THE ROYAL FISHERY 103 
collected are disposed of in, would make a man never part 
with a penny so disposed of, and above all, the incon- 
venience of having a great man, though never so seeming 
pious as my Lord Pembroke is. He is too great to be 
called to an account, and is abused by his servants, and 
yet obliged to defend them for his owne sake.” 
The report of Pepys and Duke upon the collection was 
made on October 25th, 1664. Of the 52 counties of 
England and Wales, they observed, only 32 had taken notice 
of the royal proclamation.1_ From these counties the sum 
already received was £1,076 ; the Earl of Pembroke, how- 
ever, had still a considerable sum in his possession, while 
Mr. King, who had been engaged in the collection for the 
Earl, still retained £429. Statements had also been made 
as to £412 already gathered but not yet placed to the 
credit of the society. Pepys was indignant at the conduct 
of Mr. King, who, instead of handing over the £429 en- 
trusted to him, ‘‘ insinuated in his accounts” that he had 
assigned to the Fishing Company the lease of a house situated 
in Harwich, which belonged to himself, and was said by him 
to be of the value of £700. ‘It may be fitt,”’ writes Pepys, 
sarcastically, “‘to inquire whether this house was not long 
agoe otherwise disposed of by him, and is since fallen to 
his Mate and now actually imployed by the officers 
of the Navy in his Mat service.” Pepys also drew 
1 These were :— 
London & Middlesex Northampton Leicester 
Essex Southampton Nottingham 
Norfolk Oxon Somerset 
Surrey York Lincoln 
Barkshire Hereford Durham 
Suffolk Wiltshire Salop 
Buckinghamshire Exon Northumberland 
Kent Cambridge Cumberland 
Harford Darby Carlisle 
Devonshire Lanes Berwick 
Brecknock Westmoreland 
Cal. S.P. Dom. Car. I1., vol. 103, No. 130. 
