Difference between revisions of "MRP: C10/55/132 f. 2"

Latest revision as of 09:57, February 7, 2012

C10/55/132 f. 2

Editorial history

15/11/11, CSG: Images made of manuscript
20/11/11, CSG: Started transcription

Abstract and context

The mariner Willliam White the younger replied in March 1657/58 to a bill of complaint (C10/55/132 f. 1) of four London merchants, Martin Noell, George Underwood, Simon Delboe and John Taylor. Separately, Noell and Delboe were subscribers to the Smirna Venture joint stock in which George and Christopher Oxenden were involved.

William White the younger had sailed on the Mayflower with William White the elder, the commander of the ship. Both were mariners; White the younger was presumably the elder's son or nephew, though this is not stated in the suit. The ship probably departed from London in late December 1655 and was back in Plymouth by August 1657, before sailing on to its final destination of London.

William White the elder appears to have died during the voyage, or shortly after his return, and William White the younger answered on his as well as his own behalf.

The suit concerned alleged missing trading assets of the deceased Henry Watkins, who had died from drowning off the east coast of continental India. Reference is made to Watkins in both the Court Book of the English East India Company and in XXXX. Watkins had been sent as the official factor on the Mayflower, a ship of about 240 tons, which had been chartered by the English East India Company in late 1655. However, according to the bill of complaint, Watkins was also employed by the complainants as their factor for private trade with a stock of £1500, which had been entrusted to Watkins.

Martin Noell, the principal complainant in the bill of complaint, had stood security for Watkins on a bond of £500 taken out with the English East India Company. It is not clear whether Noell or any of the three other merchant complainants were also part owners of the Mayflower. They are not named as such in their bill of complaint, but it is possible that one or more of them were indeed so. A separate dispute between the English East India Company and the owners followed the ship's return, and appears to have related to suspected private trade off loaded at Plymouth and the using up of scarce freight capacity in the ship by such unpaid for activities.

Prior to the Mayflower being chartered by the English East India Company it had been chartered by the Navy, under the command of Captain White, and had been involved in the English war with the Dutch.

Suggested links

See C10/55/132 f. 1

To do

Transcription

//Sworne the 18:th of//
//March 1657//
//?Ala: ??Hoball//

//The severall Answer of William White Marriner one of the def:ts to the Bill of Comp:lt of Martin Noell Esq:r George Underwood Esq:r Simon Delboe and John Taylor Merchants Complaynants//

//The sayd Def:t saving to himselfe now and at all tymes hereafter all advantages and benefit of Excepcionn to the incertaintyes insufficiencyes and ?Impfeccons of the sayd Bill of Complaint for Answer unto soe XXXX thereof or any wayes materially//

//XXX XXXX him this Def:t to make Answer unto saith That hee doth not know that the Comp:lts or any of them about the moneth of December in the yeare of our Lord one thousand six hundred ffifty and ffive or att any other tyme did ioyntly//

//?or severally adventure severall or any pcells of goods money Comodities or Merchandizes of the value of ffive hundred pounds sterling or any value whatsoever in ??certeyne or any places in the//

//East Indyes in the Shipp called the Mayfflower of which Captaine William White was then Commander And therefore doth not know that such goods Merchandizes and Commodityes were by the Comp:lts//

//or any of them or any other for them committed to the Care or Managem:t of Henry Watkins in the said Bill of Complaint named as ffactor for the Comp:lts to negotiate Barter or Merchandize//

//with the same upon the Comp:lts behalfe or for their Accomp and benefit or otherwise or that the Comp:lts or any of them allowed him Sallary as their or any of their servant or ffactor Neither doth this Def:t//

//know that the sayd Henry Watkins did on the behalfe of the Comp:lts or any of them traffique with ?or barter or exchange by way of Merchandizing or otherwise the sayd p:rtended goods or comodityes in the said Bill of//

//Complaint menconed for goods Comodities or Merchandizes of the native growth and Manufactures of the said Indies or any other goods the said Indyes did afford or for any other goods whatsoever neither doth thus def:t//

//know that the Comp:lts p:rtended stocke in the says Bill menconed was any way improved to any value whatsoever or that the Comp:lts or any of them had any stocke there to improve And this def:t doth not know//

//what the sayd Henry Watkins in the yeares of our Lord one thousand six hundred ffifty and six and one thousand six hundred ffifty and seaven or at any other tyme did shipp or layd aboard any//

//XXXXX money on or comodities whatsoever to the value of one penny in the ship called the Mayflower in the Bill menconned of which William White the elder or this def:t was then Captaine or Comander or in any//

//other ship or that any such goods money of Comodities were committed or delivered to the sayd William White the elder or or this Def:t or that the same were by the sayd William White this Def:t received//

//to the use of Comp:lts or to any of their use or uses But this defend:t doth confesse it to be true that after the death of the said Henry Watkins the sayd William White the elder did take into his possession certaine//

//goods of the sayd Henry Watkins in ??Menzaies and looking glasses for all which accompt hath been made to the Administrato:r of the sayd Henry Watkins (Excepting three hundred and thirty one ??dollers which are in the//

//East Indies and the sayd William White the elder could not then receive the same) But this Def:t doth not know that the said Henry Watkins did take one or more Bills of Lading or other acknowledgem:t from the//

//said William White the elder of the severall receipts of such goods money Wares or Merchandizes as the proper goods money Wares or Merchandizes of the Comp:lt or of any of them or of any other But this def:t doth deny//

//that the sayd Henry Watkins took any Bill or Bills of lading from this def:t at any time of any goods money or merchandizes whatsoever as the proper goods of the Comp:lts or any of them or any other neither//

//did this def:t or the sayd William White the elder (to this def:ts knowledge) undertake to deliver unto the said Henry Watkins for the use of

//or any port or ports or places in the East Indies or elsewhere or to the said Henry Watkins for the Comp:lts use or for the use of

//other place neither this def:t know that any such goods money or Merchandizes in the Bill menconned did belong to the Comp:lts

//their venture neither doth this def:t know that the sayd Comp:lts or any of them did adventure any thing at all with the sayd Henry Watkins

//or property in his owne right in the goods money or Merchandizes

//Comp:lts or any or them or that he did traffick with their or any of their stocke

//or XXXXed to the Comp:lts

//the said Henry Watkins was untimely drowned in the said Indies And this def:t doth beleive it to be true that at the time of the death of the said Henry Watkins

//of XXX the said Henry Watkins in the Custody of

//or that the same were for the use of the Comp:lts

//of them & did acquaint the Comp:lts with the pticulars thereof so farre as hee this def:t knew and did rite them a note thereof which the def:t cannot now remember the same being in ?Menzages & looking glasses which note this Def:t doth//

//beleive the Comp:lts or some of them have in their or some of their Custody But this Def:t doth deny that hee this def:t or the sayd William White the elder to this Def:ts knowledge did ADD LONG INSERTION did possesse him or themselves of any ?Lres of advice//

//Invoyces directed to the Comp:lts or any of them or to any other of their or any of their ffactors concerning the said p:rtended goods money Comodities or Merchandizes in the sayd Bill of Comp:lt menconned neither doth//

//this Def:t know or did ever see any such Letters of advice or Invoyce directed to the Comp:lts or any of them or to any others And this def:t doth confess it to bee true that hee this Def:t and the said William White the elder as this def:t//

//doth beleive did refuse to deliver to the Comp:lts or to any other for their use the said goods Comodites & Merchandizes in the sayd Bill menconned or to any of them either in the East Indies or in London for this Def:t doth not know of//

//any goods Merchandizes or Comodities which were ever in the said William White the elder or this def:ts possession w:ch did or do belong unto the Comp:lts or to any of them But this Def:t doth deny that this def:t or the sayd William White XXX//

//to this def:ts knowledge did on their or either of their Accompts trafficke or trade with the sayd p:retended goods money Comodities and Merchandizes

//or Comodities

//Watkins or did

More text to come

//?Ric: ??ffarnham [Signature, bottom RH corner]//

Possible primary records

PROB 4/23449 Haley, Thomas at sea, batchelor (marriner in the East India ship Mayflower') 28 Feb 1661/2 (28 Feb 1661/2)

SP 46/97/fo 18 Petition to the Council of State by Major Robert Russell and Robert Barrett requesting that they be treated similarly to the other members of the East Indies Company sailing on the ship Mayflower in respect of payment for provisions. [1655 Dec. 20]