Slightly shorter holograph draft of MINT00847 (Mint 19/1/503)

<496r>

The Warden of the Mint represented to the Honourable Committee that what past between Mr Harris Mr Morris Peers & Iustice Negus was three months before he knew any thing of their matters. And yet in the Report these things are mixed with what was done under his management as if he had been concerned in the whole.

Peers represented to the Honourable Committee that when he came first to the Warden of the Mint he told the Warden that he & John Holloway & Yarberry had coyned about 20s at Egham in Surrey by Morrises directiosn to draw in Chaloner. The Warden denyed that Peers told him of any such directions or design to draw him in. That money was coyned three weeks or a month before the Warden knew any thing of their matters as the Warden can shew by an Information of Peers then made. And yet in the Report Peers makes that money coyned after he came to the Warden & the Warden privy & consenting to the coyning thereof to draw Chaloner in

Mris Collingwood who brought Peers the first time vizt Aug. 13 to the Warden, deposed before the High Committee that the Warden did then caution Peers against drawing in or tempting any body & that Peers made Answer that there was no need to draw them in for they (vizt the Holloways) were so forward that they were for hiring horses & riding them out of town & selling them abroad to make a stock to go to coyn with. But in the Report all this is omitted & Mris Collingwood on the contrary represents the Warden for drawing Chaloner in.

To make out a confederacy of the Mint against Chaloner, & that some of the Mint gave Privilege to coyn false money Peers calls Morris a Messenger of the Mint & yet Morris was no way related to the Mint till Dec. 15 when the Prosecution of Chaloner was over. Chaloner has not proved that any two men of the Mint were confederate or ever consulted together against him. And tho some of the Mint were offended at him, yet it was for libelling them in print.

The Warden represented that all he did against Chaloner or in favour of Peers was to put a stop to a new & dangerous way of coyning &c but this scarce in the Report.