a surprise visit to Berkeley Castle, which was not in the 'gestes', and so ruined the head of deer by killing twenty-seven in one day that Lord Berkeley in a passion disparked the estate. This appears to have been a deliberate scheme by Leicester to bring Berkeley into disfavour and secure the castle himself.[1] The Stuart households were probably just as bad. After Anne's visit in 1603, the Leicester corporation had to pursue the court 'aboute lynnyns and pewter that was myssinge'.[2]
It is not quite clear how far these annoyances were aggravated by the financial burden of the royal entertainment. There is some evidence that, so far as the essentials of food and drink and fuel were concerned, the household was prepared to pay its way, and that, although the hosts had to make provision of these necessaries, they were entitled to recoupment for the cost by the Cofferer.[3] Certainly the progress, once an economy for the Crown, had become an expense.[4] Burghley's papers contain an estimate, based on the accounts of 1573, showing an 'increase of chardgies in the time of progresse' to the extent of £1,034, 'which should not be if her Majestie remeynid at her Standing Howses within XX myles of London'.[5] This is not wholly conclusive, because in any case part of the time was usually spent, not in private houses, but at royal manors or even in inns.[6] But
- ↑ 1 Ellis, ii. 277, evidently misdated 'ann. 15' for 'ann. 16'.
- ↑ Kelly, Progresses, 325.
- ↑ The Cofferer's Account for the progress of 1561, printed in Nichols, Eliz. i. 92, from Cott. Vesp. C. xiv, shows expenditure while the court lay or dined at several private houses. On 24 July 1560 Sir N. Bacon wrote to Parker, 'The Queen's majesty meaneth on Monday next to dine at Lambeth; and although it shall be altogether of her provision, yet I thought it meet to make you privy thereto, lest, other men forgetting it, the thing should be too sudden' (Parker, 120). This was a dinner on a remove from Greenwich to Richmond, not during a progress; but the principle was probably the same. The older practice was certainly for the crown to pay. Puttenham, iii. 24 (ed. Arber, 301), records that Henry VII, 'if his chaunce had bene to lye at any of his subiects houses, or to passe moe meales then one, he that would take vpon him to defray the charge of his dyet, or of his officers and houshold, he would be maruelously offended with it, saying what priuate subiect dare vndertake a Princes charge, or looke into the secret of his expence?' And the discreet courtier adds, 'Her Maiestie hath bene knowne oftentimes to mislike the superfluous expence of her subiects bestowed vpon her in times of her progresses'.
- ↑ Cf. p. 17.
- ↑ 1 Ellis, ii. 265, from Lansd. MS. 16, f. 107.
- ↑ In 1576 the Board of Green Cloth paid £3 6s. 8d. by way of 'rewards given to inns in progress time where her majesty hath been' (Nichols, Eliz. ii. 48).
honour, and the no little damage and displeasure of those to whose houses the Kings Highnesse doth fortune to repaire. . . .'
