonium, has literas nostras fieri fecimus patentes. Teste meipso apud Westmonasterium, vicesimo nono die Aprilis, Anno Regni nostri primo. Per Bre’ de Privato Sigillo. Bisse & Bray.
It should be added that this Commission is printed, both in Latin and in English, in Documents relative to the Colonial History of the State of New York, v. 849–854. A translation will be found in the Appendix to this volume, pp. 386–390, post.
214 The translation of the Latin Commissions of Vice-Admirals (pp. 187–236, ante) has been made with constant reference to the English phraseology of William Shirley’s Commission (pp. 237–246, ante), and of the Commission of Hans Stanley as Vice-Admiral in the Isle of Wight in 1765 (as printed in Sir Sherston Baker, The Office of Vice-Admiral of the Coast, 1884, pp. 51–63).
215 The Latin text of this Commission will be found on pp. 187–198, ante.
216 Or Binney, as Benin was then sometimes called. See Rymer’s Fœdera, xix. 370. The Latin text (p. 187, ante) has Binniœ.
217 The Latin text (p. 188, l. 26, ante) has vel, but we should certainly read per (“throughout”). See Andros’s Second Commission, p. 204, l. 23, ante, and cf. Rymer’s Fœdera, xv. 158, 194.
218 Here ubicunque should doubtless be inserted in the Latin text (p. 188, l. 31, ante). See Phips’s Commission, p. 207, l. 2, ante.
219 The Latin text (p. 189, l. 29, ante) erroneously omits quœ. See Phips’s Commission, p. 207, l. 29, ante.
220 The Latin text (p. 190, l. 22, ante) has existentium by error for assistentium. See Phips’s Commission, p. 208, l. 22, ante.
221 The Latin text (p. 190, l. 30, ante) has reportis by error for repertis. See Phips’s Commission, p. 208, l. 30, ante.
222 An old word for “whale.”
223 The Latin text (p. 191, l. 23, ante) has forisfacturis by error for forisfactis. See Phips’s Commission, p. 209, l. 18, ante.
224 Made agrees with letters, above.
225 Here the Latin text (p. 192, l. 6, ante) has Ac and begins a new paragraph. The ms is unreadable as printed. The scrivener or copying clerk did not heed or understand the sense. The emendation ad is certain (see the formula in Rymer’s Fœdera, xv. 195). The connection is: “appointed or to be appointed . . . for hearing and determining . . . all and singular the treasons,” etc.
226 These participles and adjectives belong grammatically to “amercements, issues, fines, perquisites, mulcts, and pecuniary punishments whatsoever and forfeitures of [all] recognizances” in lines 26–28, p. 361, ante.
227 I. e., the premises.
228 The Latin text (pp. 192–193, ante) is somewhat corrupt here. For a better reading, see Phips’s Commission (p. 211, ante; with translation, p. 376, post, and the footnote).
229 The Latin text (p. 194, l. 3, ante) erroneously omits “being” (existentibus) here and adds “and being” (ac existentia) to “adjacent” (adjacentia). Compare Phips’s Commission, p 211, l. 11, ante.
230 See p. 377 note 1.
231 Literally “made” (factam) (p. 194, l. 17, ante).
232 The Latin text (p. 195, l. 2, ante) has eosque by error for eaque. See Phips’s Commission, p. 212, l. 9, ante.
233 The Latin text (p. 195, l. 8, ante) has ad (“to or for”) by error for et (“and”). See Phips’s Commission, p. 212, l. 14, ante.
234 See p. 378 note 1.
235 The Latin text (p. 195, l. 14, ante) has exigit (“requires”) doubtless by error for exiget (“shall require”). See Phips’s Commission, p. 212, l. 20, ante.
236 Per is accidently omitted in the Latin text (p. 195, l. 20, ante). Cf. p. 358 note 1, ante.
237 Grammar requires editorum et provisorum for the edits, et provisa of the Latin text (p. 195, l. 30, ante.) The sense is beyond question.
238 Happening belongs to mayhem.
239 See p. 379 note 2.
240 The Latin text of this Commission will be found on pp. 199–200, ante.
241 The Latin text (p. 200, l. 1, ante) has quadrigenos (“four hundred”), an error for quadraginta (“forty”). The same error occurs in Andros’s Second Commission, p. 204, l. 4, ante.
242 The Latin text of this Commission will be found on pp. 203–205, ante.
243 The Latin text (p. 204, l. 4, ante) has quadrigenis (“four hundred”), a manifest error for quadraginta (“forty”). Cf. Dudley’s Commission, p. 200, l. 1, ante.
244 The Latin text of this Commission will be found on pp. 206–215, ante.
245 The Latin text (p. 208, ante) omits aut.
246 The words here translated by “to be heard and determined, assigned or to be assigned” (audiendis et terminanais assignatis seu assignandis, p. 209, ll. 33–34, ante), are an erroneous adaptation by the scrivener of a formula belonging to a provision not contained in Phips’s Commission (see pp. 192, 209, ante). They may be disregarded. The participles that follow (“happening,” etc.) belong to “amercements, issues,” etc., in l. 14, above.
247 I. e., the premises.
248 The words translated thus (“to proceed . . . thing”) refer to summary process. The Latin (p. 211, ll. 1–2, ante) is “velo levato sine strepitu et figura judicii sola facti et rei veritate inspecta procedendum.” Velo levato is a formula of the civil law meaning “openly and plainly” (literally, “the curtain being raised”). Strepitus judicialis (or judicii) and figura judicii are practically synonymous phrases for “formalities or technicalities in procedure.” An English commission for the trial of pirates (May 29, 1519) authorizes the court to proceed “summariè et de piano sine strepitu et forma seu figura Judicii ac solâ Facti Veritate inspectâ” (Rymer’s Fœdera, 2d edition, xiii. 700), these phrases occurring in a treaty of 1518 between England and France which had for its object the execution of summary justice in such cases, with avoidance of vexatious appeals and dilatory motions (Fœdera, xiii. 650). See Ducange, s. vv. velum, strepitus, figura, planum; Fœdera, xv. 161, 197; R. G. Marsden, Select Pleas in the Court of Admiralty, vol. i. p. lvi (Selden Society Publications, vi).
249 The words translated thus (“to proceed . . . thing”) refer to summary process. The Latin (p. 211, ll. 1–2, ante) is “velo levato sine strepitu et figura judicii sola facti et rei veritate inspecta procedendum.” Velo levato is a formula of the civil law meaning “openly and plainly” (literally, “the curtain being raised”). Strepitus judicialis (or judicii) and figura judicii are practically synonymous phrases for “formalities or technicalities in procedure.” An English commission for the trial of pirates (May 29, 1519) authorizes the court to proceed “summariè et de piano sine strepitu et forma seu figura Judicii ac solâ Facti Veritate inspectâ” (Rymer’s Fœdera, 2d edition, xiii. 700), these phrases occurring in a treaty of 1518 between England and France which had for its object the execution of summary justice in such cases, with avoidance of vexatious appeals and dilatory motions (Fœdera, xiii. 650). See Ducange, s. vv. velum, strepitus, figura, planum; Fœdera, xv. 161, 197; R. G. Marsden, Select Pleas in the Court of Admiralty, vol. i. p. lvi (Selden Society Publications, vi).
250 The words in brackets are not omitted in the Latin by accident; they are involved in the Latin conservandum et exequi et conservari faciendum (p. 211, l. 27, ante).
251 The Latin text (p. 211, l. 21, ante) has “as” (quam).
252 Of course per Transitum is to be read as one word (pertransitum), as in Willoughby’s Commission, p. 195, l. 5, ante.
253 “Mere office, i. e., inquisition. Office promoted, i. e., accusation.” (Sir Sherston Baker, The Office of the Vice-Admiral of the Coast, p. 83 note.)
254 Happening belongs to mayhem.
255 So the MS.
256 The Latin text (p. 214, l. 13, ante) has duraturum by error for duraturas.
257 All these titles belong to one and the same person.
258 The Latin text of this Commission will be found on pp. 341–347, ante.
259 That is, Chief Justice of the King’s Bench.
260 The Latin text of this Commission will be found on pp. 348–353, ante.
261 Sic.