613 



I am entirely at a loss to conceive how this belief originated, and 

 the more so, as there is not the slightest historical evidence in its 

 favour ; but, on the contrary, many facts which prove most indis- 

 putably, that the Mace in question has no pretension whatever to 

 the designation of the " Bauble " of the Long Parliament. 



I confess, that when the oft-repeated story, or legend as we may 

 now call it, was imparted to me, I conceived a strong desire to learn 

 on what historical grounds the matter rested. As an officer of the 

 Royal Society, 1 felt it to be almost my duty when visitors came to 

 see the " Bauble " to be able to authenticate its history, though it 

 may be observed, that I have never heard any doubts whatever cast 

 upon its supposed authenticity ; so true is it, that we willingly 

 cling to whatever is interesting and marvellous. 



It however frequently occurred to me, that the Mace now before 

 the Society could not be the Mace used in the House of Commons 

 during the reign of Charles the First, and subsequently turned out 

 by the Commonwealth Parliament : for when I thought of the de- 

 mocratic whirlwind that uprooted and swept away every vestige of 

 royalty, it appeared to me, that nothing short of a miracle could 

 account for the preservation of so conspicuous and decisive an em- 

 blem of sovereignty as the Mace presented to the Royal Society by 

 Charles the Second. 



Researches connected with a history of the Society, upon which 

 I am engaged, led me, in the first place, to investigate the history of 

 the famous " Bauble ;" and secondly, that of the Mace of the Royal 

 Society, in order to ascertain whether the latter and former are 

 identical. 



The result of these researches, which were far more laborious than 

 I anticipated, I now lay before the Society ; and though they will 

 have the effect of destroying a pleasing and long-cherished illusion, 

 I am sure the Royal Society will not be displeased by having the 

 real truth set before them. 



On the 30th of January 1649, Charles the First was beheaded ; 

 and on the 1st of February following, the Journal- Books of the 

 House of Commons inform us"*", that "a Committee appointed for 

 securing the Crown Jewells, and other things, late the King's, re- 

 ported that they have disposed them in a room under several doors 

 now locked upf." 



It is probable that the Royal Mace w^as among the articles of 

 plate thus disposed of, as on the 17th of March, the Journal-Books 

 of the House state, that " It be referred to the Committee for alter- 

 ation of Seals to consider of a new form of Mace, and the special 

 care thereof is committed to Mr. Love J." 



On the 13th of April 1649, it is recorded, that Mr. Love re- 

 ported several forms of a new Mace," upon which it was " Resolved, 

 that this shall be the form of the new Mace§." 



•5f ^ -X- * * 



* Vol. 6. p. 164. 



t Probably in the Tower, as Whitelock says that he went at this period with 

 others to see the Seals locked up in the Tower, 



t Vol. 6. p. 166. § Vol. 6. p. 184. 



