|1. Report of the Comrs of Alienation to the Lords of the Treasury, on a memorial of the judges and serjeants residing in Serjeants Inn, Fleet Street, desiring their Lordships' leave to have the keys to the garden belonging to the Alienation Office. They say that since the building the office and enclosing the garden with a brick wall, they had never heard of any key granted by the Lord Treasurer or Comrs of the Treasury to any of the judges or serjeants residing in the inn. The door in the brick wall had been constantly bolted for 20 years. Charles Boyle, Esq., the receiver-general of compositions for alienations, desired them to represent the danger the King's money would be exposed to, by permitting frequent access to the office and to the window of that chamber, where the revenue was kept. In 1679 leave was given to the Hon. Heneage Finch, Esq., then Solicitor-General, to make a door out of his lodgings in the Temple into the Alienation Office garden, and another door adjoining Mr. Finch's had been made into the garden without leave. They objected to leave being granted, as the servants, by having their masters' keys, could let in whom they pleased. Dated 1 March 1700.|
Minuted:—“11 March 1700. Mr Glanville is to inform my Lords who hath the other dore, & how it was opened.”
Also the report of Mr. William Glanville, finding that the door was made out of the chambers of Charles Osborne, Esq., of the Inner Temple, by a warrant of 9 Aug. 1678, of the then Lord Treasurer.
The memorial referred to is enclosed. 2 pages.
||2. Letter from the Comrs of Victualling to Wm. Lowndes, Esq., secretary to the Lords of the Treasury, sending a state of the case why they refused to accept and pay two bills of exchange drawn on them from Cadiz by Mr. Thomas Harvey, their agent. Dated 3 March 1700.|
The paper referred to is not with it. See also No. 22. 1 page.
||3. Presentment of the Comrs of Excise to the Lords of the Treasury, as to the duty on small ale, the same having been reported on to them by the general and particular surveyors of the London Brewery. Dated 4 March 1700. 2 pages.|
||4. Report of the Comrs of Customs to the Lords of the Treasury, on the petition of Richard Marriot, Edward Browne, gent., and others, praying for the renewal of the grant of the office of gauger of wines and other liquors in the several ports; stating that they had perused the statutes relating to gauging, which were very ancient, none being later than the reign of Hen. VIII., and the design of them was to prevent the subjects being defrauded by casks of less size than they ought to be; but the danger was then otherwise in relation to the revenue, as the casks were increased in size since the increase in duties, to the prejudice of the revenue, which was the point then in dispute, between the King and the wine merchants; there had been a controversy concerning the standard of wine measure, and there had been a trial, and by the opinion of the court a juror was withdrawn, and so the point was left undetermined, supposing the liquid and dry measure to be the same; but by searching the ancient records of the Exchequer, &c., they found that the liquid and dry measure were not the same, having experienced that a vessel containing so much wheat as the law allowed to be a wine gallon, viz., 8li Troy weight, was equal to the gallon standard pott now kept in Guildhall, London, but a corn gallon contained 9li Troy, the wine gallon pot was found to contain only 224 cubical inches, and not 231 as was generally supposed, and the gauge practiced accordingly: they thought it reasonable that the ancient laws concerning wine measures should be reviewed, to have the point, which was of great moment to the revenue, revived, and settled by Act of Parliament, and until that was done, it would not be an advantage to the Crown (except the reserved rent of 12l. per ann., which was very inconsiderable), to grant the office as desired. Dated 4 March 1700|
Minuted:—“Read 4th Mar. 1700.”
Also the petition, which states that King Charles II. on the 18th of Aug., in the 15th year of his reign, granted the office for 31 years to William Carlos and others, at a rent of 12l. 13s. 4d. 2 pages.
||5. Report of the Officers of the Mint to the Lords of the Treasury, on the memorial of Benjamin Overton, Esq., concerning certain small sums imprested out of the Exchequer, as well to him as his clerk, Mr. Macy, for defraying the charges of prosecuting clippers and coiners, of which sums they desired to be discharged without the expense of a formal account in the Exchequer; in favour of the same. Dated 5 March 1700–1.|
The memorial and the two accounts.
Minuted:—“Agreed. Wt signed 18 March 1700.” 4 pages.
|6. Petition of William Atwood, Esq., appointed Chief Justice, and Sampson Shelton Broughton, Esq., Attorney-General for the province of New York in America, seeking that an allowance for charges of their voyage, which had been submitted to their Lordships by the Comrs of Trade, together with a memorial from themselves, might be favourably considered.|
Minuted:—“5 March 1700. They are to have ½ a year on their sallarys advanced, giving an assignment of the first ½ year's sallary growing due to them, to repay the King when it becomes due.” 1 page.
||7. Copy of a letter from four of the Council of New York to Mr. Secretary Vernon, stating that his Excellency the Earl of Bellomont had died at 6 o'clock on the previous morning, and the Lieut.-Governor, Capt. Nanfan, being absent at Barbadoes, the administration had fallen on them; although under the greatest consternation by the blow, yet they sent some account of the public affairs. They were left in a most deplorable condition, for there was no money in the public treasury, nor any money for subsistence of the forces, the Earl not having left sufficient for the support of his family and payment of his funeral, having expended considerable sums for a ship and ship timber sent home to the Lords of the Admiralty, and several hundred pounds for masts for the navy, from his private purse, &c., otherwise he could not have given that specimen of his great design of saving the nation many thousand pounds per ann. in ship timber and masts. They should do their best until the Assembly met, which would be in a month. They prayed that Mr. Champante, agent for this province and for the forces, might be obliged to return with all speed the money received by him for subsistence, for they could not draw bills on him lest, being attorney to the Earl of Bellomont, he might not accept them, and they would be returned protested, but they desired he might be continued by their Lordships. The other three of the Council were 70 and 150 miles distant. They had made several minutes of Council, and published a proclamation to confirm all officers, and had used their best endeavours to support the forces at Albany; they should use their utmost endeavours to keep the province in peace, and hoped the succeeding chief Governor might have the same honourable principles and zeal for His Majesty's interest and the good of the inhabitants of this province with the late Earl (whose death they could never enough bewail), otherwise the great designs so successfully begun, to unite His Majesty's subjects, to supply the navy of England with masts, timber, &c., and to people the province, would entirely fall; they hoped he would intercede with His Majesty in relation to their next Governor; they had not an opportunity to write fully, nor to the Council of Trade, for the ship was gone, and they sent this after her by boat. Dated New York, 6 March 1700. 2½ pages.|
||8. Memorial of the Victuallers of the Navy to the Lords of the Treasury, showing that they had received 10,100l. out of 12,000l. in Exchequer bills, which they could not turn into money under 3 per cent. discount, and the graziers and hogmen refused to take the same in payment; praying directions to be given thereon, and for such further money as would enable them to buy up as much flesh meat as the season would permit. Dated 7 March 1700. 1 page.|
||9. Letter signed “W. Popple,” to William Lowndes, Esq., sending an extract from the Earl of Bellomont's letter to the [Board of Trade] of 28 November last, to be laid before the Lords of the Treasury, acquainting their Lordships that it was the opinion of the Board that Mr. Weaver's salary as collector of the province of New York during his stay in England ought not to be allowed in his account, “the rather because not only the Earl of Bellomont but my Lords of this Common did also frequently admonish him to repair thither, and an example of such an allowance would be an encouragement to neglects of that kind;” their Lordships further offer their opinion, that the profits of his place be suspended till the King or the Earl of Bellomont be reimbursed the money he had taken up. Dated 7 March 1700–1. 1½ pages.|
||10. Memoral of the Victuallers of the Navy to the Lords of the Treasury; they had notice of an additional declaration for 10,000 more men for 13 months, which would require quantities of flesh to be provided forthwith, the season of the year being so far advanced; they would require at least 5,000l. weekly, as those species could only be bought for ready money; they had orders to victual immediately a considerable number of ships, the course was now 17 months in arrear; those who formerly dealt with the office would not give further credit, and extravagant demands were made by such as made any offer. They had already represented that they had received orders to send provisions for 61 soldiers for 13 months to Newfoundland, which would cost 699l. 12s. 6d. Another order they had received for provisions for 41 soldiers more for 13 months; this they computed would cost 469l. 9s.; praying assignments of money to be made, &c. Dated 12 March 1700. 1 page.|
|11a. Memorial of Henry Lowman, housekeeper and wardrobe keeper of Kensington, to the Lords of the Treasury, as to what was due to Simon Brienne.|
Minuted:—“Read to ye K. 12th Mar. 1700–1. To have 150lper ann. in lieu of bills from Midsummer 1699.” 1 page.
|11b. Proposal of Mr. Edward Corker to the Lords of the Treasury, to be employed in obtaining the arrears of the private estate in Ireland belonging to the late King James, when Duke of York; which were due before the estate was granted away (in May 1693), as the petitioner held a warrant for 800l. out of those arrears, and never received any of it.|
United is a memorandum, that on perusal of the warrants for passing the estate, it did not appear there were any arrears before it was granted to Henry Guy; but in April 1694 there was a warrant for levying those arrears, and for 800l. to be paid to the petitioner, and the rest to Richard Topham, Esq., trustee of the Countess of Orkney.
Minuted:—“See whether these arrears are in the Countess of Orkney's grants, or any of them.”
Undated. In the Minute Book, Vol. X., p. 231, 12 March 1700–1, there is the following, which probably relates to it, viz.:—“Edward Corker. Referr to Lords Justices of Ireland to state ye case and make report.” 2 pages (quarto).
||12. Letter of Mr. Wm. Popple to W. Lowndes, Esq., sending a memorial from [Mr. Thurston], the agent for the company of soldiers at Newfoundland, by desire of the Comrs for Trade and Plantations, to be laid before the Lords of the Treasury. Dated 13 March 1700–1.|
Also the memorial, which asks for clothing to be sent by the convoy about to sail. 2 parts of pages (quarto).
||13. Certificate, signed Wm. Grymes, as to the grant of the office of paymaster of the band of pensioners as appeared by the records at the Rolls Chapel. Dated 17 March 1700. 1 page (quarto).|
||14. Letter from Mr. Burchett to Mr. Lowndes, desiring orders to the collector of Lynn to pay conduct money to the persons bringing seamen to that port. Sir Cloudesley Shovell had received orders to send a tender thither to receive them. Dated Admiralty Office, 17 March 1700–1. 1 page.|
||15. Report of the Comrs of Customs to the Lords of the Treasury, on the answers of the searchers to what was proposed for regulating the searcher's office, stating that if the ease and accommodation of the officers were to be preferred to the interest and security of the revenue, the objections made to their proposal by the searchers would have some weight; but as they were of opinion the officers ought to be constituted for the service of the revenue, and that the revenue was not established for the advantage of the officers, they saw no argument in any of those papers to persuade them (the Comrs) that their proposal was unreasonable or impracticable, but thought it should be pursued. They then go into the allegations of the searchers in detail, as to methods to be followed in the examination of goods, visitation of ships, &c., and finish with the opinion “that trade ought to be accommodated in every thing that may consist with the safety of the revenue,” but they could not “think it reasonable that the King's owne officers should obstruct regulations for his Mats and the public service, barely because they happen to lessen their owne fees or perquisites.” Dated 18 March 1700–1. 2½ pages.|
|16. [Docquet.]—“Answer of ye five patent searchers in ye port of Lond. to ye reply of ye Comrs of the Customes,” expressing their concern that they were represented as persons who minded only their own advantage without regard to the King's service; and stating that had those hon. gentlemen condescended to speak with them, before they made their proposal, they doubted not they would have been convinced of the impracticability of some parts of it; they (the searchers) well knew that all officers were constituted for the service of the revenue only; they well knew also the inconveniences that would attend the examination of the goods at the quays before they were packed, but submitted themselves to their Lordships, and hoped for indemnity from such suits as should be brought against them; the wharfingers had united their interest in one general stock, and the whole quays were in one; they had allotted one quay for shipping out, and scarce any goods were landed there, but almost all the goods for exportation were there shipped off, except sugar, logwood, and such gross goods, and those but at certain places, most of the other quays being kept for the importation of foreign goods and shipping coast goods, &c. Undated, but soon after 18 March 1700–1. See the preceding report, No. 15. 1½ pages.|
||17. Report of the Comrs or Officers of Excise, to the Lords of the Treasury, as to the “prejudices” the revenue of Excise received by the brewing and selling malt drink of excessive strength; finding that the brewing and selling drinks called stout, Derby and Nottingham ale, and such like liquors, which were all of extraordinary strength, was much increased throughout the kingdom, especially within the bills of mortality. They were of opinion that the use of such excessively strong drinks lessened the consumption of the quantity of strong drink, first because the persons who drank those extraordinarily strong drinks were not able to drink half that quantity of such drink as of common strong beer and ale, if none of those extraordinarily strong drinks were brewed; and second, the manufacturers, artificers, farmers, labourers, and travellers, who were the great consumers of exciseable beer and ale, generally measured their drinking by the money they could afford, and if they drank common beer or ale would drink a full Winchester quart for 2d. or 2½d., whereas they drank no more than one pint of this extraordinarily strong drink, for the same or more money. So that out of 40s. expended in the ordinary strong drink the duty was 9s. 6d., and out of the same money expended in stout the duty was but 4s. 9d.; third, many persons who brewed these sorts of drink mixed them in their cellars with small beer. They suggest two remedies, first, an assize on all beer and ale sold by retail, or second, a further duty on all beer and ale of extraordinary strength, and give various reasons against the first remedy, amongst them that it would amount to a prohibition as regards the Northern and Welsh counties, as they brewed no other than very strong beer. They recommend the second, viz., that 4s. 9d. a barrel should be laid on all beer and ale of above 20s. the barrel. Dated 18 March 1700. 2 pages.|
|18. Petition of Lieut. Hans Finley of Col. Buchan's late regiment, addressed to the Lords of the Treasury, showing that his name was given in to Mr. Cardonell “with others that were broke,” to have half pay, but being absent in Ireland, there was no certificate that he was alive: praying to be inserted on the half pay list: with a corroborative certificate at the foot.|
Undated, but about 18 March 1700–1, as his name was then ordered to be inserted in any list of half pay to be made. See Letter Book, Vol. X., p. 328. 1 page.
||19. Letter of Mr. W. Popple to Wm. Lowndes, Esq., intimating to the Lords of the Treasury that no money had yet been ordered for the captain and 40 additional men about to proceed to Newfoundland. The frigate “Assistance” lay in the Downs, and was intended to carry the men and provisions for them. The provisions for the company then at Newfoundland were already on board the ship. Dated 19 March 1700–1.|
In the Minute Book, Vol. X., p. 267, 9 May 1701, is:—“Write a letter to ye E. of Ranelagh out of ye mony in his hands to pay to the agent of ye compa for Newfoundland, 264. 6. 8. for subsist., clearings, & clothing of ye officer & 41 additional men, from 25 Ap. to 24 Xbr. 1701. incl., taking care that this expence do not make an excess upon ye establ. above 300ml p[er] ann.” 1½ pages.
||20. Petition of the Knights, Citizens, and Burgesses serving in Parliament for the city of York, and others, the Justices of the peace of that county, to the King, praying for a warrant to make use of the ruinous walls, &c., of the King's manor house at York, to build the gaol. Undated, but noticed in the Minute Book, Vol. X., p. 235, 19 March 1700; and further on p. 248, 8 April 1701, the surveyor was to hasten his report. 1 small page.|
||21. Memorial of Sir Basill Dixwell to the Lords of the Treasury, showing that the whole support of the lieutenancy of Dover Castle depended on the 160l. per ann. payable to the Lord Warden of the Cinque Ports, and the 50l. per ann. payable to him as lieutenant of the castle, of which payments 229l. 1s. 6d. were in arrear: praying for an order for speedy payment. Dated 19 March 1700–1.|
Minuted:—“18 July 1701. For ye future he will be well paid by ye Earle of Ranelagh. There is no fond for ye arrear.” 1 page.
|22. Memorial of Sir John Houblon and John Houblon, jun., to the Lords of the Treasury, in reply to the memorial of the Comrs of Victualling, about the supply of money to Mr. Harvey, the high rate of exchange at which the bills were drawn, the living above his salary, and the vain extravagant expenses of Mr. Harvey: praying that the bills might be forthwith paid.|
Accompanied by the copy of a testimonial in favour of Mr. Harvey.
Minuted:—“21 March 1700. 1,100£ is to be paid by ye victuallers to John Houblon, junr & Company, assignees of Sir Wm Hodges upon a bill of 3,000 dollrs at 59d and 1,500drs at 58d, drawn by Thomas Harvey at Cadiz for money furnished there for the service of the victualling.” 2 pages, much decayed.
|23. Petition of His Majesty's messengers in ordinary, showing that the generality of them had during the late war been obliged to take up several sums of money, on pawn of their goods and otherwise, at very great interest, to enable them to carry on His Majesty's service at home and abroad; the greatest part of which remained unpaid, the petitioners having to pay the interest; the patience of their creditors was quite worn out: praying for an order for payment of their old bills to Christmas 1698, besides which there were about 3,000l. due to them on new bills for the last three years.|
Minuted:—“Read 24 Mar. 1700. Ref. to Mr Vanburgh to state how much the messengers' bills since the Revolution have amounted to, how much they have received, how much they clayme to be still due, and what part thereof in the case of every p[er]ticular messenger ought (in Mr Vanburgh's opinion) to be allowed and disallowed.” 1 page (quarto.)
||24. Letter from Mr. Charles Mason to William Lowndes, Esq., asking him to let their Lordships know that he owed Mr. Whittley 300l., which he was willing and ready to pay. Dated 24 March 1700.|
In the Minute Book, Vol. X., p. 237, 24 March 1700, is:—“To the agents to call upon Mr Charles Mason forthwth to pay into the Excheqr the sume, being abt 300li, wch he owes to Morgan Whitley upon the accot of ye sd Whitley, as recr of the dutys on marriages, births, & buryals, & to take a tally for the same in Mr Whitley's name, provided Mr Whitly do give him a discharge for so much as Mr Mason shall pay. To which end the agents are also to call upon Mr Whitley.” ½ page.
||25. Petition of Lawrence Stanyan, one of the farmers of the Revenue in Ireland, praying that certain undetermined articles in the state of the account of that farm might be referred to the Earl of Rochester, the King's Lieutenant of Ireland.|
With a note at the foot, that they were so referred on 25 March 1701. 1 page.
||26. An abstract of the gross produce of His Majesty's revenue in Ireland for one quarter, ending at Lady Day 1701. 1 page.|
|27. Letter of W. Bishop of Worcester, “Almoner” to [the King], detailing the mode in which he had distributed the charities ordered to be paid by Mr. Nicolas by Her late Majesty, viz., he inquired of every petitioner whether he had served His Majesty or his royal predecessors in the army, navy, or royal household, or whether there was any debt owing to them from the Crown which might entitle them to charity. Many of them had been kept from perishing, but many were now brought to great straits, their pensions being seven quarters in arrear: asking that notice might be given if these pensions were taken away.|
In the Minute Book, Vol. X., p. 239, 26 March 1701, is:—“Bishop of Worcester's letter read, concerning the money he receives of Mr Nicholas for charities. There are 7 quarters due at Xmas 1700. The King orders them to cease from Xmas 1700, but to be paid until that time, and no further. Halfe a year of the arrear is to be paid at present. Signifye this to the Bishop.” 1 page.
||28. Report of the Officers of the Mint, on the petition of Mr. Weddell, wherein he craved allowance of 61l. 13s. 6d., the balance of 101l. 13s. 6d. expended by him in the prosecution of Joseph Horton, who was convicted at Chester of having a coining press: recommending that Mr. “Burrett,” solicitor to the Treasury, should pay the 61l. 13s. 6d. out of money imprested to him for prosecutions. Dated 26 March 1701.|
The petition of Robert Weddell, Deputy Warden of the Mint, late at Chester. 2 pages.
||29. Letter of Captain Delavall to W. Lowndes, Esq., desiring him to put their Lordships of the Treasury in mind of the residue of 500l. [viz. 300l.] promised him by several Lords of the Council upon his last undertaking a voyage to Barbary for the redemption of English captives: sending also an account of the maintenance of the Moors in their voyage, and of the fees paid at the Treasury and Exchequer on receipt of sums for redemption of the captives, also the wages of an interpreter, &c., amounting to 371l. 3s. 10d. Dated 27 March 1701.|
Minuted:—“13 May 1702. To be laid before the Queen.”
In the Minute Book, Vol. XI, p. 163, for that date is:—“Capt. Delaval's papers are read. He demands 300l, rest of 500l, and his charges upon ye Moors going home. To be laid before the Queen.”
On the 9th June 1702, p. 185, he demanded 671l. 13s. 10d. “His demand to be moderated.” And on 8 July, p. 212, 500l. were to be allowed in full of all pretensions for his service and charges in carrying home the Morocco agents and bringing back several slaves. 2 pages.
||30. Representation of the agents for bringing in taxes, about bonds to be taken for Mr. Mason, late receiver for the county of Cambridge. Dated 27 March 1701.|
In the Minute Book, Vol. X., p. 242, ult. March 1701, is:—
security. The agents wth Sr John Conyers, Mr Pickering, & al. Mr Pickering will signe ye bond. 1 page.
||31. Letter from the officers of Ordnance to William Lowndes, Esq., desiring that an enclosure as to stores for St. John's, Newfoundland, might be laid before the Lords of the Treasury. Dated 28 March 1701.|
The enclosure referred to, which applies for clearance of the stores by the Custom-house.
Minuted:—“Ordered.” 2 pages.
||32a. Report of Lord Ranelagh, on the petition of Col. Farrington, as to taking off the respites on his pay. Dated 29 March 1701.|
Also the petition.
Minuted:—“Read 2d Apr. 1701. A warrt to be prepared.” 2 pages.
|32b. Two petitions of Captain Rigby to the Lords of the Treasury, the first praying them to accept Mr. Joseph Reading at the Bell Inn, Wallbrook, London, and Mr. John Woodward at the Crown Inn, Kensington, as security for payment of his fine. [Minuted:—“The 200li being paid down. The rest to be pd every 6 months, & if he dyes before any of the daies of paymt, his heirs, exrs, & suretys are to be discharged of the sumes or pay of[f] them as shall then remn unpd.”]; and the second that Matthew Struch might be accepted in room of the said Reading. Undated.|
There is an entry in the Minute Book, Vol. X., p. 245, on 3 April 1701, for 200l. to be paid to Capt. Rigby, to enable him to pay 200l. fine to the King. 2 pages (quarto), the upper part all decayed.
||32c. Petition of William Savage, Batchelor of Divinity, to the Lords of “His Majesty's” Treasury, showing that King James I., by patent of the 7th year of his reign, granted to Francis Morice and Francis Philips (inter alia), all his rectory impropriate of St. Buttolph's without Aldgate, London, in which patent there is a general exception of all advowsons, donations, &c., the impropriations whereof were then granted away from the Crown; in pursuance of which King Charles II. [in the 33rd year of his reign], granted to Richard Hollingworth, D.D., the curacy of the said church, which he enjoyed for 20 years, till Samuel Brewster, Esq., the present impropriator, gained a judgment against him and ejected him from the same; after which the Doctor resigned his nomination to His Majesty, who thereupon granted to the petitioner the office of curate or chaplain in the said church. The Bishop of London licensed him, and he was put in possession of the desk and pulpit by the churchwardens; but Brewster forcing the keys from the sexton, and putting a lock upon the desk, has ever since kept the petitioner out of his rights: praying that as he is only a fellow of a college in Cambridge, having no ecclesiastical preferment, and as he has expended a considerable sum in maintaining His Majesty's right, that the same for the future shall be defended, and the suit carried on at His Majesty's expense. Undated. It was about 20 years from 1681, and the second paper mentions “this instant March.”|
Minuted:—“Send for Mr. Borret to be here the next time my Lords meet.”
Another paper, containing the same matters set out somewhat more fully.
In the Minute Book, Vol. X., p. 252, 14 April 1701. is:—“Their Lops order Mr Borret to proceed to a trial or a hearing in the case concerning the church of St Buttolph to mainteyne the King's title at ye King's charge.” 2 pages.
||33. Report of the Officers of the Board of Works to the Lords of the Treasury, as to the expenses of works under the care of Mr. Tallman, about the gardens at Hampton Court. Dated 2 April 1701. Also,|
“Abstract of ye bills passed for ye gardens att Hampton Court from ye last of December 1699 to ye last of December 1700.”
Minuted:—“To be laid before ye King. Read 23 June 1701. The weekly paymts to ye works to be continued.” 2 pages.
||34. Report of the Officers of the Mint to the Lords of the Treasury, on the petition and bill of Robert Weddell, late deputy warden of the Mint at Chester Castle, recommending the allowance to him of 30l. for his salary to Michaelmas 1698 [Minuted:—“This 30l allod.”]; that the charges of 15l. for his journey by post from Chester to London and back in the midst of winter should be allowed [Minuted:—“15l. alld.”]; that for other work and attendance at the Tower he be allowed 30l. [Minuted:—“30l. alld.”] For other services in prosecuting clippers and coiners, recommending that he should be rewarded out of money imprested to Mr. Neale, and in the hands of his agent, Mr. Fanquier. Dated Mint Office, in the Tower, 2 April 1701.|
The petition and account referred to. 4 pages.
||35. Order of Council referring the petition of John Bowles to the Lords of the Treasury. His application was for the remainder of 7,135l. 8s. 2d., whereof he had received but 584l. 10s. 5d., and he sets forth in his petition that by letters patent of 30 Sept. 1690, he was empowered to measure all ships from 13 Feb. 1688 to 17 Sept. 1690, and to receive a quarter of what he saved His Majesty by the admeasurement. Dated 3 April 1701.|
Also the petition.
Minuted:—“4 July 1701. To see wt has been don on his former peticons.”
Again:—“Upon their Lõps having had an accot of wt had been don on his former peticons, 8 Aug. 1701, my Lds are resolv'd to make no further allowance in this case.” 3½ pages.
||36. Letter from the Comrs of the Navy to Sir Thomas Littleton, Baronet, Treasurer of the Navy, complaining that the clerks of the Cheque at Chatham and Sheerness were at a stand as to the payment of conduct money to seamen, and for the men sent thither by vice-admirals, &c.; asking to know the pleasure of the Lords of the Treasury thereon. Dated 3 April 1701.|
Minuted:—“Read 7 Apr. 1701.” 1 page.
||37. Report of Lord Ranelagh to the Lords of the Treasury, affirming the facts in the petition hereafter described, and recommending the grant of an annuity of 300l. a year out of the revenue of Ireland for 21 years, to the petitioner and her assigns. Dated 7 April 1701.|
The last minute on it is:—“Read to ye K. 9 Apr. Not granted.”
Petition of Sarah Abbott, relict of Mordecai Abbott, Esq., to the King. Her late husband, soon after the King's accession, was employed by Mr. Harboard, paymaster-general of the forces in Ireland, and since by the Right Hon. the Earl of Ranelagh, paymaster-general of the forces in England, as his deputy, in which employment he continued during all the difficulties of the late war, and to the time of his death, and assisted in forming and perfecting the design of subscriptions for circulating Exchequer bills, at a time when the public credit was at its greatest extremity, by calling in the clipt money; he had a grant of 300l. a year out of the forfeited estates in Ireland, which was then resumed by Act of Parliament. Before he had enjoyed the office lately conferred on him of Receiver-General of the Customs a year, he sunk under the weight of the great business, leaving eight young children: praying an allowance for the support and education of the children. 1½ pages.
||38. Report of the Comrs of Customs to the Lords of the Treasury, on the petition of the merchants and other persons trading in tobacco, in the port of Liverpool; praying enlargement of their time, after the 1st December last, for payment of their bonds: expressing their opinion that if all the merchants of England would come to the terms proposed by Alderman Clayton for Liverpool, it might be for the public service; but it would be necessary to have their Lordships' directions. Dated 7 April 1701.|
Also the petition, with 24 signatures.
Minuted:—“Ordered, provided they pay by ye 10th of May next.” 2 pages.
||39. Presentment by the Comrs of Customs to the Lords of the Treasury, with respect to the debt of the Old East India Company, which amounted to 39,554l. 8s. 1½d., on their importation account, and 37,880l. 16s. 10½d. for such goods as were subject to 15 per cent. of the value for which they were sold, by the candle: also with respect to the debt of the New East India Company, on their importation account, for the cargo of the ship “Norris,” amounting to 16,957l. 16s. 10d., not including the 15 per cent. on the same. Dated 7 April 1701.|
Minuted:—“8 Ap. 1701. To be read to-morr. morn, when the comtees are here.” 2 pages.
||40. Report of Mr. Auditor Done to the Lords of the Treasury, on the petition of Sir Thomas Knatchbull, in respect to arrears of his pay and half pay as muster master to the marine regiments commanded by the Marquis of Carmarthen and Sir Cloudesley Shovell. Dated 8 April 1701.|
The petition referred to. 3 pages.
|41. Memorial of Mr. Onslow and others, [officers of the Excise Office], to the Lords of the Treasury. The laying a further duty upon the better sort of drink had always been disrelished and exploded, but now a further duty of 4s. 9d. of every barrel of beer or ale of above 18s. value was proposed; they ask where would be the equality of it. Some said it would be of great benefit to the public. It would either (1) discourage the consumption of drink of extraordinary strength and advance the consumption of ordinary strong beer and ale, or else (2) the revenue would be advantaged. As to the first, the contrary was to be feared, for men who had accustomed their bodies to strong liquors, if debarred from their stout by means of a surcharge laid upon it, would make use of brandy and foreign spirits, or fall to brewing their own drink, a mischief lately experienced in the Excise on doubling the duties. And whereas it was suggested that people could not drink above half the quantity of stout or strong Nottingham or Derby ale that they did of common strong beer or ale, to the diminution of half the duty, it was noted that men who had vitiated their stomachs with the constant use of hot drinks were habitually feverish and thirsty, and though they could not drink so large a draught of what was excessively strong, nor so great a quantity of it at one time, as they could of what was milder, yet they oftener repeated their drinking, and were sooner dry again; and what the revenue lost by one it gained by the other. As to the other part, that the revenue would be advantaged by such duty proportionably to the loss it then sustained by the brewing and consumption of such extraordinary drink, it did not hitherto appear that the revenue sustained such a loss, but it was evident strong drink consumed a great quantity of malt, which improved the rents. They state various other difficulties and objections to the proposal. “Delivered to the Lords, April 8, 1701.” 2 pages.|
||42. Report of the Comrs of Customs to the Lords of the Treasury, on the petition of John Ford, searcher of the port of Chichester, praying payment of his part of the information mentioned in the petition, and recompense for his extraordinary trouble about other informations; certifying that the informations and prosecutions were well attested, and several of their number had witnessed his diligent attendance in Parliament in prosecuting and convicting Signioret, D'Harse, and other merchants upon articles of impeachment, upon which they were fined 19,500l., which was also attested by Sir Rowland Gwynn, chairman, and other gentlemen of that committee. He had made oath that he had expended upwards of 200l. in bringing over witnesses. They thought he deserved a good reward. As to the pretentions of Mr. Joseph Beverton, in the petition annexed, for the same services, they referred to the said Ford's answer annexed. Dated 8 April 1701.|
The petitions and the answer referred to, and ten other papers relating thereto.
Minuted:—“Read 20 June 1701. 200l. charges & 300l. reward to be p[ai]d him out of the mony arising by forfeitures.” 15 pages.
||43. Presentment of the Comrs of Customs to the Lords of the Treasury, founded on letters from Col. Robert Quary, Judge of the Admiralty in the province of Pennsylvania and the Jerseys, and on another paper containing his observations on the state of trade and the increase of piracy. They had given directions for removing the officer from Bridlington to Cohansy, as was proposed, and would send a circular to the officers in the plantations to examine the goods more strictly. They were of opinion that a small vessel for Delaware Bay would much prevent illegal trade. They had found Col. Quary to be a gentleman of good understanding in the plantation affairs, of great industry and probity, and deserved encouragement, and they proposed that he should be made surveyor-general of the duties under the Act 25 Charles II., in those provinces. [The salary minuted:—“200£ p[er] annū.”] Col. Quary in some of his late letters complained of the difficulty he laboured under as to trial of pirates, many of whom had been seized, and their effects to a considerable value lodged in the hands of Governor Penn. Their (the Comrs) letters had been opened before they came to their hands, and other letters entirely intercepted. The Comrs referred to the letters sent to the Lords of the Council of Trade for the history of piracy, and offered it as their opinion (as they understood was represented to Mr. Randolph, the surveyor-general), that for the prevention of these and many other abuses all those governments should be vested in the Crown. Dated 8 April 1701.|
Accompanied by one of the papers referred to, entitled:—“Some remarks on the trade of these parts, with a true accot of severall grand abuses in trade, and the proper remedies, humbly presented to the Commissrs of His Mats Customs.” Dated Philadelphia, 6 March 1699/700.
It contains information about the Madagascar trade, which was then thought the best to get money. It states that the manner of the voyage of the ships was this:—they carried a suitable cargo to the Madeiras, and there they took in a loading of wine and brandy, and from thence direct to Madagascar, where they met the pirates, and purchased on very easy terms their plunder, and then came back. The consumption of tobacco in Barbadoes was not so much, and yet the quantity shipped thither was almost ten times as much. He had found out the mystery, it was repacked and sent to England, Ireland, and the Dutch settlements. That province (Pennsylvania) grew very populous, and the people were very industrious, and had so improved the tillage, that bread, flour, and beer were drugs in the markets in the West Indies; as the trade was overdone, they had resolved to go on with planting tobacco in the three upper counties, where there was never any planted before; the land was very proper for it, and would produce very bright tobacco, and the number of the people would produce vast quantities; they had no other way of making returns to England, and so the place was very miserable. There were more than six times the goods imported than were exported, and thus the money was carried away. Four times the tobacco was made there that year that had been made before, and all of it engrossed by the Scotch, as almost all other trade there was. No one who designed to trade fairly could give the extravagant rates they did, being not less than double what was given in Maryland. They carried on a constant trade from Curacao: a vessel from thence, about a month before, belonging to Scotch merchants, with linen, &c. of the manufacture of Holland, ran the goods ashore at a place called “Bumbo-hooke.” The business was then publicly known, and it was impossible to prevent it. But a small vessel of four guns and 15 or 20 brisk men would effectually answer the end. A most pernicious trade had been carried on between this bay and New York by several vessels for above 12 years, but more especially by one Graverard, a Dutchman, of New York; the manner was this:—He generally entered some small quantity of tobacco; when he had his despatches he took in his lading, which lay in some convenient place in the bay; when he came near Sandy-Hook he put ashore all the tobacco, except what he had a cocket for, at a small Dutch village. If any vessels were ready to sail for Surinam, Curacao, or Newfoundland, they touched there and took in the tobacco; and if no vessels were ready, the wood boats carried it up to York. He nearly took this man in the bay with six of the pirates on board his sloop, with their estates to carry them to the capes of Virginia. He sent expresses to the Governors of Virginia and Maryland, and Governor Blakiston seized him with his sloop and one of the pirates, the rest being on board ships for England; the sloop and lading, with all his ill-gotten goods from the pirates, were condemned, which had squeezed the rogue pretty well; but he was upon the old trade again. Were there a small vessel it would spoil his trade. Abundance of East India goods had been brought into all the governments on that main, more especially northward, by pirates and other illegal traders; they were generally repacked to pass for other goods. He was assured that no cask or bale had been pierced or searched for two years; abundance of cut and leaf tobacco had been pressed into flour and bread casks. He advised the officers should be assisted if necessary.
Their Honours were much misinformed by Mr. Randolph in placing a collector at Burlington in West Jersey. It was 20 miles from Philadelphia, and no vessels came there. An officer might do the King service at Cape May; he might have seized 20,000l. worth of East India goods that summer. There were other places, called Cohanzy and Salem, where many vessels traded from Boston. It might be of service to remove the officer.
There was great abuse in the revenue of 1d. per pound on tobacco shipped to the plantations; they pressed into a hogshead 1,000 weight, and entered it for 400 pounds weight, and paid duty for no more, and that was not the worst, for the merchants ordered a sort of cask called barrels to be made, in which they pressed 600 or 700 weight, and entered them for 200 weight, and frequently “cropp the chymes” of a hogshead and enter them for barrels, and pay but for 200 weight, when really there is 800 or 900 weight in the cask. The collectors are vying with one another who shall receive most of the money for the duty of tobacco; the merchants manage them by going to one, and telling him unless he will give him such an encouragement they will go and enter with the other who will accept the terms, and the collectors give the merchants certificates for so many hogsheads and barrels entered, without mentioning the weight; the officers in Barbadoes finding great casks entered but for 200 weight, and the largest at most but 400 weight, have forced them to a post entry. The King is cheated of two-thirds of his duty of all tobacco shipped off to Barbodoes, and the rest of the markets in America.
Governor Penn was very zealous, and willing to do all things to promote the King's interest in his Government, and the writer proposed the insertion of several useful clauses in the new Act; amongst the rest there is one that all tobacco shipped shall be weighed and entered according to the weight, but it would be to no purpose unless put in execution, as he knew it would not be; the good management of this affair would be of great service in preventing such quantities of tobacco from going hence to Barbadoes.
The King was much abused in payment of the duty, for he lost on all the money received 30l. per cent.
If the management of this branch of the revenue were committed to him, viz., the 1d. per pound on the tobacco shipped to the plantations, the King should not be cheated of his duty, and the revenue would be much more considerable. 6 pages.
||44. Report of the Comrs of Excise to the Lords of the Treasury, on the petition of William Leich, lately a collector of Excise in the Macclesfield collection, as to certain bill transactions with Peter Wright, an alderman of Macclesfield; recommending the allowance to him of 491l. 10s. 1¾d. Dated 8 April 1701.|
Also the petition. 5 pages.
||45. Report of the Comrs of Customs to the Lords of the Treasury, on the petition of Giel Pieterson Gorter, master of a ship from Dantzic, which was forfeited under the Navigation Act; leaving the question of relief to their Lordships. Dated 10 April 1701.|
Minuted:—“To be remitted half ye King's p[er]t.”
The petition and two other papers. 4½ pages.
||46. “Great wardrobe. Certificate about Court drummers' and trumpeters' liveries paid in money.” Dated 11 April 1701.|
Minuted:—“To be laid before ye King. Again:—23th Apr. 1701. The King will find them no liverys in money.” 1 page.
||47. Letter of the Lords Justices of Ireland to the Lords of the Treasury, as to the quit rents out of the Earl of Antrim's estate in the barony of Glenarme, in co. Antrim, Ireland, which the Comrs of the Revenue had instructions to recover; they would give such directions as were necessary to recover the King's title to those rents. Dated 12 April 1701.|
Accompanied by a letter of the Comrs of Revenue, Ireland, dated 15 March 1700, enclosing (1) a copy of a letter of the Comrs of Revenue, Ireland, of 2 April 1698; (2) the copy of the then state of the case (2 April 1698); and (3) the copy of the state of the case as it stood, 13 March 1700, all relating to these quit rents.
There is a long minute on the back of this letter to the Comrs of Revenue, Ireland, to the effect that they were to look after the King's interests in this behalf. 9 pages.
||48. Report of the Comrs for Transportation to the Lords of the Treasury, on the petition of Mr. Joseph Earle, owner, and John Easton, master of a ship, which carried forces from Ireland to France, on the surrender of Limerick, the ship being lost on the voyage; showing what was due for freight, &c.; they had not made out a debenture, as the ship did not come to disaster by the enemy, but was shipwrecked at Ilfracombe. It was not the “custom of any office to make any warrant against shipwreck on the King's account.” Dated 12 April 1701. 1½ pages.|
|49. Letter from the Navy Office to Sir Thomas Littleton, Bart., Treasurer of the Navy, sending copies of two letters from the clerks of the Cheque at Portsmouth and Sheerness, to be laid before the Lords of the Treasury, touching the difficulty of paying Exchequer bills on account of the discount.|
Minuted:—“Read 15 Apr. 1701.”
Also the two copies. 3 pages.
|50. Memorial of Theophilus Westwood, clerk of the impost on wines, on behalf of the Lord Mayor, sheriffs, &c. of London, applying for the remission of certain fees claimed at the Exchequer on sums which were formerly paid at the Custom-house without fees.|
Minuted:—“15 Apr. 1701. Mr Tailer to examine & settle these fees, & pay them out of secret service. P'd 13li 6s. 1st Aug. 1701.”
Also a memorandum of the fees disbursed. 1½ pages.
||51. “An accot of deposits on prisage wine received by Mr Wm Bodington, deputy to the Prisage Mar in the port of London, from the 28th of May 1697 to the 16th of Aprill 1701, when the deposits were taken into the collector's hands.” ½ page.|
||52. “Moneys paid to Richard Povey, Esq., out of the 20,000l. ordered by the Rt Honoble the Lords of the Treasury the 5th of July 1700, out of the surplus of the Customs, for the sick and wounded.” Dated 16 April 1701. ½ page.|
|53. Memorial of J. Stanley, warden of the Mint, to the Lords of the Treasury, stating that it was his duty to prosecute counterfeiters and diminishers of the coin, the charge whereof “in and about this town” for the last year was 34l. 6s. 9d.; that formerly the wardens had money imprested for that purpose, and for want of it there were a great many coiners, especially in the north and west, and the justices very much neglect such prosecutions because of the charges: proposing that Mr. Burret, their Lordships' solicitor, might have an order about the same.|
Accompanied by:—“An accompt of the charges for prosecuting coyners for ye year 1700.”
Minuted:—“23 Ap. 1701. This 34. 6. 9. is to be p[ai]d p[er] Mr Borret. Wt signed 25 Apr. 1701.” 2 pages.
||54. Memorial of the officers of the regiment of marines lately under the command of the Hon. Col. Seymour, begging their Lordships to issue their pay, the regiment being cleared and adjusted before Auditor Done. 23 signatures.|
Minuted:—“23th April 1701. Audrs Imprest & Mr Dodington to attend abt ye accots of marines on Tuesday next.” 1 page.
||55. Memorial of the Trustees for exchanging Exchequer bills; on the 29th of April the seventh contract would determine, when 15,000l. at 3 per cent. on 500,000l. would be due to the contractors; the payments made by the subscribers had been 499,850l.; they had exchanged bills amounting to 476,395l. 1s., &c. &c. Dated 23 April 1701. 1½ pages.|
||56. Order in Council, on reading the petition of Lieut. Daniel Hunt, praying that his services in the plantations might he examied, and an allowance made him, and particularly for bringing over Captain Kidd's treasure: referring the matter to the Lords of the Treasury to report upon. Dated 24 April 1701.|
Also copy of his petition and his case, the latter details his services. Their Lordships to not appear to have made any report.
Minuted:—“29 Apr. 1701. To be layd before ye K., Mr Bl. present. Read 23 June 1701. Give him 50li. for his journey. Paid 28th July 1701.” 3 pages.
||57. Memorial of Henry Baker to the Lords of the Treasury, praying their Lordships' commands as to prosecution of certain persons for counterfeiting and forging a 100l. tally, and for a fraud by an under clerk of the Exchequer, and another, both of whom were in the Gatehouse. Dated 24 April 1701.|
Minuted:—“Order'd.” 1 page.
|58. A warrant from the Lords of the Treasury to the Comrs of Excise, authorizing them to pay to all their officers (whose salaries did not exceed 100l. per ann.), the sums assessed on them to the second 2s. aid in respect of their salaries.|
Minuted:—“25 Ap. 1701. The audr & comptr must satisfie theire owne clerks.”
Accompaned by the petition of George Bruere and others of the Auditor's office, and John Tooker and others of the Controller's office of Excise, enclosing copy of a warrant on the same subject. 3 pages.
|59. Petition of John Hudson, gent., to the Lords of the Treasury, showing that he had served in all the late war in Flanders as controller of the field and town hospitals for the sick and wounded; the House of Commons had consented that he should have half pay from Michaelmas 1697, but he had received nothing: praying that his half pay might be ordered. Further, he was then ordered to take care of the sick and wounded for Holland, which might happen to be 10,000 men, but had no money allowed.|
Also two certificates as to his service. Dated 25 April 1701. 3 pages.
||60. Report of the Comrs of Customs to the Lords of the Treasury, on the petition of John Linegar, a tidesman of London, praying to to be delivered from the costs of prosecution of an information for a lading of French wine from St. Sebastian; in favour of his being allowed his costs (81l. 10s.), &c. Dated 29 April 1701.|
Minuted:—“The 81. 10. 0. to be p[ai]d as an incidt charge.”
The petition, the account of his charges, and three other papers relating thereto. 7 pages.
||61. Report of the Comrs of Customs to the Lords of the Treasury, on the petition of divers hoymen belonging to several of the ports of the counties of Kent and Essex, suggesting that they are places belonging to and within the port of London, and complaining that they had to take out warrants and despatches from the Custom-house, for carrying inland provisions, such as corn, hops, &c., to London only, and that great fees were exacted for cockets, &c.; offering instead to pass by transire on reasonable fees. The substance of the answers of the Customs' officers for the counties of Kent and Essex was—|
(For Sandwich), that the declaration in the book of rates which extended the port of London to the North Foreland, in the Isle of Thanet, was with a saving of the known rights of Sandwich and Ipswich, and by the old establishment of ports printed in the book of rates, Faversham, Milton, and Rochester were set out (as they had always been esteemed to be) members of the port of Sandwich. There are then details of various regulations for the transmission of corn by the hoys, &c. The officers concluded that their fees were settled in Parliament, and if taken from them, they should be made good to them at the King's charge.
The answer of the officers for Ipswich was, that they did not oblige the petitioners to take out any cocket or warrant for apples or cherries, nor for corn (except for a very large quantity) anything but a lett-pass, for which they took no more than according to the table of fees, viz., 3s. 6d. On these answers being communicated to the gentlemen who appeared on behalf of the petitioners, they replied—
1st. That a vote in Parliament was not sufficient to create fees; that nothing but an Act of Parliament or prescription could justify them, and that the officers had neither.
2ndly. They carried only corn and such commodities as were not prohibited, &c.
3rdly. That the owners were willing to pay fees for transires, &c.
Upon all which the Comrs of Customs observed that as to the establishment of fees, the Act of Tonnage said that the officers of the Customs should take such fees as were taken in the 4th of James I. until further settled by Parliament. A table of fees signed by the Speaker of the House of Commons in 1670 is the authority of Parliament under which the officers of Sandwich claimed, and as to the boundaries and distinction of the ports, they observed that the “saving” in the return of the commission for setting out and bounding the ports was very particular and express in these words, “Saveing the usuall and knowne rights, liberties, and priviledges to the ports of Sandwich & Ipswich, and either of them, and the knowne members thereof, and of the customers, comptrollers, searchers, and their deputies of and within the said ports of Sandwich and Ipswich,” &c., and all the ports in Kent and Essex on this side the Foreland and the Nase had been always under the regulations of the coast trade, as distinct ports from London, and always so accounted, except as to importations from foreign parts. The words in the Act of Frauds, for regulating the coast trade, were general, and there was no mention of a transire in that regulation, which was only an expedient in practice for the ease and accommodation of trade. Upon the whole, for the ease of these ports on this side the Foreland and the Nase, for furnishing London with provisions only, they recommend the accommodation agreed on in 1692, between the officers of the Customs and the hoymen of Kent, to be renewed, or that the fees should be moderated by their Lordships' authority. Dated 29 April 1701.
Minuted:—“The former accommodation to be re-established & extended to corne & hopps.”
Also the petition referred to.
“The King's officers of London's answer to the agreement between the officers and hoymen of Kent.”
And the “accommodation” above mentioned.
In the Minute Book, Vol. X., p. 273, 20 May 1701, is:—“Comrs of Customs with the genten concerned for ye hoymen of Kent & Mr Bretton. He insists that there be cocqts & bonds, and to have his fees, but said at last he would submit them.” 9 pages.
||62. Report of the Comrs of Customs to the Lords of the Treasury, on the petition of John Hodgson, recounting his services in the reduction of Ireland, and praying that 2,282l. 19s. 5½d. due to the King for bonds given for customs, might be remitted, he being unable to pay the same; stating that the bonds were put in suit and process of scire facias issued against him and his sureties; there was then due to him, as appeared by certificate from the Transport Office, for his interest in four ships employed, 739l. 19s., which he was willing to transfer in part satisfaction for his debt; a certificate of members of Parliament and other gentlemen of Lancaster, testifying the decay of his fortune and inability to pay, was also annexed. Dated 29 April 1701.|
Also the petition, the certificate referred to, and four other papers relating to this business. 7 pages.
||63. Letter from Mr. Burchett, of the Admiralty, to Mr. Lowndes, sending two papers in relation to the defalcations of the Treasurer of the Navy. Dated 29 April 1701.|
Also copies of the papers referred to. 13 pages and 2 halves.