|
| April 10. |
51. Hugh Lemprière, bailiff's lieutenant, and four justices of
the Court Royal in Jersey to Sec. Conway. We have, as ordered,
summoned before us Jean Maret and Jean Bisson, receivers of the
King's revenues in Jersey, and charged them to pay the wages and
arrears ordered for Jean Herault, lord of St. Sauveur, to his procurer
Jean Durell. Maret is willing to pay the arrears up to Midsummer
1621, but since then he has paid all the money to the governor,
and his lieutenant Bisson will pay the wages in future, according to
order. [1 page, French.] |
| April 23. |
Statement that in Parliament 13 Eliz., it was enacted that
all wines of the growth of Candia and Rotimo, or any other place
within the Levant seas, imported to England by merchant strangers,
should be landed at Southampton, and not elsewhere, upon forfeiture of 20s. a butt, one moiety to the Queen and the other to the
mayor, bailiff", and burgesses of Southampton, for maintenance of
the walls, sea banks, &c.; this was worth 200 marks yearly. On
17 April 1615 the Turkey merchants procured a proclamation from
His Majesty, Prohibiting all men, denizens or aliens, not free of that
company, from importing any of those wines, whereby the benefit of
the said Act is taken away. [Venetians may bring in their own
ships or in English ships.] The mayor, &c. of Southampton, in Aug.
1615, petitioned His Majesty for relief, and were referred to Council
for recompense. Council referred the cause to Secretary Lake, the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, Master of the Rolls, and AttorneyGeneral, who ordered that the town of Southampton should forbear
their suit for a time, by reason of the then troubles in Turkey; and
if the company held, satisfaction should be made for their losses;
but if the company should be dissolved, then the town should
receive the benefit intended by the Act. |
|
The town forbore for 18 months, little profit meantime accruing
to them by reason of the proclamation, and then they preferred
another petition to Council for relief. Council referred it to Sec.
Naunton, Sir Fulke Greville, now Lord Brooke, then Chancellor of
the Exchequer, Sir Julius Cæsar, the Master of the Rolls, and the
Attorney-General. Finding that the proclamation was procured
by the said merchants by misinformation to the board, for their
private benefit, and that they had not had the sole bringing in of
those wines, as they wrongfully suggested, as was plainly proved by
the agent for Southampton, their honours ordered that the merchants
should make satisfaction to the town of Southampton, so that the
board might not be further troubled. This the merchants have not
hitherto done, neither has the town, for divers years past, received
one penny profit for the same. |
|
The mayor, &c. now desire recompense for the time past, having
by means of the proclamation been hindered above 1,000l.; also
some consideration hereafter, to the yearly value that they formerly
received, and have lost by reason of the proclamation, which, with
the threatenings of some of the company against the merchant
strangers, have put by the latter from their trade, and they are
never likely to renew it. The greater part of those wines brought
in lately have been brought in English bottoms, and therefore no
hindrance to the State. [2½ pages. Levant Papers, Vol. I.,
No. 38.] |
April 28.
Jersey. |
52. Sir Phil. Carteret to Sec. Conway. The absence of the bailiff,
and death of the lieutenant bailiff, have left the island destitute of
a judge, and the jurats without power to punish offences. So I
assembled the States and proposed a judge provisory; most consented, but some quoted the King's edict forbidding the governor
to nominate the bailiff and other officers, which I in no wise attempted
to infringe. [1 page.] |
| [April.] |
53. Abstract of the proofs against the validity of the nuncupative
will of Edw. Norris, said to be made at Christmas, 1619. Taken
from the examination of witnesses, ex-parte Gower, May, 1623, and
April 1624, &c. [5 sheets.] |
| April ? |
54. Reasons why the Act 27 Hen. VIII. c. 13, relating to the
import and export of cloth, should not be altered. In 3 Hen. VII.
the King received for custom and subsidy of wools 1,000l. a year,
and then cloths of the value of 4l. and under went unrowed. For
licensing transport of cloth he also received 1,000l. a year. Now
nothing is received for wools, and if such cloths should now go
unlicensed, that vent would be lost, and the Crown be defeated of
the advancement of that farm when the lease shall be ended. Considering that by exportation of every sack of wool by an Englishman, the King loses 12s., and by a stranger 22s., and that now the
draping and knitting in this land consume all the wool, whereby
His Majesty loses the customs of draperies and knitware heretofore
imported, and those of the wools exported, it should rather seem
reasonable to advance the customs and subsidies of draperies and
knitware, than to decay the 1,000l. rent yearly, which if the King
wants, the Commons must supply, and the merchandise will better
bear it than the Commons, and cloths of 7l. the piece or under may
go by license, which is but 2s. 2d. |
|
Restraints or impositions are not so proper to the Crown as
licences for composition. In all ages, the Kings and Queens of this
realm, when policy requires it, have licensed things generally forbidden, for the benefit of trade, and the increase of the customs
and subsidies; and [for] 1,000l. yearly, His Majesty has already
licensed the same sort of cloth to pass over unrowed. |
|
In matters concerning the revenues of the Crown, it will be fitter
for the King to license at his pleasure than for one Parliament to
set free that which, without another Parliament, the King cannot
restrain without much grudging; and it will be better to let the
ancient laws stand than make new ones as required. The prices of
cloth are so uncertain that whether it be one of 7l. or 7l. 10s.
cannot easily be discovered, and this will be a great means to deceive
the King in his license. The white cloths now sold for 7l. the cloth
are longer, heavier, and finer than those sold for 4l. in 27 Hen. VIII.,
as can be proved by witnesses still living. |
|
If the Act desired should pass as now drawn, it would defeat the
privileges of the Merchant Adventures in a main point, and make
others as free for transporting cloths of 7l. and under as the licensed
men. The farmer of the license, besides his rent of 1,000l. a year,
is a means to advance the King's customs for cloths 2,000l. a year at
least. If the Merchant Adventurer could get cloths of 7l. and under
to go over unrowed without license, the farmer of the license must
then give over his farm, and the merchant would then disadvance
the customs at his pleasure. [2¾ pages.] |
