1634
431. [f.68v. Before 22 Feb. 1634] Trinity House to the lords commissioners of the admiralty [See 432; cf SP 16/228, f.117v; CSPD 1633–4, 470.]
They have had the sole execution of the office of lastage* and ballastage
for 100 years, for these 38 or 40 years under the broad seal. Lately the
king has confirmed the grant under his privy seal, reserving a rent of £50 a
year assigned to Capt. Thomas Porter. Lastly in 2 references the king has
declared his intention not to abridge their rights. Nevertheless, the
attorney general, on information and considering only the legal point, has
preferred a quo warranto action against the corporation in the court of
king's bench, being of opinion that the right of sole ballastage does not
belong to them. The commissioners are asked to consider the point of
convenience and how prejudicial would be the 'promiscuous' ballastage
of ships, with nobody answerable for misdemeanours. The commissioners know how it concerns the reputation of the petitioners that the office
be executed without prejudice to the river.
432. 22 Feb. 1634. Whitehall. [Lords commissioners of the admiralty] to
the attorney general [Cf SP 16/228, f.117v; CSPD 1633–4, 470; 431.]
He is desired to stay further proceedings on the quo warranto brought
against the petitioners about ballastage until he has spoken to the writers
and further order given.
[Lords] Lindsey [omitted from SP text] and Dorset, [Sir] John Cooke,
[Sir] H. Vane, [Sir] Francis Windbancke.
433. [f.69. ? Before 6 Dec. 1634] Trinity House to the lords commissioners of the admiralty about Humphrey Streete and the ballastage office
[Cf SP 16/278/15; CSPD 1634–5, 344. The SP text is annotated in a
contemporary hand as received on 6 Dec. 1634 and is ascribed by CSPD
to that date.]
434. [f.69v] 19 Dec. 1633. Admiralty court order to Sir John Wentworth,
Francis Brewster and Henry North, esquires, Thomas Trenchfeild,
'Charles' [? recte Christopher] Browne and George Hatch, mariners
The bailiffs, commonalty and adventurers in the fishing trade at
Dunwich, Southwold and Walberswick in Suffolk have complained that
Sir John Rowse, for private gain, has lately made heading banks and 2
sluices whereby the ancient, previously navigable, channel belonging to
the towns is blocked not far above the mouth of the haven. The haven and
harbour are much decayed and likely to be stopped, impoverishing the
inhabitants and prejudicing the king's service and customs. In the star
chamber on 29 Nov., the privy council ordered Sir Henry Martin,
admiralty court judge, to institute an enquiry by some members of Trinity
House, together with some gentlemen of Suffolk with no interest and not
living nearby. Martin has decreed a commission to them accordingly to
view the haven, channel, headings and sluices, and to make a report to
the admiralty court, to be presented to the star chamber board by the
beginning of next term.
Thomas Wyann, deputy register.
435. [f.70] 17 Jan. 1634. Sir John Wentworth, Francis Brewster, Henry
North, Thomas Trenchfeild, Christopher Browne and William Ewen to
the privy council about the threat to the fishing trade at Dunwich,
Southwold and Walberswick [Cf SP 16/260/28(1); CSPD 1633–4, 453–4.
CSPD does not list the signatories or mention that the sluice had been
built near the site of a mill which the father of Sir John Rowse, who had
died 30 years since, had built on the stream.]
436. [f.70v] 8 March 1634. Trinity House to the principal officers of the
navy
According to the order dated 29 Jan. 1634 they have consulted sailmakers
whose opinions are enclosed. Mildewing of sails can only be lessened if
shipmasters take care to open the sails often to dry, air and cool them.
Sails left furled for long become heated, which mildews them more than
lying wet. 'Buckt cloth double' [? cloth steeped or boiled in an alkaline
dye] is too weighty, boisterous and unmanageable. But for double sails
for great ships good 'warpt' cloth is best.
437. [f.71] 4 March 1605. Certificate by Thomas Milton and others (fn. 1)
They were summoned before Sir Julius Caesar, admiralty court judge,
and empanelled as a jury to set down how far the king's chambers,
havens, or ports on the coast extend. They comprise all the coast within a
straight line drawn between each headland of England. [The headlands
are listed, together with the distances and bearings, one from another,
starting with Souter Point and ending with Holyhead.] A plat is enclosed
[not entered].
Thomas Milton, William Bigate, John Burrell, William Joanes, Peter
Hilles, Michael Edmonds, James Woodcott, Thomas Best, William Ivy,
John Skynner, John Wyldes, Henry Hancken, William Case.
438. [f.71v] 24 Jan. 1634. Edward Steevens and other shipwrights [? to the
principal officers of the navy. See 421.]
According to 'your' warrant of 19 Dec. [not entered], they have surveyed
the 2 new ships built for the king in dry dock at Deptford and Woolwich,
and have calculated the burdens according to the old rule and that laid
down by the privy council on 26 May 1628.
|
| Ship built at
Woolwich by
Mr Boate
[Unicorn] | Ship built at
Deptford by
Mr [Peter] Pett
[James] |
| Old rule: | | |
| Length by the keel | 107 ft | 110 ft |
| Breadth outside [the planks] | 36 ft 4 inches | 37 ft 6 inches |
| Draught | 16 ft 3 inches | 17 ft 2 inches |
| These figures multiplied together
and divided by 100 produce in
tons and tonnage* | 841 | 944 |
| New rule: | | |
| Length by the keel | 107 ft | 110 ft |
| Breadth inside the planks | 35 ft 8 inches | 36 ft 10 inches |
| Depth from the upper edge of
keel to the diameter of the
breadth | 15 ft 1 inch | 16 ft 2½ inches |
| These figures multiplied together
and divided by 100 produce in
tons and tonnage | 767 | 875 |
The frames, mould, workmanship, the sizes and scantlings of the timbers,
the binding within and without board, and the quality of the materials in
the scarf* riders, beams, knees*, etc. is good. The decks of the ship at
Deptford go flush fore and aft, as does the lower gundeck of the ship at
Woolwich, but a rise is cut in the fore part of the gunroom in the upper
gundeck. In future, both gundecks should be flush, as they have certified
formerly. The ports of both ships will lie about 5 ft from the water and are
8 or 9 ft apart or under in the case of the ship at Woolwich, and 9 ft in that
of the ship at Deptford. The ports are of a convenient depth and breadth.
Both ships will be very serviceable royal men-of-war.
Edward Steevens, John Ducy, John Southerne, John Graves, John
Dearsly, Robert Tranckmore. (fn. 2)
[Note at end] The certificate following [? 439] was written under this, and
both were presented as one.
439. [f.72. 14 Jan. 1634. Trinity House to the principal officers of the
navy. Cf SP 16/273/27; CSPD 1634–5, 185.]
They were required this day for the king's service to give their opinions of
the 'reasons abovementioned' [not entered]. Nine of the 10 ships built in
the time of the late commissioners of the navy [appointed in 1619] were
cast in the 2nd and 3rd ranks of the king's ships. The 4 new ships built at
Deptford and Woolwich within this last 2 years are likewise of much
greater burden than those mentioned in the propositions of the
commissioners. It is concluded that the reasons of the 'masters' for
increasing the cables in the new ships by one inch for mooring in habour
and for service are very fitting, but for the old ships mentioned in the
propositions, to which 'divers of us' then subscribed, cables of the
scantlings then set down will suffice.
Anthony Tutchen [omitted from SP text], William Rainborowe, Thomas
Best, Robert Salmon, Walter Coke.
440. 4 June 1634. Trinity House to the same
Following a warrant dated 31 Dec. they viewed and certified concerning
the 2 new ships of the king then in dock at Woolwich and Deptford
[Unicorne and James]. Now that the Unicorne does not prove answerable
to their opinion, they acknowledge their error, which proceeds from their
not weighing well the overbuilding of the ship, which is the only cause of
her tenderness. They were not alone in this error because many others of
good judgement have also failed in their opinion of her.
441. [f.72v. Before 23 Apr. 1634] John Hide and others [to Trinity House.
See 442.]
Being lately at Genoa, they had needed a friend on divers occasions as
they were strangers and repaired to Francisco Massola their consul who
had renounced the task. Signor Phillippo Barnardi befriended them and
considering the need for so able a protector in future, they recommend
Barnardy as consul. He is honest and able, has a great affection for
England, having long been there, and knows the language and customs of
the English.
John Hide, Nicholas Hilson, Robert Nethersall, John Hall, Reynold
Newe, John Gargardnall.
[Marginal note] The merchants' letter to the company on behalf of
Barnardy as consul.
442. 23 Apr. 1634. Certificate by Trinity House
Upon the suit of merchants, captains and masters trading to Genoa, they
appointed Francisco Massola, a Genoese, to be consul for so long as he
aided the English nation there, but now they have been credibly informed
that he has renounced the consulship. Phillippo Barnardy having been
recommended in his stead [f.73] Trinity House, insofar as in them lies,
appoint him consul for so long as he provides assistance. His fee is to be 2
ducats a ship, great or small. The state of Genoa is asked to accept him as
consul.
443. 29 March 1634. [Commissioners of the admiralty to Trinity House
seeking an opinion on a petition by Capt. Thomas Porter and Capt.
Hawkeridge (444) about pilotage. Cf SP 16/264, f.2; CSPD 1633–4, 528.]
444. [f.73v. ? Before 12 Feb. 1634] Capt. Thomas Porter and Capt.
William Hawkeridge to the king [See 443; 445.]
Strangers daily enter the king's ports for trade and succour and sound the
harbours and entry places on the coast of England, Scotland and Ireland,
the Thames only excepted, which has made them as skilful as 'our best
pilots' and has caused much mischief and misery. Thus in 1631 Turkish
pirates landed at night at Baltimore in Ireland, sacked the town, and
carried away 109 persons whom they sold as slaves in Algiers, which they
would not have dared, had they not known the haven. The mischief is
because there is no restraint on foreigners entering without native pilots,
as is the rule in Spain, France, the 'Two Countries', Denmark etc. where
native pilots have to be employed and pilotage paid. To keep foreigners
at the like distance and to employ aged seamen unfit for long voyages, the
king is asked to ordain that no stranger shall enter in or out without a pilot
under penalty. In view of their services and the late great losses of
Hawkeridge, the king is asked to empower the petitioners to appoint
pilots in England, Wales and Ireland [sic], the Thames excepted, and to
take such fees from strangers for their services as are granted to like
officers by foreign princes.
445. 12 Feb. 1634. Court at Whitehall. [Sir] Sidney Montague [master of
requests] to the lords commissioners of the admiralty
Reference of [? 444].
446. [f.74] 26 Apr. 1634. [Trinity House to the lords commissioners of the
admiralty. Cf SP 16/266/39; CSPD 1633–4, 570.]
In reply to 443, they oppose the grant of a patent to prevent strangers
from entering the ports and harbours of the kingdom without pilots for
these reasons: (a) Apart from the Thames, Bristol, Hull, Lynn and some
other petty places, the harbours are open and free from danger.
Corporations of seamen exist at Newcastle, Hull and Dover, charged by
their charters to provide pilotage. Yarmouth is a limb of the Cinque Ports
to whom pilotage belongs. (b) It would be a needless charge and give
much discontent to strangers, and might endanger the king's subjects to
have a like charge put on them in all foreign countries. (c) Strangers were
never subjected to pilotage, those few places formerly mentioned
excepted, nor has there been such a proposal previously. (fn. 3) The king's
subjects pay pilotage only at Venice in Italy. In all other places within the
Straits, in the ports of Spain, Holland, and Denmark, they are free,
although anyone can have a pilot if he wishes. (d) Ports are open to
receive all navigation in all countries. God forbid that the ports of the
king's dominions should be shut up, as they will be if pilotage is made
compulsory. Since pilots are not required, ships often enter for shelter
and to safeguard lives and goods when it is not possible to obtain pilots.
(e) Whereas the 'petitioner' [sic] conceives that the Turkish action at
Baltimore was caused by their knowledge or that of a Christian stranger,
this was not so. The Turks took a fisherman not far away and made him
guide them into the port, promising to set him free, which they did. (f)
Since ports in all countries are known to those seamen who trade in them,
knowledge [f.74v] of English ports which have so great a trade cannot be
clouded. (g) The petitioner conceives that if strangers had to have pilots,
they would be kept ignorant, but a mariner once brought in and out of a
port is there made a pilot forever. (fn. 4)
447. [f.75. Before 23 Apr. 1634] Patrick Kirwane and Thomas Lynch,
merchants of Ireland, to Trinity House [See 448.]
They request an opinion on the following 2 cases: (a) Two merchants
freighted a ship from Ireland to London and back again and let 6 tons in
her by charter party. The ship reached London, discharged her lading,
and began to relade. Goods came so fast from the 2 principal merchants
and strangers, that when the servant of the merchant who had freighted
the 6 tons arrived, there was space for only 4 tons. Nevertheless, he came
with the other 2 tons within the time specified in the charter party. When
the master refused to accept them, he brought them ashore and ventured
them in another ship without the consent of his own master or the other
freighters. Who is to bear the loss of these 2 tons? (b) Mr Kirwane
freighted a 60 ton ship for £120 for a voyage from Ireland to Bilbao and
loaded 20 tons of salmon. His factor, Mr Lynch, seeing the ship ready to
part not half loaded, put another 10 tons aboard without the consent of
the principals. What freight should be paid?
448. 23 Apr. 1634. Opinion by Trinity House
Their opinion on these cases propounded to them today [447] is: (a) The
servant of the third merchant took the 2 tons of goods ashore again
without protesting against the master and principal factor according to
law. Although he offered to lade in due time and according to the charter
party, since he had direction from neither the principal freighter nor the
master to ship the goods in another vessel, the third merchant must bear
the whole loss of the 2 tons loaded by his servant. (b) In the second case,
the factor is to pay to the principal or first merchant a proportionate part
of the freight, i.e. £20.
William Rainborow, master, John Bennett, Anthony Tutchin, William
Ewens, Thomas Best, William Bushell.
449. [f.75v] 24 May 1634. Trinity House to the privy council supporting
the building of a quay and dry dock at 'Dunham Bridge' [Downham
Bridge on the Orwell near Ipswich] in Suffolk [Cf SP 16/268/59; CSPD
1634–5, 38. The SP text is signed by William Rainborowe, master,
Anthony Tutchen, John Totton, Gervais Hockett, Samuel Doves, James
Moyer, William Case, T. Best, Robert Salmon, Walter Coke.]
450. 4 June 1634. Certificate by Trinity House
Sir William Curteene, merchant of the city of London, has made suit to
them about the need for a consul for ships and seamen at Trapani in Sicily
and has sought their allowance of Henry Dyke, a merchant, to be settled
there as consul. They are credibly informed by Curteene that Dyke is of
good report and an able man, being already consul there for the Dutch.
Insomuch as in them lies, they appoint Dyke consul for so long as he helps
'our nation'. His fee is to be 2 ducats a ship, great and small. The viceroy
of Sicily is entreated to accept him as consul.
451. [f.76] 7 June 1634. Trinity House to Sir Robert Heath
In answer to his letter about the king's pleasure for ballast in the Tyne,
they recommend an order entered in the register of the council. All men
can, and many will, then take copies to answer exceptions. Whereas he
desired them to find a man to seize the ballast and receive the money, if
there is anything else needed, they will do their best therein.
452. [f.76v] 4 June 1634. Masters of Trinity House and shipwrights [to the
principal officers of the navy. Cf SP 16/269/42(1); CSPD 1634–5, 66.]
According to the warrant dated 24 May they have been aboard the king's
ship, the Unicorne, now at Chatham, and on conference with her
principal men they conclude that she is unfit to bear sail because she has
too little breadth and too much height. To remedy these defects and for
the grace of the ship, the following work is required: (a) Since she is too
high for her breadth, her upper works need to be taken down to the level
of the upper edge of the ports in the waist of her upper gundeck, and the
upper deck taken away, leaving a large quarterdeck and forecastle. The
great cabin floor should go flush with the middle deck, the roundhouse
floor 'settled' 18 inches, and the roundhouse made a convenient height to
make her 'shipp shapen'. The step of the mizen should be brought down
to the lower gundeck and the friezes, spirket wales and gunwales on the
forecastle removed. The timbers and work in the waist and on the
quarterdeck should be made as light as possible. (b) It is fit to girdle her
with 8 strakes of wales and plank, the thickest being 5 inches, 'to continue
the breadth one foot higher than now it is, and to bring on a wale to finish
it under the ports'. The total cost of the work, timber, planks, pitch, tar
and ironwork and the workmanship of carpenters, caulkers, joiners,
carvers and painters, would be £500.
William Raineborow, Anthony Tutchen, John Totton, James Moyer [of
Trinity House], Edward Steevens, Henry Goddard, Peter Pett [? nephew
of Phineas Pett], John Graves, Robert Tranckmore [shipwrights]. (fn. 5)
453. [f.77] 30 May 1634. Mincing Lane [London. Sir] Henry Palmer and
Ken. Edisbury [principal officers of the navy] to Trinity House and
Shipwrights' Hall
The lords commissioners of the admiralty directed the writers to survey
the king's new ships now building in dry dock at Deptford and Woolwich
[Leopard and Swallow] before the deck beams or planks are laid to
enable the remedy of any defects which cannot be so well done when they
are fully built. At least 3 from both Trinity House and Shipwrights' Hall
are required to set aside all other business and assemble at Woolwich on
next Monday morning, 4 June, (fn. 6) to survey the materials and workmanship, and to prevent ill quality in the laying of her orlops*, the contriving
of her ports and the rounding* of her gundecks. The ship at Deptford will
be surveyed similarly in the afternoon.
454. [f.77v. 16 June 1634. Trinity House and Shipwrights' Hall to Sir
Henry Palmer and Kenrick Edisbury, principal officers of the navy. Cf SP
16/269/96(1); CSPD 1634–5, 82.]
In reply to 453, they have surveyed the 2 ships building for the king at
Woolwich and Deptford. The dimensions of the ship at Woolwich
[Leopard]1 are: length by the keel, 93 ft 8 inches; breadth from outside to
outside the timbers, 32 ft 8½ inches; depth from the upper part of the keel
to the diameter of the breadth, 12 ft 1½ inches; depth of the keel, 1 ft 7
inches; rake of the stern, 31 ft 3 inches; (fn. 8) rake of the stern post, 4 ft 6
inches; the flat floor about 13 ft (it could not be exactly measured);
draught amidships, 12 ft 9 inches, at which draught the master
shipwrights may lay the orlops* so as the lower edges of the ports are 5 ft 9
inches from the water. The dimensions of the ship at Deptford [Swallow] (fn. 7)
are: length by the keel, 95 ft 6 inches; breadth from outside to outside the
timbers, 32 ft; depth from the upper edge of the keel to the diameter of
the breadth, 11 ft 7½ inches; depth of the keel, 1 ft 8 inches; rake of the
stern, 27 ft 9 inches; rake of the stern post, 4 ft 8½ inches; the flat floor
about 13 ft (it could not be exactly measured); draught amidships, 12 ft 3
inches, at which draught the master shipwrights may lay the orlops so that
the lower edges of the ports are 5 ft 9 inches from the water. [f.78] Their
timber, material and workmanship are sufficient; only part of the oak
plank is green and of insufficient length. As to their upper works, what is
to be done for rounding* of the beams, laying the orlops flush fore and
aft, and making the ports, they leave to the king's directions but they wish
the master shipwrights to take great care in building the upper works as
snug and as light as may be.
Walter Coke, Robert Salmon, William Rainborow, Anthony Tutchen [of
Trinity House], Edward Steevens, John Taylor [shipwrights, see 280]
Thomas Hawkins [? shipwright].
455. [f.78v] 1 June 1634. Court at Greenwich. Order of the privy council
[Cf PC 2/44, 24–5.]
Present: the king, archbishop of Canterbury, lord keeper, archbishop of
York, lord treasurer, lord privy seal, duke of Lennox, marquess [of]
Hamilton, earl marshal, lord chamberlain, earl of Dorset, earl [of]
Bridgewater, viscount Wimbledon, lord Newburgh, Mr treasurer, Mr
comptroller, Mr vice chamberlain, Mr secretary Coke, Mr secretary
Windebanke.
Upon consideration of a complaint by the mayor and burgesses of
Newcastle that the ballast shore lately built at South Shields on the Tyne
by Sir Robert Heath, lord chief justice of common pleas, would prejudice
shipping, navigation and the river, the care of which had been entrusted
to them by the king, and upon hearing both sides with their counsel, it was
ordered that: (a) the ballast shore be finished and backed with ballast to
make it fit for the saltworks which are begun there for the king's service in
the first place; (b) seamen shall be free to cast their ballast there if they
wish, but not forced to do so; (c) the town of Newcastle and the hostmen
are not to hinder seamen indirectly by refusing to transport coal in keels
to the ships which cast their ballast at Shields. The king reserves the
ordering of the ballast shore so that navigation and shipping benefits, no
loss of customs and other duties occurs, and the town suffers no loss of
trade [f.79] or the river any hurt.
456. [? 8 June 1634] Watermen's company to the privy council about the
employment of watermen at sea [Cf. SP 16/269/52; CSPD 1634–5, 69–70.]
457. [f. 79v] 8 June 1634. Thomas Meautys, clerk of the privy council, to
the lords commissioners of the admiralty requesting an opinion on 456 [Cf
SP 16/269/52(1); CSPD 1634–5, 70.]
458. 30 June 1634. Lords commissioners of the admiralty to Trinity House
about 456 [Cf SP 16/264, f.27; CSPD 1634–5, 98. 458 subscribed by lord
Cottington, Sir Henry Vane, Sir Francis Windbanck and the earl of
Lindsey.]
459. [f. 80–80v] 9 July 1634. Trinity House to the lords commissioners of
the admiralty about 456 [Cf SP 16/271/46; CSPD 1634–5, 138–9. CSPD
does not mention the distinction which Trinity House drew between 'we
that are owners and masters of ships' and 'those men that be masters
mates, gunners, carpenters and boatswains'. The SP text is signed by
Walter Coke (described as deputy master in 459), Anthony Tutchen,
Jonas James, George Hatch, Thomas Trenchfeild, T. Best, James
Moyer, John Totton, Robert Salmon, Christopher Browne.]
460. [f.81] 25 Oct. 1634. Certificate by Trinity House
At the instance of the bearer, David Davison, ropemaker of Wapping,
they certify that it is much better for the spinning of yarn for all sorts of
cordage to be done under cover than in the open air. Yarn spun in the
open air is subject to moisture in the air, dew and rain. If there is moisture
in yarn made into cordage, the cordage soon rots endangering ships of
merchants and of the king. Even the best hemp, when spun moist or wet,
will rot. To spin and make cordage under cover is not a new device but
ancient in all countries, as in Muscovy, Prussia, Holland, Poland, Lubeck
and Hamburg.
Walter Coke, deputy master, etc.
461. 29 Oct. 1634. Trinity House to the lord privy seal
They have seen the engine model which Mr Needham and his 'second',
Mr Browne, have made for cleansing the Thames and have seen it work.
It is of no use to the river but a 'mere fancy or toy fallen from an idle
head'. The reasons are too tedious to trouble him with, but can be given if
desired.
Walter Coke, deputy master, etc.
462. [f.81v. ? After 5 May 1634. A project. See 463.]
Provision has been made by statute [2 Richard II, stat. 1, c. 4] for
mariners to be retained in the king's service under his admiral or
lieutenant, but there is no other provision for retaining them for the
service and defence of this kingdom. Mariners at sea or in foreign parts
not under the admiral or his lieutenant are neither bound to return, nor
restrained from serving foreign princes. The king thereby loses the
service of expert and courageous seamen whose names are not made
known. Despite laws against the transportation of ordnance, there is no
means of discovering the names of those who transport it. Merchants,
masters, owners and governors load as much ordnance as their ships will
bear, and return scarce half or quarter, having sold the rest at great profit.
The master of the ordnance of the Tower takes notice only of the
ordnance which is exported from the port of London, and takes bonds
only for the ordnance imported but there is no provision for discovering
what becomes of the ordnance afterwards. At no other port is there any
regulation of ordnance at all. Nor is there a register of seamen leaving and
returning and no officer is appointed for these purposes. The course
hereafter propounded would prevent these evils and also the illegal
export of wool, fuller's earth, hides, leather and other prohibited goods
allegedly sent to another port in the kingdom but really carried overseas.
[f.82] Since his accession the king has created a new office for the entry of
passes to ascertain the names of all subjects leaving the realm, their
places of abode, estates, degree, destination and intended date of return
so that the king can recall them if he requires their services. (fn. 9) A similar
register of seamen, ordnance and prohibited goods would provide the
king with information about the number and quality of seamen and would
prevent illegal practices. Prohibited goods would be listed and bonds
taken against their export without licence as laid down by former
proclamation [? of 30 Sept. 1632 (Proc. i. 196)]. The creation of an office
and register at London and all other ports, creeks and havens of England
and Wales is requested. Details would be kept of each ship departing, her
burden, captain, master, governors, owners, officers, seamen and
passengers, her guns, muskets and other munitions, [f.82v] and of
prohibited goods carried, and on her return of any discrepancies in
personnel or ordnance, and where prohibited goods had been landed. A
copy of the entry would be given to the master, owner, or chief officer of
the ship before departure. The books of entry and the register should be
delivered once yearly to the king's remembrancer in the court of the
exchequer, as is done by the customer and comptrollers of the port of
London. On pain of forfeiture, ships should be prohibited from leaving
port for Newfoundland, the North Sea or any other place, and the crew
forbidden to disperse or unload on return before the entries are made and
an oath administered. Since many ships go out of one port and return to
another where there would be no record of their departure, officers
should not grant clearance before an oath has been taken, and an entry
and copy [f.83] made. The copy is to be shown to the authorised officer,
and an explanation given of discrepancies under oath. The master of the
ordnance of the Tower [of London], saving his privileges, and the
authorised officers are to take care that these provisions are not
breached. It is requested that those whom the king appoints as keepers of
the register and as clerks should receive for taking bonds and making the
entries and copies a fee of 2d a head for captains, governors, masters and
officers, and 1d for mariners, ships' boys and passengers for voyages
abroad, payable both outwards and homewards, and half these amounts
for voyages to ports in England and Wales, and 1d a ton on ships entering
and leaving for voyages abroad, and a farthing for voyages to ports in
England and Wales. [f.83v] These dues would be paid only by the king's
subjects and on ships belonging to the king's subjects. Payment would be
made by the master or owner before departure and on return, on pain of
the same forfeiture.
463. [? After 5 May 1634] Report by Trinity House
They report their opinions of 462. No better provision can be made than
that which already exists. The new office would maintain many idle
fellows and damnify many thousand honest men, enthralling all
merchants, owners and masters. To await the pleasure of this 'great
officer', thereby losing their tide, fair wind and weather would delay all
ships. The projector argues that there is no provision for registering
seamen but is ignorant of 'our customs' because no ship can be cleared in
the customs house and searchers' office until the number of the crew is
given in a note signed by the master or purser, whereby the number of
seamen at sea can always be known. Besides, every 4 or 5 years, the lord
admiral takes a muster of seamen, so that a new office is not needed for
this business. As for seamen who run away from ships overseas and enter
the service of foreign nations, the projector offers no remedy. Great
disorder exists among seamen at home, since for every 500 who take press
money, only 200 or 300 appear despite all the wit of the king's officers.
Besides, the late proclamation [of 5 May 1634 (Proc. i.200)] against
runaways abroad and the orders of Trinity House based on the civil law
render offenders liable to loss of wages and, if they come home later, to
imprisonment either by the judge of the admiralty or by Trinity House.
As to ordnance, the projector acknowledges divers laws to prevent
transportation but says that there is insufficient provision to discover the
names of the transporters. This savours of silliness, for once transportation is discovered, the names of those responsible cannot be hidden. The
master and crew will reveal the names of the owners of the ordnance and
who hired the ship. If discovered abroad, every customs house will say for
12d when it was landed, and the name of the ship and master. Besides, in
every port and creek of the realm, the customs house is like the eye of
Argus, ever vigilant and prying. [f .84] Further, ordnance cannot be taken
aboard any ship without a warrant from the lord high admiral to the
master of the ordnance, who must first take bonds for its safe custody at
all times. When a ship returns from a voyage, the ordnance is inspected
by officers appointed by the master of the ordnance as appears by order of
24 June 1619 [order no. 11 in 464 is then quoted] which was sent by the
privy council to Trinity House with command to perform it. Failure to do
so would render the corporation liable to condign punishment. The
matter of the illegal export of prohibited goods is for the gentlemen of the
Customs House to answer. As to the dues being a small charge on
subjects, the annual yield would be £5,000 or £6,000, a grievous burden
upon navigation.
464. [f.84v] 24 June 1619. Order by the king to the privy council to prevent
the illegal transport of iron ordnance [Cf SP 14/109/109; CSPD 1619–23,
55.]
(1) Since the only furnaces for casting iron ordnance are in Sussex and
Kent, the one market for buying and selling it shall be at the 'further
Tower Hill', London, commonly called East Smithfield, which is to be
free for all founders of iron ordnance, merchants and others, as
accustomed. (2) Iron ordnance is only to be landed at Tower wharf, as
accustomed. (3) Iron ordnance is only to be proved at Ratcliff fields, as
accustomed. (4) Iron ordnance is to be shipped only at Tower wharf. The
lieutenant of the Tower is to assist in the removal of ships which hinder
the loading and unloading of iron ordnance there. (5) Iron ordnance is
only to be shipped from London because of great abuse in stealing and
shipping away ordnance, principally in the outports. (6) Furnaces for
manufacture may only be built in future by licence of the king on the
advice of the lord admiral and the master of the ordnance. (7) No founder
is to sell iron ordnance unless it bears his name (or at least 2 letters of it),
its weight and year, so as to ensure that each piece is of the right weight
and no more. [f.85] (8) The master of the ordnance is to take bonds of
£1,000 from founders, with the condition that they must provide him
annually with details of iron ordnance manufactured, the number,
height, weight and nature, and to whom it was sold; that the ordnance will
be delivered only to the market place at Tower Hill; and that they will
obey the other orders. (9) Iron ordnance is only to be shipped from the
port of London. Shipping from all ports and creeks of Sussex, i.e. Lewes,
'Michinge', (fn. 10) Newhaven, Brighton, the old and new Shoreham and their
members and elsewhere forbidden. The master of the ordnance or his
deputy is to take bonds of £500 and £1,000 from principal searchers and
other officers to enforce this regulation. (10) If any licence is granted by
the king and council for export to foreign princes and others, it is first to
be registered with the master of the ordnance who is to take bonds to
ensure that the provisions of the warrant are not transgressed. (11) When
any new ship is to be supplied with ordnance, certificate is to be brought
from Trinity House to the lord admiral testifying the burden of the ship
and the quantity and quality of the ordnance required. The lord admiral
will signify his approval to the master of the ordnance who is to take
bonds from the master and one owner to ensure that the ordnance is for
the defence of the ship and is not to be sold. The bonds are to be [f.85v]
for 4 years unless the ship is sold or there is a change in the master or
owner. (12) The master of the ordnance shall cause the letter of the lord
admiral, or a copy, to be returned to the searchers' office in the Customs
House with 'test' that bonds have been taken. The searchers are to certify
the same to the collectors outward. The ancient fee of 6d a ship for
viewing the ordnance on her return is to be paid, and searchers and
collectors are to 'confer' their books once a quarter. (fn. 11) (13) Bonds are to be
certified to the court of exchequer as by law they ought. No action is to be
taken to execute them unless the master of the ordnance certifies that
they are forfeit, or upon manifest testimony of the same. (14) The
customer, with the consent of the vice admiral or his deputy dwelling
there, or the farmer's deputy is to take bonds in the outports. If a ship in
the outports is to be supplied with new ordnance, the ordnance must be
bought at the market at Tower Hill as aforesaid, and bonds are to be
taken by the master of the ordnance as for the port of London. (15) For
every new ship which is to be furnished in the outports, the burden of the
ship and the ordnance required is to be certified to the lord admiral who
will signify his approval to the master of the ordnance and he will take
bonds as for the port of London. Copies of bonds are to be sent to the
customer and searcher of the outport who are to keep registers as in
London. Letters are to be written to the outports to this effect. (16) Only
the accustomed fees are to be taken and new ones are not to be exacted.
465. [f. 86. After 25 March 1634] A note of the dues received for Winterton
light in the port of London and in the outports from 26 March 1629 to 25
March 1634
(a) Port of London:
|
| 1629 [–30] | 1630 [–1] | 1631 [–2] | 1632 [–3] | 1633 [–4] |
| £ | s | d | £ | s | d | £ | s | d | £ | s | d | £ | s | d |
| 173 | 9 | 8 (fn. 12) | 84 | 3 | 2 | 65 | 1 | 10 | 62 | 3 | 6 | 66 | 16 | 2 |
| 53 | 18 | 0 | 69 | 4 | 0 | 75 | 7 | 0 | 101 | 3 | 9 | 93 | 18 | 9 |
| 58 | 8 | 6 | 115 | 0 | 4 | 70 | 0 | 2 | 87 | 3 | 11 | 88 | 3 | 0 |
| 129 | 10 | 8 | 106 | 15 | 0 | 51 | 12 | 2 | 121 | 11 | 6 | 121 | 8 | 7 |
| 43 | 18 | 4 | 120 | 18 | 4 | 94 | 13 | 10 | 134 | 0 | 4 | 161 | 16 | 0 |
| 101 | 14 | 0 | 43 | 5 | 2 | 13 | 2 | 10 | 66 | 4 | 8 | 22 | 15 | 6 |
| 53 | 9 | 5 | 94 | 2 | 4 | 71 | 5 | 9 | 71 | 6 | 4 | 105 | 19 | 0 |
| 44 | 19 | 10 | 14 | 12 | 0 | 28 | 2 | 11 | 62 | 0 | 0 | 37 | 0 | 9 |
| 31 | 0 | 2 | 47 | 10 | 10 | 37 | 3 | 4 | 39 | 7 | 10 | 43 | 7 | 11 |
| 17 | 0 | 4 | 6 | 5 | 8 | 5 | 19 | 10 | 19 | 1 | 4 | 17 | 18 | 3 |
| 23 | 12 | 8 | 20 | 16 | 0 | 26 | 7 | 5 | 32 | 9 | 2 | 15 | 17 | 5 |
| 10 | 2 | 8 | 38 | 9 | 4 | 70 | 19 | 11 | 59 | 0 | 2 | 45 | 3 | 2 |
| 641 | 4 | 3 (fn. 13) | 761 | 2 | 2 | 669 | 17 | 0 (fn. 14) | 855 | 12 | 6 | 820 | 4 | 5 (fn. 15) |
(b) Outports and 'crossers of the sea in the port of London':
|
| 1629 [–30] | 1630 [–1] | 1631 [–2] | 1632 [–3] | 1633 [–4] |
| £ | s | d | £ | s | d | £ | s | d | £ | s | d | £ | s | d |
| 18 | 11 | 6 | 70 | 0 | 0 | 11 | 6 | 1 | 14 | 2 | 0 | 14 | 1 | 5 |
| 19 | 13 | 6 | 20 | 11 | 7 | 15 | 1 | 10 | 34 | 5 | 0 | 8 | 2 | 3 |
| 50 | 0 | 0 | 12 | 11 | 5 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 20 | 0 | 0 | 64 | 1 | 3 |
| 20 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 6 | 12 | 5 | 0 | 58 | 12 | 9 | 31 | 2 | 0 |
| 50 | 0 | 0 | 60 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 7 | 2 | 11 | 8 | 50 | 10 | 3 |
| 4 | 5 | 0 | 4 | 15 | 9 | 36 | 3 | 0 | 30 | 0 | 0 | 16 | 8 | 6 |
| 32 | 6 | 0 | 16 | 11 | 10 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 4 | 2 | 6 | 88 | 0 | 0 |
| 10 | 17 | 10 | 18 | 16 | 2 | 43 | 13 | 6 | 40 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 4 |
| 5 | 0 | 0 | 32 | 14 | 11 | 36 | 13 | 6 | 43 | 17 | 5 | | | |
| | | 20 | 0 | 0 | 40 | 19 | 8 | 19 | 3 | 11 | | | |
| | | 3 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 14 | 3 | 53 | 10 | 0 | | | |
| | | | | | 29 | 19 | 0 | 24 | 12 | 5 | | | |
| | | | | | 30 | 17 | 4 | 13 | 10 | 7 | | | |
| 210 | 16 | 1 | 260 | 4 | 2 | 271 | 15 | 9 (fn. 16) | 358 | 8 | 3 | 272 | 17 | 0 (fn. 17) |
| Total for the year: |
| £852 | 0s | 4d | £1,021 | 6s | 4d | £941 | 12s | 9d | £1,214 | 0s | 9d | £1,097 | 1s | 5d (fn. 18) |
Total for coasters in the port of London for 5 years, £3, 748 0s 4d; cost of
collection, £374 16s; balance, £3, 373 4s 4d; total receipts from the
outports and the 'crossers of the sea' in the port of London, £1,378 1s 3d;
total receipts, £4,751 7s 5d; (fn. 19) less one eighth of the total, £593 18s 2d;
balance, £4,157 7s 5d; cost of the maintenance of the service at £160 a
year for 5 years, £800; 'so resteth clear per annum one year with another
for 7 parts of 8' is £671 9s 5d, £3,357 7s 5d.
466. [f.86v] 3 Dec. 1634. [Sir] Henry Palmer and Ken. Edisbury
[principal officers of the navy to Trinity House. See 467.]
The carpentry in the 2 new ships of the king [Leopard and Swallow] now
in dry dock is complete. The king's master shipwrights at Chatham and
Shipwrights' Hall have been asked to meet Palmer and Edisbury at
Deptford at 9 a.m. on Tuesday 9 Dec. to resurvey the hulls and give an
opinion on the materials, workmanship, burden and properties of these
ships. Some principal men of their brotherhood should be chosen to
observe the building, the rounding* and laying of the gundecks, the
distances between, and the sizes of, the ports, the placing of cook rooms,
storerooms and bulkheads, and to assess the draught and the burden in
tons and tonnage*, and the suitability of the ships for the service of the
king.
467. 10 Dec. 1634. [? Trinity House and the shipwrights to Sir Henry
Palmer and Ken. Edisbury]
In reply to 466 they have surveyed the 2 new ships of the king in dry dock
at Deptford and Woolwich and have calculated the burdens according to
the old rule and that laid down by the privy council on 26 May 1628.
|
| Ship built at
Woolwich by
young Mr
[Peter] Pett
[son of Phineas]
[Leopard] (fn. 20) | [f. 87] Ship built at
Deptford by Mr
Peter Pett [nephew
of Phineas]
[Swallow] (fn. 20) |
| Old rule: | | |
| Length by the keel | 95 ft | 96 ft |
| Breadth from outside to outside
[the planks] | 33 ft 8 inches | 32 ft 10 inches |
| Draught | 13 ft 6 inches | 12 ft 9 inches |
| These figures multiplied together
and divided by 100 produce in
tons and tonnage* | 575 | 536 |
| New rule: | | |
| Length by the keel | 95 ft | 96 ft |
| Breadth inside the planks | 33 ft | 32 ft 2 inches |
| Depth from the upper edge of the
keel to the diameter of the
breadth | 12 ft 4 inches | 11 ft 7½ inches |
| These figures multiplied together
and divided by 100 produce in
tons and tonnage | 515 | 478 |
The frames, workmanship, the size and scantling of timbers, the
goodness and strength of materials in the scarf* riders, beams, knees*,
etc., and the rounding* and laying of the gundecks, together with the
siting of cooks' rooms, storerooms and bulkheads is good. The distances
between the decks is 6 ft 6 inches. The lower edges of the ports will be 5 ft
from the diameter of the breadth. The ports are 8 ft 8½ inches apart in the
case of the ship at Woolwich, and 8 ft generally in that of the ship at
Deptford. The ports in both ships are 2 ft 1 inch from the orlop*, and the
sizes 2 ft 4 inches fore and aft, and 2 ft 2 inches in depth. Both ships are
suitable for the service of the king.
468. [f.87v.? Before 2 Oct. 1634] Thomas Smith, receiver general of the
duchy of Cornwall, to the king about ballastage in the Thames [Cf SP
16/275/11, annotated as received on 2 Oct. 1634; CSPD 1634–5, 224,
which ascribes it to that date. CSPD does not mention Smith's account of
an offer by the city to pay 2d for every ton of sand and gravel taken from
the Thames.]
469. 2 Oct. 1634. Sir Thomas Aylesbury, master of requests, to the
attorney general seeking advice on 468 [Cf SP 16/275/11(1); CSPD 1634–5,
224–5.]
470. 11 Dec. 1634. Order of [Sir] John Bankes [attorney general. Entry
deleted.]
He appoints 9 a.m. on Wednesday 17 Dec. to hear this business [? 468–9].
All concerned are to attend his chambers in Gray's Inn.
471. [f. 88–88v] 1535. An act for the preservation of the Thames [Printed
in Statutes, iii. 550.]