(Vol. v., p. 496.)
In reference to the pardon to John Trenchard, Esq., here communicated in
answer to me, I request permission, in the first place, to present my
acknowledgments to MR. E. S. TAYLOR for his courtesy; and, in the next, to
explain the motive of my inquiry. I was about to print a very long document
of this nature, which was issued on the 2nd Jan., 12 Car. II. (1660-1), in
favour of Colonel Richard Beke, who had married a cousin of the Protector
Cromwell. It appeared to me probable that some general pardon had been
already printed, and I wished either to avoid the needless repetition
should the pardon to Colonel Beke prove to be in the ordinary form, or, at
least, to make a comparison between that and other records of the same
class. I could not, however, ascertain that any general pardon had been
printed, nor have I hitherto heard of any. The pardon to Colonel Beke has
been printed for _The Topographer and Genealogist_, but is not yet
published. It occupies nearly seven large octavo pages, and consequently is
much longer than that granted to Mr. Trenchard: speaking freely, it is
between three and four times as long. It is evidently formed on a different
and more ample precedent; but perhaps the main difference consists in its
having relation to the tenure of landed property, and not merely to the
simple pardon of offences conferred in the grant made to Trenchard, though,
from the enumeration introduced in it of all imaginable offences and
crimes, political and moral, it is certainly more quaint and extraordinary.
I much regret that the pardon to Trenchard has not been presented _in
extenso_ to the readers of "N. & Q.;" for the contractions and very
irregular punctuation will render it almost unintelligible to those who are
not conversant with other documents of the kind. The following words are
actually misprinted. In line 3. "he" for l're (literæ); line 12.
"nuncupabatur" (one word); col. 2. line 1. "Jud'camenta" for Indictamenta,
and "condempnac'onas" for condempnationes; line 3. and again line 14.
"fforisfutur" for forisfactiones; line 23. "n're" for nostri; line 34.
"existim't" for existunt; line 37. "p'lite^r" for placitetur; line 39. "mea
parte" for in ea parte; last line, "p'rato" for privato.
It is also necessary to correct the error into which MR. TAYLOR has fallen
in supposing that this pardon was granted on the 7th of December, 1688. The
date it bears, "decimo septimo die Decembris anno regni nostri tertio,"
refers to a year earlier, viz., the 7th of December, 1687. The Revolution
occurred in the _fourth_ year of the reign of James II. "Mr. Trenchard of
the Middle Temple" was clearly the same who was afterwards Sir John, and
Secretary of State to King William. See the biographical notice of him
appended to the pedigree of Trenchard in Hutchins's _History of
Dorsetshire_, in which work two portraits of him are given. He had been
engaged in Monmouth's rebellion; and it is said that he was at dinner with
Mr. William Speke at Ilminster, when the news arrived of Monmouth's defeat
at Sedgmoor. Speke was shortly after hung before his own door; whilst at
the same time, having secreted himself, Trenchard had the good fortune to
be embarking for the continent. The other John Trenchard mentioned by MR.
TAYLOR as occurring among the regicides, was great-uncle to Sir John, who
was only forty-six at his death in 1694.