^{page 233 note 1} See below, App. (13 April), p. 293.

^{page 233 note 2} MS.: 15; the Speaker was presented 15 April.

^{page 233 note 3} See below, App., Grimston, p. 296.

^{page 233 note 4} See below, App., Seymour, p. 297.

^{page 234 note 1} See below, App., Rudyerd, p. 296.

^{page 234 note 2} M.P. for Colchester.

^{page 234 note 3} Harley.

^{page 234 note 4} Probably his speech of 15 April (below, App. (15 April), p. 294).

^{page 234 note 5} Laud.

^{page 234 note 6} See below, App., Pym, p. 299.

^{page 234 note 7} The speech noted above.

^{page 235 note 1} M.P. for Winchelsea.

^{page 235 note 2} Debate of 21 April.

^{page 236 note 1} Debate of 22 April.

^{page 236 note 2} See below. Petition, Smart, p. 280.

^{page 236 note 3} C.J., ii, p. 9.Google Scholar

^{page 236 note 4} Canterbury.

^{page 236 note 5} The Lord Keeper spoke to both Lords and Commons at the Banqueting House, 21 April (see below, App. (21 April), p. 303).

^{page 237 note 1} No formal answer was given to the king (C.J., ii, p. 9).Google Scholar

^{page 237 note 2} Stephen Marshall, leading preacher for the Long Parliament; Ralph Brownrig, bishop of Exeter, 1641; Sir Thomas Barrington (Essex).

^{page 237 note 3} We have been unable to identify Shepeheard.

^{page 237 note 4} Perhaps a reference to his speech at the conference 28 April (below, Harl. MS. 4931, fos 48–48^v, p. 239).

^{page 237 note 5} No conference was held.

^{page 237 note 6} C.J. gives no evidence of this. For the figures to be accurate virtually all M.P.s would have to have been present.

^{page 238 note 1} MS.: priviledge.

^{page 238 note 2} Debate of 20 April.

^{page 238 note 3} The Lord Keeper spoke for the House of Lords, not for the king (see below, App., L.K. (25 April), p. 310).

^{page 238 note 4} There is no record of a Mr. Estwicke in the Parliament. The business may be that in orders for committees, 29 April (C.J., ii, p. 15).Google Scholar

^{page 239 note 1} Perhaps the debate of Jones and Pym, 23 April.

^{page 239 note 2} 28 April.

^{page 239 note 3} See debates of 24 and 29 April.

^{page 239 note 4} C.J., ii, p. 15Google Scholar, and below, App., Pym (28 April), p. 312. Rossingham says the motion of thanks came from ‘both the Secretaries’ (B.L., Add. MS. 11045, fo 114^r).

^{page 240 note 1} See below, App., Pym (28 April), p. 312.

^{page 240 note 2} Jas. Hay, 2nd earl of Carlisle. The bishop of Carlisle was not present.

^{page 240 note 3} Perhaps on 23 April.

^{page 241 note 1} Perhaps on 27 April.

^{page 241 note 2} See below, App., L.K. (1 May), p. 314.

^{page 242 note 1} See below, B.L. Harl. MS., 4931, fo 49 (Commons), p. 242.

^{page 242 note 2} Perhaps the debate of 30 April.

^{page 243 note 1} The message went to the House of Commons.

^{page 243 note 2} Lords' House. Rossingham and Montereul mention a protestation against shipmoney which was to have been presented to the Commons (CSP 1640, P, 153Google Scholar; P.R.O. 31/3/72, fo 140^r); see also Clarendon, , History, II. 76.Google Scholar

^{page 243 note 3} See below, App. (5 May), p. 316.

^{page 244 note 1} There is no record of debate 5 May (C.J., ii, p. 19).Google Scholar

^{page 244 note 2} See below, App. (13 April), p. 293.

^{page 244 note 3} See below, App. (15 April), p. 299.

^{page 245 note 1} See below, App., Grimston, p. 296.

^{page 245 note 2} See below, App., Rudyerd, p. 296.

^{page 245 note 3} See below, App., Seymour, p. 297.

^{page 245 note 4} See below, App., Pym, p. 299.

^{page 246 note 1} See below, App., L.K., p. 303.

^{page 246 note 2} See below, Petition, Smart, p. 280.

^{page 246 note 3} The Privy Council (below, S.P. 16/450/113, p. 290).

^{page 247 note 1} Cf. S.P. 16/451/10, and below.

^{page 247 note 2} Wrongly dated 27 April in S.P. 16/450/94 and S.P. 16/451/10; CSP 1640, pp. 39–40Google Scholar, is correct.

^{page 247 note 3} See below, App., L.K. (25 April), p. 310.

^{page 247 note 4} See below, App., Grievances, , p. 308.Google Scholar

^{page 247 note 5} See above, 25 April, p. 247, n. 2.