<496r>

The Warden of ye Mint represented to ye Honble Committee that what past between Mr Harris Mr Morris Peers & Iustice Negus was three months before he knew any thing of their matters. And yet in the Report these things are mixed with what was done under his management as if he had been concerned in the whole.

Peers represented to ye Honble Committee that when he came first to ye Warden of the Mint |[|wch was Aug. 13|]| he told the Warden that he & Iohn Holloway & Yarberry had coyned about 20s at Egham in Surrey by Morrises directiosn to draw in Chaloner. The Warden denyed that Peers told him of any such directions or design to draw him in. That money was coyned three weeks or a month before ye Warden knew any thing of their matters as ye Warden can shew by an Information of Peers then made. And yet in the Report Peers makes that money coyned after he came to the Warden & the Warden privy & consenting to ye coyning thereof to draw Chaloner in

Mris Collingwood who brought Peers the first time vizt Aug. 13 to ye Warden, deposed before ye H. Committee that the Warden did then caution Peers against drawing in \or tempting/ any body & yt Peers made Answer that there was no need to draw them in for they (vizt the Holloways) were so forward that they were for hi{illeg}|r|ing horses & riding them out of town & selling them abroa{illeg}|d| to make a stock to go to coyn with. But in the Report all this is omitted & Mris Collingwood on ye contrary represents the Warden for drawing Chaloner in.

To make out a confederacy of the Mint against Chaloner|,| Peers & that some of ye Mint gave Privilege to coyn false money Peers make calls Morris a Messenger of the Mint & yet Morris was no way related to ye Mint till Dec. 15 when the Prosecution of Chaloner was over. Chaloner has not proved that any two men of the Mint were confederate or ever consulted together against him. And tho some of the Mint were offended at him, yet it was for libelling them in print.

The Warden repres{illeg}|en|ted that all he did against Chaloner or in favour of Peers was to put a stop to a {illeg}|n|ew & dangerous way of coyning &c but this scarce in the Report.

© 2017 The Newton Project

Professor Rob Iliffe
Director, AHRC Newton Papers Project

Scott Mandelbrote,
Fellow & Perne librarian, Peterhouse, Cambridge

Faculty of History, George Street, Oxford, OX1 2RL - newtonproject@history.ox.ac.uk

Privacy Statement

  • University of Oxford
  • Arts and Humanities Research Council
  • JISC