East Indies: October 1601

Calendar of State Papers Colonial, East Indies, China and Japan, Volume 2, 1513-1616. Originally published by Her Majesty's Stationery Office, London, 1864.

This free content was digitised by double rekeying. All rights reserved.


, 'East Indies: October 1601', in Calendar of State Papers Colonial, East Indies, China and Japan, Volume 2, 1513-1616, (London, 1864) pp. 128-129. British History Online https://www.british-history.ac.uk/cal-state-papers/colonial/east-indies-china-japan/vol2/pp128-129 [accessed 22 May 2024].

. "East Indies: October 1601", in Calendar of State Papers Colonial, East Indies, China and Japan, Volume 2, 1513-1616, (London, 1864) 128-129. British History Online, accessed May 22, 2024, https://www.british-history.ac.uk/cal-state-papers/colonial/east-indies-china-japan/vol2/pp128-129.

. "East Indies: October 1601", Calendar of State Papers Colonial, East Indies, China and Japan, Volume 2, 1513-1616, (London, 1864). 128-129. British History Online. Web. 22 May 2024, https://www.british-history.ac.uk/cal-state-papers/colonial/east-indies-china-japan/vol2/pp128-129.

October 1601

Oct. 13. 295. Court Minutes of the East India Company. Payment of 57l. 16s. 8d. to Benj. Decro, agent of the Muscovy Company, for cordage. Freedom to John Jackson, introduced by Sir John Spencer. Report of the deputy governor on the proposals to the Muscovy Company, agreed to at the last general court, concerning the North–west passage. Resolution as to the conditions upon which the discovery is to be attempted, and the amount of the contributions which will entitle the adventurers and their posterity, under the common seal of the Muscovy Company, to the freedom of the discovery. Concerning a previous resolution to set out a second voyage to the East Indies; the whole adventure already set down does not exceed 11,000l., “which carrieth no convenient proportion to set out any voyage at all.” The Lord Admiral and Mr. Secretary’s [Cecil] having inquired of the governor the cause of the Company being so slack in seconding their former voyage, considering that the Dutch nation had so honourably gone through with their voyage, and returned again with such good success, and noted that the Company were not so respective of the honour of Her Majesty and their own Company as it were fit they should be; it was answered that one especial hindrance was the fear that the committees, “for some private respects,” might be drawn to prefer ships not so serviceable as were convenient. Ordered that the name of every ship be notified at a general court and offered to consideration. The book to be carried to the brethren of the fellowship by men appointed and able to persuade and encourage them to proceed in the adventure. Admission of Christopher Cletherow in place of Robt. Bowyer. [Two pages and a half. Court Bk. I., 77–78.]
Oct. 296. The Privy Council to the Merchants trading to the East Indies. The Queen having granted them a privilege for sole trade to the East Indies, to employ six ships and six pinnaces yearly, which trade they began by furnishing ships last year for those parts, and Her Majesty having been informed that they were making preparations for a second voyage, following therein the practice of the Dutch, “conceived very good liking” thereof. Understand that of late they surcease in their preparations until the return of their other fleet. Recommend them “to be better advised in the carriage of such an action as this where the world hath had so great expectation,” because an imputation may thereby be laid upon the State, and further to consider that in their default, there are divers ready to enter into the furnishing of certain ships for a second voyage, whose proceedings they cannot justly hinder, when they do not use the benefit of their own privileges according to their own proposition. [Draft, corrected by Secretary Cecil. Two pages and a quarter. East Indies, Vol. I., No. 21. Indorsed, “1601. October. Minute from the Lds. to the Merchants trading into the East Indies.” Vide Bruce’s Annals of the East India Comp.I., p. 151. This letter was read at a court of the East India Comp., Nov. 5. See next article.]