Page:Protestant Exiles from France Agnew (1st ed. vol 3).djvu/67

 *Nicholas De Wael.
 * Peter Roux.
 * John Chadaigne.
 * Henry Jourdan.
 * Adrian Brievinck.
 * William Best.
 * John Valleau.
 * Vincent De Lainerie.
 * John Audebert, Elizabeth wife, John, and Moses sons.
 * Daniel Fougeron, John son.
 * Peter La Brosse.
 * Andrew Dennis.
 * Samuel Du Rousseau.
 * Gerard Bovey.
 * Nicholas Wilkens.
 * Cornelius Van Deure.
 * Peter Brun.
 * John Dubrois.
 * Abraham Dupont.
 * David Knigg.
 * William Moyon.
 * Isaiah Valleau.
 * Nicholas Fallet.
 * Thomas Fallet.
 * George Nicholas Dobertin.
 * Austin Borneman.
 * Abraham Tixier.
 * Nicholas Moyne.
 * John Papin.
 * Daniel Marcherallier De Belleveeve.
 * Matthew Chouard, Paul and Gabriel sons.
 * Josiah Gaillon, Josiah and John sons.
 * James Thomeaur.
 * John Thomeur.
 * Peter Thomeur Duport.
 * Elias Arnaud, John and Elias sons.
 * Jeremy Marion.
 * Ambroses Godfroy Hautkwits.
 * Jacob Egidius Zinck.
 * John Motteux, John, Anthony, Timothy, Peter, Judith, Catherine, and Martha Mary his children.
 * Isaac Charier.
 * Peter Chabet.
 * Denis Chavalier.
 * Peter Maurice.
 * Daniel Cadroy.
 * Moses Jaqueau.
 * Mary Anne Pryor.
 * Peter Fermend.
 * David De la Maziere.
 * Esther Sandham.
 * Isaac De la Haye.

. — As to List XX., I am not informed whether there was a relationship between Rev. Abel Ligonier and the great Ligoniers; he must have been of an older generation; I have his autograph on the title-page of a copy of L’Estrange's Colloquies of Erasmus. There are in this list several surnames which occur among the Memoirs in my Vol. II.: such as Garnault, Justel (also in List XIII.), Robethon, Fonnereau, and Motteux. The Gentleman’s Magazine (6th March 1750), announces the marriage of Peter Motteux of Spittle-fields, Esq., to Miss West of Bishop’s-gate Street.

The chronology of history requires me to interrupt these lists of adopted indigence and ligel, in order to glance into the House of Commons of 1694. Until almost recent times the House sat with closed doors, and the reporting of its transactions and speeches was illegal. Even a member could not report his own speech; and if he experimented on the not quite impossible forbearance of the executive by printing his speech, the public had to take its accuracy upon trust. It was known that in 1694 a Bill for naturalizing all Protestant strangers had come to a second reading, but had been dropped. But Sir John Knight, M.P. for Bristol, published an elaborate oration, which he represented as having been delivered by himself, off-hand, in his place in parliament, concluding with the amendment, “That the sergeant be commanded to open the doors, and let us first kick the Bill out of the House, and then Foreigners out of the kingdom.”

This brochure drew forth a reply, entitled:— “An Answer to the Pretended Speech, said to be spoken off-hand in the House of Commons, by one of the Members for B_____l, and afterwards burnt by the Common Hangman, according to the order of the House — London, printed in the year 1694.” “It’s very probable,” wrote the pamphleteer, “that if this speech had been spoken within as it was printed without doors, that the author had undergone the same