those Princes were named by every of the Knights-Companions then
present, according to the Sovereign’s signification (which has been
usually done at all other Times upon the like Occasions.) But
concerning the third Person then to be Elected, the Sovereign,
(intending him to be a Knight-Subject) left it entirely to their
Pleasure to Nominate whomsoever they thought worthy of their Votes.
Since this Time, the Nominations in like Cases, have been
sufficiently acknowledg’d by the Knights-Companions themselves, to be
a Prerogative belonging solely to the Sovereign. For to the End they
might more expeditiously and clearly shew their Compliance, it was
moved in a Chapter held at _Oxford_, _March_ the 2d. 19 _Car._ I.
_That it might become a Custom for the Sovereign to declare
before-hand, whether he would elect any Foreign Prince, and whom,
that so the Knights-Companions might be there to name him in the
Scrutiny_.
§. 7. ANOTHER Consideration in our Progress towards the Act of
Election, is appertaining to the Number, Qualifications and Dignities
of the Persons nominated, which may be more conspicuously resolved from
another Branch of the before-mention’d Article, _viz._ That every one
of the Knights-Companions present at the Election should nominate for
himself nine very sufficient Persons, whom he should judge free from
all Reproach and Scandal, whether Subjects to the Sovereign, or
Foreigners, Provided they are known not to Favour or Abet any Party at
enmity with him; that is to say, three Earls, or others of higher
Degree, three Barons, and three Knights. Wherein the Things chiefly
observable, we rank under five Heads.
For the First of these, their Number. Every Knight-Companion assembl’d
in Chapter, is injoin’d to name Nine, neither more nor less. So also
saith King _Henry_ V’s Statutes. Nor are King _Henry_ VIIIth’s. any
ways dissonant. And in this particular, the Statutes have been hitherto
inviolably observed, except in one Case. As to Numbers, and the
Mysteries wrapt up in them, we shall not further insist upon. But why
our Royal Founder selected this particular Number above all other,
unless he had some Eye, and tacit Reflection on the Nine Worthies, or a
treble threefold Cord and Symbol of perfect Stability and solid Amity,
the Number Nine is accounted to signifie, can with no great Facility or
Certainty be decypher’d.
As to the Second Point, they ought to be of unspotted Character. The
Injunction in the Statutes of Institution takes Order, that the Persons
designed for Election, should be _free from all Reproach, and of
untaintted Reputation_; and according to those of King _Henry_ V. are
to be _the best and most sufficient Knights, and freest from Reproach_.
To the same purpose the Exemplar in the Black-Book, _Such as are
fittest_, and whom they who Nominate _believe to be free from Ignominy
and Dishonour_. And to this Act of Nomination belongs part of the
Second Article in _Henry_ VIIIth’s Statutes, _That no Knight-Companion
should name any Person whom he thinks or esteems in his Conscience to
have upon him any Spot of Reproach_. But on the Contrary in another
Place of the same Statutes it is Provided, That they be nominated and
proposed _out of the Number of the most worthy and select Knights_.
How tender the Knights-Companions were in pristine Times of infringing
this particular, is proved from a notable Passage which happen’d _Ann._
39 _Hen._ VI. at a Scrutiny taken the 8th of _February_, in the Bishop
of _London_’s Palace, where _John de Foix_ Earl of _Kendal_, a
_Gascoigner_ by birth, (which makes the Example more eminent, that a
Stranger should have so great Regard to the Honour of the Order) not
being acquainted with the Quality and Merit of Knights and Honourable
Persons amongst us so well and demonstrably as to nominate such whom he
was confident were irreprehensible, forbore to mention any Persons at
all. And certainly, seeing the Statutes put very considerable
Qualifications upon the Deputies and Proxies, made choice for the
Installation of Strangers (as elsewhere shown) much more Caution and
Regard ought to be used both in the Nomination and Election of Knights
into this radiant and illustrious Society.
THE third Head the Statutes render indifferently capable of being
nominated or elected, either Knights Subjects, or Strangers, [Free
Princes or their Subjects.] And it was so even at the Election upon the
first Choice, where among the Twenty five Elected Knights, Twenty three
of them were Subjects. And this was the constant Custom not only in the
remaining Part of the Founders Reign, and during those of his three
Successors, but has continued ever since, as appears from the
Scrutinies taken and entred throughout the Annals of the Order.
OF those who have gain’d admission into this Noble Order by Election,
we shall in the last Chapter give an Account in a compleat Catalogue of
them, and likewise insert the Names of such as have missed their
Election, yet are not to be buried in Oblivion, out of this very
respect, that by their standing Candidates, have the Fame of being
enrolled in the Principal Register of Honour now in the Christian
World. It cannot be supposed we should give a List of all, (for that
were a Task too laborious, and wou’d prove too numerous) but only of
those of eminent Quality in foreign Parts, with the Æra when the
Scrutinies were taken.
_A_ CATALOGUE _of some_ STRANGERS _who have been nominated, but not
elected_.
_Rambrith de Walsey_ }
_Johannes de Voynada_ } 25 _Hen._ 6.
_Franciscus Sforza_, Dux _Mediolani_ 28 _Hen._ 6.
_Franciscus_ secundus, Dux _Britanniæ_ 13, 14, 15, 22 _E._ 4.
_Henricus_ quartus, Rex _Legionis_ & _Castil._ 14 _Ed._ 4.
_Matthius Corvinus_, Rex _Hungariæ_ 19, 22 _Ed._ 4.
_Fredericus_ secundus, Dux _Austriæ_ 22 _E._ 4. 1 _R._ 3.
_Philippus_ quartus, Dux _Burgundiæ_ 14 _Hen._ 7.
_Franciscus Maria_, Dux _Urbini_ 1, 2 _Hen._ 8.
_Uladislaus_ secundus, Rex _Hungariæ_ 1, 2, 6 _Hen._ 8.
_Christianus_ secundus, Rex _Daniæ_ 6, 8 _Hen._ 8.
Dux _Barryæ_ }
Comes _Galaciæ_ } 8 _Hen._ 8
_Alphonsus_ Dux _Ferrariæ_ 13, 15 _Hen._ 8.
_Ludovicus_ secundus, Rex _Hungariæ_ 13, 14, 15 _H._ 8.
_Maximilianus Sforza_, Dux _Mediolani_ 14, 15, 16 _H._ 8.
_Marchio Pescaræ_ 17 _Hen._ 8.
_Johannes_ tertius, Rex _Portugalliæ_ 17, 18, 26, 28 _H._ 8.
_—— Marchio Mantuæ_ 18 _Hen._ 8.
_Carolus Burbonus_, Dux _Vandosme_ 24 _Hen._ 8.
_Gulielmus_ Dux _Clivensis_ }
—— Dux _Bavariæ_ } 32 _Hen._ 8.
Dux _Alvæ_ }
Dux _Medinæ Cæli_ } 1 & 2 _Ph._ and _M._
Comes _Fereæ_ }
_Franciscus_ secundus, Rex _Galliæ_
_Franciscus_ tertius, Comes _Palatinus_
_Augustus_ Dux _Saxoniæ_
_Alphonsus_ secundus, Dux _Ferrariæ_
—— Dux _Andegavensis_
Dominus _Grabazenby_ }
Dominus _Humers_ }
Dominus _Johannes Mounte_ } 24 _Hen._ 8.
Dominus _Harmibolt_ }
Dominus _Boysy_ }
THOSE Persons were render’d incapable of Nomination who were known to
Act in contrary Interest to the Sovereign; as the _Exemplar_ in the
_Black-Book_ expresseth more copiously, _Such as are not his
Adversaries, or Abettors, or willing Defenders of his Adversaries_.
Sometimes the Knights-Companions being more wary and discreet in
Nominating them, to put either disrespect upon the Sovereign, or offer
Violation to the Statutes.
IN the last Place, concerning the Degree, Rank and Dignity of the Nine
Knights proposed to be Elected, the Statutes of the Institution set
forth, That they be, _First_, Three _Earls_, or Persons of great
Dignity. _Secondly_, Three _Barons_. And, _Thirdly_, Three _Knights_:
Or, as it is in _Henry_ V’s Statutes, _Trois Contes ou de greegnear
estat, trois Banerets, & trois Batchelers_. These Degrees are to be
ranked in Three Classes, and they distinguish’d by Three Divisions, all
including the Three Degrees aforesaid.
WHEREAS all other Bodies and Exemplars of the Statutes make positive
mention of Earls only, yet the Statutes of _Hen._ VIII. in this Point
are more ample, by expressing the first Class, _Dukes_, _Marquesses_,
and _Earls_, or _Persons superior_ to these in Degree, wherein the
highest Dignity is comprehended.
WE may observe the different Title, _viz._ _Baneret_ that _Henry_ V’s
Statutes hath given us instead of _Baron_; and not only in this
Article, but in all other where there is Occasion to treat of Barons;
and yet the Record intends by it no other than the Person it mentions:
For tho’ a Banneret had its Denomination _à vexillo_, it usually
signify’d a Degree of Honour next below a Baron, both in a later and a
modern Date; yet formerly among our Records, it is expressedly
Synonymous to Baron, as is sufficiently clear’d up by our most Learned
_Selden_; and in this Sense is to be taken here, and not as a distinct
Title of lower Degree, because we observe the Bannerets rank’d in all
Scrutinies before King _Henry_ VIII. establish’d his Statutes (except
one) with the Knights-Batchelors, not with Barons.
THE Title of the third and lowest Rank in this Classis in the Statutes
of their Institution, are called _Milites Bachalauri_, and in those of
King _Henry_ V. _Batchelors_, and elsewhere _Bachalauri & Bachelauri
Equites_, which in common Acceptation are the same with _Milites_, tho’
thus render’d to evince their difference from Knights-Bannerets, who
are of a superior Degree of Honour. And here we may observe, that there
is no Place in a Scrutiny for any under the Degree of a
Knight-Batchelor. And tho’ Three of the Nine mentioned are set down to
be Barons, and Three other Earls, or of higher Degree, yet must these
Six be such as have had conferred on them the Order of Knighthood, else
their Names are rejected, and neither given or taken in Nomination; for
the Words of the Statute expresly are, _That each of the Knights
assembl’d at the Election shall name nine Knights_.
THUS King _Charles_ I. _Anno_ 6 _Regni sui_, designing to invest
_James_ Marquess of _Hamilton_ with this Order, conferr’d the Honour of
Knighthood upon him immediately before his Nomination: And the Annals
in that Place put this commentary Remark thereupon, _Because by the
Statutes it is provided, that none should be elected into the Order
that have not been dignify’d with the Title of Knight_.
YET the Ceremony of Knighting the Person designed to be elected, was
not so strictly regarded, but sometimes this Branch of the Statute was
either wholly passed, or else confounded with the second Article
throughout the several Bodies of the Statutes, which prohibits the
Choice or Election of any Person into the Society, as this doth the
Proposal or Nomination. And thereupon perhaps it was conceiv’d, that
altho’ the Nomination, Election, and sometimes Delivery of the Ensigns
of the Order was first dispatch’d and past, yet it was sufficient if
the Honour of Knighthood was conferr’d afterwards; as in the Cases of
_William_ Earl of _Derby_ and _Thomas_ Lord _Burleigh_, _Anno_ 43.
_Eliz._ where the Register observes, That as soon as their Election was
over, and they Usher’d into the Chapter, the Earl of _Derby_, (who it
seems had not been Knighted before) was dubbed Knight with a drawn
Sword, according to Custom, after which they had the Garter and George
put on by the Sovereign her self.
IN like manner, _Ulrick_ Duke of _Holstein_, and _Henry_ Earl of
_Northampton_, immediately after their Election, (the last Day of St.
_George_’s Feast, _Ann._ 3. _Jac._ I.) and before they receiv’d the
Ensigns of the Order, had the Dignity of Knighthood conferr’d on them
by the Sovereign; and in like manner the Earl of _Sussex_, _Ann._ 3
_C._ I. which the _Red-Book_ of the Order recites, _That as soon as it
was understood that the Earl had not receiv’d the Order of Knighthood
before, the Sovereign immediately drawing his Sword, Knighted him_;
which was not done till after his Election and Investiture with both
the George and Garter.
THUS did the Ceremony of Knighthood succeed the Election of _Charles_
Prince of _Wales_, the 21st of _May_, _Ann._ 14 _Car._ I. for after he
had been elected, and invested with the Ensigns of the Order by the two
Senior Knights (the Earls of _Pembroke_ and _Montgomery_, and of
_Arundel_ and _Surry_) were intreated by the rest of the
Knights-Companions, to present his Highness to the Sovereign in the
Name of all the rest, to be initiated a Knight-Batchelor. He was
conducted by the said Earls (his Supporters) into the Presence-Chamber
in _Windsor-Castle_, where before the Chair of State, he most Solemnly
receiv’d the Order of Knighthood from his Father King _Charles_ I.
TO Honour which Knighthood, and the Memory thereof, Four of the chief
Nobility then present were Knighted, _viz._ the Earls of _Essex_, _St.
Alban_’s and _Elgin_, and Viscount _Grandison_, being conducted from
the Great Chamber to the Sovereign’s State, each between two
Batchelor-Knights.
AFTERWARDS the Law in this Point began again to be more rightly
understood; and by that Time _James_ Duke of _York_ came to be elected
(which was the 20th of _April_, 18 _Car._ I. at the Feast of St.
_George_ celebrated at _York_) the Sovereign appointed, and accordingly
conferr’d Knighthood upon him the Day before, which he receiv’d upon
his Knees, being conducted into the Presence-Chamber between two of the
Nobility, who were also Knights, the Marquess of _Hertford_ and
Viscount _Grandison_. In Honour and Commemoration whereof, Four other
Noblemen receiv’d the Honour of Knighthood at that time, the Earl of
_Carnarvan_, the Lords _George D’Aubignie_, _John Stewart_, and
_Bernard Stewart_, each supported by two Knights.
AND thus Prince _Edward_ Count Palatine of the _Rhine_, and _George_
Duke of _Buckingham_, being designed by King _Charles_ II. to be
admitted into this Noble Order, were both first Knighted at St.
_Germains_ in _France_, 1649. and afterwards had the Ensigns of the
Order sent unto them, by the Hands of Sir _Edward Walker_, Kt. Garter,
who, in right of his Office, invested them therewith.
YET in the Case of Prince _Rupert_, who was elected with _James_ Duke
of York, _Ann._ 18. _Car._ I. His want of Knighthood became no
impediment, because he was a Prince in another Country, _viz._ Count
_Palatine_ of the _Rhine_, and Duke of _Bavaria_, and might therefore
justly challenge a Privilege to come within the Rule of foreign Princes.
BUT the Sovereign, to arrive as near to the Intention and Observance of
the Statute as he could, (where there was a possibility to do it, and
the Honour would be well accepted by the Prince) thought it requisite
by Commission under the Great Seal of _England_, to impower _Thomas_
Earl of _Arundel_ and _Surry_, and _George_ Lord _Goring_, both being
then in _Holland_, or either of them, to Knight the said Prince before
putting on the Garter (seeing it could not possibly be done before his
Election) which was intended to be sent by him by the Hands of Sir
_John Burrough_, Garter. But Death intervening, the Sovereign’s
Intention was frustrated; altho’ the Prince, upon his coming afterwards
into _England_, receiv’d both the Garter and the George from the
Sovereign himself at _Nottingham_ nevertheless without Knighthood,
which to excuse, it may well be alledg’d, that the Sovereign might not
recollect this Part of the Ceremony, it being a Time of so great
Turmoil and Fatigue, occasion’d by the then setting up of his Standard.
HOWEVER, upon the 17th of _January_, 1644. when a Decree past in
Chapter then assembl’d at _Oxford_, That both the Duke of _York_ and
the Prince, should enjoy all Emoluments and Privileges of the Order,
tho’ they were not as yet Install’d (which Ceremony was to be
compleated assoon as _Windsor_ was out of the Power of the Rebels.) The
Prince, before he receiv’d his Oath, was conducted by the Earl of
_Berk-shire_ and Duke of _Richmond_ and _Lenox_, unto the Sovereign,
and had conferr’d on him the Honour of Knighthood, there being at the
same Time two of the Nobility Knighted in Memorial of that Solemnity,
the Lord _Henry Seymour_, Second Son to the Marquess of _Hertford_, and
the Lord _Capell_, conducted each between two Knights.
§. 8. WE are now come to speak of the Scrutiny it self, in reference to
which, we shall consider by whom it ought, or hath been usually taken,
and the Manner and Form thereof.
BY the Statutes of the Institution, the Collecting the
Knights-Companions Votes, and entring them in the Scrutiny, solely
appertains to the Prelate of the Order; and upon him is this Office
devolved, not only by the other Bodies of the Statutes, but by the
Constitutions of his Post, and the Obligation of his Oath, whose right
we find duly asserted upon this Persons taking a Scrutiny, _Anno_ 29
_Eliz._
THE Statutes likewise provided, That if the Prelate was at any Time
absent, then the Dean of _Windsor_, or the Register, or the Senior
Residentiary of the College, or the Secretary, or Scribe of the Order,
should undertake the Employment; and elsewhere it is mention’d
expressly, _In the absence of the Prelate, whose particular Duty
otherwise it was_. And among the various Examples enroll’d in the
Annals of the Order, these Examples abundantly confirm it. The Prelate
of the Order collected the Suffrages from the Knights-Companions,
_Anno_ 9 _Hen._ V. when _John_ Earl-Marshal, and Four other Knights
were elected. The like did _Henry Beaufort_, Lord-Cardinal, Prelate of
the Order, upon the Election of _John_ King of _Portugal_, _Anno_ 13
_Hen._ VI. And when the Duke of _Suffolk_ was chose, _Anno_ 26 _Hen._
VI. the Prelate then also gather’d the Suffrages; which he likewise did
upon the Feasts of St. _George_, Celebrated in the 12th, 13th, 14th,
27th, 28th, 30th, 31th, 34th and 35th Years of Queen _Elizabeth_’s
Reign. Sometimes the Scrutinies have been gathered both by the Dean of
_Windsor_, and the Register of the Order jointly; as we find by the
Election of _John_ Lord _Talbot_, _Ann._ 2 _Hen._ VI. of Sir _John
Falstaff_, _Ann._ 6 _Hen._ VI. and the Duke of _Quinbery_, _Ann._ 5
_Hen._ VI. all receiv’d at the Feasts of St. _George_, celebrated at
_Windsor_.
IT is more than a bare Conjecture, that the Dean at those Times
receiv’d the Votes from the Knights-Companions on the Sovereign’s side,
while the Register collected those on the Prince’s; for ’tis observ’d,
that in King _Henry_ Vth’s Reign, in Posts of different Natures, one
whereof was to signifie the Sovereign’s Pleasure to the
Knights-Companions about their paying due Reverence, first to God, and
afterwards to himself; and the other in a Ceremonial, which directs the
Manner and Order of Mulcting the Knights-Companions; in both which, the
Dean perform’d the Service on the right Hand the Choir (the Sovereign’s
side) and the Register on the left.
SOMETIMES the Register of the Order took them alone, as at the Election
of _John_ Earl of _Arundel_, _Anno_ 10 _Hen._ VI. and those of the Earl
of _Morteyn_ and Sir _John Grey_, _Ann._ 14 _Hen._ VI. Moreover it’s
plain, that when the Office of Register was not fill’d, and _Thomas
Ruthall_, Bishop of _Duresme_, executed it during its Vacancy, the
Bishop himself, _Ann._ 2 _Hen._ VIII. collected the Suffrages. The like
did _William Day_, Dean of _Windsor_, in the Absence of _George Carew_,
Dean of the Chapel and Register of the Order, at the Feasts of St.
_George_ held at _Whitehall_, _Anno_ 18 and 19 _Eliz._
THIS Duty was executed by the Register from the 15th Year of King
_Henry_ VIII. to the Period of his and his Son’s Reign, as the
_Black-Book_ of the Order fully evinces; as also on St. _George_’s Day,
_Ann._ 1. _Eliz._ by _John Boxhall_; and at the Feast of St. _George_
held _Ann._ 1 _Jac._ I. by _Giles Thompson_, who in the several Times
were Registers, yet we must not mistake that what they officiated was
on their own behalf, but supply’d the Place of the Prelate.
IN the Beginning of Queen _Mary_’s Reign, we find the Chancellor of the
Order began to perform this Service, being by King _Henry_ VIIIth’s
Statutes adjoined to those other Offices before describ’d, to collect
the Scrutinies in absence of the Prelate, and thereby made capable of
the Employment, which afterwards is tacitly remark’d to be perform’d as
if in his own right, when the Register has only effected it in the
Chancellor’s absence, tho’ in reality it was no other, than as in the
Instance of the Bishop of _Duresme_ and Dr. _Day_ aforesaid, who took
the Scrutiny in the Vacancy of the Office, and absence of the Register.
_Anno_ 4 _Eliz._ the Register in the Absence of the Chancellor (who was
sick,) upon the Feast Day of St. _George_, collected the Suffrages. And
_Ann._ 8. _Eliz._ _George Carew_, then Register of the Order, _took the
Votes of the Knights-Companions in absence of Sir_ William Petre,
_Chancellor of the Order_. So also _Ann._ 4. _Jac._ I. where the Cause
of the Chancellor’s Absence is noted to be Sickness, and _Ann._ 6.
_Jac._ I. to be Death.
IN the first of these Instances, we find the Prelate expressly set down
to be there; in the two following, his presence is implyed, for it is
said, that the Four Officers of the Order did attend both Feasts,
whereof, (the Chancellor being wanting) the Prelate must needs be one.
NOW all these Passages seem to relate to the Right of the Chancellors
rather than the Prelates by this Remark, That every of the Scrutinies
were taken in the Absence of the Chancellor, which looks something like
a cautionary Remark that denoted the Right of Executing this Office to
the Chancellor, rather than the Prelate.
WHEN a Deputy-Chancellor hath been admitted to Officiate in the
Chancellor’s absence, he, and not the Prelate, hath taken the Scrutiny,
(tho’ present) as at the Election of _Charles_ Prince of _Wales_, the
20th of _May_, 14 _Car._ I. and at another taken the 22d of _May_
following, and the same when the Suffrages were collected for the
Election of the Duke of _York_ and Prince _Rupert_ at _York_, _Anno_ 17
_Car._ I.
BUT there is one Passage more (upon taking a Scrutiny _Anno_ 22 _Jac._
I.) which seems Advantageous to the Chancellor in this Point, where it
is said, _That when the Knights-Companions had given their Votes_ (as
say the _Annals_) _THE CHANCELLOR WHO, ACCORDING TO HIS OFFICE, was to
receive them, presented them to the Sovereign_. Howbeit, in truth there
is no sufficient Foundation for the Register to insert this as done by
the Chancellor, _by Virtue of his Office_, or any one Act or Chapter
that hath suspended or made void, the Right of the Prelate, which is
reserved by him, even by the Patent, for erecting the Office of
Chancellor; especially in those Affairs, which, respecting the Order,
ought by the Statute of the Institution to appertain to him. But since
the stated Time of performing this Ceremony in the Chapel, the Prelate
(if present) is presumed to be Officiating at the Altar, in discharge
of another part of his Duty, upon this consideration hath the Service
been then imposed upon the Chancellor, and others.
_Lastly_, WE find the Scrutiny to be once taken by Garter, _Ann._ 16.
_Car._ I. at the Election of _Thomas_ Earl of _Strafford_. But this was
at a Time, when not only the Prelate, but all the other Officers of the
Order, excepting Sir _John Burrough_, Garter, were absent, and
consequently this Service so executed, ought rather to be judged to
have been done in the Prelate’s than Chancellor’s Right.
§. 9. BUT whosoever gather’d the Suffrages, the Time when they enter’d
upon this Duty (in the Intervals of Feasts, where the Occasion requir’d
a peculiar Chapter for an Election) was usually after the Chapter had
been open’d, and the Matter of Election proposed by the Sovereign;
after which he proceeded with all possible Reverence and Respect.
HOWBEIT upon an extraordinary Occasion (in the Interval of the Grand
Feasts) the Sovereign hath sometimes called an Assembly of the Knights
Companions, to be convened at the Castle of _Windsor_, who in the
Choire of St. _George_’s Chapel (not Chapter-House) after the more
solemn Manner, have deliver’d in their Nominations, and returning
thence into the Chapter-House, he there continu’d the Election. Thus
did King _Henry_ VIII. upon the 7th of _June_ in the 17th Year of his
Reign, in reference to the Election of the Lord _Henry Fitz Roy_, (so
stil’d in the Scrutiny, and rank’d among the Barons; for as yet he was
not created Duke of _Somerset_ and _Richmond_) and _Ralph Nevil_, Earl
of _Westmorland_.
ON the 20th of _May_, _Anno_ 14 _Car._ I. being _Trinity-Sunday_, the
Sovereign caus’d a Chapter to be held that Afternoon in the
Chapter-House at _Windsor_, for the Nomination and Election of
_Charles_ Prince of _Wales_; at the Breaking up whereof, the Sovereign
and Knights-Companions proceeded immediately to St. _Georges_’s Chapel,
where at Evening-Prayer, (which was not within the Compass of the
Feast, for that began not ’till next Day) the Scrutiny was taken.