St Helena Letters from England 1673-1701
Introduction: This is the second volume in the series St Helena Letters from England. It includes incoming official correspondence from the East India Company in London to the island’s Governor and Council, conveying directives on government, defence, trade, staffing and supplies. The letters were usually read in consultation and copied or abstracted into the records.
Source: Images of the original records can be viewed on the British Library’s website: https://eap.bl.uk/archive-file/EAP1364-1-3-4.
Text Transcription: This text was produced entirely by AI transcription of handwritten document images on the British Library’s website, at approximately thirty pages per hour.
Current AI systems cannot transcribe handwritten manuscripts with complete accuracy, particularly where documents are degraded or damaged, where poorly formed script or marginal notes merge into the main body of text, or where complex tables are present.
Four specific problems affected this transcription. First, AI is designed to prioritise meaning and readability, which creates a strong tendency to alter spellings, expand abbreviations, or adjust grammar rather than preserve original forms. It is particularly unreliable in recognising the correct spellings of unfamiliar surnames and place names. To mitigate this, for each image submitted, the AI was given a strict protocol requiring it to rely solely on clearly visible ink strokes and to mark any uncertain readings as [...], thereby reducing the risk of inferred or invented text. Second, AI struggled to transcribe handwriting in the style of the late secretary hand, commonly employed from the sixteenth to eighteenth centuries, in which the letter ‘S’ appears in a form resembling a trailing ‘L’. Third, some of the handwriting in this volume is so faint or poorly formed as to be difficult to read even by eye. Fourth, many tabular sections were too complex to transcribe accurately, so these have been replaced by summary titles such as “Report: Invoice for Goods Received by Sea”.
Given these limitations, this transcription should be regarded as unreliable and used only as a search-and-find shortcut. Once a relevant passage has been located, it must always be checked against the original images.
Modern Text Interpretation: Each section of text was submitted for AI analysis in order to explain the archaic language in clear, modern UK English. These are not direct sentence by sentence replacements, but explanatory interpretations intended to clarify meaning while preserving the substance of the original. Where a specific individual is named within a section of the original text, that person will generally also be identified within the explanatory interpretation. However, where the original consists largely of lists of names, these are not usually repeated in the explanatory text.
Each modern summary is followed by an AI-generated Interpretations section, which provides additional commentary on the material based on wider information located on the internet. The AI analysis also includes a ‘Speculations’ section, offering one or more possible reflections on the material. The value of these notes range from the profound to the trivial or self-evident - time did not permit deletion of the latter.
Text Loss: The volume shows foxing throughout, and the text along the bottom edge and corners of roughly half the pages is mildly or heavily faded.
Referencing Text Locations: A dual numbering system has been adopted, combining the British Library film number with the manuscript’s original page number. These are presented in the format: British Library Film No. / Document Page No.
Pagination: There is a single anomaly in the original page numbering. Numbering begins on Film No. 20 (i.e. 20/1) and continues sequentially until 72/53. At this point, a single page is inserted, bearing a brief note on one side and blank on the other. The two sides of this inserted page are labelled 73/54 and 74/55. Consequently, the subsequent numbering appears to jump backwards by two, with the sequence continuing as 75/54, 76/55, and so on.
Content: Although this is entitled St Helena Letters from England, it contains a variety of other unrelated material:
18/- to 19/-: A list of soldiers and sailors left by Sir Richard Munden after St Helena was recovered from the Dutch in May 1673.
232/211 to 293/272: A record of judicial hearings held at St Helena, with the governor acting as judge.
294/273 to 296/275: Several court martials conducted on the island.
298/277 to 299/278: A private letter written from St Helena, probably by Mr Bazett.
Dates: During the period covered by this volume, England and its colonies followed the Old-Style Julian calendar, under which the legal new year began on 25 March (Lady Day). When creating the modern interpretations of these texts, the AI has automatically adjusted the dates. For any date quoted in these early St Helena records falling in the period between January and 25 March, the year has been moved forward to the modern equivalent. Month names were frequently rendered using Roman calendar abbreviations such as 7ber, 8ber, 9ber and 10ber, in which September through to December were counted as the seventh to tenth months.
The earliest date Charter granted by King Charles the Second, dated 3 April 1664. reference is the recorded in this volume is 19 December 1673 and the latest is a letter dated 10 July 1701. A note reporting the death of Mr Pack at 299/278 quoted a much later date, 3 April 1713.
The letters were sent during the administrations of Captain Richard Kedgwin/Keigwin (1673-1674), Captain Gregory Field (1674-1678), Major John Blackmore (1678-1690), Captain Joshua Johnson (1690-1693), Captain Richard Kelinge or Keeling (1693-1697) and Captain Stehen Poirier (1697-1703).
AI Generated Summary
Governance and Administration
The records that survive in this volume open in the immediate aftermath of one of the most significant events in St Helena's early history: its recapture from the Dutch in 1673. In December of that year, at a Court Committee held on 19 December, the Governor and Company of Merchants of London trading to the East Indies formally recorded that the island had been retaken by Sir Richard Munden, who commanded a squadron of ships sent out by the King. Although Charles II had initially intended to retain St Helena under his direct government and at his own expense, he subsequently signified his royal pleasure that it should be placed under the care and government of the East India Company. Letters patent issued under the Great Seal of England in December 1672 granted the island in perpetuity to the Company, conferring on it the power to establish such rules and directions for good government as were deemed necessary within the scope of its charter. The ships James, commanded by Captain James Gregory, and the John and Alexander, commanded by Captain Samuel Ricards, were hired to take formal possession. Captain Richard Field was appointed as the first Governor of the island, and Captain Anthony Beale as Deputy Governor, with a Council constituted to exercise chief command, any three of whom could act provided the Governor or his Deputy was always one. [Film No. 20–21]
The constitutional basis of the Company's authority over St Helena was formally restated and enlarged across a succession of royal charters. The 1661 charter granted by Charles II established the Company as a body corporate and politic, conferring on it perpetual succession, the right to purchase and hold land, to plead in all courts, and to establish laws and ordinances for the governance of its servants and merchants. Crucially, the charter authorised the Company to make war or peace with any non-Christian prince or people, to erect forts and plantations, and to coin its own money. A subsequent charter of 1673 named St Helena specifically as a place where the Company was empowered to establish forts, fortifications, and colonies. The island was to be held from the Crown as of the manor of East Greenwich in free and common socage - a tenure without military obligations - with the King reserving the faith and allegiance of the inhabitants and his own royal sovereignty. All gold, silver, gems, artillery, arms, weapons, ammunition, and ships found upon the island at the time of grant were included in the transfer. A further charter of 1683 confirmed and enlarged these powers, while that of 1685, issued by James II, reaffirmed them under the new reign and provided for the exercise of martial law within Company forts and plantations. [Film No. 176–201, 202–225]
The constitutional documents make clear that the Company understood itself to be a sovereign body within its territories, not merely a commercial concern. Its charters granted it the right to legislate, to raise armies, to administer oaths, to coin money, to govern civil and criminal causes according to the laws of England, and to seize and punish those trading without its licence. A court of judicature was established under each major charter, to consist of one person learned in civil law and two merchants, empowered to hear cases of a maritime and commercial nature and to decide them according to the customs of merchants and the principles of equity. The instruction that all laws and punishments must be consonant with reason and not repugnant to the laws of the realm of England was a recurring safeguard against purely arbitrary governance, though its practical effect in so remote a colony is difficult to assess from the record. The charters also required officials to take corporal oaths of fidelity, establishing a formal bond of loyalty and accountability between the Company in London and its officers in the field. [Film No. 67–72, 190–200]
The governance of the island in practice was shaped by the appointment and succession of Governors and Councils, and the records document these transitions with some care. Captain Richard Field served as the first Governor but was permitted to return to England in 1675 at the earnest request of his wife. His departure set in motion the first of several gubernatorial successions: Captain Anthony Beale succeeded him, and in February 1677 Major John Blackmore was appointed in turn, dispatched on the ship Johanna with extensive new directions for the security and government of the island. The appointment carried with it a clear line of succession: Captain Anthony Beale was designated first to succeed Blackmore, and thereafter the remaining Council members were to serve as chief commissioners in the event of death or removal. The Company was at pains to establish that no vacancy in the highest office should leave the island without an acknowledged authority. [Film No. 32, 36–38]
As the decade progressed, the composition of the Council itself became a recurring source of concern. In 1683, in response to reports that some councillors had opposed the established government, several officials were dismissed from the Council, from the Company's service, and from their salaries simultaneously, with new members appointed in their place. By 1687 the directors were restructuring the Council around army officers, requiring a Captain to be present at all proceedings. The repeated changes in personnel reflect not only disciplinary concerns but also a wider tension within the colonial project: the Company needed experienced local knowledge, but feared the independence and potential disloyalty that could accompany prolonged residence on so remote an island. The 1689 commission appointing Joshua Johnson as Deputy Governor and Richard Keigwin as Ensign, with a clear order of succession tied to the arrival of a specific ship, illustrates the legalistic precision with which the Company sought to manage the transfer of authority across thousands of miles. [Film No. 157, 226–228]
The instructions issued to incoming governors were extraordinarily detailed, covering not only the management of stores and the exercise of justice but also the religious and moral life of the colony. Governors were required to ensure the Lord's Day was observed through the cessation of all servile labour, to appoint convenient places for worship, to suppress profane swearing, drunkenness, and uncleanness, and to punish offenders according to the laws of England. Rules issued in 1680 required that a court sit at least weekly, that all trials be conducted before a jury of twelve men, that no man be deprived of land or subjected to corporal punishment without such a trial, and that fees charged for the court's maintenance be reasonable and not burdensome to the inhabitants. The formal architecture of English law, including indictment, jury trial, and the possibility of appeal, was thus transplanted to an island in the middle of the South Atlantic. How consistently it operated is another matter, and the trial records examined below offer revealing evidence on this question. [Film No. 38, 68–72]
Military Affairs and Defence
The military condition of St Helena was a persistent preoccupation of the Company from the moment of its regrant. The initial instructions of December 1673 required the Governor to take all ammunition and stored provisions from incoming ships upon arrival, place them under the custody of the Deputy Governor, and preserve them from damage, waste, and embezzlement. Soldiers were to be reduced into two companies, the Governor commanding one and the Deputy Governor the other, with Lieutenants and Ensigns appointed as necessary. Ordinary soldiers were to be paid annually, with specific rates set for Sergeants, Corporals, Drummers, and Gunners. The inferior officers and soldiers were to be exercised in arms and taught watch and duty according to the practices of military discipline, and when they could be spared from garrison duties they were to assist the planters in their plantations. [Film No. 22–24]
The number of soldiers on the island was subject to repeated revision, driven by the costs of the garrison and the changing assessment of the threat. In 1674, following news that Charles II had made peace with Holland, the Company directed that the force be reduced to seventy-five of the ablest men. By the time the ship London arrived under Captain William Bass, the number was reduced further to fifty, drawn from the most civil and able men available and required to be employed in planting as well as soldiering. The Company was explicit that it expected the inhabitants, once exercised in the use of arms, to provide a sufficient defence without an expensive standing garrison, and that any continuing cost must be justified by the genuine military situation. [Film No. 28–29]
The management of gunpowder was a consistent source of friction between London and the island. In 1675, the death of a gunner in an accident while firing a gun prompted a rebuke from the Company, which blamed the Governor and Council for the vain expenditure of powder and noted that the gunner had carelessly used a double charge. Subsequent orders required an exact account of gunpowder expenditure to be sent to London yearly, with a strict prohibition on firing guns for ceremonial salutes except on the most specific authority. By 1687 the directors were again expressing strong dissatisfaction, finding the Governor's expenditure of gunpowder excessive by half and dismissing his apologies as insufficient. The repeated nature of these complaints suggests that the norms of colonial and naval ceremony - which depended on salutes - were in persistent tension with the Company's concern for frugality and security. [Film No. 33, 40, 148]
The island's fortifications were subject to continuous instruction and occasional alarm. Governors were repeatedly directed to view the forts upon arrival, to strengthen them where necessary, and to construct new forts or trenches at harbours or other exposed points. A chief magazine was to be maintained near the middle of the island as the most convenient location from which to supply all guards, and provisions were to be sent to every part of the island so that men would not be forced to abandon their posts for want of food. The gun platforms were to be strong and sufficient. In 1685, following the rebellion of that year, Sir John Wyborne was specifically tasked with advising the local administration on modern methods of managing a garrison and the proper keeping of military stores. [Film No. 24, 40, 126]
A full set of Articles of War was formally issued to govern military conduct on the island, the text of which forms a substantial portion of the surviving record. These ordinances applied to all ranks from Colonels and Captains to common soldiers and covered every aspect of garrison life, from duties to God - the penalty for blasphemy being to have the tongue bored with a red-hot iron - to the punishment of desertion, which carried the penalty of death. Mutiny was punishable by decimation, the ancient practice of casting lots so that every tenth man among the participants might be hanged. Cowardice in the face of the enemy was a capital offence, as was the unauthorised demolition of a fortification. Giving false muster returns, embezzling the King's goods, engaging in private duels, and failing to report seditious speeches were all punishable by death or at the court's discretion. The articles addressed the treatment of prisoners of war, the prohibition of private pillaging, and the specific duties of the Provost Marshal in maintaining order. The severity of these provisions must be read in the context of a remote island garrison that had recently experienced an armed rebellion, and where the Company had concluded that an example of strict military discipline was essential to its future security. [Film No. 137–146]
External threats shaped the island's military posture at several points in this period. By 1689, with the outbreak of the Nine Years' War, the Company was warning the Council in the most urgent terms to guard against any irruption of French ships into the island's ports, and a royal warrant under the Great Seal authorised the garrison to seize any French vessel entering the island's waters, bringing its goods ashore, inventorying them carefully, and transmitting all maritime papers to the authorities at Surat or Bombay. The Company's correspondence from May 1689 is notable for the explicit mention of "force of arms" as the appropriate response to French vessels, a formulation that reveals how completely the island had by this point been drawn into the military and diplomatic conflicts of the European state system. [Film No. 171–172]
The men from St Helena who served on King's ships during the period of the island's recapture are documented in the earliest films. The frigate Assistance under Captain Richard Keogwin, the Levant, the Mary and Martha, the Bridgewater, and the William and Thomas all carried men from the island, with wages recorded for individual soldiers and seamen. These wage records, with their partially legible names and abbreviations, are among the most evidently personal documents in the volume: they record ordinary lives reduced to pounds, shillings, and pence. The transcriptions attempt to expand abbreviated names - Rai[...] & Tui[...] becoming Raines and Tuit, Fra: Corri[...]on becoming Francis Corrinson - which is itself a reminder of the fragmentary nature of the evidence and the work required to recover individual identities from it. [Film No. 18–19]
Settlement, Land, and Agriculture
The land policy established by the Company in 1673 and refined over the subsequent decades reveals the assumptions and contradictions at the heart of its colonial project. Planters, both old and new, were to have their lands conveyed to them, their heirs, and assigns for ever, along with a common right in proportion to the land allowed at the time of settlement. However, they were not to have the power to sell or alienate their lands or to dispose of them in any way during their lives; instead, they were required to live upon and improve the land by planting and sowing, on pain of forfeiting all grants. The Company wished to create a stable, settled population tied to the land, but it was not willing to allow the social and economic consequences of a genuine freehold property market, which might have produced a powerful local gentry beyond its control. The tension between granting permanent rights and retaining permanent oversight runs through every major instruction on land policy in this volume. [Film No. 25–26]
The initial settlement instructions envisioned a town built for defence above each valley fortification, with houses constructed in a regular fashion. Any houses situated between the sea and the coast were to be removed inland. The detailed rules about how markets were to function when ships arrived - no inhabitant or mariner to be restrained from participating - suggest an attempt to create a degree of commercial order rather than leaving exchange to informal arrangements. By 1680, in instructions issued under the Company's rules and orders drawn up at East India House, this vision had been elaborated into a formal code. All land was to be surveyed, all allotments registered, all sales recorded in a public register, and any transaction not so recorded rendered void. The duplicate of the register was to be sent to the Company annually. No timber trees were to be cut without a special order, a provision that reflected both the island's resource limitations and the Company's need for wood in building and ship repair. [Film No. 59–61]
The ambition to turn St Helena into a productive agricultural colony is a recurring theme throughout the period covered. The initial instructions encouraged the raising of sugar canes, indigo, cotton, ginger, and tobacco, with planters to bring their produce to the storehouse and receive a price. By the early 1680s the Company had become more insistent, ordering the enclosure of all plantable land within three years on pain of forfeiture, requiring planters to pay annual rents of two shillings and six pence per holding, and threatening to repossess land where occupants remained in default. Fruit trees and vines were sent to the island. The Company proposed that Indian corn and olive trees would be the most profitable crops, expressed interest in cultivating coffee, cinnamon, and beaver, and offered specific financial incentives: three pounds per hundredweight for indigo and one shilling per pound for cotton. The evidence that any of these projects succeeded in the short term is thin. The Company's own letters repeatedly note that the inhabitants had not raised sufficient provisions from their plantations, that industry was lacking, and that the island remained dependent on supplies from England. [Film No. 25, 40, 84–85, 90, 101–102]
The proposed manufacture of saltpetre from St Helena's soil received extended treatment in the Company's letters of 1683. The Company provided detailed technical descriptions of both the English and Indian methods of extraction, recommending that the Governor trial the Indian approach, which used large square cisterns and solar evaporation to crystallise nitre from percolated earth. The Company undertook to send experienced workmen, timber, boards, and materials if the inhabitants showed proper encouragement, and wrote to the Agent and Council in the Bay of Bengal for a full description of the process. The enterprise reflects both the strategic value of saltpetre - the essential ingredient of gunpowder - and the Company's tendency to imagine St Helena as a general-purpose colonial laboratory. Whether the soil of the island contained sufficient nitre to make the venture viable was left to local experiment, and the record does not reveal the outcome. [Film No. 98–100]
The effort to reform the built environment of the settlement drew an unusual instruction from the Company in 1683, which ordered that the layout of the town follow the modern style of London, with streets laid out in good square lines to ensure a decent and useful appearance for the public good. The Governor was granted authority to oblige owners to alter or pull down buildings that did not fit this method. Existing houses, being only twelve or fourteen feet high and built with wooden battons, were deemed in need of improvement. The Company also proposed the construction of a church in the best manner, following the style used in England, and noted that as materials were now cheaper than formerly, brick and stone should be sought locally as the best means of construction. The communal labour required for the maintenance of highways was formalised, with every person including free planters, servants, and slaves required to contribute one day each week to public works under the direction of the Governor and Council. [Film No. 91–92]
Supply and Provisioning
The supply of St Helena was a continuous logistical challenge and the source of persistent anxiety in the Company's correspondence. The ships despatched to the island are named throughout the records: among the earliest are the Europe and the John and Alexander, the London under Captain William Bass, the Johanna, the Hamburg Merchant, and the Expectation, Emily, Eagle, and Berkeley Castle. Each arrival brought invoices and bills of lading that formed the baseline of the island's accountability system. The Governor was required to take from each incoming commander all ammunition and stored provisions according to the specific invoices, place them safely under the Husband's custody, and keep an exact account by way of debtor and creditor. [Film No. 28–29, 49, 55]
The recurring complaint that the inhabitants had not raised sufficient provisions from their own plantations and therefore remained dependent on shipments from England is one of the most consistent refrains in the correspondence. In 1674 the Company expressed hope that through proper instruction the island would achieve food self-sufficiency, but by 1678 it was expressing disappointment with the same shortfall. The Company's response combined pressure on the planters to improve their agricultural output with careful management of the reserve stores, requiring the Governor and Council to take a strict account of stores every three months, or more often if needed, and to ensure they were kept in conditions where little or no loss occurred through spoil. Soldiers were to receive victuals as an encouragement and maintenance, and planters were to be allowed provisions from the storehouse for up to three months if their own plantations could not yet supply them, after which they were expected to sustain themselves. [Film No. 28, 31, 47, 63]
The island's role as a refreshment station for passing ships was recognised from the outset and shaped many of the practical arrangements recorded in the correspondence. In the early 1680s the Company was instructing the Governor to ensure that all shipping employed in the Company's service was provided with sufficient bread and fresh provisions, and that fresh beef and mutton were killed in the afternoon to ensure they were ready for delivery to visiting crews without the need for those crews to manage the slaughter. The rate charged to visiting ships was set at twenty shillings per man for each vessel's stay, with additional allowances for longer visits. A system for the supply of visiting ships from India was also formalised, with returning vessels instructed to deliver specific goods at the island, including cloth for the clothing of the enslaved population and the planters. [Film No. 43, 90, 124–125, 155]
The management of bread prices became a specific concern by the later 1680s. The Company instructed the Council to set a reasonable rate and ensure a constant and wholesome supply, noting that high bread prices were a major discouragement to trade. All bakers were required to produce good quality bread, and a strict inspection system was to be established to punish those who sold bad bread or charged excessive prices. The attempt to regulate a basic foodstuff in this way reflects both the island's economic vulnerability and the Company's willingness to intervene in the details of daily life when commercial order was perceived to be at risk. [Film No. 155]
Trade and Shipping
The regulation of trade at St Helena was a matter of persistent difficulty. The island occupied a unique position in the geography of English maritime commerce, serving as the essential waypoint on the homeward voyage from the East Indies, and the Company's monopoly over the East India trade made the question of who could trade at the island, on what terms, and with what oversight, a matter of fundamental commercial importance. The rules and orders issued in 1680 under the Company's seal required that no shipping be permitted to trade without a licence from the Company or the Governor, that all goods moved on or off the island be entered in a register, and that all rents and duties due to the Company be duly answered and paid. A specific provision required that no tavern or public house be kept without a special licence, and that the sale of strong drink to servants or slaves without their master's permission be strictly prohibited. [Film No. 59–60, 66]
The treatment of foreign ships was a particularly sensitive area. The Company's orders required that all Dutch, French, and Danish vessels use only St James Valley as their place of anchoring, and that they not be permitted to trade until they had been examined. A schedule of fees and duties was established, including a charge for anchorage for every ship not in the Company's service for every voyage it made to the island. Dutch ships were singled out for particular concern: the Company reiterated in several letters that no trade was to be conducted with them or with vessels of other nations without a licence, and that if the Dutch were found at parts of the island where inhabitants resided the Governor was not to contend with commanders about their rights but to record the ship's name and captain so the Company in London could judge the matter. [Film No. 79–80]
The provisions of the 1681 rules concerning ships arriving without authority were detailed and specific. Any ship found within the harbour or roads without a person bringing formal orders from a Governor or Commanding Officer was subject to a fine not exceeding twenty shillings for any one offence. Any person guilty of a crime deserving death or other punishment was to be dealt with according to the laws of England. The Company's general order that no person should trade at the island without a licence under the Company seal was accompanied by the threat of a minimum fine of one thousand pounds for any subject found trading in the East Indies without such authorisation - a sum intended to be ruinous and to deter the "interloper" problem that persistently undermined the Company's monopoly. [Film No. 72, 75–76, 186]
The potential expansion of St Helena's trade into new commodities attracted intermittent attention. By 1683 the Company was proposing that the island develop a sugar plantation, and was promising to furnish the necessary coppers and stills if the experiment proved viable. Captain Knox, after discharging a cargo of enslaved persons, was directed to proceed on a further voyage to procure pepper, with the Governor to furnish him with whatever could be found on the island, including bags of calico. The vision articulated in 1684 - that the island might come to host as many as five hundred ships yearly and that its coffee, sugar, and dried fish might find ready markets in Holland, Spain, and other European states - reflects the scale of the Company's ambitions for the colony, even if the gap between aspiration and achievement was very wide. In practice, the island remained dependent on provisioning and refreshment income rather than on export commodities. [Film No. 106–112]
Economy, Finance, Currencies, and Accounting
The financial administration of the island was governed by an accounting system that required strict records to be kept of all goods received and issued, all debts and credits, and all money in the treasury. The Husband - the officer in charge of ship's accounts and stores, a role initially held by Captain Anthony Beale - was responsible for ensuring that no goods were delivered or issued except by warrant signed by the Governor and a majority of the Council. Every item taken from the store was to be charged to each person's individual account at the invoice rate, and copies of all accounts were to be transcribed and remitted to London. The Company's recurring dissatisfaction with the state of island accounts is a thread running through the entire volume, with specific complaints about small balances left unpaid, irregular entries, and the accumulation of debt that proved impossible to recover once it had been allowed to linger. [Film No. 22, 39, 104]
Currency arrangements on the island evolved through the period covered. In 1677, the Company dispatched 879 Mexican and Seville pieces of eight in several sorts of coin, to be held by the Husband and issued at the rate of five per cent for payment in the money of the island, allowing wages to be advanced against future earnings. The Company subsequently fixed the value of the piece of eight at five shillings, declaring it current on the island at that rate. By 1683 a schedule of fees and duties had been established, including ten pounds for every ship engaged in trade, ten shillings for every merchant, and one shilling for every bill of sale. Licences for the retail sale of arrack, brandy, punch, wine, or any other strong liquor were to be paid for at ten shillings each, lasting no longer than a year. The Company also ordered that a book of all spirits, leases, and customs be maintained to keep the government informed on how revenue was raised. [Film No. 39, 86, 88, 119]
Land rents were set at two shillings and six pence per year, with the Company making clear in 1683 that only a few planters reportedly continued to refuse payment while retaining large portions of their estates, and that such persons would be required to leave their lands, which would revert to Company control. The annual payment of rents was to fall at Michaelmas, the feast of St Michael on 29 September, the standard English quarter day. No alienation of land was to take place without a written licence under the Company seal, and each transaction was to be recorded with appropriate fees paid. Leases to single men or women without established settlements were to be for sixty-six years, at rents payable annually. These arrangements reveal an attempt to apply the familiar apparatus of English property law - rents, licences, registers, seals - to a remote island where conditions bore little resemblance to the settled English landscape that had given rise to these instruments. [Film No. 84–85]
Slavery and Coerced Labour
The role of enslaved labour in the development of St Helena is a central and disturbing feature of the record, and the Company's letters address it with a frankness that makes the economic reasoning explicit. The initial instructions of 1673 mentioned two slaves to be appointed to look after Neapolitan goats to be sent from Surat. By 1674, instructions spoke of using slaves to assist the new settlers, and the London under Captain Bass was directed to assist the speedy settlement of new arrivals by the laying out of their lands, the provision of assistance from the slaves, and the encouragement of cottage building. The language of "assistance" obscures the coercive reality, but subsequent correspondence makes the relationship unambiguous. [Film No. 29–30]
By the early 1680s the Company was engaging systematically with the question of the enslaved population's size and management. In 1683 it observed that various planters had acquired slaves under the pretence that they or their servants required them, resulting in a number exceeding what was necessary, and declared this to be considerably dangerous to the government and the security of the island. A limit was placed on the number of slaves any household might keep, with excess enslaved persons to be brought into public stock and employed for the benefit of the island. Every group of enslaved people was to be overseen by two English servants and a child, one of whom was to act as a watchman. The fear of slave rebellion is visible in these provisions, even if it is never stated directly: the concern about excess slaves as a security risk, the prohibition on enslaved people using firearms, and the requirement for constant surveillance all reflect the anxious management of a population whose labour was essential but whose obedience could not be assumed. [Film No. 85–86, 96]
The Company's view of the necessity of enslaved labour was stated most baldly in a letter of 1684, which declared that it was utterly impossible for any European plantation located between the Tropics to thrive without the assistance and labour of enslaved people, and that the lack of such labour at St Helena was the primary reason the planters had not yet found a way to produce any useful or profitable commodity. This statement, signed by Governor Joseph Ashe and Deputy Jeremy Sambrooke, is a remarkable document of the ideological framework within which the Company understood colonial development. It was not simply that enslaved labour was cheaper or more available - the Company's correspondence makes clear that it was regarded as a structural necessity, without which no plantation economy of the kind it envisioned could be sustained. [Film No. 122]
The supply of enslaved people to the island came primarily from Madagascar, with some from the African coast and, through the Company's factors, from Persia. Captain Knox was specifically directed to transport enslaved persons. In 1683 the Company was expressing enthusiasm for establishing a regular trade with Madagascar to supply all the islands, noting that Madagascar and Barbados blacks were particularly skilled in carpentry, masonry, and bricklaying. Fifty enslaved people were sent by one ship, with more promised as the season allowed. The 1684 instructions directed the Governor to sell enslaved people to the planters at prices between twelve and fourteen pounds per head, with those not sold to be employed in cultivation and other works. The Company's letters to Fort St George in 1683 instructed the factors in Persia to provide slaves by every ship for the Company's use. [Film No. 107–108, 116, 123]
The conditions under which enslaved people lived and worked are addressed in the correspondence in terms that combine economic calculation with formal gestures toward humane treatment. The Company declared in several letters that servants and Negroes were to be well regulated and kept under strict order and discipline, but also that abuse was forbidden and that an official was to inspect their treatment to ensure it was conducted in a "just and equal manner." They were to be well fed, clothed, and kept in good health to prevent them from being overworked. In 1686 the Council books recorded the trial of black sail women for matters of theft and murder, and the directors approved of the legal proceedings while noting a concern that whipping had been carried out without sufficient regard for the interests of the masters. These passages reveal the condition of the enslaved in fragments only, filtered through the perspective of those who owned and managed them, and the documentary record provides almost no insight into the perspectives of the enslaved themselves. [Film No. 66, 113, 150]
The 1685 correspondence noted that certain enslaved people had attempted to abscond or run away, and commanded that any who did so be punished according to their demerits. Young enslaved men over the age of fourteen were, by 1687, being offered as potential labour for the Bombay settlement, with the Company noting they were perhaps burdensome to the current inhabitants and offering to remit the freight costs and provide victuals for the voyage. The promise of freedom after serving the agreed-upon period of labour appears in this context as an incentive designed to reduce the cost of maintaining a surplus workforce at St Helena while ensuring that labour remained available at Bombay. Whether such promises were honoured in practice is impossible to determine from this record. [Film No. 167–168]
Religion and Education
Religious observance was treated by the Company as a matter of both spiritual and practical importance. The instructions issued to Major Blackmore on his appointment in 1677 opened with the requirement that the Lord's Day be religiously observed throughout the island by all inhabitants, through abstaining from all bodily labour, servile employment, and vain or idle sports and pastimes. A convenient place or places were to be appointed for the worship of Almighty God, and the minister was to be encouraged in the discharge of his duty. Profane swearing, the licentious use of the name of God in vain, rioting, drunkenness, and uncleanness were all to be carefully punished. The formal rules of 1680 required that the Athanasian Creed and the Ten Commandments be read to the people on the Sabbath, along with the summary of the law from St Matthew's Gospel, and that any resident minister visit the youth at least once a week for religious instruction. [Film No. 38, 67–68]
The supply of suitable ministers proved difficult. The death of the first minister, noted in 1674 with regret, forced the Company to seek a replacement, who was eventually engaged to travel on the ship Nathaniel by way of Surat. His salary was set at fifty pounds per year, with a gratuity of the same amount. His duties included preaching at least once every Lord's Day, spending the remainder of that day catechising both English and black children and expounding on the Catechism, and teaching children to read and write on weekdays. He was to be accommodated at the governor's table and lodged at the Fort house, with a soldier or slave appointed as his serving man. If he desired to settle a plantation, he was to be granted the same land and accommodations as the previous minister. [Film No. 34]
The relationship between the minister and the civil authority on the island was a source of recurring difficulty. In 1683, the Company expressed strong dissatisfaction with Mr Samuel, a minister on the island, finding him to be an inconsiderable charge, and ordered that no allowances for provisions be made to him beyond ten shillings per quarter for his land. Future ministers were to receive only their bare salary and gratuity, along with diet at the Governor's table, provided they performed their duties as a domestic chaplain and said grace. More significantly, the Company clarified that no laws existed on the island other than those made by the Company itself: consequently, if any minister refused to marry a person upon the Governor's licence, the Governor and Council were directed to dismiss him immediately and send him home. Ministers were further forbidden from presuming to marry any person using the banns of matrimony or any other formality of the Church of England unless they possessed a specific dispensation. This extraordinary instruction effectively subordinated ecclesiastical authority to civil power, making the minister a licensed official of the Company rather than an independent officer of the Church. [Film No. 95]
By 1687, two ministers had been sent to the island simultaneously, with the Company ordering a total reformation of disorder and profaneness and commanding that prayers and religious services be performed according to English ecclesiastical standards. A charge was laid on all inhabitants to contribute towards the costs of the ministry - every master, mistress, and servant paying a yearly share for every person in their household, including black servants and slaves over the age of sixteen years. These funds were dedicated to the Company's charges for building and repairing the church and maintaining the ministers. In 1683 the Company had already expressed its intention that the church be built in the best manner, following the style used in England, and had instructed that materials - particularly brick and stone - be sought locally. [Film No. 91, 96, 147]
The provision of formal schooling was built into the initial instructions for the island. A schoolmaster was appointed and a plantation built for his use in 1675, and the minister was expected to instruct persons for teaching at schools and other necessary subjects. In 1683 the instructions about education included the community service requirement that every person contribute one day per week to works on the highways and church. The aspirations for education on the island - including the catechising of black children alongside English children - raise questions about what was actually taught and to whom, and the record does not permit confident answers. [Film No. 43]
Social Order, Crime, and Punishment
The formal rules and orders issued for the island in 1680 established a detailed code for the regulation of behaviour. Profane language was to be admonished on a first offence and fined thereafter at the Governor's discretion. The sale of strong drink without a licence was prohibited, and no servant or slave was to be served without the master's permission. Fornication, adultery, and other immoral acts were to be punished on the testimony of two or more witnesses, with persistent offenders treated as incorrigible under English law. Theft was punishable by full restitution plus damages on a first offence, with increasingly severe penalties for second and third offences, the third bringing the offender within the laws of England which prescribed a capital sentence. Fraud and forgery were punishable by inability to hold any office of trust, combined with full restitution of all damages. No one was to keep an alehouse without a licence. These provisions borrowed directly from English law and custom, modified only by the necessity of governing a community far too small for the full machinery of English legal administration. [Film No. 70–72]
The regulation of personal conduct extended to detailed monitoring of who could go on board visiting ships. In 1683 the Company noted numerous complaints about loose women going on board ships and ordered that no person on the island be permitted to do so without a written licence. Any ship that offended against this rule was to receive a severe reprimand. No freeman or servant was to be carried on board without authority, and any person transgressing this order was to be committed to prison and punished with a double custom or fine until the matter was brought into good order. These provisions reflected not only moral concern but practical security: the movement of people between the island and visiting ships was a route for desertion, private trade, and the evasion of the Company's authority. [Film No. 87]
The aftermath of the 1684–85 rebellion brought a new severity to the treatment of disorder. The estates of executed rebels were formally confiscated and ordered to be sold to the highest bidder for the Company's profit. Two men under sentence of death were spared on the grounds that their execution would leave their wives and children wholly dependent on the state; instead their families were to be sent to England with the fleet, with the Company undertaking to provide for their subsistence. Young men among them willing to enter the Company's service were permitted to remain. The Company quoted the proverb "too much pity spoils a city" to caution the Governor against excessive leniency, while simultaneously exercising that leniency in specific cases. The banishment of Thomas of Colesfield, permanently removed from the island as a threat to safety, and the formal confiscation of rebels' property reflect the post-rebellion legal settlement. [Film No. 152–153]
Repeat and persistent offenders received especially harsh treatment. Thomas Writckee, who had been involved in an earlier rebellion and been restored to service on his promise of good behaviour, was held to have forfeited all prior leniency when found guilty of seditious speech and sentenced to close confinement and transportation to India. Thomas Fuesdale, tried at a court martial in January 1682 for threatening the Deputy Governor during a money dispute, was found to have a long history of turbulent and seditious behaviour, including prior involvement in the rebellion and subsequent use of words considered defamatory toward the King. Though the court concluded he justly deserved death under martial law, he was permitted to escape that penalty through banishment. The pattern of combining formal capital sentences with mitigated actual punishments appears throughout the court martial records, and reflects a governance philosophy that asserted the full severity of the law while exercising discretionary mercy as a tool of discipline. [Film No. 273–275]
Judiciary
The trial records preserved in the later films provide a vivid and detailed picture of how the island's judicial system functioned in practice. The Court of Judicature sat at the Sessions House near Fort James, with the Governor presiding as Judge, the Deputy Governor, and the Attorney General in attendance. Cases were heard before juries of twelve men, drawn from the island's population of free planters, soldiers, and corporals. Witnesses were sworn, examined, and cross-examined, with the prisoner given the opportunity to question them and to call his own witnesses. The formalities of English trial procedure - indictment, plea, jury oath, examination, address to the jury, verdict, sentence - were followed with evident care, even in cases where the evidence was fragmentary and the proceedings took place far from any appellate court. [Film No. 231–234, 235–261]
The trial of Richard Honeywood for the killing of Sergeant Hunt in 1683 offers the most detailed account of courtroom procedure in the entire volume. The events that led to the fatal encounter were reconstructed through the testimony of multiple witnesses: Anne Conner, Thomas Goodwin, Daedalus Barker, Joseph Spicer, Thomas Sherwin, John Williams, Mr Gates, and Mr Elkin all gave evidence, each contributing a different perspective on the quarrel in and around Mr Cannady's house on the evening of the incident. The testimonies reveal a community in which strong drink, personal grievances, disputes about authority and precedence, and the constant carrying of weapons created an environment in which violence was never far below the surface. Hunt appears throughout the evidence as an aggressive and drunken figure, making threats and issuing challenges, while Honeywood is portrayed by his own account and by several witnesses as attempting to calm the situation and offering punch as a means of reconciliation. The evidence of Thomas Sherwin - that Honeywood told him Hunt had made a thrust at him while he was relieving himself, so that he scarcely saw clearly at the moment he drew his rapier - formed the core of the self-defence case. [Film No. 237–247]
The jury's verdict in the Honeywood case - guilty of manslaughter only, and in his own defence - was followed by an instruction from the judge that had Honeywood been found guilty of murder, he would not have been obliged to confirm a sentence of death. Honeywood was discharged after receiving several admonishments. The outcome is difficult to assess against the evidence heard: the jury was clearly entitled to find manslaughter on the basis that Hunt was the aggressor, but the judge's remark about not being obliged to impose death even for murder hints at a degree of discretion in capital sentencing that the formal rules of English law did not easily accommodate. The case illustrates both the aspiration to apply English legal norms and the inevitable adaptations required by colonial circumstance. [Film No. 248]
The trial of John Miller in June 1687 for the wilful murder of Charles Spines produced a contrasting outcome. The evidence was extensive and included medical testimony from two surgeons confirming the nature and location of the fatal wound, testimony from multiple witnesses about Miller's threatening behaviour earlier in the day - including alleged statements that he would "run his sword into someone's belly" before nightfall - and an account by Robert Goodwin that Spines had been following Miller through the dark streets, with Miller apparently aware of his proximity when he drew his sword. Miller's own account - that Spines had run himself upon his rapier as it was drawn in self-defence - was not accepted by the jury, who returned a verdict of wilful murder. The judge sentenced Miller to be hanged by the neck until dead, and expressed the hope that the case would serve as an example to prevent such crimes in the future. The contrast between the outcomes of the Honeywood and Miller cases is instructive: in both cases the defendant claimed self-defence and argued that the deceased had initiated the violence, but in the Miller case the evidence of prior threats, the pursuit through the dark, and the alleged statement made in prison all pointed towards premeditation rather than accident. [Film No. 249–261]
The sedition trial of James Wakefield in 1682, charged with having spoken scandalous and derogatory words against the King's sacred person while in drink, reveals how carefully the island's courts distinguished between genuine political disloyalty and drunken personal quarrels. The prosecution relied almost entirely on the testimony of John Long, who claimed to have heard Wakefield speak words against the King. Multiple other witnesses, including Richard Geuing, Thomas Allis, Joseph Quinny, Thomas Fuesdale, and Robert Thompson, testified that they had been present during the quarrel between Long and Wakefield and had heard various abusive exchanges - including "English dog" and "Protestant rogue" - but not a single one of them heard the King mentioned. The defence produced additional witnesses who portrayed Long as drunk, vindictive, and explicitly seeking revenge by threatening to have Wakefield hanged or whipped. The jury deliberated for three or four hours before returning a not guilty verdict, and Wakefield was discharged after formally declaring his loyalty to the King. The case demonstrates that the island's juries were capable of resisting prosecutorial pressure where the evidence was weak, even in politically sensitive cases. [Film No. 262–270]
The two trials of John Oliver - the first for bestiality in 1683 and the second for rape in 1690 - each produced an acquittal, and each illustrates a recurring problem in the island's legal proceedings: the difficulty of establishing proof of a specific act when the key evidence rested on reported speech and inconsistent witness testimony. In the bestiality case, the widow Matthews, who had allegedly told multiple people that she had seen Oliver commit the act, denied direct knowledge of it in court. Thomas Monke's information, based on what others had told him, provided the core of the prosecution's case, but Monke himself was absent. The judge summarised the contradictions for the jury, and the not guilty verdict was returned. Oliver was nonetheless sentenced to twenty-one lashes in public for the lascivious behaviour the court considered proven regardless of the formal acquittal, illustrating the discretionary authority the Governor retained even after a jury had spoken. In the rape case, which concerned a nine-year-old girl, the key informant was again absent, Matthews again distanced herself from her earlier statements, and the physical examination of the child revealed no injury. Oliver again denied everything, and the jury again acquitted. [Film No. 276–293]
The court martial records reveal a distinctive legal culture for the military population of the island. Cases of seditious speech, neglect of duty, threatening a superior officer, and abandoning a post were all tried under the Articles of War, with death as the formally prescribed penalty for most serious offences. In practice, the court regularly mitigated the prescribed sentence, substituting banishment to Bombay or other Company settlements in India for execution. Thomas Easton, found guilty of neglecting his duty during an alarm in 1694, was ordered to walk around the fort for an hour with a musket tied to him, a punishment both physically demanding and publicly humiliating. John Calemorth, who abandoned his post while on sentry duty, was sentenced to close imprisonment in irons rather than death. The pattern suggests that the court understood its role as deterrent and disciplinary rather than purely punitive, and that maintaining a viable garrison required retaining men whose offences fell short of rebellion or treason. [Film No. 271–275, 294–296]
Personalities
Captain Anthony Beale is one of the most consistently present figures in the early part of the record. He served as Deputy Governor under Richard Field from the island's regrant in 1673, was designated Steward and Storekeeper with specific responsibility for provisions and ammunition, and was granted dwelling accommodation in the Company's storehouse together with his family. His importance to the early settlement is illustrated by the fact that the Company appointed a named successor - Maurice Moore - specifically to take over his duties if he died. He subsequently served as Lieutenant and Husband under Major Blackmore, managing the island's financial accounts and the distribution of the 879 pieces of eight sent in 1677. By 1681, at the time of the accounts audit, he had resigned from employment, and the Company ordered a strict audit of all Company property that had passed through his hands. His long tenure makes him a central figure in the Company's management of the island, though the record does not permit a full assessment of his character. [Film No. 22–23, 37, 39, 64]
Major John Blackmore served as Governor of St Helena from 1677 and presided over the island through its most turbulent period, including the 1684 rebellion. He was appointed at a moment when the Company had lost confidence in Captain Richard Field, and the specific trust reposed in his fidelity, prudence, justice, and circumspection was formally stated in his commission. He was still serving as Governor and Judge at the time of the Oliver trials in the early 1690s, presiding over the Court of Judicature with evident command of the formal procedures of English law. His long tenure - spanning at least fifteen years and surviving both the rebellion and the political upheavals of the Glorious Revolution - marks him as the dominant personality of the island's administration in this period. The 1689 commission revoking the authority of Robert Holden and Gregory Field while confirming his own underscores the degree to which the Company regarded Blackmore as an essential stabilising figure. [Film No. 36, 98, 133–134, 226, 276]
Daedalus Barker appears briefly in the Honeywood trial as the keeper of a house where punch was sold, a man who positioned himself physically between Honeywood and Hunt in an attempt to prevent violence and who later gave careful and relatively detailed evidence about the sequence of events in Cannady's house on the evening of the killing. His name is distinctive enough to be memorable, and his willingness to intervene in a quarrel between armed soldiers reflects a combination of civic responsibility and physical courage. He is the kind of figure - present, observant, cautious - who appears in court records because something went wrong in his neighbourhood, and who rarely leaves any other trace in the historical record. [Film No. 240–241]
Mr Bazett, whose letters survive in the later films, is a figure of a different kind: a Company servant engaged in a prolonged dispute with a Governor whose conduct he regarded as oppressive and self-interested, seeking to protect his position through appeals to contacts in England and careful cultivation of the Company's patronage networks. His letters reveal the precariousness of life in Company service in a remote colony, where an unsympathetic Governor could threaten a man's livelihood and where the only remedy was the slow process of appeal to London. His account of confusion in the stores, the withholding of documents, and the disorder following recent arrivals offers a perspective on the island's administration that differs sharply from the orderly picture the Company's own instructions sought to project. His later appointment as storekeeper following Mr Pack's death in 1713 suggests that his persistence was ultimately rewarded. [Film No. 297–299]
Andrew Wiefson, who appeared as both plaintiff and accused in the 1683 Court of Judicature, is notable less for the substance of the dog trespass case he brought against James Wakefield than for the allegation made at the end of the same court session that he had told an informant the Governor would accept bribes to favour cases, and that the Governor had taken bribes and deceitful payments from a Mr Eveless. When called to account, Wiefson denied having made such statements and asked the Governor's forgiveness in open court. The allegation was treated as sufficient for a formal apology rather than a criminal prosecution, and Wiefson was discharged. The incident suggests that rumours about corruption in the island's justice system circulated, and that the Governor - serving as his own judge in the matter - was content to accept a public apology rather than risk the exposure of a formal trial. [Film No. 231–234]
The chaplain John Winn, who requested permission to return to England in 1678 and received it, and the surgeon Francis Moore, who expressed a wish to return home in 1680 and was engaged for the voyage, both represent the difficulty of retaining qualified professional staff on an island that many found unappealing. The Company's complaint about the minister Mr Samuel as an inconsiderable charge - too expensive, too little productive - and its assertion that ministers were to say grace at the Governor's table and receive diet there as their primary benefit, reveals a determination to treat the clerical function as subordinate to civil governance. By contrast, the Company was genuinely anxious about periods without a minister, and its efforts to recruit, dispatch, and retain chaplains were persistent if not always successful. [Film No. 47–48, 57, 95]
BL Image No. | Document No. | OCR Transcription | Modern Interpretation |
|---|---|---|---|
1 |
| EAP 1364 St Helena Document Name and Date: St Helena letters from England 1673 - 1701 Additional comments: | |
2 |
| Book cover | |
3 |
| WARNING. | |
4 |
| Blank page | |
5 |
| Blank page | |
6 |
| BOOK “A”. Contains:
This book was probably compiled 1690. /1701/ | |
7 |
| Blank page | |
8 |
| Letters from England 1683 to 1701 Mr Wogan the Apothecary stated he had Session of the Court Martial from 27 Nov 1685 to 7 Oct 1690 210 276 A private letter - direction or writer not mentioned 277 Another letter evidently written by Mr Hogarth on the will With regard to his evidence see Book of Laws p. 250 & 251 | |
9 |
| St. Helena Records. We now present our readers with Index to the LETTER BOOK FROM ENGLAND 1673 - 1701. Letters report Charles II., dated 5 Dec. 1673, granting Letters Book from England 1673 - 1701, throws into clear St. Helena, fort Mounts. Disposition of, Dec. 27, Fortifications, all extensive, not yet so. Also P.S. Most of documents not summarised are of | |
10 |
| Blank page | |
11 |
| Contents 19 Dec 1673 - page 1 also copied also 22 Aug. 1683 - 83 East India Company’s Charters from Charles II - the pages 147, 167 Company Commission 3 Feb. 1685, concerning trials, Mr. Hodson as Govr At the end of this Book 210 to 275 are entered various Trials at Sessions | |
12 |
| Mr. Wogan (Chaplain) declining &c. All Island baptising &c, and Sheriff John appointed then oath 50. Each Planter having to Degree Proof of Proficiency - in plough, or lantern, 10 for honesty Plan of property by New Survey described 65 Fencing - right of clearance 72 | |
13 |
| Subjects to be recorded 77 - Reference to sending a mod | |
14 |
| Blank page | |
15 |
| Blank page | |
16 |
| Blank page | |
17 |
| N.B. - Letters Noted of No. 11 dated J. Crowcher - Printer p. 8 - Clark 11 W. Holland - James the Constable 9 - born p. 30 Sent prisoners - particulars 13 - F. S. L. C. &c &c Mr. Stace - Chaplain - Salary & duties - B. D. at W. Church till December 1679 Girl Fields ordered home in 1677 - by letter per Cond 17 Instructions to Governor Skelton about withholding Indians 17 | |
18 |
| A Liſt of What men were Sland of St Helena out of the Severall The Aſsiſtance Frigott Captn Rich: Keo[...] ... 8:10:0 Sould: Rai[...] & Tui[...] ... 1-04-0 Cooke Rich: Gil[...] ... 1-04-0 Pete[...] Mathe[...] Moh[...] Dan Davi[...] Wm Mill[...] The Leva[...] men Captn [...] ... 4-5 | This records the men from the island of St Helena who served on various warships and the wages they received while in the King’s service. On the frigate Assistance, Captain Richard Keogwin received £8 10s 0d. Thomas Patterson and the seaman George Neale were each paid £1 3s 0d. Ensign George Levenden received £1 4s 0d. The soldiers listed for this vessel included Thomas Reeve, Thomas Jones and William Badley, who were each paid 18s 0d. Raines and Tuit were paid £1 4s 0d. George Shandy was also paid £1 4s 0d. Other soldiers recorded were Peter Blake, Thomas Downes, David Griffiths, Michael Morgan, Hugh Richards, John Barker, Edward Harris and Matthew Whaley. Richard Gilbert, the cook, received £1 4s 0d. Additional men listed without specific wage figures were Henry Ellis, Robert Green, John Marland, Thomas Clifford, Francis Bartlett, Hugh Price, Francis Corrinson, Francis Barker, William Wickham, John Lovelace Junior, Robert W[...], Daniel Leigh, Amos Hopkins, John Goodwin, Thomas Brown, Samuel Green, John Compton, Daniel Gardner, Henry Heath, Samuel Rolles, Peter Matthew Mohun, John Dunfield, Richard Davis, John Addison, Thomas West, Matthew Geddes, William Bradley, Daniel Davis, Matthew Geddes, Anthony Booth, William Miller, George Brooks, Richard Whitehall and Henry Smith. The men from the Levant included the Captain, whose name is unreadable and who received £4 5s. Others listed were George Barnfield, Thomas Shipton, James Smith Meads and William Burton. The seaman Michael Johnson was listed alongside Ensign John Vaughan, Hugh Martin, John Eden Lawrence, Robert Martin, John Tracey, Thomas Inos, Henry Webborne, Philip Bond, Robert Wilkins, James Wakefield, Thomas Newall, Morgan Harris, John Stile, Jonas Taylor, Francis Carrier, William Ward, Robert Bateman, George Carmella, Thomas Bazet and Thomas Brooks. Interpretations Rai[...] & Tui[...] : Raines and Tuit Geo Leven[...] : George Levenden Fra: Corri[...]on : Francis Corrinson Pete[...] Mathe[...] Moh[...] : Peter Matthew Mohun Jame[...] Smi[...] Mea[...] : James Smith Meads |
19 |
| Owen: Daw[...] The Mary & Martha Jn: Hen[...] Volunt: The Bridgwater : 13 Men: Ward The Wm & Thomas Rich: Holland | This records the additional men from St Helena who served in the King’s service on various ships. The following men were also listed, perhaps as part of the previous group, including Owen Dawson, Matthew Borne, Joseph Copeland, Richard Tannock, Michael Daniel, Thomas Dodd, Thomas Jones, William N[...], Thomas Yorke, William Tar[...], George Bor[...] and John Logen. These were joined by John Richards, John Run[...], William N[...], William Bromley and William Ford, as well as the seamen Michael [...] and Al[...]. On the Mary and Martha, the men serving were John Hen[...], John Co[...], John Richards, Robert Williams, Thomas Gaskin, Joseph Brown, William Brown, John Stride, Simon James, Robert Ash[...], Thomas Ganne[...], Joseph Eagleson, John Browne, William Hale, Isaac Seaton, Thomas Mas[...], Thomas Borne, Robert Whe[...]ne, Richard Pearson and Francis Rogers. The ship Bridgewater carried thirteen volunteers, including men named Ward, William Ga[...]on and Thomas Fareb[...]n. Those serving on the William and Thomas were Richard Holland, Henry Kingham, Daniel Salomon, James Williams, William Butler, Nicholas Li[...]s, William Hart[...] and Richard Alexander. This crew also included Henry Francis, Hugh Jones, Ralph Sim[...], John Holland, William Elliott, George Mitchell, Ony Quint[...]n, William James, William Hale, Robert Stick, George Wood, William King, William Wick[...]nd, John Green, Jeffrey Baker, Lawrence Ogle, William I[...], John Moore, Matthew Lynsey, Francis Cooke, Thomas Coppin, Richard Jackson, Richard Mosely, Henry Owen, Joseph Lawson, William War[...] and Thomas Barrow. Robert Nicho[...] was also part of this company. Interpretations Jo: Cope[...] : Joseph Copeland Joho: Loge[...] : John Logen Wm: Bro[...]ey : William Bromley Jos: Eagles[...] : Joseph Eagleson Thm: Mas[...] : Thomas Mas[...] Ony: Quint[...] : Ony Quintin Jef: Baker : Jeffrey Baker Law: Ogle : Lawrence Ogle Math: Lynsey : Matthew Lynsey |
20 | 1 | By the Governour & Compa[...] of Merchants Whereas upon notice given us of the Reduce[...] of | At a committee meeting held on 19 December 1673 by the Governor and Company of Merchants of London trading to the East Indies, during the twenty-fifth year of the reign of King Charles II, the following was recorded. The Company received notice that St Helena had been retaken by Sir [...] who commanded a squadron of ships sent by the King. Although the King initially intended for the island to remain under his direct government and expense after it was seized by force, he subsequently signified his royal pleasure that it should instead be placed under the care and government of the East India Company. Under the terms of letters patent issued under the Great Seal of England in December 1672, the King granted the island to the Governor and Company of Merchants of London trading to the East Indies. This grant gives the Company the power and authority to establish such rules and directions for the good government of the island as are necessary within the scope of their charter. The Company considered the measures required for the future safety and preservation of the island, noting the various ships that have arrived or are expected, as well as the people currently living there. To ensure future trade and order, the Company commands all current and future inhabitants of St Helena to be obedient to its orders and directions. The Governor is appointed to provide everything necessary for the safety and defence of the island, and he is further instructed to ensure that all abuses are prevented and that offenders are punished. Interpretations December last passed : December 1672 Sr [...] : Sir Richard Munden |
21 | 2 | By the Governour & Comp[...] of Merchants Whereas upon notice given us of the Reduc[...] of Whereas we have Hired to take Possession in And forasmuch as it is altogether necessary that in | Notice was received by the Governor and Company of Merchants of London trading to the East Indies at a Court Committee held on 19 December 1673, in the twenty-fifth year of the reign of King Charles II. It was recorded that the Island of St Helena was retaken by Sir Richard Munden, who commanded a squadron of ships sent out by the King. Although it was initially the King’s pleasure that the island remain under his immediate government and expense after being taken by force, his royal pleasure was subsequently signified that the island should be placed under the care and government of the East India Company. In accordance with letters patent issued under the Great Seal of England dated [...] December 1672, the island was granted to the Governor and Company. Power and authority were thereby conferred to establish such rules and directions for the good government of the island as seemed necessary within the scope of the Charter. Consideration was given to the future safety and preservation of the island, noting the various ships that had arrived or were expected, as well as the persons then resident there. For the sake of future trade and employment, all current and future inhabitants of the island were ordered and commanded to be obedient to all directions. The Governor was directed to make provision for all things necessary for safety and defence, and was further instructed to ensure that abuses were prevented and offenders punished. The James, commanded by Captain James Gregory, and the John and Alexander, commanded by Captain Samuel Ricards, were hired to take possession. A list of storehouses, an invoice of goods and bills of lading were sent with them. In pursuance of the authority granted, Captain Richard Field was appointed as Governor of the island and Captain Anthony Beale as Deputy Governor. These two, along with [...] and Mr Inward, were constituted as the Council for the island, to take their places in the order named. It was ordained that the Governor and Council, or any three of them provided the Governor or his Deputy was one, should exercise chief command and authority in all matters. All residents, regardless of their status, were required to yield due obedience. Provision was also made for the government of the island in the event of the death, removal or absence of Captain Richard Field. It was ordered that should he die or be removed, the person named next in the document should succeed as Governor. In the case of the death or removal of that successor, the next member of the Council was to succeed. The Council, or any three of them, were appointed as chief commissioners to execute the office of Governor with the same full authority granted to Captain Richard Field, to continue until further orders were signified under the Common Seal. Interpretations December last passed : December 1672 Sr [...] : Sir Richard Munden James Gro[...] : James Gregory Sam[...] Rica[...] : Samuel Ricards Capt [...] Swi[...] : Captain Richard Field Antho[...] Be[...] : Anthony Beale |
22 | 3 | And you our said Governour & Councill or so many Upon the arrivall of the Shipping you are to take You are to be carefull in the distribut[...] expence You are to examine & state an acct how the stores & | The Governor and Council, or those employed in the execution of the power and trust committed to them, were instructed to observe the following directions. Upon the arrival of the shipping, the Governor was to take from the Commander all ammunition and stored provisions according to their respective invoices and bills of lading. These were to be placed safely under the charge and custody of Captain Anthony Beale and preserved from damage, waste and embezzlement. An exact account was to be kept in a book by way of debtor and creditor. In the event of the death or mortality of Captain Anthony Beale, Maurice Moore was appointed to be steward and storekeeper until further notice. Care was to be taken in the distribution, expense and disposal of the said stores and provisions. It was ordered that none should be delivered or issued except by warrant signed by the Governor and the majority of the Council. Regarding victuals, these were to be allowed to every seaman for his encouragement and maintenance in the proportions prescribed, with the remainder of the goods and provisions issued as judged necessary. A record was to be kept of to whom these items were issued, and returns were to be made of other goods and provisions according to the invoices. An account was to be examined and stated regarding how the stores and provisions mentioned in the invoices had been expended or disposed of. It was to be determined in whose hands the remainder stayed and whether any goods had been embezzled or wasted. These were to be applied to the best advantage, ensuring the husband was charged with them and that the details were entered in a book. The remaining stores were to be secured in safe custody, and no part of them was to be issued without an order signed by the Governor and Council. Interpretations Cap[...] Broo[...] : Captain Anthony Beale Antho[...] Bea[...] : Anthony Beale Mauri[...] Moo[...] : Maurice Moore Stew[...] & Stor[...] : Steward and Storekeeper Hus[...] : Husband (the officer in charge of ship’s accounts and stores) |
23 | 4 | You are also forthwith to take into your posses[...] You are also to take care that the 3 Book[...] left You have sent on board the Europ[...] goods in That every man may have Touching the Souldi[...] We do order & appoint that all our Souldi[...] To the Cap[...] & Fie[...] as Governour & Captaine | Instructions were also given for the immediate possession of all goods that could be saved or recovered from the island. These were to be disposed of so that a distribution could be made to the various inhabitants according to the rules and directions mentioned hereafter. Care was to be taken to ensure that the three books left on the island by Mr Munden were kept safe. The inhabitants were to be permitted and guided to view them at convenient times, though no more than two or three persons were to be allowed to view them at once. It was strictly ordered that no one was to take away or deface any of the books. Goods and money sent on board the Europe were to be delivered into the charge of John Munden and Captain Anthony Beale. These items were to be carefully preserved and accounted for, ensuring that every man received his proportion. These were to be issued by warrant of the Governor and Council as they saw fit. Regarding the soldiers, it was ordered and appointed that all soldiers then on the island be reduced into two companies. The Governor was to be the Captain of one company and the Deputy Governor the Captain of the other. The Governor was authorised and empowered to nominate and appoint suitable persons to serve as Lieutenants and Ensigns for these companies. The pay and maintenance were established as follows: The Governor and Captain of the company was to receive [...] per year, with an additional [...] provided as a gratuity. A Lieutenant was to receive [...], and an Ensign was to receive [...]. Each common soldier was to be paid [...] per year. A Sergeant was to receive [...], a Corporal [...], and a Drummer [...]. A Gunner was to be chosen by the Governor and Council and was to receive [...] per year. Interpretations Mr Mund[...] : Richard Munden John Mund[...] : John Munden Antho[...] Bea[...] : Anthony Beale |
24 | 5 | You are to take care that the Inferior Offic[...] You are forthwith to proce[...] & dispo[...] of such arm[...] as you may have for the You are to take special care that our powder be not And whereas many of the Inhab[...] and Souldi[...] | The Governor and Council were to ensure that the inferior officers and soldiers were exercised in arms and taught to conduct watch and duty as judged necessary, according to the practices used in military discipline. During their time in the Company, they were to assist in the erection of fortifications and other useful works as directed for the welfare of the island. When they could be spared, the men were to be employed to assist the planters in their plantations; when lodged and working on the Company’s plantations, it was ordered that they be considered and paid for their labour. The Governor was to proceed immediately to dispose of such arms as were available to strengthen the fortifications. Strong goods, arms and sufficient platforms were to be established for the better safeguard and defence of the island as seen fit. Materials were not sent to remove any ammunition already upon the island. Provisions were sent to several places on the island, and it was directed that the magazine be secured and guarded about the middle of the island, where it could be issued with the most safety and convenience to supply all the guards. It was ordered that on all occasions, victuals and provisions should be sent to every part of the island so that the men would not be forced to abandon their posts for want of food. Special care was to be taken that the gunpowder was not embezzled or wasted by salutes or otherwise, but kept for special and urgent occasions. It was thought fit to provide a house or houses, sent by this shipping, to be erected on the island as a storehouse for victuals, provisions and other items. It was appointed that Captain Anthony Beale should have dwelling accommodation therein for himself and his family for the present, and every man was to use the buildings in order to serve there. Furthermore, as many of the inhabitants and soldiers in this military government were complaining and expressed a desire to leave the service to become planters or otherwise remain on the island, the Governor and Council were recommended to provide them with accommodation. This was to be done according to the instructions mentioned and for their encouragement, as follows. Interpretations Antho[...] Bea[...] : Anthony Beale |
25 | 6 | That all the old Plant[...] that were formerly That besides the said proport[...] of Land each That all the Plant[...] be by you list[...] under one | All or any of the inhabitants of the island were to be permitted and allowed sufficient land on their respective grounds to build a house or houses in any valley or place. It was directed that these houses be built regularly to form a town for defence above each of the fortifications made in any valley, should the Governor and Council think it fit. Houses situated between the sea and any of the coast were to be removed by the inhabitants. The Governor and Council were to permit the planters and inhabitants to go on board and come ashore when ships arrived at the island, so that they might sell any spare provisions and buy items to supply their needs. It was ordered that a free market be established upon the arrival of ships, to be held in the most convenient place, and that no person, whether inhabitant or mariner, be restrained from participating. The lands were to be conveyed to each planter, both old and new, and to their heirs and assigns forever, including a common right in proportion to the land allowed to them at the time of their settlement. To avoid all civil and fraudulent conveyances, it was a condition that the details of the inhabitants and planters receiving land be entered into the Company’s books. They were not to have the power to sell or alienate their lands or dispose of them otherwise during their lives; instead, they were required to live upon and improve the land by planting and sowing. Failure to do so would result in the forfeiture of all grants and gifts, which would then be returned for the use of the Company and other planters. A register was to be kept of all marriages and deaths, as well as all children born on the island. For the encouragement of the inhabitants to settle and improve themselves through planting, it was ordered that those who raised sugar canes, indigo, cotton, ginger, tobacco or any other commodity fit for trade should bring them into the storehouse. They were to receive a price for these goods, which would then be sold to the best advantage. William C[...] Interpretations Buri[...] : Deaths Wm C[...] : William Ca[...] |
26 | 7 | That all or any of the Inhabit[...] of the said Island be That the said Plant[...] & Inhabit[...] be permit[...] by the That a free Market be appoint[...] to be kept That the land[...] to be convey[...] unto each Plant[...] both That a Regi[...] be kept of all Marriag[...] & Buri[...] & That for the encourag[...] of the Inhabit[...] to sett[...] and Wm C[...] | It was ordered that all or any of the inhabitants of the island should be permitted and allowed sufficient land on their respective grounds to build a house or houses in any valley or place. These houses were to be built in a regular fashion to form a town for defence above each of the fortifications constructed in any valley, should the Governor and Council think it fit. Any houses situated between the sea and the coast were to be removed by the inhabitants. The Governor and Council were to permit the planters and inhabitants to go on board and come ashore when ships arrived at the island. This was to allow them to sell any spare provisions and buy such things as could be procured to supply their needs. It was further directed that a free market be established upon the arrival of ships, to be held in the most convenient place. No person, whether an inhabitant or a mariner, was to be restrained from using it. The lands were to be conveyed to each planter, both old and new, and to their heirs and assigns forever. This included a common right in proportion to the land allowed to them at the time of their settlement. To avoid all civil and fraudulent conveyances, it was a condition that the details of the inhabitants and planters receiving land under these provisions be entered into the Company books. They were not to have the power to sell or alienate their lands or dispose of them in any other way during their lives. Instead, they were required to live upon and improve the land by planting and sowing, upon pain of forfeiting all grants and gifts. Any such forfeited land was to be returned for the use of the Company and other planters. A register was to be kept of all marriages and deaths, as well as all children born on the island. For the encouragement of the inhabitants to settle and improve themselves through planting, it was ordered that those who raised sugar canes, indigo, cotton, ginger, tobacco or any other commodity fit for trade should bring them into the storehouse. They were to receive a price for these goods, which would then be sold to the best advantage. William Ca[...] Interpretations Buri[...] : Deaths Wm C[...] : William Ca[...] |
27 | 8 | And you are hereby strict[...] requir[...] to give all Due Wee requir[...] you to take a List of all Souldi[...] who desir[...] You are requir[...] to take care that the Person[...] that You are to take care that due improv[...] be made Wee do also ord[...] and appoint that the Comp[...] Wee have also ordain[...] that the Mini[...] be Wm Cour[...] | The Governor and Council were strictly required to give all due encouragement to all inhabitants of the island belonging to the Company. Experienced persons fit for such labour and service were to be encouraged to remain on the island. A list was to be taken of all soldiers who desired to be discharged from their duty and pay as soldiers, and they were to be given certificates. These men were to be granted the same allowance of provisions and victuals as those provided to other planters. Furthermore, it was ordered that married persons desiring to remain and settle in the same condition should have their names recorded. A list including their names and the ships they intended to return to England on was to be returned so that they might be discharged and orders given accordingly. Care was to be taken regarding those persons willing to be hired to serve on shore. The Governor and Council were further instructed to ensure that due improvement was made by the Company’s servants and planters. No servant was to be permitted to depart the island without the leave of the Governor and Council, and no servant was allowed to carry away any provisions belonging to the Company without permission. It was also ordered and appointed that the Company’s storehouse be kept at the direction and disposal of the Governor for the maintenance of the island. All persons belonging to the Company were to be subject to the orders of the Governor and Council, and all goods belonging to the Company were to be carefully preserved. It was further ordained that the ministers be encouraged to perform their duties. Provision was to be made for them according to the orders and directions of the Company, and they were to be maintained and supported by the Company. William Courtin Interpretations Marri[...] person[...] : Married persons be bor[...] : be hired Mini[...] : Ministers Wm Cour[...] : William Courtin |
28 | 9 | The above is a Coppy of our Lett[...] sent by Ship[...] Europ[...] And now since it hath pleased his Majest[...] to make And also would have you send us a gener[...] account of all | The text provided was a copy of the letters sent by the ships Europe and John and Alexander. It was hoped that, through the goodness of God, these vessels arrived safely with all passengers, various provisions and stores as recorded in the invoices. By God’s grace in sending this further communication safely, a full supply would be available. This was intended to allow the Governor to take greater care in ordering every inhabitant to plant all necessary sorts of provisions; it was noted that if they were not negligent or slothful, there could be no lack of food. Since it had pleased the King to make peace with Holland, consideration was to be given to reducing expenses. However, this was to be done while still maintaining a sufficient garrison with as much care and vigilance as if the war had continued. It was therefore directed that only seventy-five of the ablest and best soldiers should be kept. For the remainder, the Company’s terms for staying as free planters were to be proposed to them. If they would not accept these terms, they were to be sent home in a fair proportion on each of the returning ships. The number was to be reduced to seventy-five upon the arrival of the ships from India. A general account was also required of the pay of all soldiers and what provisions they had taken up. As some records had not been kept for each soldier since his arrival, a particular account was requested for every man, including the time he had been there and what goods and provisions he had received. Reports were also required concerning the stores and every provision sent from the island in ships with expedition. The commanders were to have no cause to complain of being detained through negligence in providing their dispatch. Interpretations Ship[...] Europ[...] : Ship Europe John and Alex[...] : John and Alexander his Majest[...] : King Charles II Holland : The Dutch Republic India : The East Indies |
29 | 10 | London Decem[...] ye 28th 1674 The above is a Coppy of what sent by ye Joha[...] whom we hope in This now goeth with our shipp London Cap[...] Wm Ba[...] By this shipp goeth one Mr Swal[...] whom we would have | A copy was sent of the previous correspondence carried by the Johanna, which was hoped to have arrived safely at the island from Barbados. Indirect information was received from a vessel there regarding the Europe and the John and Alexander, which had arrived and delivered all passengers and goods safely at St Helena. It was understood that a packet had been sent from the island via the ship Hamburg Merchant, which had departed Barbados for London three days after the arrival of the other vessels. However, as that ship remained missing and was feared lost, a great disappointment was felt by the Company regarding the lack of intelligence on the state of affairs. Hope was nevertheless maintained that further information might be received before the present ship departed from the English coast. The current dispatch was sent with the ship London, commanded by Captain William Bass, which carried passengers and a large supply of provisions and necessities as recorded in the accompanying invoices and bills of lading. It was concluded that if the passengers from the previous ships had arrived as expected, the island would be sufficiently supplied with inhabitants. As these people were to be exercised in the use of arms according to previous instructions, it was determined that the maintenance of seventy-five paid soldiers was no longer necessary. Therefore, upon the arrival of this ship, the number of soldiers was to be reduced to fifty. These were to be selected from the most civil and able men available and were to be employed in planting. It was directed that care be taken to encourage all inhabitants to plant every type of provision the country could produce, and a large supply of various seeds was sent for distribution among them. Mr Swale also travelled on this ship, and it was ordered that he be made a member of the Council. Instructions were given for the speedy settlement of the new arrivals by the laying out of their lands, the provision of assistance from the slaves and the encouragement of cottage building. This was intended to allow planting to begin as soon as possible. Until their own houses were completed, the new arrivals were to be lodged among those planters who already possessed houses, as it was the Company’s desire that all promises made to the planters be punctually performed. Interpretations ye Joha[...] : the Johanna ye Europ[...] : the Europe Hamb[...] Merch[...] : Hamburg Merchant Cap[...] Wm Ba[...] : Captain William Bass Mr Swal[...] : Mr Swale |
30 | 11 | We would have you take opportunit[...] of faire weather to goe We would have you take care in time of Plen[...] to order If any Europ[...] people who are at amity with Eng[...] arrive at ye We shall expect every year an exact acc[...] from you how our We intend to give ord[...] to Surat to send you by return Since ye time arriv[...] ye Europ[...] and John & Alex[...] by whom | Instructions were given for the Governor and Council to take advantage of fair weather to travel around the windward part of the island at a distance in their boats. This was to be done to discover what fishing grounds existed, and for this purpose, dipping lines and leads were sent. Care was to be taken during times of plenty to order every family to lay up a store of dry provisions that would keep, to ensure against future years of poor weather or want. If any European people at amity with England arrived at the island for refreshment, they were to be treated civilly. However, it was directed that they should not be trusted so far as to come ashore or discover the strength of the place. It was further ordered that fresh provisions should not be imparted to them to the extent that the Company’s ships or the inhabitants themselves might go without. An exact account was expected every year concerning how the stores were spent and to whom they were issued. A list of all soldiers or inhabitants, as well as a record of what ships and persons touched at the island, was also required. The Company intended to give orders to Surat to send some Neapolitan goats by the returning ships. If these arrived safely, it was directed that they be placed in one of the remote valleys at a distance from all plantations. Two slaves were to be appointed to look after them, ensuring the care of their young and the preservation of their wool and hair. Efforts were also to be made to procure some indigo by the returning ships to be kept on the island. Since the arrival of the Europe and the John and Alexander, by which advice was received of a letter dated 13 May 1674, the contents of that communication were noted. Regret was expressed regarding the death of the minister, as it was feared he would be much missed; however, it was stated that the utmost endeavour would be made to procure another to arrive on the ships if possible. Captain Benjamin had met with the Company and presented a bill of exchange for one hundred and twelve pounds, thirteen shillings and nine pence, which was paid to him. A direction was given that for the future, no such charges should be made unless for some extraordinary occasion. Interpretations 13th 1674 : 13 May 1674 Neo[...] Goat[...] : Neapolitan Goats Negro[...] : slaves Cap[...] Benja[...] : Captain Benjamin |
31 | 12 | 12 We cannot but take notice of the disingenu[...] of ye Souldi[...] You advis[...] that some sea[...] did report among ye Souldi[...] yt we In ye above we have advis[...] to reduc[...] ye Souldi[...] to ye number of 50 And whereas ye Souldi[...] say yt they will have diet as well as And though we say fifty Souldi[...] yet if you find by exper[...] We have ord[...] Cap[...] Ba[...] that to all ye Command[...] As for ye Dutch prison[...] you must give them liberty in The good[...] now sent & former[...] sent it is our pleasure yt ye | The Company noted with disappointment the ungratefulness of the soldiers. Despite care being taken to send a plenty of provisions, the soldiers had neglected to raise food from the ground. It was hoped that the Governor and Council would bring them to better order, as it was stated that they must not depend upon the Company for any more supplies in the future. Utmost endeavour was to be used to set every inhabitant to planting and raising provisions. Regarding the report that some seamen had told the soldiers the Company intended to transport them as slaves to Bombay, it was noted that the Governor should have identified the author of this forgery so he might have received his reward. It was remarked that if the soldiers had not been paid lately, they might not have given any credit to such reports, and it was affirmed that those who behaved well would be rewarded. As previously advised, the number of soldiers was to be reduced to fifty. It was thought best to select those who were civil and obedient to the government; the Company expressed a willingness to pay their wages well but expected good performance in return. Furthermore, in response to the soldiers’ demand for both diet and wages, it was noted that such a request was contrary to the custom for soldiers in a garrison. However, it was allowed that if they planted and worked for the garrison, they might receive it. Although the number of fifty soldiers was suggested, it was left to the Governor’s experience to decide if this was sufficient to keep the inhabitants in subjection and the island secure. It was observed that soldiers who mutinied upon every report would provide little security. Captain Bass was ordered to inform all commanders that if any of their common seamen or landsmen wished to stay on the island as inhabitants, they should be admitted with the commander’s consent, provided they took an equal number of soldiers back in their place. The Dutch prisoners were to be given their liberty to return on any English or European ship, or they could be shipped to Bantam on the London, whichever they preferred. It was the Company’s pleasure that the inhabitants and soldiers pay no more for the goods now or formerly sent than the prices rated in the invoices. It was also ordered that while the Captain is on the island, he and the commanders of ships and inhabitants shall serve as members of the Council. Interpretations ye Souldi[...] : the soldiers Bomb[...] : Bombay Cap[...] Ba[...] : Captain Bass Bant[...] : Bantam |
32 | 13 | There is one Jn[...] Harris a sea man at St Helena whom we order Your very Lov[...] friend[...] Jn[...] Page Berkeley Wm: Thom[...] Nath: Hern[...] Gov[...] Wee requir[...] it constan[...] by every opportun[...] you send The wife of Cap[...] Field hav[...] made it her earn[...] A true Coppy Exam[...] London March ye 5th 167[...] Wee have Receiv[...] sever[...] Letter[...] from you by our returne Wee recommend it to your care and diligen[...] to keep good watch You | It was ordered that one John Harris, a seaman at St Helena, be given liberty to return to England. The Governor and Council were then committed to the protection of the Almighty by their loving friends. The correspondence was signed by John Page, Christopher Boone, John Jolliffe, John Doggett, John Moore, John Banks, John Moore, Francis Thorowgood, Rowland Wynn, Samuel Moyer, John Houblon, William Thomson, Nathaniel Herne (Governor), Robert Thomson (Deputy) and Samuel Barnardiston. A constant requirement was made for a list of all living inhabitants and soldiers to be sent home by every opportunity, along with a separate list of those who had died and the date of their decease. As the wife of Captain Richard Field had made an earnest request for her husband to return home, he was granted free liberty to return to England. It was directed that if he chose to depart, Captain Anthony Beale should succeed him as Governor. The document was certified as a true copy examined by Stephen Legge. In a further communication from London dated 5 March 1675, it was acknowledged that several letters had been received from the island by the returning ships, including the last dispatch sent by the ship London on 4 November 1674. The contents of all these letters were noted. Care and diligence were recommended in keeping a good watch. It was strictly ordered that no strangers be permitted to come to the fort, and no more were to be allowed on the island at one time than permitted by the established rules. Former orders in that particular were to be strictly observed. It was noted that the soldiers mentioned as having been sent home from time to time had arrived; they had been entered into the records and their wages had been paid. It was remarked that many of them now repented that they had not remained on the island to become free planters. Interpretations Jn[...] Harris : John Harris Jn[...] Page : John Page Chris: Boo[...] : Christopher Boone Jn[...] Jelli[...] : John Jolliffe Jn[...] Doge[...] : John Doggett Jn[...] Mor[...] : John Moore Jn[...] Bank[...] : John Banks Fra: Thor[...] : Francis Thorowgood Rowl[...] Win[...] : Rowland Wynn Sam: Moy[...] : Samuel Moyer Jn[...] Hobb[...] : John Houblon Nath: Hern[...] Gov[...] : Nathaniel Herne, Governor Robt Thom[...] Deput[...] : Robert Thomson, Deputy Sam: Barn[...]iston : Samuel Barnardiston deceas[...] : died Steph[...] Legge : Stephen Legge March ye 5th 167[...] : 5 March 1675 |
33 | 14 | You have done well in reduc[...] ye number of Sould[...] to 50 and We are pleased to heare from you yt our Island is in You advis[...] us of ye death of ye Gunn[...] by a disa[...] in fir[...] a Gun We are satisfi[...] yt you have entertain[...] another Gunn[...] We are inform[...] yt there is a Rumour amongst ye Sould[...] You do hint as if some had Remain[...] amongst you some of We take notice of the great quant[...] of provis[...] yt you have | The reduction of the number of soldiers to fifty was noted as a positive action. It was expressed that, in accordance with previous orders, only those who were able and honest had been retained, while the remainder were to have been returned home. Satisfaction was expressed upon hearing that the island was in a flourishing condition and that affairs were thriving. However, it was observed that industry was still lacking among many of the inhabitants. It was stated that this would not be permitted to continue; those who refused to plant and provide for themselves were not to be supplied by the Company and were instead to be sent home under the title of “drones”. The death of the gunner in an accident while firing a gun was noted with regret. However, the Governor and Council were blamed for the vain expenditure of powder. Information had been received that the gunner had carelessly used a double charge. While the appointment of a new gunner into the service was acknowledged with satisfaction, instructions were given to ensure he kept a better and more exact account of the stores than his predecessor. His accounts were to be examined at least once a month. It was noted that a rumour persisted among the soldiers and inhabitants that the Company intended to send ships to transport them to Bombay. This report was described as groundless, and an assurance was given that such a plan had never been considered. Due diligence was expected from the Governor to identify the authors of this rumour. A hint had been received that some individuals remained on the island who did not belong there. It was directed that if any such persons were present, they were not to be allowed to stay. Particular mention was made of one young man who, if his behaviour did not improve, was to be sent home. The receipt of a great quantity of provisions from Captain Rogers, in addition to those sent by the Company, was noted. It was reiterated that the island must not depend upon provisions sent from England, and the Governor was instructed to govern himself accordingly. Interpretations Sould[...] : soldiers Gunn[...] : gunner Bomb[...] : Bombay Cap[...] Ro[...] : Captain Rogers |
34 | 15 | Wee have [...] the Govern[...] wife of [...] who at severall times Wee take notice of your want of a good minister by reason of ye Wee order you by ye first shipps to send home Richard [...] who We have advise from Bantam yt ye ginger and Turmerick seeds A true Coppy Examined Your very Loving Friends | The Governor’s wife made several requests regarding his salary, and it was desired that he should advise what sum might be allowed to her yearly during his continuance in service. Note was taken of the lack of a suitable minister following the death of the previous incumbent. To ensure the island was not without one, a minister was engaged to travel directly. Mr [...] took his passage on the ship Nathaniel by way of Surat. It was hoped that he would prove an able minister and that his instructions and conversation would provide great benefit to all. An agreement was made for him to receive a salary of 50 pounds per year and a gratuity of 50 pounds per year. His duties included preaching at least once every Lord’s day, and spending the remainder of the day catechising both English and black children and expounding on the Catechism. On weekdays, he was to teach the children to read and write. He was to be accommodated with diet at the general table and lodged at the Fort house. It was ordered that he be given all civil respect for his encouragement, and a soldier or a slave was to be appointed as his serving man. As he brought his own library for his use, an inventory was required of all books already on the island to ensure they were kept safe. If the minister desired to settle a plantation, he was to be granted the same proportion of land and accommodations as the previous minister. It was ordered that Richard [...], who went out with the surgeon Mr Moore, be sent home by the first ships if he were willing to depart, as his friends had importuned for his return to England. Advice was received from Bantam that ginger and turmeric seeds, along with various other plants and seeds, had been sent for the improvement of the island. As no mention of these was made in the previous letters, an account was required by the next dispatch concerning their disposal and whether they had thrived. The Governor and Council were committed to the protection of the Almighty. The document was certified as a true copy examined by Stephen Legge, Clerk. Interpretations ye Sould[...] : the soldiers Negroe : slave Chirurgeon : surgeon p me Stephen Legge Clerke : By me, Stephen Legge, Clerk |
35 | 16 | Blank page | |
36 | 17 | By the Governor & Company of Merch[...] To all to whome these presents shall come greeting And | Notice was given by the Governor and Company of Merchants of London trading to the East Indies at a Court of Committees held on 20 February 1677, in the thirtieth year of the reign of King Charles II. In pursuance of the authority granted by the royal letters patent dated 16 December 1673, by which the Company was constituted as the free and absolute lords and proprietors of St Helena, a change in governance was ordained. Captain Richard Field, the then Governor of the island, was discharged of his trust and command. It was ordered that he return to England by the first available shipping opportunity. Especial trust and confidence being reposed in the fidelity, prudence, justice and circumspection of Major John Blackmore, he was constituted and appointed as Governor and Commander-in-Chief of the island in the room of Captain Richard Field. Authority was granted to Major John Blackmore over all forts, territories and jurisdictions, as well as all forces then or thereafter employed in the Company’s service on the island. This command over the people and inhabitants was to commence upon his arrival on the ship Anna, then bound for the island, and was to continue during the Company’s pleasure or until contrary orders were signified under the Common Seal. Interpretations 20th of Feb[...] 13th yeare : 20 February 1677 (The “13th year” in the text likely refers to the year of the consolidated Charter or a clerical error, as 1677 was the 30th year of Charles II’s reign) Cap[...] Field : Captain Richard Field Ship Annah : The ship Anna in the roome of : in the place of |
37 | 18 | And we also appoint Cap[...] Anthony Beale to be And in case of death or remove of ye said Major And you our Govr & Councill before named in ye And we do hereby require as well all ye Inhabitants of ye said | It was further appointed that Captain Anthony Beale should serve as a member of the Council, alongside Jonathan Tyler Esquire, Joshua Johnson, Richard [...], John G[...]n[...] and John [...]. They were to take their places in the Council in the order named. The Governor and the Council, or any three of them provided the Governor was always one, were granted full power to exercise all command and authority on the island in all matters whatsoever. All persons residing there, including all officers and soldiers of every quality and condition, were required to yield due obedience to them. In the event of the death or removal of Major John Blackmore, it was appointed that Captain Anthony Beale should succeed him as Governor of the island. Should both Major John Blackmore and Captain Anthony Beale be deceased, removed or absent, the remaining members of the Council, or any three or more of them, were constituted as the chief commission to execute the office of Governor. This authority was granted in as full and ample a manner as that previously given to Major Blackmore or Captain Beale, to continue until orders to the contrary should be signified under the Common Seal. The Governor and Council were directed to observe all orders and instructions provided then or in the future from the Governor and Company in the execution of their power and trust. All inhabitants of the island, as well as all officers and soldiers entertained in the service, were required to be obedient to the Governor and Council and to assist them in the execution of their command. This was given under the Common Seal on the day and year first written above. Interpretations Cap[...] Anthony Beale : Captain Anthony Beale Jonathan Tyler Esq[...] : Jonathan Tyler Esquire Sould[...] : soldiers Common Seale : The official seal of the East India Company |
38 | 19 | Our Governor & Councill Wee having by our Commission bearing date ye 20th day of In ye first place thereof yt all our Concerns under your care and Upon your arrivall at ye Island St Helena on ye Ship Johanna | The Governor and Council at St Helena were advised that by a commission dated 20 February 1677, Richard Field and Gregory Field had been discharged from being Governor. Major John Blackmore was chosen to succeed them in that charge, as appeared more at large in the commission to which due obedience was required. It was ordered that Major John Blackmore embark on the ship Johanna, upon which he was to take his passage to the island. Before he assumed the government and management of affairs, the following directions and instructions were to be observed. In the first place, so that all concerns under their care and conduct might prosper by the blessing of God, it was desired that the Lord’s day be religiously observed throughout the island by all inhabitants. This was to be achieved by their abstaining from all bodily labour, servile employment and vain or idle sports and pastimes. The Governor and Council were to appoint a convenient place or places for the worship of Almighty God, where all persons might resort every Lord’s day to join in the solemn exercise of religion. Furthermore, the Governor and Council were to encourage the minister in the discharge of his duty, and the people in like manner, according to the ordinance of God. Care was also to be taken that all profane swearing or licentious use of the name of God in vain be restrained and carefully punished, along with all rioting, drunkenness and uncleanness. Any who offended in a great manner were to be punished according to the laws of England, as provided by the judgment of the Governor and Council. Upon arrival at St Helena on the ship Johanna, the Governor was to receive all provisions, ammunition, arms, iron, utensils and other goods and necessities mentioned in the bills of lading and inventory. These were to be safely landed and lodged in a fit place appointed by the Governor and the storekeeper, so that they might be preserved from damage, waste and embezzlement. A strict account was required not only of what was currently sent, but also of what had been formerly provided or should be sent hereafter. A regular account of all expenditures was to be maintained. In the event of the death or mortality of Captain Beale, the Council was to consult and appoint another in his place until further order. As the island had been plentifully furnished with all necessary stores and provisions, the Governor and Council were required to be very careful in their management. Interpretations 20th day of Feb[...] : 20 February 1677 Richard [...] and Gregory Field : Richard Field and Gregory Field ye Ship Johannah : the ship Johanna Imbez[...] : embezzlement Cap[...] Beale : Captain Anthony Beale |
39 | 20 | In ye Distribution & disposall of ye Stores & provisions yt none of And your store may be better preserved & Husbanded we We have also by this shipp sent you 879 Mexic[...] & Civill Bills We appoint yt all unmarried men pay upon our said Island And we do hereby Authorise & Impower our Govr & Councill | In the distribution and disposal of the stores and provisions, it was directed that none should be issued or disposed of by the Husband without a warrant under the hands of the Governor and two or more members of the Council. It was ordered that the provision of victuals be equally distributed to the soldiers for their maintenance and encouragement, as the Governor and Council judged necessary and convenient from time to time. The planters were also to be supplied according to the first constitution; they were to be allowed victuals out of the stores for three months if their respective plantations could not sooner furnish them with provisions. After that time, as their own provisions became sufficient, they were to be supplied at the formerly established rates. Orders were to be taken to reserve a due proportion of the stores for the encouragement of the soldiers, and it was mandated that all goods issued from the store to supply the needs of the planters be rated according to the invoice prices. To ensure that the stores were better preserved and managed, it was ordered that the Governor and Council take a strict account of them once every three months, or more often if required. Care was to be taken to keep them conveniently so that little or no loss occurred through spoil or other inconveniences. Whatever clothes or particular stores were delivered to the soldiers or planters for their own use were to be charged to each person’s individual account by the Husband and Storekeeper at the invoice rate. A copy of such accounts was to be transcribed and remitted to the Company. By this ship, 879 Mexican and Seville pieces of eight in several sorts of coin were sent, to be placed under the care and charge of the Husband, Captain Anthony Beale. These were to be issued by him at the rate of five per cent for payment in the money of the island, according to the requirements of the Governor and Council. This was intended to allow for the advancement of clothes and other items that might be taken from the store on the account of wages. It was stated that more would be sent when occasions required, but the Governor and Council were strictly forbidden from drawing any bills of exchange upon the Company. Good husbandry was to be practised in distributing money to the men upon their account of pay, ensuring they received some but not all at once. It was appointed that all unmarried men serving on the island and entertained into the service as soldiers should, upon arrival, be reduced into two companies. The Governor was to be the Captain of one company, and Captain Anthony Beale the Captain of the other, with Mr Jonathan Tyler and Joshua Johnson serving as Lieutenants. Furthermore, the Governor and Council were authorised and empowered to nominate and appoint such persons as they thought fit to draw all planters into companies and exercise them at least once a month, so that they might be better able and fitter to defend the island. Interpretations ye Sould[...] : the soldiers Husband : the officer in charge of provisions/finances (Captain Anthony Beale) Mexic[...] & Civill Bills : Mexican and Seville pieces of eight (coins) Cap[...] Beale : Captain Anthony Beale Mr Jonathan Tyler : Mr Jonathan Tyler Joshua Johnson : Joshua Johnson |
40 | 21 | Defend themselves of ye Island from any Enemy yt may assault them And yt our Island may be ye better secured agt all surprizall or any And yt all Planters may be better encouraged to sett forth Trees | The Governor and Council were directed to ensure the defence of the island against any enemy. It was ordered that inferior officers and soldiers in pay be exercised frequently in military discipline to ensure they were dexterous in the handling of arms and capable in their duties. Consideration was to be given to the number of men kept in pay upon the Governor’s arrival. It was noted that several planters had recently been taken into pay, but the Governor and Council were tasked with ensuring that no unnecessary charges were incurred by entertaining more men than required. This was based on the principle that all planters were bound by the tenure of their land to bear arms and observe orders for the defence of the island. Upon arrival, a view was to be taken of the forts and other fortified places to strengthen them where necessary. Where any harbour or other location required further protection, new forts or trenches were to be constructed as the Governor and Council judged most convenient. Materials were sent for this purpose. It was desired that communication and guards be maintained in the most suitable places, with garrisons constantly supplied at their respective posts. Provisions and other chief supplies were to be kept ready in magazines at these locations so that the men would not be forced to abandon their posts for want of necessities. A chief magazine was appointed to be kept safely near the middle of the island, as it was the most convenient location from which to supply all parts. A restriction was placed on the firing of guns for arriving ships, with no more than nine guns to be fired beyond a salute, and no shots were to be fired without an order or an especial cause. An exact account of the expenditure of gunpowder was to be maintained and sent to the Company yearly. For the encouragement of the planters, several fruit trees and vines were sent to the island. The Governor and Council were to ensure these were sufficiently planted and distributed among the various plantations. The sowing and planting of sugar canes was also heartily recommended. Interpretations Sould[...] : soldiers ye practice of military dis- cipline : the practice of military discipline judgmt : judgment Gunn : guns Powder : gunpowder |
41 | 22 | [...] or to inhabit [...] shall by their Lin[...] & Travell [...] And that our said Island may be put into best posture of Defence | The Governor and Council were enjoined to give all due encouragement to the inhabitants in the work of planting. Experienced persons were to be employed to instruct and advise those ignorant in the field, and all artificers and workmen were to be encouraged in their various callings. To prevent disputes regarding work performed on the Company’s plantations or other projects, it was appointed that every master workman and labourer enter into a contract for service. It was directed that a master workman receive the value of one shilling sterling per day, while labourers or servants in husbandry or other works were to receive one penny per day, or such other amount as allowed by the Governor and Council. Furthermore, as an encouragement for persons to reside on the island, it was ordered that they be allowed to plant a double proportion of land compared to former grants, not exceeding fifty acres for each family. These plantations were to be placed conveniently near one another so that the inhabitants might better secure and relieve each other during a sudden alarm or assault. To ensure the island was placed in the best posture of defence, the Governor and Council were to employ no more men than judged necessary. Officers were to be appointed to exercise and train the men in arms at least twice a month. Particular rendezvous locations were to be assigned where planters could resort when an alarm was given. It was strictly required that planters have due regard for their watches and not leave their respective plantations while a watch was continued or during an alarm. Upon the discovery of any enemy or strange vessels, all men were to repair to their several posts and observe the orders of military discipline as directed by their officers for the safety of the island. This was noted as one of the conditions upon which land and accommodations were granted. No man was to absent himself from his assigned ground or place in any valley without the leave of the Governor. Interpretations p Diem : per day ye : the yt : that accommod[...] : accommodations |
42 | 23 | To be more duly allotted to ym by ye Govr & Councill appoint[...] ym Upon arrivall of shipping employ[...] in our Service we order We have formerly granted to Land we have given an allot[...] For the improvement of your own Plantation[...] you have | The Governor and Council were directed to allot particular places in the island for defence, with houses to be built between the various forts. Upon the arrival of shipping employed in the Company’s service, it was ordered that free intercourse be appointed in the most convenient places to accommodate both the inhabitants and the mariners. However, inhabitants were strictly forbidden from going on board any vessel without first obtaining leave from the Governor. The Company confirmed former grants and allotments made to every man and his family. These lands were to be held by them, their heirs, and assigns for ever, whether in common or as sole possessions. It was intended that they be quietly settled and their estates confirmed to them, provided they continued to behave themselves in good service as appointed. A register was to be kept of all lands set out and allotted to any planter, including the specific boundaries and conditions. Furthermore, a particular register was required for all sales, mortgages, and conveyances to record who possessed the land at any given time. Any sale or transfer not recorded in this register after the specified time would be void. A duplicate of these registers was to be sent to the Company yearly to prevent fraud and unfair dealing. A regular record was also required of all marriages, births, and burials on the island. A list or roll of these events was to be sent to the Company so that the increase or decrease of the inhabitants could be monitored, providing a plain view of the state of the island. It was noted that if any men desired to have their wives and children join them, passage would be provided upon their request. Liberty was also granted for persons to return home to England within a year if they so wished. Similarly, servants or those who had a mind to leave their plantations were to be permitted to return. For the improvement of the plantations, the Governor and Council had their own slaves to employ in planting, setting fruit trees, and sowing seeds. Care was to be taken to ensure a sufficient stock was provided and that due encouragement was given to others. Interpretations ye : the ym : them wthout : without tenem[...] : tenements Negro[...] : slaves perhaps : likely (as per preference for “perhaps”) |
43 | 24 | Memorand[um] And that all Shipping wch shall arrive wth you, The Companies Plantation and to be produce thereon, wee doe The minister wee have entertained and given directions on our Generall Wee have now entertained a Gunner to take care of our Forts And that all our Planters Lands may be confirmed to them | Memorandum It was ordered that all shipping arriving at the island should be provided with a sufficient supply of both bread and fresh provisions, which the Company was to furnish. No grant of land to any planter or other person was to serve as an encouragement for servants to neglect their duties. In addition to the keeping of horses and cows for the increase of the Company’s stock, both great and small, the production of the Company’s plantation was to be at the direction and appointment of the Governor and Council. This was intended to maintain a sufficient stock for those residing on the island, including the carpenter, other officers, and servants in the Company’s employment. Care was also to be taken regarding the commanders and persons belonging to ships and vessels arriving at the island during their stay. The minister engaged for the island was directed not only to preach twice every Lord’s day but also to instruct the younger sort and the people in the principles of religion. He was further tasked with the care of the Company’s plantation and other convenient matters, for which he was to receive his salary. It was expected that he would instruct persons for teaching at schools and other necessary subjects, particularly if he were found to be industrious and deserving. A schoolmaster was also appointed for the island, and a plantation was to be built for his use. It was required that all persons returning to England from the island take notice of the records kept by the Governor, Council, and minister. Strict care was to be taken that no person departed the island without the Governor’s leave, and the minister was to be careful to observe the religious laws and orders. A gunner was engaged to take care of the forts and their ordering, along with all other places where great guns were required for defence. The Governor was to appoint a person under the gunner to assist him and provide dispatch. To ensure that all planters’ lands were legally and firmly confirmed to them in obedience to the aforementioned orders, the Governor was to appoint a fit person, with the advice of the Council, to survey each plantation. This surveyor was to describe the several quantities and bounds of each holding, delivering a clear description of the boundaries as exactly as free common. Each planter was to have his land conveyed to him in a legal tenure of common soccage, which the Company stood ready to confirm for the use of the island government and its inhabitants. Interpretations wth : with p[er?]sons : persons yt : that p Diem : per day soccage : a legal form of land tenure p[er?]son : person |
44 | 25 | That our Island may prosper and flourish Under our Governm[en]t Wee Recommend unto you the encouragement of the Practice of Our late Letter under our said Hand was dated the 6th of You Complaine that that Savage now living doth intend You are to charge to the Accompt of Robert Black the summes We have entertained Mr Joshua Johnson to serve | To ensure that the island might prosper and flourish under the Company’s government, it was ordered that every means be used to encourage both planting and any other activities that might conduce to the improvement and well-being of the inhabitants. Such matters were to be decided by the advice and consent of the major part of the Council. All commanders of ships employed in the Company’s service were required, upon arrival in the road of the island, to ensure their vessels were carefully managed. Any differences arising from time to time were to be reported alongside an account of all affairs entrusted to them. The encouragement of the practice of true religion, virtue, civility and all honest and good means was recommended. This was to be pursued on all occasions to improve both religion and commerce, ensuring that the good were encouraged and the evil repressed. Crimes were to be punished, and particular observation was to be made of swearers and drunkards. The previous letter under the Company’s hand was dated 6 April 1677, sent by the ships Richard, Mary and Anne, containing several commands given to the Governor. The most recent advice had been received via the Eagle and the India Merchant, which arrived safely during the present month. It was noted from these communications that some differences had arisen on the island. These causes of friction had been carefully considered in an effort to compose and settle them. It was suspected that certain individuals might be responsible, and it was directed that, upon due examination, no person should be encouraged who endeavoured to disturb the peace contrary to the Company’s orders and the inhabitants’ duty. Note was taken of a complaint that a man referred to as “that Savage” intended to return home because his wife was not with him. It was observed that she had been offered free passage to join him but had refused. Instructions were given to charge the account of Robert Black for the sums of money expended, which were to be deducted from his wages to compensate for damages. Finally, it was noted that Mr Joshua Johnson had been engaged to serve as one of the Lieutenants. He was to be granted a plantation and a dwelling, and was to receive the pay, diet and wages equivalent to those of a soldier. Interpretations The Road refers to the sheltered offshore anchorage area for ships. Capt [...] refers to Captain Richard Field, the outgoing Governor. This present month refers to April 1677. Robert Black refers to the individual Robert Black. Mr Joshua Johnson refers to Joshua Johnson. |
45 | 26 | As to your Negroes And yr Servts Their is a Short in a Small We shall allow no Pay to any Souldiers but those that When it shall please God to Arrive our home ward Your Loving Friend | To ensure that the island might prosper and flourish under the Company’s government, it was ordered that every means be used to encourage both planting and any other activities that might conduce to the improvement and well-being of the inhabitants. Such matters were to be decided by the advice and consent of the major part of the Council. All commanders of ships employed in the Company’s service were required, upon arrival in the road of the island, to ensure their vessels were carefully managed. Any differences arising from time to time were to be reported alongside an account of all affairs entrusted to them. The encouragement of the practice of true religion, virtue, civility and all honest and good means was recommended. This was to be pursued on all occasions to improve both religion and commerce, ensuring that the good were encouraged and the evil repressed. Crimes were to be punished, and particular observation was to be made of swearers and drunkards. The previous letter under the Company’s hand was dated 6 April 1677, sent by the ships Richard, Mary and Anne, containing several commands given to the Governor. The most recent advice had been received via the Eagle and the India Merchant, which arrived safely during the present month. It was noted from these communications that some differences had arisen on the island. These causes of friction had been carefully considered in an effort to compose and settle them. It was suspected that certain individuals might be responsible, and it was directed that, upon due examination, no person should be encouraged who endeavoured to disturb the peace contrary to the Company’s orders and the inhabitants’ duty. Note was taken of a complaint that a man referred to as “that Savage” intended to return home because his wife was not with him. It was observed that she had been offered free passage to join him but had refused. Instructions were given to charge the account of Robert Black for the sums of money expended, which were to be deducted from his wages to compensate for damages. Finally, it was noted that Mr Joshua Johnson had been engaged to serve as one of the Lieutenants. He was to be granted a plantation and a dwelling, and was to receive the pay, diet and wages equivalent to those of a soldier. Interpretations The Road : The sheltered offshore anchorage area for ships Deal : The port of Deal in Kent Souldiers : soldiers Jonathan Digby : The individual or ship’s master associated with the vessel from Deal Captn Moore : Captain Moore Negroes : slaves |
46 | 27 | London Mad[...] Andrews John Banc[...] William Thompson Gov[er]n[or] We have Received an Accompt of Captn Anthony Beale A Totall of all the Accompt We send you Accompts of Accompts for last Year and where The Ship Mary & Sally arrived from you have Received from John Marden Will Thomson | The communication from London dated 20 February 1678 was signed by several individuals, including William Thompson (Governor), Samuel Barnardiston (Deputy Governor), John Lawrance, Nicholas Moore, Thomas Kidd and Zachary Lambert. Other names listed included Madam Andrews, John D[...], Daniel Matthews, Francis Bridge, Samuel Page, Thomas Conway, Nathaniel K[...], Robert Bayly, John Banks, Stephen [...] and John Walden. An account from Captain Anthony Beale was received, indicating a balance due to him. It was noted that certain sums from 1675 and 1676 were brought to his bills, and any moneys he had lent or disbursed were to be mentioned in the account and charged home. All items taken out of the stores for the Company were to be particularly followed. A total of the account was provided, showing a balance with William of 15 pounds, along with various payments of 10 pounds and 5 pounds for provisions, and a bill for Thomas [...] of 12 pounds, amounting to a total of 62 pounds. Accounts for the previous year were sent, showing both debtor and creditor entries under each head. It was recommended that certain deficiencies be remedied and that more care be taken in the future. Specifically, a perfect account of expenses was to be sent monthly, along with the relevant books. The ship Mary and Sally had arrived from the island, and communications dated 3 December last had been received. In response, a large supply of provisions and necessities for the island had been sent. It was desired that care be taken in the future to ensure a good understanding of the commissions for the government of the island. An assurance was given that the Company would be ready to provide further assistance as required, and that no injury should be done by the servants. The document also noted the names John Marden and Ann Bayly. Interpretations 20th [...] 1677 : 20 February 1678 (modern style) Captn Anthony Beale : Captain Anthony Beale Ball wth : Balance with Accompt : account p : per Will Thomson : William Thompson Sam[...] Ja[...] : Samuel Barnardiston Mary & Sally : The ship Mary and Sally |
47 | 28 | To Major John Blackmore Governour of These. A true Coppy examined Stephen Legge Our Governour & Councell. London 9th November 1678 Our last unto you was dated the 13th of March 1677 sent The Money you have received for the Armes and his Ma[jes]ties pay | A true copy of the original document was examined and confirmed by Stephen Legge. The communication from London, dated 9 November 1678, was addressed to Major John Blackmore, the Governor of St Helena, and the Council, or to the Governor and Council for the time being. It was noted that the previous letter was dated 13 March 1678 and sent via the ship Johanna, upon which Major John Blackmore travelled. He had been appointed Governor in place of Captain Gregory Field. That letter contained extensive directions for the security and good government of the island and the management of the Company’s affairs, to which punctual obedience was expected. Several letters had been received: one dated 6 March 1678 by the Golden Fleece and another dated 7 July 1678 by the Mary. These communications reported a great shortage of necessary supplies. It was observed with disappointment that the inhabitants had not raised sufficient provisions from their plantations, which it was felt could have been achieved with greater industry. Consequently, the Governor and all the men were urged to find a better way of subsisting to support the garrison. It was expected that the island would be supplied by shipping as before, especially considering the large supplies recently sent. Regarding the money received for arms and His Majesty’s pay, the amount of 40 pounds 15 shillings and 9 pence was noted in the account of exchange. It was ordered that no part of this sum should be disposed of for island uses. Furthermore, the Governor and Council were instructed to be very sparing in charging the Company with any money, except in cases of extraordinary exigency, which were not to exceed one hundred pounds in total. Interpretations 9th November 1678 : 9 November 1678 13th of March 1677 : 13 March 1678 (modern style) Shannam : the ship Johanna 6th of March 1677 : 6 March 1678 (modern style) 7th of July 1678 : 7 July 1678 bin : been Ma[jes]ties : Majesty’s 40:15:9 : 40 pounds 15 shillings 9 pence |
48 | 29 | That one Words concerning John [...] who the Off[...] Wee having Received a letter from John Winn our Chapp[...] You are also to permitt Lieut Jonathan Tyler Joseph Smith a [...] Wee are troubled to heare that there should be so much Dis[...] And Considering how troublesome the times are like to be, and not And so committing you to the Guidance and Protection of Your Loving Friend Nathaniell Henshaw Gov[...] John Moore | Regarding the matter of John [...], it was noted that he had returned home on the Golden Fleece. He alleged that having been taken at Denmark Road by ships that sailed from there, he was imprisoned and brought from thence as a stranger, being bound for his own country. It was directed that whatever was to be charged against him for cloth and stock left on his plantation must be made good to all concerned. A letter was received from the chaplain, John Winn, expressing a desire to return to England. His request was granted, and it was ordered that he be provided passage for Europe at the first opportunity. It was further noted that the sum of seventy-five pounds had been paid to Mr [...]. Permission was also granted for Lieutenant Jonathan Tyler, Joseph Smith and John Wills, a seaman, to take their passages for England, following applications made by their relations on their behalf. Concern was expressed regarding the reports of discord among some in the Council and others. It was hoped that such differences had been thoroughly removed and that affairs had been brought to a better posture and regulation, of which a better account was expected. Considering the potential for disturbance due to the wars and the troublesome nature of the times, it was deemed necessary that preparations be made to defend the island. It was directed that sufficient provisions and ammunition be kept for its security. The Governor and Council were urged to ensure that fortifications were repaired, the garrison was kept in good order and discipline, and guards were duly observed. No person was to be permitted to go abroad without leave, and a strict watch was to be maintained for the safety of the island. The Governor and Council were committed to the guidance and protection of Almighty God. The letter was signed by Nathaniel Henshaw (Governor), Robert Thomson (Deputy), Daniel Sheldon, Matthew Elken, William B[...], John Paige, Sencey Lambert, John Moore, John Nicoll, Charles Thorold, Edmond Reeve, John B[...], Thomas Penham and John Beckford. Interpretations 9th November 1678 : 9 November 1678 Golden Fleece : the ship Golden Fleece Chapp[...] : Chaplain (John Winn) bin : been Dis[...] : discord or dispute Nathaniell Henshaw : Nathaniel Herne (Governor of the East India Company) Robert Thomson : Robert Thomson (Deputy Governor) p : per |
49 | 30 | Our Governour & Councill London 15th May 1679 Wee have rec[eiv]ed yo[u]r severall l[et]ters of the 24th December 1678 Wee take Notice what difficulty you write for & though wee are Wee Observe that Divers shipping that comes with Negroes doe Wee have information that our ships from India doe land some | The Governor and Council at St Helena were advised by a letter from London dated 15 May 1679. Receipt was acknowledged of several letters dated 24 December 1678 and 21 February 1679, sent by the ships Expectation, Emily, Eagle and Berkeley Castle, along with various duplicates and papers. Satisfaction was expressed regarding the quick passage and the safe arrival of the Governor at the island. Note was taken of the difficulties reported, and while there was no desire to lay unnecessary burdens upon the inhabitants, it was deemed necessary to encourage planting. Liberty was granted for all provisions grown on the island and other plantations to be managed such that the inhabitants were not burdened by external demands. It was suggested that terms be settled for the inhabitants once they had provided for themselves, even if they had previously had little time to plant or sow due to other engagements. This was urged particularly because servants returning to England often had small means to repay the island for their subsistence. It was advised that they be employed for their own health and profit. Having already supplied the island with various conveniences and clothing, it was thought needless to send more for the present. However, if goods were required, a request was to be made. A suggestion was made to take a bale or two of broad bays of English manufacture from the ships, and further supplies would be furnished as needed to ensure the people had sufficient employment and could better subsist. Should the colony be unable to support itself, care would be taken to send supplies directly from England via frequent shipping. It was observed that various ships carrying slaves touched at the island. Regarding those from places relevant to the inhabitants, care would be taken to provide appropriate directions in due time. Information had also been received that ships from India were landing individuals at the island and that slave ships were carrying them away. The Governor and Council were desired to examine this business and take care of it. For the future, notice was to be given that ships should not bring slaves for their own use, especially for servants, and that slave ships were not to take on any other goods. Interpretations 15th May 1679 : 15 May 1679 21th Febr[ua]ry last : 21 February 1679 Bearely [...] : the ship Berkeley Castle Bayes : a type of coarse woollen fabric (baize) Negroes : slaves yo[u]r : your l[et]ters : letters |
50 | 31 | Wee Like well yt you have putt our Island in so good a posture On this Ship later we have laden a Parcell Containing materiall Your Loving Friends Natt Horne Gov[...] John Paige Will Thomson | It was observed with satisfaction that the island had been placed in a good posture of defence. As it appeared that His Majesty was at peace with all his neighbours and the inhabitants of the island were numerous, it was judged that it would not prejudice the safety of the place to permit some of the old soldiers who so desired to return to England. It was directed that this be done by degrees, with not too many departing in a single year, so that notice could be given to supply replacements if needed. Such soldiers were to take their passage on Company shipping that lacked a full complement of men, as this would save the charge of their transportation. Particular leave was granted to John Richards, John Hungerford, James Dringnetts and John Rogers, as well as to Thomas Boneton, who had gone out in the Thames, to return by the first available shipping. A parcel containing materials fit for husbandry and trade was laden on the current ship. It was desired that these materials be used and employed in the management of the land and the Company’s affairs to the bettering of the Company. The letter was signed by Nathaniel Herne (Governor), Robert Thomson (Deputy Governor), John Paige, John Beckford, Edward Bridge, Thomas Pankham, James Maid, Andrew Walker, William Thompson, Samuel Moyer, Christopher Browne, Richard Porter, John Bathurst and Joseph Ke[...]. Interpretations his Ma[jes]ties : His Majesty (King Charles II) Sould[ie]rs : soldiers transporta[...] : transportation yt : that Natt Horne : Nathaniel Herne Rob[er]t Thompson : Robert Thomson |
51 | 32 | To our Honoured the Govern[o]r & Councell Fort St George the 8th of Jany 1679/80 These may be to certifie you the Castle Fleet Shipps the William and [...], wee wrote you The Honourable Companie have had us to give you advice Your affectionate friends Streynsham Master The like sent was brought by the Vera Copia [...] | A communication from Fort St George, dated 8 January 1680, was addressed to the Governor and Council at St Helena. It confirmed that the letter followed previous correspondence sent by the Castle Fleet ships, the William and another vessel. Concern was expressed regarding the mean condition of the island, which had received only a small supply. It was noted that certain shipping had neglected their duties or missed the better season, and that no previous letters had been received from the Bay. The Governor and Council were advised by the Honourable Company that, in the event the appointed supplies for St Helena had not arrived, they were to take care to harbour the ships from which they might be supplied. Mention was made of the George and the Mary, as well as other ships, for the better relief of the island. No further information was added, and the Governor and Council were commended to Divine protection. The letter was signed by Streynsham Master, Joseph Hemmers, John Bridges, Timothy Wilkes and Richard M[...]ne. A note indicated that a similar message was brought by the George and the Golden Fleece, and a true copy was verified by Andrew Walker. Interpretations 8th of Jany 1679/80 : 8 January 1680 Fort St George : The Company headquarters in Madras (Chennai) the Bay : The Bay of Bengal (likely referring to the factories in Bengal) Streynsham Master : Streynsham Master (Governor of Madras) ye : the Vera Copia : A true copy |
52 | 33 | London yᵉ 13ᵗʰ 1679 on the Acct Invoice of Goods Laden by the Governor and Company on board Report: Invoice for Goods Received by Sea | A document from London, dated 13 May 1679, provides an invoice of goods laden by the Governor and Company on board a ship of one hundred tons burthen. The vessel was engaged in trading to the East Indies and bound for St Helena. It was noted that the ship, under the command of Jonathan [...], was bound by obligation to the port of Bantam on the island of Java Major, and from thence to the island of St Helena. The goods were consigned to the Governor and Council resident on the island for the account of the Company. It was further noted that the particulars of the stock were to be detailed in the following report, titled Invoice for Goods Received by Sea. Interpretations yᵉ 13ᵗʰ 1679 : 13 May 1679 Acct : account Compᵃ : Company Vizᵗ : namely (videlicet) Tunn : tons (referring to the ship’s capacity) Bantam : the Company’s trading post in Java Java Major : Java |
53 | 34 | Our Governour and Councill London the 24ᵗʰ of March 1679/80 Wee have sent unto you two by the Shipps [...], One of the 17ᵗʰ may take [...] In answer to your desires we send you herewith Rules Laws and On the said Orders you will find the service wee require of the Governour Reference to the granting out Land to the Inhabitants That you take a survey of all the Plantable Lands of the Island That for the better settling and improvement of the same you That noe person be admitted a free Planter or have any Land That no person whatsoever presume to cut downe any Timber That such Inhabitants as shall marry and settle upon the Island [...] [...] | The Governor and Council at St Helena were addressed in a letter from London dated 24 March 1680. Reference was made to previous instructions and several letters sent between March 1679 and May 1679. In response to requests from the island, a set of rules, laws and orders was provided to ensure that every inhabitant understood their duties and privileges. The Governor and Council were directed to ensure these were punctually observed. Particular care was required to ensure that no private trade was permitted and that no person departed the island without leave. Accurate accounts were to be maintained for all goods, provisions and stores received or issued. The inhabitants were to be kept in due subjection and obedience, and all unnecessary expenses were to be avoided. Furthermore, a restriction was placed on the importation of brandy, allowing only what was necessary, and all other abuses were to be reformed. Specific directions were provided regarding the granting of land. The Governor and Council were required to take a survey of all plantable lands on the island. Any parts not yet disposed of by the Company were to be taken into possession and reserved for the Company’s use, with an account of the quantity and quality of such land to be sent by the next opportunity. For the better improvement of the island, parcels of land were to be let out on reasonable terms to fit persons able to plant and improve them. No person was to be admitted as a free planter or allotted land unless they were in the Company’s pay or specifically approved by the Council. Such persons were required to improve the land through their own labour or that of their servants and keep it in good order. The sale or alienation of land was forbidden without the Council’s consent. Additionally, no person was permitted to cut down timber trees without a special order, as care was to be taken for the preservation of the woods. Finally, encouragement was offered to inhabitants who married and settled on the island with children, with land grants to be provided according to their number and condition. Interpretations 24ᵗʰ of March 1679/80 : 24 March 1680 10ᵗʰ March 1678/9 : 10 March 1679 (modern style) att : at wee : we accompt : account alien : transfer ownership of property yt : that |
54 | 35 | That if the woman so marrying any [...] shall be remaining then [...] That any free woman which so serve all free Planter or others living on the These are you are to observe in the granting Lands & rather such that [...] we send you the election of Mary [...] and their desires And forasmuch as it may be dangerous to have too many [...] Wee have likewise sent to the said Island [...] two persons that you have [...] which have beene brought hither in the said Island [...] You are to take care that the good Government be made of our Plantation [...] and that you keep a strict account of all Goods and Provisions [...] the said Island and of all the Plantations there [...] 168[...] | It was directed that if a woman married, land and cattle might descend to her sons, provided they were capable of maintaining the property. Upon such a marriage, a son who settled on the land was to be given one cow and one bull. However, if the land was not settled upon him, he was only to receive the livestock. Any free woman serving a planter or others on the island in the Company’s pay was to receive no wages or allowance, nor was she permitted to depart the island without leave. No allowance was to be made upon such intermarriages. In granting land, care was to be taken that the plantations were properly maintained and that no person was allotted more land than they were able to improve. All such persons were to be approved, and land was not to be alienated without the consent or order of the Council, as established by the orders of March 1677. Respect was to be had regarding the election and desires of Mary [...]. As it was considered dangerous to have too many persons on the plantations, potentially over-stocking the same, it was observed that there were approximately a certain number of persons already on the island. It was ordered that no more should be brought to the island without a special order. The inhabitants were to be strictly governed by these orders. Two persons whom the Governor had allowed to remain were permitted to do so as the Company thought fit, provided they behaved well and encouraged others. Those who had been brought to the island were not to be suffered to wander nor permitted to leave at one time. They were to be kept in good order and discipline. The Governor and Council were to ensure the good government of the plantation by keeping out all idle and disorderly persons. No person was to remain there unless they were serviceable to the Company. All persons were required to labour and employ themselves in the works of the plantation in obedience, with all offences punished according to law. A strict account was to be kept of all goods and provisions received and issued to ensure no waste was made. A full account of all proceedings and the state of the plantations on the island was to be sent to the Company yearly. Interpretations alienated : transferred to the ownership of another Cow and one Bull : livestock provided as a marriage or settlement grant March 1677 : the date of the previous standing orders intermarriages : marriages between inhabitants of the island 168[...] : the date of the document (c. 1680) |
55 | 36 | [...] Island wee have sent out there is a strict settlement [...] Method to be observed in keeping Storeing and issuing of Goods 1 That all goods as well Companys goods and stores that shall be sent to the 2 That the Governour and Councill doe forthwith deliver all the said 3 That the said keepers doe receive and give out none of the said goods 4 That the said keepers from time to time doe accompt clear and make [...] and the totals of provisions of goods to be inserted in the book Wee doe appoint that you the Governour of the Society with your Wee have considered what you have written touching the [...] upon the Island shall be well provided for and that the [...] you take care that no persons depart from the Island without [...] and that the publick works be carefully carried on and [...] [...] | It was directed that a strict settlement be observed regarding the island, with several specific instructions ordered for the management of the Company’s affairs. It was mandated that no person whatsoever should presume to trade without authorisation. The original documents and letters from the current year were transmitted to the Governor and Council, and it was noted that care had been taken to provide for the Company’s supplies. A specific method was established for the keeping, storing and issuing of goods. Firstly, it was ordered that all goods and stores sent to the island be taken into stock by the Governor and Council, who were required to provide the ship commanders with receipts on their bills of lading. Secondly, the Governor and Council were to deliver these provisions and stores to the designated keepers of the Company, from whom security was to be taken. Thirdly, it was stipulated that the keepers should neither receive nor dispose of any goods or stores without an order signed by the Governor and Council, which would serve as their official discharge. Fourthly, the keepers were required to provide exact and clear accounts concerning the issuing and expense of all provisions. No such expenditure was to be made except by official order, and all totals were to be inserted into the books, which were then to be examined and signed by the Governor, the Council and any ship masters present. The Governor and Council were appointed to take especial care for the good ordering and regulation of all persons on the island. It was strictly required that all individuals conform to the orders established by the local government. In cases of neglect or refusal, proceedings were to be taken against the offenders according to the established rules. It was further ordered that all persons be required to labour in their respective callings and employments to provide a good example to others. Provisions were to be carefully husbanded to ensure that no waste was made. Furthermore, it was directed that no person depart from the island without a licence, and all arriving ships were required to give a due account of their presence. A register of all persons on the island was to be maintained, and it was mandated that public works be carefully carried on to ensure the island was kept in a proper state of repair and defence. Interpretations Bills of Lading : Detailed lists of a shipment of goods in the form of a receipt Husbanded : Managed or used conservatively Discharge : A formal release from responsibility or obligation St Helena : St Helena Companys : Company’s Society : The East India Company (sometimes referred to as the Society) Callings : Professions or trades |
56 | 37 | Understanding that the Mastsmen and labourers Imployed Wee are informed that James Moxon have designed to Venture on private Trade Wee shall have you further next Shipping to send to the said Island Thomas Bower taking his passage for the Island to be imployed in the [...] To Capᵗ Wee are troubled to find that William Burton is returned to Deptford in By the last Letters Wee find the Plantation was much disordered of Wee further require you that no person be permitted to depart [...] | Reference was made to the mastsmen and labourers employed on the island, and it was directed that care be taken regarding their fitting and service to the Company’s satisfaction, as previously ordered in March 1678. Information had been received that James Moxon intended to venture on private trade to the Indies, having apparently departed the island in December last. It was noted that he intended to make a voyage from thence. It was strictly required that if the Company or any other persons trading beyond the Cape of Good Hope should employ any individuals upon the island, no goods, provisions, or servants belonging to the Company were to be used for such purposes without a special order. It was further directed that Thomas Bower, who had taken his passage to the island to be employed, was to be strictly examined. A full account of his service had not been returned, and a report of the findings from this examination was required. Dissatisfaction was expressed regarding William Burton, who had returned to Deptford in debt. It was noted that he had not provided a reasonable account of his service for over a year and a half, during which time he became a planter and acquired additional servants through marriage. This was noted as being contrary to the Company’s rules. It was ordered that his accounts be settled as soon as possible and certified to the Company so that appropriate action could be taken to ensure he refunded what was due. The Governor and Council were informed that the plantation had been much disordered of late. Consequently, all possible care was required for its future government and settlement. It was mandated that offenders be punished according to the laws, while those who behaved well were to be encouraged. Disorderly persons were to be discountenanced. Finally, it was required that no person be permitted to depart the island without a licence. All arriving ships were to provide a due account of their voyages and cargoes. Care was to be taken to ensure the island was well provided with necessaries and that no waste was made of provisions or stores. A full account of all proceedings was to be sent to London by every available opportunity. Interpretations 5ᵗʰ March 1677/8 : 5 March 1678 (modern style) Accoᵗ : account discountenanced : disapproved of or discouraged private trade : trade conducted by individuals for personal profit rather than for the Company |
57 | 38 | [...] have certified you [...] and continuing supply & [...] Upon discourse with Mr Moxon and others wee find that he hath come forward [...] Directions for what you shall find necessary to be done herein, and that [...] [...] you shall receive for keeping which you are to [...] Wee have according to the desire of our Governour and Mr Legg [...] Wee have given you good reason to employ careful and able Persons And accordingly you shall take care to observe the Orders and [...] Francis Moore the Chirurgeon having a desire to returne home [...] | Confirmation was provided regarding the continuing supply. It was requested that the Governor and Council provide whatever was necessary for the exchange. They were left to manage certain matters at their discretion, with a standard established for the future to regulate their proceedings. Following discussions with Mr Moxon and others, it was discovered that he had come forward again and was expected to return shortly with more supplies. It was noted that slaves had been imported to the island and required proper management. It was ordered that no person be permitted to trade in or use these slaves without official allowance. Directions were issued for whatever actions were deemed necessary in this matter to ensure sufficient care was taken. Instructions were given regarding the keeping of items received. The relevant orders were to be followed to ensure everything was properly accounted for and disposed of, with strict measures taken to prevent any waste or embezzlement. In accordance with the wishes of the Governor and Mr Legg, a payment was made on account of the Governor’s salary. Permission was granted for his daughter to manage her estate and marriage, which included the allowance of one cow as per the established rules. Emphasis was placed on the need to employ careful and capable individuals to manage these affairs. The plantation was to be well regulated and the land properly improved. It was mandated that all disorderly persons be restrained and punished. The Governor and Council were instructed to be diligent in their management of the island and to ensure that no person departed without leave. Francis Moore, the surgeon, expressed a wish to return home. He was engaged for the voyage, and further directions regarding him and the employment of suitable replacements for the Company’s service were to be provided upon his arrival in England. Interpretations The exchange: likely refers to the rate or system of bills of exchange for transferring money between the island and London. Entertained: in this context, formally engaged or accepted for service or passage. |
58 | 39 | As to the large quantity of powder remaining in our Stores you are Wee have received the 2 small parcells of Cinnamon which you sent The Relations of John Miles Jonathan Tyler John Sutton Henry Wee have sent you a good supply of Arms with its Appurtenances And also tell John Rooke Seaman who have liberty to Returne home as he Wee take Notice of what you write concerning the mutiny of the Soldiers If any Military Forces be upon the Island to see them kept in due [...] 24 March 1679/80 Jos: Reede Your Loving Friends Randall H[...] | Regarding the large quantity of gunpowder remaining in the stores, it was directed that care be taken to preserve it from decay. It was to be kept in the driest possible place and stirred occasionally, or more often as needed. Any gunpowder found to be unserviceable was to be returned by the next available shipping. The two small parcels of cinnamon that were sent were received and found to be of good quality and very fragrant. These were to be taken to market at the same rate as those from the Coast. The relatives of John Miles, Jonathan Tyler, John Sutton, Henry [...] and Thomas Bolton recently requested their return to England. It was ordered that they be permitted to leave on the next convenient vessel, being placed aboard one of the Company ships to help make up the full complement of the crew. A good supply of arms and related equipment was sent. Furthermore, John Rooke, a seaman, was granted liberty to return home. He was to arrange his own passage with a commander and was cautioned to ensure he did not misbehave during the voyage. Notice was taken of the reports concerning the mutiny of the soldiers. It was acknowledged that there was good reason to keep them in order. The Governor and Council were advised to be even more diligent in giving the soldiers proper encouragement when they deserved it, while keeping them in strict subjection. Where any animosity or disorder appeared, the offenders were to be punished. It was noted that justice was a necessity, as it was common in all plantations for drunkenness to occur if the men were not kept under good discipline. Such disorders were to be prevented and punished to maintain order. Any military forces present on the island were to be kept in due order and given fitting encouragement, being employed in whatever way best served the interests of the Company. The letter, dated 24 March 1680, was signed by the following individuals: Joseph Reede, John Moore, John Batwell, John Cleeve, Edward Ridge, Richard H[...]ton, Randall H[...], Robert Thomson (Deputy Governor), Samuel Barrowston, Arthur Ingram, Thomas Bullen, Thomas Larens, Samuel Moyes and John Pike. Interpretations The Coast: Refers to the Coromandel Coast of India, a major trading region for the Company. Appurtenances: In this context, the accessories or necessary equipment for the firearms, such as ammunition, cleaning tools or powder flasks. Give them good countenance: To show them approval or support. |
59 | 40 | By the Governᵒʳ and Company of Merchants The said Company at the East India House in Leadenhall Street Whereas his most Sacred Majesty hath been graciously pleased And whereas by vertue of severall former Orders and Directions from And whereas divers Disorders and Irregularities have arisen Wee doe therefore strictly Charge and Command you the Governᵒʳ That you take care that all Persons whatsoever residing upon the That you take speciall care that the Publick Works be carefully That you keep a strict Account of all Goods Provisions and Stores That you take care for the due preservation of the Timber and Woods That you provide for the maintenance of good Order and Discipline That you take care that no Person depart from the said Island That you cause all Ships arriving at the said Island to give an Account That you send us from time to time a full and exact Account of [...] | The Governor and Company of Merchants Trading to the East Indies issued the following rules and orders at the East India House in Leadenhall Street, London, on 29 March 1680. These regulations were annexed to the communication to be strictly observed by the Governor and Council of St Helena. It was noted that King Charles II, by his Royal Charter under the Great Seal of England dated 8 [...] in the twenty-eighth year of his reign, had graciously granted the Company all the islands, ports and havens mentioned in the document. This grant included full power, authority and jurisdiction to create orders for the good government and security of those locations. By virtue of several previous orders and directions, the Company had already established Governors and Councils for the island and had provided ongoing instructions regarding the discharge of their duties. However, because various disorders and irregularities had arisen which prejudiced both the Company and the inhabitants, further orders were deemed necessary for the better government of the island. The Governor and Council were strictly charged and commanded to put the following rules into execution. They were to ensure that every person residing on the island conformed to the established laws and orders, and that no one presumed to act against them. Special care was to be taken to ensure that public works were carried out and that all persons were employed in those works according to their individual abilities. A strict account of all goods, provisions and stores belonging to the Company was to be maintained to ensure that nothing was wasted. The Governor and Council were also responsible for the preservation of the timber and woods on the island, and no trees were to be cut down without an official order. It was required that good order and discipline be maintained among all persons on the island, with all offenders punished according to the law. No person was permitted to depart from the island without a licence from the Governor and Council. Furthermore, every ship arriving at St Helena was required to provide an account of its voyage and the goods it carried. Finally, a full and exact report concerning all proceedings and the general condition of the island was to be sent to the Company in London from time to time. Interpretations The twenty-eighth year of his reign: This refers to 1676, as Charles II dated his reign from the death of his father in 1649. |
60 | 41 | I hereby Require you to cause the same to be duly Examined and finding [...] that all Lands so Granted and no more shall be allowed to be 3 That any person or persons to whom Land hath been allotted [...] 4 That all Lands and Tenements whatsoever upon the said Island [...] 5 That no Person or Persons shall presume to buy or sell any Land or Goods 6 That if any Lands be not improved within a reasonable time the same 7 That care be taken for the preservation of Timber and Woods and that 8 That all Planters shall be obliged to reside upon their Lands and not 9 That no person shall be admitted to keep Tavern or Publick house without 10 That all Servants shall be duly employed and none suffered to be idle 11 That no person shall depart from the Island without Licence 12 That all Ships arriving shall give an Account of their Voyage and Goods [...] | The Governor and Council were required to ensure that all land allotments were duly examined and, if found to be correct, officially registered. It was ordered that the revenues from these lands be managed without the extraction of any unauthorised fees or rewards. Care was to be taken to ensure that the ancient land allotments were respected. Any land granted to a free planter by the Company or a commander was subject to strict conditions. If such land were sold, transferred, or if the owner died, the property was to revert to the Company. It was then to be reassigned to another person at the discretion of the Governor and Council, or through an official order. Any such change in ownership was to be reported to England within one month of the event. Only lands specifically granted in this manner were permitted to be registered for that purpose. Furthermore, general power was given to ensure that no person kept or sold Company goods without an official order. Specific rights were granted to those to whom land had been allotted, allowing them absolute possession and occupation. However, they were strictly prohibited from transferring or disposing of the property without the consent or order of the Council. Occupants were required to keep their lands and buildings in a good state of repair and improvement. It was further mandated that all lands and tenements on the island be kept in good order and that no waste be permitted. No person was allowed to buy or sell any land or goods without a licence from the Governor and Council, and all such transactions were to be officially recorded. If any land was not improved within a reasonable timeframe, it was to revert to the Company to be disposed of to another person. To preserve the island’s natural resources, it was ordered that timber and woods be protected and that no trees be cut down without an order. Planters were obliged to reside upon their allocated lands and were not permitted to desert them without a licence. Additionally, no person was allowed to keep a tavern or public house without a special licence. All servants were to be kept in constant employment, and none were to be suffered to remain idle. Finally, no person was permitted to depart from the island without a licence, and all arriving ships were required to provide a full account of their voyage and cargo. Interpretations Tenements: Buildings or dwellings held by an occupant. Antient Allotments: Land holdings established during the early settlement of the island. |
61 | 42 | [...] all in due time be paid out that [...] they are to take care that all Rents and Duties upon [...] And that they be careful for the preservation of Timber and Woods [...] Vera Copia Teste Robert Blackborne Secrᵗ Wm Blathwayt Secrᵗ | It was directed that all payments be made in due time and that the land held and occupied by any individual be properly managed. Strict care was to be taken regarding the sale or disposal of property; no person was permitted to sell or dispose of their land without first obtaining a licence from the Governor and Council. All such transactions were required to be recorded in the public register. The Governor and Council were further instructed to ensure that all rents and duties associated with the land were punctually paid. No arrears were to be permitted to accumulate, and all sums were to be fully answered and settled. Exact accounts of all such receipts and payments were to be maintained. Additionally, responsibility was assigned for the preservation of timber and woods, with instructions that they must not be wasted or destroyed. The document was certified as a true copy by Robert Blackborne and William Blathwayt, who both served as secretaries. Interpretations Vera Copia Teste: A Latin legal phrase meaning “attested as a true copy”. Duly answered: Formally accounted for or paid in full. |
62 | 43 | Our Governour & Councill [...] of the [...] Company of this ship [...] arrived [...] Wee take notice of yo[u]r sending home the three Ma[le?]nes persons mentioned [...] that you would have given effectual orders for the prevention of such evills [...] 14 Aprill 1680 Tho: Papillon Vera Copia Examᵗ Your Loving Friends Robᵗ Thompson Depᵗ Govᵗ Sam: Moyer | The Governor and Council at St Helena were addressed in a letter from London dated 24 April 1680. It was noted that a Company ship had arrived and that certain matters related to the captain had been reviewed. Concern was expressed that previous advice and instructions had not achieved the intended effect, resulting in several failures on the island and the miscarriage of former plans. Notice was taken of the decision to send home three individuals whose names were mentioned in the correspondence. It was desired that these persons be tried and punished according to the nature of their offences. The Governor and Council were instructed to take care to restrain such individuals on the island to prevent them from engaging in similar dishonest practices in the future. Any such men were to be seized and secured. It was observed that since the offences were committed at such a distance from England, it had been thought appropriate to send the offenders home for trial through ordinary legal channels. However, it was doubted whether it would be possible to bring them to England in so short a time without incurring a very great expense to the Company. The Company expressed a wish that more effectual orders had been given to prevent such evils. It was noted that sending offenders home often provided them with the means to escape or evade justice. To ensure that nothing of this nature occurred hereafter, a strict prohibition was desired. Further orders and directions were to be issued to all persons under the local government to ensure they made no such attempts. Anyone found guilty of such conduct was to be severely punished. The Governor and Council were urged to be very careful in suppressing all such disorders and to provide constant advice to London regarding these matters. The letter, also dated 14 April 1680, was signed by Robert Thompson (Deputy Governor), Thomas Papillon, John Moore, John Child, Thomas Baltham, Joseph Heme, Randal, Arthur Ashburnham, John Page, Jeremy Sambrooke, Samuel Moyer, Sam Ward and John Cole. The document was certified as a true copy by the secretary, J Blachmore. Interpretations Vera Copia Examᵗ: A Latin phrase meaning “a true copy examined”, indicating the transcript had been checked against the original. Advices: Information or formal reports sent from a distance. |
63 | 44 | Our Governour and Councill London this 20ᵗʰ of May 1681 44 Wee have yo[u]rs of the 18ᵗʰ of January last by the Falconer advising you Wee note yo[u]r proceedings in stating the Accompts of the Stores and There hath been many inconveniences arise to yo[u]r Island Wee have considered the petitions of Leiv Stokes and Wᵐ Wee expect to receive yearly by our servants and ships of yo[u]r | The Governor and Council at St Helena were addressed in a letter from London dated 20 May 1681. Receipt of their correspondence from 18 January was acknowledged, which had arrived via the ship Falconer. It was noted that the stores and provisions sent aboard the Loyalty had been received as specified in the invoices. The Company expressed confidence that these supplies would be used to the best advantage for the island’s service. Satisfaction was expressed that the inhabitants, through the care taken by the local government, were now in a position to maintain and defend the island without expecting further relief from England for several years. It was emphasised that it would be of great advantage if the labour and industry of the slaves produced enough to provide for their own support and subsistence. The Company expected an improvement in the management of its large stock so that the island could be maintained without incurring further expenses. The proceedings regarding the accounts of the stores and plantations were noted. The Governor and Council were urged to recover any outstanding amounts as quickly as possible and to establish good order. This included the reformation of abuses and the punishment of notorious crimes and disorders. Correspondence had also been transmitted regarding the prosecution of offenders currently in custody. It was observed that many inconveniences had arisen from failing to follow the rules prescribed for the distribution and allotment of land. The Company insisted that these rules be strictly followed. No person was to be permitted to enjoy property unless it had been officially assigned to them under the Company’s seal. Furthermore, regulations were to be enforced to ensure that no individual acquired more plantations than permitted, whether by purchase or otherwise, to ensure that land remained in the hands of those who would maintain good planting standards for the island’s security and plenty. The petitions of Lieutenant Stokes and William [...] were considered and approved. It was directed that they be constantly employed in the Company’s own plantations and in the fishery. They were also to assist in constructing platforms and frames, now that the necessary materials for such work were available. Finally, the Company stated its expectation to receive perfectly balanced account books annually via its servants and ships. This was required so that the true state of affairs and any reductions in the Company’s significant expenses could be properly monitored. Interpretations Plantations: In this context, specific plots of cultivated land or farms rather than large estates. Relieved: Provided with fresh supplies, personnel or financial support from home. Platforms and Frames: Likely refers to heavy timber structures used for mounting cannons (gun platforms) or for building works. Propriety: Ownership or legal right to a property. |
64 | 45 | 45 Wee have received yo[u]rs of the 1[?]ᵗʰ of Aprill and for the agreement Wee have also The Ships Seamen Appointed bound for Bantam and Counselled Wee take notice of the defective Carpet returned ill by the Bantam men And for the better carrying of our affairs on the Island Wee have Wee have also appointed and settled rules in the managing Your loving Friends Jeremy Sambrooke Sam: Moyer Beverly Joseph Kecher Upon Mr Anthony Beale his surrender of his Employment Wee desire Josiah Child Govᵗ | Acknowledgement was made of the correspondence received from April, and it was directed that the agreed terms be allowed. Regarding Mr Pyke, the desire was expressed that he be encouraged to continue his service. It was noted that kindness and respect shown to the planters by the Governor tended to promote amicable relations on the island. Although it was hoped that the overseer would remain until a replacement could be found, he was granted liberty to return to England if he remained determined to leave. It was ordered that his accounts be finalised and the balance due to him be settled before his departure. Instructions were issued concerning the ships and seamen bound for Bantam to ensure the voyage was managed effectively. Care was to be taken regarding the welfare of the mariners and officers, and it was required that the ships be used to the Company’s advantage, with all proceeds credited to the accounts. Notice was taken of a defective carpet that had been returned by the Bantam men in accordance with standing orders. For the improved management of the island, the discharge of Mr [...] was ordered, and suitable persons were appointed to replace him. He was required to return to England, and it was decreed that any disputes between him and the Company be resolved by the Governor and Council. Rules were established for the management of trade, and it was ordered that Company goods be sold to those who made an offer. It was required that the liberty of trade be maintained for all planters, provided that necessary discipline was preserved. Encouragement was to be given to the planters based on their conduct and behaviour. The letter was signed by Jeremy Sambrooke, Thomas Thompson, John Merrick, Joseph Herne, Richard Boone, Walter Helton, Samuel Moyer, Richard Hutchinson, Edward Rudge, Thomas Canham, Richard Edwards, John Cornish, John Keeke, Beverly, Thomas [...] (Governor) and Thomas Papillon (Deputy Governor). Upon the resignation of Anthony Beale from his employment, it was ordered that a strict audit be conducted of all Company property that had passed through his hands. It was required that his accounts and any items delivered by him be sent to England at the first opportunity. Care was to be taken to address any deficiencies before the next shipping arrived, and a true account of these actions was to be provided to the Company. These additional instructions were signed by Josiah Child (Governor) and Thomas Papillon (Deputy Governor). Interpretations Bantam: A major trading port and Company pepper centre in present-day Indonesia. Quit state: A final, cleared status of accounts where all debts and credits have been settled. |
65 | 46 | Our Governour & Councill 46 London the 4ᵗʰ of March 1681 Our last unto you was by the S[e]n[ie?] dated yᵉ 8ᵗʰ May 1681 Wee have sent by our Ships Rice Servants of yᵉ last In the first place wee shall desire that you lay to heart Wee have been at great charge to obtain and settle that Island Wee shall say the Determining of all laws towards yo[u]r Government Wee are resolved to have known and declared upon this [...] Wee have also given directions for punishing all such offences Wee do further enjoin and require that no division nor dissentions | Correspondence was sent to the Governor and Council at St Helena from London on 4 March 1682. Reference was made to the previous letter dated 8 May 1681, the contents of which were confirmed. Although the original document was dated 1681, the year was converted forward to 1682 to account for the modern calendar. It was noted that rice and servants had been sent by the latest ships, and mention was made of three vessels from the Coast, as well as ships from France and Persia, which had returned laden from Bantam. The Governor and Council were urged to take to heart the specific charges regarding the island’s management. Instructions were given to address all disorders and new impositions. It was required that those who transgressed be punished, while those who behaved well were to be assured of the Company’s favour. It was observed that great expense had been incurred to settle the island and furnish it with men and stores, and it was deemed unreasonable for these efforts to be undermined by the neglect of official orders. Regarding the government of the island, it was directed that the Governor and Council follow the instructions provided and conform to them. Authority was to be exercised for the public good and the Company’s interests. It was declared that every person, particularly the Governor and Council, must perform their duties and strictly observe all commands to ensure good behaviour and order. Every individual was required to obey the government and remain subject to its authority. Directions were also provided for the punishment of offences and disorders, with a requirement that all laws and constitutions be carefully observed and executed. It was strictly enjoined that no divisions or dissensions be permitted to arise on the island, particularly between masters and servants or regarding the unauthorised transfer or sale of property. More especially, it was ordered that no servant be forced to work during times of sickness or other inability. Due respect for humanity was expected, and strict obedience to all commands was required. In all matters concerning property rights or disputes, the Governor and Council were to have regard to justice and equity. Finally, it was ordered that proclamations be made to ensure these instructions were publicly known. Interpretations The Society: the name of a specific ship belonging to the East India Company. New impositions: unauthorised taxes, duties or burdens placed upon the inhabitants. Constitutions: the established rules or fundamental principles by which the island was governed. |
66 | 47 | [...] [...] [...] [...] [...] [...] [...] [...] [...] [...] [...] [...] [...] the [...] Island that you [...] the arrival [...] wee doe further require that you cause due observance to be had [...] wee doe further require that you take care that all Rents and [...] wee doe further require that you take care for the preservation [...] wee doe further require that you take care that all Servants [...] wee doe further require that you take care that all such [...] wee doe further require that you send unto us yearly Wee [...] by Mr [...] his letter that some have [...] [...] recommending these matters to your care and diligence Your [...] friends James Ward Josiah Child Governᵗ Joseph Ashe | It was required that no shipping be permitted to trade without a licence from the Company or the Governor. Care was to be taken that no goods were moved on or off the island without an official entry being made in the register. This was intended to allow the Governor to inform himself of the quantity of merchandise imported or exported. Exact accounts were to be maintained and returned to London annually, or more frequently if requested. Further observance was required of all orders and directions previously sent concerning the regulation of trade and government. No abuses or disorders were to be suffered to arise or continue, and all offenders were to be punished according to their actions. It was also required that all rents and duties due to the Company be duly answered and paid. No persons were to be permitted to enjoy any lands or plantations unless they had a legal right to them, and they were expected to pay the required rents and perform the necessary services. Responsibility was assigned for the preservation of timber and woods. No person was to be suffered to cut or destroy them without a licence, and those who offended in this matter were to be punished. Furthermore, it was required that all servants and slaves be well treated and not abused. They were to be provided with necessary food and clothing and were not to be forced to labour during times of sickness or infirmity. Instructions were given to ensure that all individuals sent from England to serve on the island were duly employed. Their designated time of service was to be observed, and they were not to be wronged or abused by any person. A true and perfect account of all proceedings was to be sent to London yearly, including the state of the island, a record of all goods received and disposed of, and a summary of all rents and duties received and paid. It was noted from a letter received from Mr [...] that some individuals had neglected their duty and that disorders had occurred among the people. Regret was expressed regarding these reports, and it was expected that due care would be taken to reform these abuses, punish the offenders, and prevent similar incidents in the future. The letter was signed by Josiah Child (Governor), Thomas Papillon (Deputy Governor), James Ward, Richard Hutchinson, Edward Rudge, John Child, William Sedgwick, John Cole, Joseph Ashe, John Laurence, George Sambrooke, Joseph Herne, John Morden and Thomas Canham. Interpretations Duly answered: formally accounted for or paid in full. Time of service: the specific duration of an indentured servant’s contract or a soldier’s enlistment. |
67 | 48 | By the Governour and Company of Merchants To all to whom these presents shall come greeting Whereas our said Soveraigne Lord the King most Excellent [...] to make and establish Laws and Ordinances Now know all men that we the said Governour and Company [...] to make ordain constitute and appoint [...] And wee do hereby further ordain and appoint And wee do hereby further declare and appoint [...] And wee do hereby ordain constitute and appoint [...] Teste | The Governor and Company of Merchants of London trading into the East Indies issued a formal greeting to all parties concerned. It was noted that King Charles II, by his Letters Patent dated 16 December in the twenty-ninth year of his reign, granted the Company and their successors the possession and enjoyment of the island of St Helena. This grant included the authority to establish laws and ordinances for the government of the island and its inhabitants, and for the impartial administration of justice. Having considered these premises and the significant expense incurred in the settlement of the island, the Company ordained and appointed a Governor and Council. They were empowered to create such laws and ordinances as were necessary for the good rule of the inhabitants and the proper administration of justice. It was further ordained that the Governor and Council possessed the power to punish all offenders according to their deserts and to execute all laws made under this authority. It was declared that every person inhabiting or residing upon the island was subject to its government and laws and was required to yield total obedience to them. Finally, it was appointed that the Governor and Council ensure the true Protestant religion and the worship of God be duly observed and maintained. It was required that all persons regularly attend public worship. Interpretations The twenty-ninth year of his reign: 1677, as Charles II officially dated his reign from the death of Charles I in 1649. Demerits: in this legal context, the specific nature or degree of an individual’s offences or misconduct. |
68 | 49 | Wee doe direct Order and Appoint That the Lords Day be observed That in the meantime the Ministers or Teachers Discharge the Duties That when there is a Minister resident in the said Island then Secondly touching the Administration of Justice and Con[...] Wee doe direct and Appoint That in all Cases whatsoever That none be deprived or dispossessed of any Lands or Tenements | It was directed and appointed that the Lord’s Day be observed through the cessation of all servile labour. The Governor and Council were required to appoint one or more capable ministers or teachers for the worship of God. All persons, including servants and apprentices, were obliged to attend religious exercises, including prayer, the reading of the Word, and the hearing of sermons. The administration of baptism and the Lord’s Supper was to be maintained, and ministers were to be encouraged in the discharge of their duties. It was required that all religious ordinances be performed with reverence, solemnity, and decency. In the event that no minister was resident on the island, the inhabitants were still required to assemble on the Lord’s Day to hear the Holy Scriptures read by a suitable person appointed by the Governor and Council. Instructions were given that, in the absence of a ministry, prayers must still be offered for the service of the King and the prosperity of his kingdoms, as well as for the welfare of the English East India Company. On the Sabbath, it was required that the Athanasian Creed and the Ten Commandments from the twentieth chapter of Exodus be read to the people, together with the summary of the law contained in the twenty-second chapter of St Matthew’s Gospel. It was further ordered that any resident minister visit the youth and younger people at least once a week to instruct them in the principles of the Christian religion. This catechising was intended to ensure the people were well grounded in their faith and able to defend it against errors. The Governor and Council were charged with appointing and overseeing these educational duties. Regarding the administration of justice, it was appointed that all cases be handled impartially, without favour or affection. It was decreed that no person be deprived of their lands, tenements, or estate, nor suffer any corporal punishment, without a trial by a jury of twelve men. This rule was to be strictly followed unless otherwise specifically allowed by a law made for the island or by the courts of judicature. Interpretations Servile: relating to physical labour or work typically performed by servants or slaves. Ordinances: established religious rites or ceremonies, such as Holy Communion. Catechising: the practice of providing religious instruction through a series of questions and answers. Courts of judicature: the formal legal system or bodies responsible for the administration of justice on the island. |
69 | 50 | [...] be from the aforesaid upon any [...] Thirdly And for the better settling and Dispatching Affairs [...] [...] which said Officers [...] [...] [...] that due Obedience shall be given unto the Governour [...] [...] and that all persons shall be ready and assisting [...] And that all persons shall behave themselves dutifully and [...] [...] that notice be given of all offences | Instructions were issued for the maintenance of the government and public peace. It was directed that the Governor and Council possess the authority to discharge individuals from their positions if found necessary for the proper conduct of affairs. It was further ordered that no unauthorised actions be taken against the established government. For the improved management and dispatch of business, it was appointed that a council be established to transact such matters as were committed to them. These officers were required to provide a regular account of their proceedings to the Governor and Council. The Governor and Council were empowered to appoint the necessary officers for the better ordering of the island. These officials were granted the power to hear and determine all legal causes, whether civil or criminal, in accordance with the established laws and orders. It was strictly required that due obedience be given to the Governor, the Council, and all officers appointed by them. All residents were commanded to conform to the instructions and directions received from the local government. Furthermore, it was mandated that all persons be ready to assist the Governor, the Council, and their officers in the execution of their official duties. Every individual was expected to behave dutifully and in obedience to the King’s authority and the laws of the island. Finally, it was ordered that notice be given of all offences so that due punishment might be inflicted upon offenders according to the nature of their misconduct. Interpretations Civil as criminal: refers to the two main branches of law, the former dealing with private disputes between individuals and the latter with offences against the public or state. Demerits: the specific nature or degree of an individual’s offences or misconduct. |
70 | 51 | That all the Civill Causes of this Island wherein the Governour That all tryals at the said Court be by a Jury of 12 men Fourthly And to the intent of Reformation Morality and Wee doe ordain and appoint that all and every person That all Swearing and taking the Name of God in vain That all intemperance and Drinking be abstained from [...] not exceeding the value of [...] for one offence [...] | It was directed that all civil causes on the island be heard and determined by the Governor and Council. A court was established for the deciding of matters between parties within that jurisdiction, according to the laws provided. This court was required to sit once every week, or more frequently as the situation demanded. It was ordered that the judge ensure all proceedings and sentences were duly recorded in books kept for that purpose. All necessary officers for the court were to be appointed by the Governor. It was mandated that any fees charged for the maintenance of these officials be reasonable and not burdensome to the inhabitants. No warrant was to be issued unless signed by the judge or a designated officer. Furthermore, it was ordered that any person who attempted to delay proceedings or interfere with the execution of the court’s orders be punished and required to pay double damages to the injured party. It was appointed that all trials in the court be conducted before a jury of twelve men, summoned by the provost or another island officer. The jury was to be sworn in the common form, with every man taking an oath upon the Holy Word of God to truly try the matter in question and provide a verdict based on the evidence and the established laws. For the reformation of morality and the encouragement of virtue, ordinances were issued to restrain vice and clearly state the punishments for misconduct. It was ordained that any person who used profane language or behaved in an unseemly manner be reproved and admonished for a first offence. For subsequent offences, a fine was to be imposed at the discretion of the Governor. Strict punishments were also established for swearing or taking the name of God in vain. Instructions were given to prevent intemperance and excessive drinking. No person was permitted to keep an alehouse or tavern without a licence from the Governor and Council. Furthermore, the sale or gift of strong drink to any servant or slave without the master’s permission was strictly prohibited. Any person found offending against these rules was to be punished at the discretion of the Governor and Council. Finally, it was ordered that anyone who struck or abused another person be required to pay damages to the injured party. Interpretations Civil causes: legal cases relating to ordinary private matters, such as debts or property disputes, rather than criminal acts. Provost: the officer responsible for maintaining order and summoning individuals to court. Servile: relating to physical labour or work typically performed by servants or slaves. Common form: the standard or traditional procedure for administering a legal oath. |
71 | 52 | 4 That all fornications Adulteries and all [...] 5 That no man doe steale or take from another that which doth That if any person or persons shall commit any That any person that shall counterfeit any Deed or Deeds Writing [...] | It was ordered that all instances of fornication, adultery, and other immoral acts be addressed. Those found guilty by confession or the testimony of two or more witnesses were to be convicted. If offenders failed to reform and grew more impious or addicted to such habits, they were to be treated as incorrigible under the established laws and statutes. Regarding the theft of property, it was decreed that no man take that which did not belong to him. Any person found guilty of theft was required to restore the stolen items to the rightful owner. In addition to returning what was taken, the offender was held liable for all damages. It was mandated that punishment for a second offence be more severe, at the discretion of the Governor and Council. For a third offence, the individual was to be dealt with according to the laws of England. It was further directed that any person committing a felony receive punishment in accordance with English law. In cases where questions or doubts arose concerning such crimes, the matter was to be referred to the Governor and Council for a determination based on the laws and statutes of England. All proceedings were required to be directed by the principles of justice and equity to preserve peace and good order on the island. Provisions were also made for the punishment of fraud and forgery. Any person convicted of counterfeiting deeds, writings, or other papers, or using any device to obtain goods or money, was to be punished according to the severity of the offence. Such individuals were to be rendered incapable of holding any office or position of trust on the island and were required to make full restitution to the wronged party for all damages sustained. Interpretations Incapable to bear any office: a legal bar preventing an individual from holding public or administrative positions. Quality of the offence: the specific nature, severity, or circumstances surrounding a particular crime. |
72 | 53 | In case any Ship or Vessel or Boat shall come into this Island If it shall happen that any person or persons shall be guilty In case any person shall resist or oppose or go about the execution of this March 1681 Wee doe ordain Establish and appoint that in every place Thirdly And for the better ordering and governing the Peace of the said Island 1 That noe person whatsoever shall presume or attempt 2 That if any person or persons shall neglect his duty or 3 That if any person or persons shall use or exercise | Ships were prohibited from entering the island or being found within the harbour or roads without a person bringing formal orders from a Governor or Commanding Officer in England or elsewhere. Making a stay contrary to such orders or without a licence from the Governor and Council was forbidden, with breaches carrying a fine not exceeding 20s for any one offence. Any person guilty of a crime deserving death or other punishment was to be dealt with according to the laws of England. Resistance to the execution of any law or order was to be punished at the discretion of the Governor and Council, and all officers were required to be aiding and assisting in the execution of the same. A section dated 1 March 1681 ordained that in every place where English inhabitants resided, a sufficient number of persons were to be appointed for the better government and ordering of the island. Every person was required to conform to the established orders and constitutions. Regarding the maintenance of peace and suppression of disorders, it was enacted that no person should attempt to strike the Governor or any officer in authority, nor use reproachful speech or behaviour towards them. Instead, all were to behave with humility and submission, and offenders were to be punished at the discretion of the Governor and Council. Furthermore, any person who neglected their duty, departed their place or station without a licence, or was absent from their charge without lawful cause was subject to punishment, especially if such neglect resulted in prejudice or damage to the Governor or the King’s subjects. The exercise of unlawful games or pastimes, tippling, drunkenness or any disorderly behaviour that disturbed the peace or broke the island’s constitutions was also prohibited. Such offenders were to be punished according to the quality of the offence. Interpretations [... any person bringing order]: This probably refers to a Commission or a Warrant, which would be the formal document required to authorise a ship’s arrival or a passenger’s landing. [... deserve death or other punishment]: The missing text here almost certainly refers to Loss of Life or Limb, a standard legal phrase of the period used to categorise the most severe physical penalties. [... and the same shall be executed]: This gap probably refers to the Provost or Marshal, the specific officer tasked with carrying out the physical punishments or collecting the fines ordered by the court. |
73 | 54 | Blank page | |
74 | 55 | Blank page | |
75 | 54 | Accordingly unless the Governour with the advice of the Major 4 That there be no unlawfull expence of any powder shot 5 If any person or persons shall make any insurrection or And whereas severall English ships have of late come For prevention whereof and to the end such abuses may be And that all offenders herein shall be punished according [...] | It was ordered that no powder, shot, ammunition, or other stores belonging to the public be unlawfully expended or embezzled. Any person found guilty after a trial or lawful conviction of embezzling or stealing such stores was to be liable for the punishments established by the laws of the island. These penalties included making full restitution, imprisonment for a period not exceeding six months, or corporal punishment, provided it did not result in the loss of life or limb. The specific sentence was to be determined by the Governor with the advice and consent of the majority of his Council. Strict regulations were also established concerning insurrection and rebellion. No person was permitted to engage in hostile actions without the specific command of the Governor or his authorised officers, except when commanded to withstand an invasion. Any individual who conspired to betray or deliver up the island or any part of it, or who held intelligence or correspondence with enemies of the King of England, was to be punished. This also applied to anyone who used false declarations or rumours to stir up sedition. Offenders were to be treated as enemies to the Crown of England and faced the penalty of death or other punishments provided by the laws of England or the island. The Company noted that several English ships had recently arrived at the island under the pretence of trade but had failed to conform to the established rules. These vessels had traded clandestinely with various persons and moved goods off the island without paying the Royal customs or duties required by law. To prevent such abuses in the future, it was declared that no ship or vessel was permitted to trade at the island without first obtaining a licence from the Governor and Council. All ship masters and merchants were required to conform to the regulations made for trade and commerce and to pay all duties according to the statutes of England and the island. Any person offending against these rules was to be punished according to the quality of their offence, and any goods unlawfully traded or moved were to be forfeited and seized for the use of the King. Interpretations Imbez[...]ment: This is interpreted as embezzlement, referring to the theft or misappropriation of public stores. Major part: This refers to the majority of the military officers or the Council members. Quality of their offences: This probably refers to the specific nature or severity of the crime, which determined the level of punishment. |
76 | 55 | Wee the said Governour and Company of Merchants of London trading And Wee doe further ordain and strictly charge and require our And Wee doe further order and appoint that if any person or persons And Wee doe further declare and ordain that the said Governour And lastly Wee doe hereby require and command that the said [...] | The Governor and Company of Merchants of London trading into the East Indies issued a strict command that no ships belonging to the Company, nor any inhabitants or visitors to the island, were to engage in any traffic, trade, or dealings with any vessel or its crew until the Governor had formally permitted them to come ashore and refresh themselves. Any person who broke this order was to be fined twenty pounds sterling for each offence, with the money being paid to the Company. The Governor was further required not to grant any warrant or licence for trade to any person or vessel without express orders and directions from the Company in London or those authorised by them. If any such unauthorised trade occurred, the Governor was ordered to seize and secure all goods and merchandise involved for the Company’s use. Furthermore, those found trading were to be apprehended, imprisoned, and prosecuted according to the laws and orders of the island. It was also ordered that if any person presumed to sell, barter, exchange, or otherwise dispose of goods belonging to any ship without the Governor’s licence, those goods were to be forfeited to the Company. The offenders in such cases were to be punished at the discretion of the Governor and Council. The Governor was instructed to take special care that none of the island’s inhabitants or any other persons engaged in private trade or commerce with strangers or foreigners without a licence from the Governor and Council. Those who violated this rule faced punishment under the island’s established laws. Finally, the Governor and all other officers and ministers on the island were commanded to be diligent in executing these orders and to provide regular accounts of their proceedings and the general state of the island to the Company. Interpretations paine of [...]: This probably refers to a phrase such as “paine of imprisonment” or “paine of further penalty”, indicating a physical or legal punishment in addition to the specified twenty-pound fine. way reliefe or supply: This is interpreted as “by way of relief or supply”, referring to the provision of food, water, or naval stores to visiting ships. strangers or foreigners: In this context, this refers to any persons or ships not directly employed by or authorised by the East India Company, including those from other nations or independent “interloper” vessels. |
77 | 56 | And Merchandize as shall be so delivered into his hands Given under our Common Seale the day and | It was ordered that all merchandise delivered into the Governor’s hands be recorded, with at least two copies of the ledger truly registered and attested. One of these copies was to be given to the shipmaster and another sent to the Company by the next opportunity. This was required so that after the Company had advised on the matter and consulted the King’s Majesty, further orders could be given regarding the disposal of the ships and goods held. A specific provision was made for any English ship or vessel not in the Company’s service that arrived at St Helena. If it appeared to the Governor that such a ship had been trading only to Madagascar or adjacent parts for slaves and had not come to the island to trade in goods, the Governor was authorised to grant the vessel and its crew leave to enter and refresh themselves. In such cases, the crew members were permitted to be free of all tolls and charges and could receive any manner of refreshment from the island. They were also allowed to trade upon such terms or agreements as the Governor in his discretion thought fit to make with them, notwithstanding any other orders to the contrary. These orders were given under the Common Seal on the day and year first written in the document. Interpretations Shipma[...]: This is interpreted as shipmaster, the officer in command of a vessel. Opper[...]ty: This is interpreted as opportunity, referring to the next available ship sailing for England. Ex[...]ent Maj[...]: This is interpreted as Excellent Majesty, a formal reference to the King of England. disposi[...]: This is interpreted as disposition, referring to the legal arrangement or sale of the goods and vessels. Madagas[...]: This refers to Madagascar, which was a primary source of slaves for the island during this period. Refre[...]: This is interpreted as refreshment, typically meaning fresh water, meat, and vegetables for a ship’s crew. discre[...]: This is interpreted as discretion, granting the Governor the power to negotiate individual terms for these specific visits. |
78 | 57 | Our Governour of What is further Nec[...]ary to our Aff[...] Wee have written att Wee have sent you some further Instr[...] relating to the You will see by our said Instr[...] that Wee have thought fit You are likewise to take care that the Inhabi[...] do not Wee recom[...] unto you the good Government of the Island and Wee are Your loving Friends [...] | The Governor and Company of Merchants of London sent a letter from London dated 14 March 1682 to the Governor of St Helena. They noted that they had written at length in a general letter to the Governor and Council of the same date, which contained the necessary details concerning their affairs. The Governor was urged to focus on the instructions provided and to renew his commitment to protecting the honour and interests of the Company. Constant care was required to maintain the reputation of the island and to ensure that all disorders and irregularities were prevented. Those who committed offences were to be duly punished according to the principles of justice and good government. The Company emphasised that the success of the island depended upon the diligence of the Governor and the good example he set for those under his charge. Further instructions were sent relating to the management of the island and its trade, which the Governor was expected to observe and execute carefully. The Company expressed its expectation that through prudent management and conduct, affairs would be brought into a better state and the inhabitants would remain in good order and obedient to the Company’s authority. These instructions included rules and orders for regulating trade and commerce to prevent previous abuses. The Governor was also directed to ensure that the inhabitants gave no just cause for complaint to those who came to the island to trade. They were required to behave with civility and provide good usage to all persons, ensuring no injury was done to anyone. The Company recommended the good government of the island and the welfare of its inhabitants to the Governor, trusting that he would use his best endeavours to promote these goals and render the island as flourishing and beneficial as possible. The letter concluded with the formal closing from the Company as his loving friends. Interpretations 14 March 1681: Following the seventeenth-century custom of starting the new year on 25 March, this date is rendered as 14 March 1682 to align with the modern calendar. Nec[...]ary to our Aff[...]: This is interpreted as necessary to our affairs, referring to the business and administrative needs of the East India Company. Generall Lett[...]: This is interpreted as General Letter, the standard term for the formal correspondence sent from the Court of Directors in London to their overseas governors. care and dili[...]: This is interpreted as care and diligence, a common seventeenth-century legal and administrative pairing. Exa[...]: This is interpreted as example, referring to the moral and professional standard the Governor was expected to provide. Instr[...]: This is interpreted as instructions, the specific rules and orders accompanying the letter. manage[...]: This is interpreted as management, referring to the administration of the island’s resources and population. Inhabi[...]: This is interpreted as inhabitants, the permanent residents of St Helena including both planters and Company employees. flour[...] and benefi[...]: This is interpreted as flourishing and beneficial, reflecting the Company’s desire for the island to be both prosperous and profitable. |
79 | 58 | Such New Constitutions as wee shall judge Most fit & proper to Establish That wee may be Certainly informed of your proceedings wee tell you again that Besides the Dutch have maintaine[...] you are to Receive from Wee doe hereby strictly forbid all persons upon our said And wee doe hereby further Require you once at least in every year You shall likewise send us a full List of all our Stores of all kinds Direction to the Governour and Councill of St Helena [...] | It was ordered that the new constitutions judged most proper for the island be established. The Governor and Council were directed to observe these instructions and orders for their own support and to ensure that all proceedings were recorded to keep the Company informed. All foreign ships, including Dutch, French, and Danish vessels, were required to use only St James Valley as their place of anchoring. Failure to comply with this order would result in fines or other penalties. The Governor was expected to enforce this strictly and provide regular accounts to the Company. Furthermore, these foreign ships were not to be permitted to trade until they had been examined. They were prohibited from visiting other parts of the island except those within the allowed limits. Regarding the shipping trade at Madagascar, it was understood that only what was due to them for the improvement of shipping should be paid. The Governor was instructed to demand and receive duties from all English and foreign ships trading at the island. This included a charge for anchorage for every ship or vessel not in the Company’s service for every voyage they anchored in St James Valley. All persons on St Helena were strictly forbidden from selling, dealing, or trading with anyone on the island without a licence. The Governor was tasked with the due execution of these orders, and any person trading without a licence was to be severely punished. A requirement was set for the Governor to send an exact list at least once every year of all officers, soldiers, merchants, and inhabitants on the island. This list was to distinguish between married and unmarried individuals and include a column for the number of women, children, and servants in each household. The same column was to record the number of cattle owned by each person. Additionally, a full list of all Company stores was to be provided. This was to include the number and names of all ordnance, both great and small, and every sort of ammunition used for battery work or other purposes. A particular account was also required for all money in the treasury, noting to whom it was due and how it was to be disposed. Interpretations [...]: This probably refers to a phrase such as “our instructions now sent” or “our letter,” indicating the formal transmission of the new constitutions. maintaine[...]: This is interpreted as maintained, likely referring to the costs or fortifications the Dutch had previously kept on the island or a specific maintenance duty. [...]: In the context of anchorage fees, this probably refers to a “vessel” or “ship” that is not part of the Company’s own fleet. [...]: In the list of ordnance, this probably refers to the “quantities” or “stocks” of ammunition available. [...]: In the treasury section, these gaps probably refer to “debts” or “balances” and the “purposes” for which the money was allocated. |
80 | 59 | If any Dutch or other Ships or Vessells shall come to any Send us an account of what Cattle or what Stock there is upon the If any of our Servants shall be negligent or remiss in the doing their duty Wee have for some years now made you not to make use of any And so commending you to our care in all your affaires we rest Your Loving Friends Tho[mas] Ward For the East Ind[...] Company Joseph Ashe | The Governor and Company of Merchants of London sent instructions regarding Dutch or other vessels that arrived at parts of the island where inhabitants resided. The Governor and Council were ordered not to contend with commanders regarding their rights, but instead to record the name of the ship and its captain so the Company in London could judge the matter. Such vessels were not permitted to stay or trade beyond what was strictly necessary for their immediate provisions. The Company noted it was improper to provide assistance or accommodation to those who benefited from the island without contributing to the significant expenses incurred for its settlement and possession. The Governor was required to provide an account of all cattle and stock belonging to the Company and the inhabitants. This report was to include the number of Company employees engaged in husbandry and the number of men forced into employment due to a lack of money or other necessity, as well as the wages they received. Regarding the arrival of slaves, the Governor was directed to employ them in clearing and taking more ground to enlarge the Company’s plantation, which was expected to be managed profitably. It was ordered that any Company servants found to be negligent, remiss in their duties, or using their authority for private interest be punished. Such offenders were to be prosecuted according to the established orders and constitutions of the government. The Company reiterated its long-standing order that no trade be conducted with Dutch ships or those of other nations. The Governor was directed to ensure that no such trade or commerce occurred with any vessels not belonging to the Company without a licence. The letter concluded by commending the Governor’s care and was signed by Joseph Ashe, John Lawrence, James Edwards, Jeremy Sambrook, Joseph Herne, John Morden, Thomas Cookham, Thomas Ward, Richard Hutchinson, Edward Rudge, John Curzon, John De Boy, and William Debrick on behalf of the East India Company. Interpretations Capt[...]: This is interpreted as Captain, referring to the commanding officer of a visiting vessel. Husbandry: This refers to the management and conservation of resources, particularly agriculture and the raising of livestock. Commissions: In this context, this refers to the formal document granting the Governor legal authority to manage the island and its inhabitants. D[...]rick: This is interpreted as Debrick, identifying William Debrick, one of the committee members or directors signing the document. Ja[...] Edwards: This is interpreted as James Edwards, a known director of the East India Company during this period. East Ind[...]: This is interpreted as the East India Company. |
81 | 60 | Blank page | |
82 | 61 | Our Governour & Councell London 3d August 1683 att St Helena
But in case of where a Way lyes open to Ends not warranted
The System we have sent you shall become of more concern We find by the List of Goods herewith sent to us by Capt [...] Without [...] | The Governor and Company of Merchants of London sent a letter dated 3 August 1683 to the Governor and Council at St Helena. It was noted that several letters had been received by various ships, and the Company expressed much satisfaction that these recent communications were more thoughtful and deliberate regarding the concerns of the island than those formerly expected. The Governor and Council were directed to settle a system of laws and constitutions for the government of the island, which were sent with the letter along with copies of relevant correspondence. The Company suggested that a review and perusal of the first constitution book, combined with observations of the current rules, would provide a more orderly and exact way to establish a regular system of laws for the benefit of the island. The Governor was encouraged to proceed with the methods already begun and to determine what further regulations were not only agreeable but necessary for the settlement. In cases where objectives were not already warranted, the Governor was instructed to follow the methods provided by the Company. The system sent by the Company was intended to serve as a direction for the model of government to be established on the island. It was observed that the inhabitants were to be governed by laws based upon reason and the specific orders provided. The Governor was required to execute this government for the good of the island, except in special cases previously noted. This system was considered of great concern for the condition of the island and was not to be delayed. The Governor was required to send an account to the Company every year and every quarter, or more often if required. This was to include a report for every ship and an account of trade and every such transaction. The Company demanded to be informed of what profit was made to discharge the charges of the island and all other necessary expenses. Finally, it was noted from a list of goods sent by a captain that some strange and great demands had been made, which appeared to indicate much disorder and waste of supplies. Interpretations 3 August 1683: As this date falls after 25 March, it remains August 1683 in the modern calendar. y[...]e: This is interpreted as “the,” a common contraction in seventeenth-century manuscripts. yo[...]r: This is interpreted as “your,” referring to the Governor and Council. lett[...]rs w[...]ch: This is interpreted as “letters which,” referring to the correspondence between London and St Helena. ha[...]e: This is interpreted as “have,” used here in the context of receiving or possessing the letters. be[...]: This is interpreted as “better,” referring to the improvement of the island through a regular system of laws. [...]: In the fourth paragraph, this probably refers to “own knowledge” or “own benefit,” indicating the importance of the legal system to the local administration. Capt [...]: The name of the captain is unreadable in the manuscript, but he is identified as the person who delivered the list of goods and demands. Without [...]: The text ends abruptly, probably referring to the need for better management “without further delay” or “without such waste.” |
83 | 62 | Without one penny charge to her that hath so long suffered
[...] | It was noted that the island had suffered for a long time, and the Company expressed concern that strangers had received significant benefits while the Company’s own merchants were neglected. The Governor was required to ensure the island was managed so that proper hospitality could be provided to those entitled to it. For the future, the Governor was ordered not to permit any person to trade or enter the island without a written licence under the Company’s seal. Authority was granted to punish any individual who transgressed this order. To prevent the accumulation of debt, it was required that no man be allowed to leave the island for a voyage to the East or on any foreign ship. Furthermore, restrictions were placed on the extension of credit for goods, ensuring that no person owed more than a specified amount to the merchants, and no credit was to be extended to others upon any account. The Governor was directed to be very strict in the governance of all strangers, regardless of their reason for visiting the island, unless they had specific orders from the Governor for the time being. After many years of the Company building walls and other structures, the Governor was tasked with ensuring that all stone fences and enclosures were kept in good order. He was also required to ensure that all planted trees were thriving and protected from damage. No person was permitted to cut down trees or commit any other waste without the Governor’s order. A strict account was to be kept regarding the management and security of the island’s grounds. It was observed that every twenty acres of land carried the duty of performing watch and ward for the defence of the island. Every person was expected to contribute to the plantation, with all labour and planting hereafter conducted under the Governor’s order. It was also specified that those holding shares of land, except for certain exceptions, held them as they had been granted. Upon the death of a possessor, the lands or tenements were to be formally transferred or managed according to the commands of the Governor and Council. Interpretations [...]: In the first paragraph, this probably refers to “benefit” or “advantage,” suggesting that strangers had profited from the island’s resources more than the Company’s own agents. In [...]: This is interpreted as “in the island” or “in the harbour,” referring to the restriction on entry without a formal licence. Number of [...]: The specific financial limit for debt or credit is missing from the manuscript and is represented by this gap. Walls &c and all [...]: This probably refers to “fortifications” or “buildings,” identifying the infrastructure the Company had financed over several years. Trees or [...]: This is interpreted as “timber” or “underwood,” referring to the natural resources the Governor was required to preserve. Watch and ward: This is a standard seventeenth-century term for the duty of guarding a town or fortress by day (watch) and by night (ward). [...]: In the final paragraph, these numerous gaps probably refer to the “inheritance,” “succession,” and “conveyance” of land, which were strictly regulated by the Governor and Council. |
84 | 63 | And in regard we have hereby Ordered yo[...]r Compa[...]y shall Keep Accompts And wee doe hereby [...] all [...] Officers and Souldiers [...] 14 Wee understand and desire to know if there are not above a few 15 And wee further Order that no Alienation [...] | It was ordered that the Company keep accounts and books to record all payments received, including those for small amounts. These records were to include any provisions supplied by ships, as the Company intended to maintain the settlement through such remittances. The Governor and Council were required to ensure that all land and financial accounts were fairly and accurately maintained. A directive was issued stating that officers and soldiers on St Helena were not to receive any wage increases for the time being, except for those already holding a commission. The Governor and Council were appointed as the judges of such matters and were granted the authority to manage the salaries and land holdings of all current and future military personnel. The Company noted that only a few planters on the island reportedly continued to refuse to pay rent for the land granted to them, while still retaining a large part of their estates. Consequently, it was ordered that every person on the island must immediately pay their rents, debts, and all other dues. The Governor and Council were instructed to repossess any lands where the occupants remained in default. Such persons were required to leave their estates, and the land was to return to the Company’s control. The Governor was further directed to register all lands held by the planters, along with the specific rents due, which were set at a yearly rate of two shillings and six pence. Furthermore, it was ordered that no alienation of land be made by any person without first obtaining a written licence under the Company seal. No individual was permitted to sell or dispose of their land, or any part of it, without such permission. Following any approved sale or transfer, the transaction was to be recorded, and the appropriate fees were to be paid to the Company for the licences and related administrative costs. Interpretations Yo[...]r Compa[...]y: This is interpreted as your Company, referring to the administrative body and employees under the Governor’s command. Remittances upon [...]: This probably refers to “remittances upon account,” meaning the formal recording of payments or goods received. Alienation: This is a standard legal term referring to the transfer of ownership of a property or land from one person to another. Paid for such [...]: This gap probably refers to “fees” or “dues” payable to the Company upon the legal transfer of land. |
85 | 64 | Wee Doe further order and Confirm what we writ to you 18 And if any Person shall bring in upon the Produce of any Deceased [...] for 66 years paying to the Company yearly at the Feast 19 Although we have Appointed a Rate to be paid to the Company 20 Wee have observed that divers Planters have taken away Negroes [...] | The Company confirmed the orders sent on 11 March 1682, stating that from the arrival of that letter, no further land on the island was to be granted or invested in any person for any consideration without prior notification. The Governor was directed to collect the rents from the inhabitants for the Company’s use, awaiting further instructions from the Corporation regarding the future management and disposition of these holdings. It was ordered that no single man or woman be granted a right to manage land unless they intended to establish a formal settlement. Such persons were to be granted 20 acres to hold from the Company for a term of 66 years. The rent for these holdings was to be paid annually to the Company at the Feast of Michaelmas, following the terms set out in the written form provided. Although a rate was appointed to be paid to the Company for every alienation of land, the Company noted that its intention was not to allow these transfers to be made freely or daily. Instead, the process was strictly regulated under the Company seal to prevent fraud. The Company observed that various planters had acquired slaves under the pretence that they or their servants required them, resulting in a number exceeding what was necessary. This was deemed considerably dangerous to the government and the security of the island. Consequently, it was resolved that henceforth no person was to keep more than a specified number of slaves for any house or estate. Any excess slaves were to be brought into the public store and kept under inspection. These individuals were to be employed for the benefit of the island and the production of various commodities, with their provisions supplied from the store. To ensure the security of the plantations, it was ordered that every group of slaves be overseen by two English servants and a child, one of whom was to act as a watchman and guard to attend all alarms. Furthermore, every person was required to contribute to the Company’s use for every 20 acres held, particularly during times of war or danger. Every free planter was ordered to maintain a proportion of one slave for every 10 acres of land. Interpretations 11 March last: As the main letter is dated August 1683, this refers to 11 March 1682 in the old calendar, which is rendered as 11 March 1682 in the modern calendar. Michaelmas: This refers to the Feast of St Michael and All Angels on 29 September, a standard English quarter day for the payment of rents and settling of accounts. Rea[...]: This is interpreted as “Reasonable,” referring to the forthcoming instructions for the management of the island. [...] for 66 years: The unreadable portion likely refers to a “lease” or “tenancy” agreement for the specified term. Above [...] Slaves: The manuscript omits the specific maximum number of slaves allowed per household, which was to be strictly limited to prevent security risks. Alarms: This refers to formal signals, such as the firing of a gun or the ringing of a bell, used to alert the inhabitants to the approach of an enemy or other emergency. |
86 | 65 | The Reason of which order is As the Negroes doe increase upon 22 And that our Slaves and Losses may always have a And because no Trade can be maintained Regularly without the For every Ship for Trade - - - 10 - 0 - 0 39 And for reasonable for a Lease or Quarter granted [...] | The Company ordered that as the number of slaves increased on the island, it was necessary to encourage their care and industry in proportion to the need for the security of both the inhabitants and the settlement. It was intended that slaves and those who had suffered losses always have the means of returning home with English servants. The conditions on the island were to be maintained as close as possible to those in England and Europe to encourage the population. These individuals were to be employed primarily in establishing dwellings on the island. The Company anticipated that as the settlement grew, one or two additional ships would be sent annually. The inhabitants were required to pay their rents to the Company from their produce and income to cover the disbursements and costs associated with their plantations. Regular accounts were to be provided and payments made accordingly, while the inhabitants remained governed within their households. Through these charges and the money received, the Company intended to save a portion of the island’s produce for the benefit and advantage of the settlement. Because regular trade could not be maintained without registered accounts and good discipline, it was ordered that no trade in any commodities be exercised on the island except through formal channels. Goods were not to be obtained from any other place, and only those with a licence from the Company were permitted to trade. Every person holding a trade or office was required to pay fees according to a specific schedule. This included a payment of ten pounds for every ship engaged in trade, ten shillings for every merchant, and one shilling for every bill of sale. A reasonable rate was also to be set for leases or quarters granted, as well as for the supply of vessels trading to Madagascar or other locations, including fees for the duration of their anchorage or trade. Interpretations 3 August 1683: As this letter is dated August, the year remains 1683 in the modern calendar. Losses: In this context, this refers to persons who have suffered financial or material ruin and require a means of support or repatriation. Proportionable: This refers to the Company’s strategy of scaling its security and administrative measures in direct relation to the growing slave population. Disbursement: This refers to the funds spent by the Company on the initial setup and ongoing supply of the plantations, which it sought to recover through rents. [...]: In the schedule of rates, the missing text for inhabitants probably indicates they were exempt from a specific trading fee or were subject to a nominal “nil” rate, as suggested by the zeros in the manuscript. Bill of Sales: This is interpreted from “of Sales” and refers to the formal legal document used to record the transfer of property or goods. |
87 | 66 | 6 Besides Wee shall write to our Factors in Persia to send 25 Wee shall Order by the Ships two Masts and one Stone 26 Wee understand that some upon the Island or there 27 If you shall think any more hereafter to take Account 28 We have very many complaints of loose Women 29 For any other Commodities for which no rates of Custome 30 You are to begin your Return Books with this year [...] | The Company informed the Governor that instructions were sent to its factors in Persia to provide slaves by every ship for the Company’s use. These individuals were to be managed by the Governor to generate small returns on the Company’s account. It was further ordered that two masts and one stone house be erected by the ships to serve as a guard for the soldiers in the event of an enemy attack. The Company noted that certain individuals, either from the island or from visiting ships, had attempted to take what they pleased from the Company’s plantation. It was strictly ordered that no person be permitted to meddle with any part of the plantation held under the government. Any person who presumed to do so was to be punished severely by the Governor and Council, either through corporal punishment or a financial fine, according to the established laws. Furthermore, no person was permitted to transport any of the Company’s goods or its servants as freight. The Governor was directed to maintain the established methods and ensure that no person altered the orders of the island or departed from them. Market regulations for the purchase and sale of provisions and goods were to be strictly observed to ensure the island was properly supplied and trade was conducted orderly. The Company received numerous complaints regarding loose women going on board ships. For the future, no person on the island was to be permitted to go on board any ship without a written licence. If any ship offended against this rule, the Governor was to provide a fit reprimand and issue a severe order forbidding the practice. No such women were to be allowed to bring disorder into the island from the ships. Likewise, no freeman or servant was permitted to be carried on board. Any person transgressing this order was to be committed to prison and punished, perhaps by a double custom or fine, until the matter was brought into good order as befits a well-governed place. For any commodities for which no specific customs rates were set, the Governor was to use his discretion to establish moderate rates. These were intended to be fair and not overly burdensome, while remaining proportional to the value of the goods. Finally, it was ordered that the return books begin with the current year to ensure all orders were observed and reported to the Commissioners. Interpretations 3 August 1683: As this letter is dated August, the year remains 1683 in the modern calendar. Factors: These were the commercial agents of the East India Company stationed at overseas trading posts, in this case, in Persia. Pecuniary Mulct: This is a formal legal term for a financial fine or monetary penalty. Loose Women: This seventeenth-century term refers to women considered to be of immoral character or engaged in prostitution. Fitt: This is interpreted as “fit,” meaning an appropriate or deserving reprimand. Double Custome: This refers to a punitive fine equivalent to twice the usual duty or tax, used as a penalty for the unauthorized movement of people or goods. Return Books: These were the official ledgers sent back to the Company in London to record the administration, trade, and legal proceedings of the island. |
88 | 67 | 31 Suffer no person to sell Arrack Brandy Punch 32 34 35 36 37 | A ledger was ordered to be kept of all spirits, leases, and customs to ensure the government remains informed on how revenue is raised. No person was permitted to sell arrack, brandy, punch, wine, or any other strong liquor by retail without a licence under the Governor’s hand and seal. Such licences were to be paid for at a rate of ten shillings, with none lasting longer than a year. Receivers and other officers were appointed to prevent the imposition of unauthorised charges and ensure the system of laws was followed. If any person was found guilty of such a misdemeanour for a third time, the offender was required to wear an iron collar fastened about his neck for a whole year, or for as long as his guilt was deemed to persist. The Company noted that the island had reached such a thriving condition that various servants had attempted to transport themselves to other persons, either as servants or in exchange for goods and wages. It was reiterated that Company men were to have their wages duly paid, and regulations were established for labourers arriving on the island under agreement. Such labourers were not permitted to depart from their service before the agreed time without the consent of the Governor and Council. Any labourer who absented himself or ran away before his term expired was to be punished according to the laws of the island. The Governor was requested to provide an account of the island’s affairs at least once a month, or more frequently if the weight of business required, to ensure better government. Finally, a former treasurer and a present treasurer were appointed to maintain an exact account, alongside the Company’s agent, of all goods, provisions, and associated charges belonging to the island. Interpretations [a] Book of all such [...]: This is interpreted as a “Book of Rates” or a general ledger used to record the collection of spirits duties, lease payments, and customs. Arrack: This refers to a strong alcoholic spirit, typically distilled from the sap of coconut palms or from rice, which was commonly traded in the East Indies. Iron Collar: This was a form of physical and public punishment intended to shame the offender and signify their status as a repeat transgressor of the law. Divers: This seventeenth-century term means “several” or “various.” Weight of business: This refers to the volume or seriousness of the administrative tasks and legal matters requiring the Governor’s attention. |
89 | 68 | 38 39 40 41 42 | The Company stated that although permission had previously been given regarding land, its true meaning was that such permission should not be extended to anyone other than the servants of the island who inhabited it for the Company. No leases were allowed to be granted upon any terms whatsoever without further written orders. Because the Company was informed that inhabitants commonly owned shipping yearly, it expressly forbade the movement of all manner of goods into or out of the island with any ships other than those belonging to or freighted by the Company. Any person who violated this order faced a penalty of forfeiting half the goods shipped or landed, unless they possessed an express licence from the Governor or his Council, or if the shipping arrived from India with the Governor’s permission. A list of all conditions agreed with a Mr S[...] was sent, along with his obligations to pay the Governor within twelve months. The Governor was instructed to give the Company credit in the accounts for this sum. Although the individual had promised to pay all that remained of the interest in a certain time, it was required that the full amount be paid at St Helena, even if it were settled sooner than the formal obligation required. It was ordered that everyone pay the value of their goods. The Governor was required to keep a book for the Company’s better security to ensure that all goods and debts were discharged once the money was paid to him. The Company took this course for the future of the island to ensure that Islanders were not exacted upon by merchants. A rule of prices was established, as it was supposed that many persons might sell goods at prices that would result in a gain for the Company without being unreasonable. Allowance was made for breakage and waste, though not for damage from accidents. The intention was to ensure goods were sold at these set prices, allowing for a gain through half-freight and the specified price, and that none of the Company should take or interfere otherwise. Interpretations Ye: This is a common seventeenth-century scribal abbreviation for “the”, where the ‘y’ represents the Old English letter thorn (þ). Inhabit themselves: This refers to those who have established their permanent residence or “settled” on the island specifically for the service of the Company. Mr S[...]: The full name of this individual is missing from the manuscript, but he appears to be a merchant or agent with significant financial obligations to the Company. Exacted upon: This refers to being overcharged or subjected to unfair financial demands by merchants. Breakage & wast: This refers to the standard allowance for goods lost during transit or through natural evaporation and handling (waste), which was distinguished from “damage” caused by negligence or accidents. [...]: The text ends abruptly, perhaps referring to the prohibition on Company servants “taking or receiving” unauthorised profits or goods. |
90 | 69 | 40 41 45 16 47 48 49 | Mr S[...] provided a promise that the Governor would receive all the rents and other wages intended for the use of the garrison, plantations, or the Governor’s own family. These were considered roles for which the Governor was to provide credit to ensure the Company remained financially secure. The Governor was directed to take possession of a portion of the goods and property belonging to Mr S[...] for the benefit of the Company and its plantations. This was intended to ensure that such resources were carefully managed and utilised for the interest and welfare of the inhabitants. The Company noted that nothing was more probable to thrive than orchards and timber when carefully tended by the young. Planters were encouraged to set trees, particularly cypress, which were expected to serve in time as boards and masts for shipping, as well as for general construction. The Governor was instructed to encourage an equal and orderly manner of planting among all persons on the island. It was observed that St Helena possessed several singular and certain commodities not found elsewhere. This unique condition had already encouraged the Company to enlarge trade by sending more ships. The planters were urged to improve upon this great opportunity provided by God and the Company’s assistance to ensure the island’s prosperity. The Company anticipated that the Governor would oversee a great quantity of maize and other fruits from year to year. As the produce was expected to exceed what was necessary for the Governor’s own use, he was commanded to use diligence to spare the surplus for the Company. This surplus was to be used to furnish ships sailing for India with more provisions than had been provided formerly. In return, ships were to provide bills of exchange payable to the Company at 110 days’ sight. For the public utility of the island, it was suggested that on Easter Day each year, or at another convenient time appointed by the Governor, the inhabitants should gather together to work on the highways and the church. Although the manner of this communal work was to be directed by the Governor, it was noted that wages would be provided for specific tasks, such as mason work. Interpretations Ye: This remains the common seventeenth-century abbreviation for “the”. Masts: This refers to the tall spars of a ship, for which the Company hoped to find a local source of timber to avoid the expense of importing wood from Europe or the Baltic. Maiz: This refers to maize or Indian corn, which was being cultivated as a staple crop for the island’s subsistence and for victualling ships. Bills of Exchange: These were formal written orders used in international trade, requiring one party to pay a fixed sum of money to another at a predetermined future date (in this case, 110 days after the bill was presented or “seen”). Easter day: This was chosen as a significant date in the liturgical and social calendar for communal assembly and the organisation of public works. 110 Dayes sight: This term specifies the duration of the credit period for the bills of exchange before payment became due. |
91 | 70 | 50 51 52 53 54 55 | The Company established a fundamental constitution for the future governance of the island. It was ordered that no person, including current masters or inhabitants, should be granted power or office unless they were settled planters. The Company intended to always honour and give countenance to the freeholders of the island, as their freedom and vested interest were considered the best means to manage the island’s safety and design. To prevent the concentration of power in the future, the Company addressed the potential for ill-disposed or ignorant persons to buy out their neighbours or accumulate large estates through inheritance. It was decreed that even if a person came to possess multiple portions of land beyond the standard 20 acres, they should have only one personal vote in all future elections of officers. For the public utility of the island, every person-including free planters, servants, and slaves-was ordered to observe a system of communal labour. One day each week was to be dedicated to working on the highways and other necessary island projects under the direction of the Governor and Council. If a person refused to perform this work, they were required to pay the value of a day’s labour to the Governor. No person was expected to provide more than one day of such service per week. A list was enclosed providing the names and qualifications of all persons currently on the island. The Company expressed a desire to grant further lands or farms to those who might be useful assistants to the Governor in Company building projects and other works. It was stipulated that as long as these individuals remained ready to serve the Company, they were not to be removed from their lands. Regarding the construction of the church, the Company intended it to be built in the best manner, following the style used in England. Instructions were sent to identify the best locations for such a structure. Furthermore, it was noted that as materials were now cheaper than formerly, brick and stone should be sought locally on the island as the best means for construction. Interpretations [a] [...]: In the first paragraph, this probably refers to “authority” or “command,” following the context of the Company’s restriction on who may hold office. Freeholders: These were individuals who owned their land “in fee simple” or for life, giving them a permanent stake in the colony and, consequently, the right to vote. High ways: This refers to the main public roads and paths on the island, the maintenance of which was a collective responsibility in seventeenth-century English law. [...]: In the fourth paragraph, this gap perhaps refers to “houses” or “fortifications,” which were the primary “Companys building” projects at the time. After the manner it is in England: This instruction reflects the Company’s desire to replicate English social and religious infrastructure on St Helena. |
92 | 71 | 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 | The Company instructed that while labour was necessary, it should not be so burdensome as to constrain the inhabitants in their houses. It was suggested that work be broken into smaller tasks to ensure a just value of labour was maintained. Fines and other punishments were to be applied to prevent neglect, particularly to stop servants from idleness, such as “running by the heels” or lingering by their fires. Plans were made to send experienced men to the island to burn lime. These individuals were expected to instruct the inhabitants in the art, as the ability to produce lime from the local rocks would be a mighty advantage, allowing the island to be developed more usefully and ornamentally. In the contriving of new works for the fort and town, the Governor was ordered to ensure uniformity and regularity. Buildings and streets were to follow the modern style of London, laid out in good square lines to ensure a decent and useful appearance for the public good. The Governor was granted authority to oblige owners to alter or pull down buildings that did not fit this method. The Company noted that current houses, being only 12 or 14 feet high and built with battons, required such improvement for the accommodation of the generality of the inhabitants. Regarding agriculture, it was judged that Indian corn and olive trees would be the most profitable things to raise on the plantations. The Company also expressed interest in beaver and cinnamon, having received some specimens of the latter. To prevent the theft of livestock, the Governor was ordered to make a strict enquiry into any stolen oxen or other beasts. In cases of suspicion involving unmarked cattle or horses, the seller was to forfeit treble the value. Both buyers and takers of unmarked animals were to pay the costs of the enquiry, and further penalties were to be applied if missing animals were found in another’s possession. All exchanges of goods were to be conducted without fraud or deceit and to the satisfaction of the Governor. Payments were to be settled within one day or up to seven months, as the Governor deemed convenient. If any person refused payment, they were to be constrained by order to satisfy the debt, including a gratuity for the adversary’s service and any expenses or damages incurred. Rates were assigned at 20 shillings for every man on the island for every ship that arrived, ensuring the inhabitants could provide sufficient fresh victuals. If a ship remained for one month, further allowances were granted for the longer stay. Upon a ship’s departure, a receipt of satisfaction was required, which the ship’s master was allowed to receive. Finally, the Company reiterated its prohibition on the alienation of any Company land in fee to any person. Interpretations Ye: This remains the common seventeenth-century abbreviation for “the”. Running by the heels: This seventeenth-century phrase probably refers to servants or labourers loitering or avoiding their duties. London: This refers to the “New London” style of architecture and town planning that emerged following the Great Fire of 1666, characterised by wider streets and brick or stone buildings in regular lines. Battons: This refers to simple wooden planks or strips used in the construction of the early, less permanent houses on the island. Indies Corne: This is another term for maize, which the Company viewed as a vital staple crop. Treble value: A common legal penalty involving the payment of three times the original value of a stolen or disputed item. Alienating... in fee: This refers to the legal transfer of absolute ownership of land (fee simple), which the Company strictly prohibited in favour of its own tenure. |
93 | 72 | [...] and we do hereby by Proclamation or other publick 64 65 66 67 68 | The Company issued a proclamation commanding all free planters to enclose and improve their respective lands against all types of cattle within three years. Failure to comply would result in the forfeiture of the said lands to the Company at the end of the third year. It was expressly stated that no person who held land by first settlement should continue to hold it beyond that time without making such improvements; otherwise, the land would revert to the Company. All persons on the island were strictly forbidden from using any cattle for land work on Company property, except for those specifically allowed, such as the Company’s horses and draught animals sent for that purpose. Furthermore, all cattle permitted to graze on Company land were to be marked annually on May Day, or another day directed by the Governor. Owners were required to pay the Company twelve pence per head for the privilege of grazing their stock on the Company’s waste for one year, following the customs of common pasturage used in England. The Company intended for all common land heretofore on the island to be improved, and no further common land was to be granted. Boundaries and limits were to be certified for every ground, and those allowed to use the land were to pay according to established custom. To ensure these orders were followed, the Company appointed officials to measure and provide an account of all grounds found on Company lands. They were particularly tasked with identifying cattle that did not bear the Company’s mark or brand. Any unmarked cattle found grazing were to be investigated to determine if they belonged to the Company or an unauthorised owner. The Company acknowledged that the prosecution of these matters required great care and vigilance. It proposed to entrust these services to capable persons and appoint Governors who would focus on management rather than engaging in trade with Company goods. Further and more detailed instructions concerning these particulars were to be sent with the next ships. Interpretations Enclose: This refers to the practice of “enclosure,” where open land is fenced or hedged to establish private control and prevent the wandering of livestock. Ye 3d year: This refers to the third year following the issuance of the proclamation, marking the deadline for land improvements. May day: 1 May, chosen as a specific date for the annual branding and census of livestock. Twelve pence: A fee of one shilling per animal for grazing rights. Waste: This refers to uncultivated or “common” land that was not yet part of a specific farm or plantation but was owned by the Company. Running by the heels: As noted previously, this seventeenth-century phrase probably refers to idleness or loitering. |
94 | 73 | [...] pay for ye Coyns as a forfeit & we have resolved 69 70 71 72 73 | The Company resolved that no person, for any reason whatsoever, was permitted to remove any servant or individual from the Company’s service to any other location. The Governor and Council were granted full authority and assistance to compel such persons to remain and to restrain any who attempted to depart the island for their own purposes. Surprise was expressed that the regulations previously sent to the colony were not being properly enforced. It was noted that the Council had failed to take notice of persons transporting themselves from the island or elsewhere, in direct violation of the Company’s laws. The Company reiterated that such individuals were not to be concerned in any Company business. Following the prohibition of all future alienation of Company lands in fee simple, the Governor was ordered to grant no permissions for land use on any pretence, except for those specifically raised for the benefit of the Company. Responding to the Governor’s letter of 10 July 1682, which expressed confusion regarding how to manage the buying and selling of lands between free planters, the Company clarified its position. It was established that grants of land were made without the right of alienation or inheritance except through the Company. The Company retained the sole right to dispose of lands within its limits. Only those in active Company employment and administration were to be allowed such holdings, and no man was permitted to transfer land to another under any pretence. The Company addressed the Governor’s concerns regarding the scarcity of work and the quality of the ground. It was observed that while a small number of labourers could perform a full day’s work, some were unfit for their tasks. The Company noted that it was a great inconvenience if labourers on St Helena did not perform as much work as those on other plantations. Finally, notice was given that a ship had arrived with a commission to apprehend all disorderly persons and transport them off the island. The Governor was directed to ensure this commission was executed for the Company’s service across all its lands. Furthermore, the Governor was to command that no ships within the island’s jurisdiction permit any person to be carried away upon any pretence whatsoever. Interpretations Ye Coyns: This refers to the currency or “coins” used on the island, possibly involving a fine or forfeit related to their regulation. 10th of July: This refers to the Governor’s previous dispatch from 10 July 1682. Small number labourers: This indicates a concern that the labour force was either insufficient in size or lacking in productivity compared to other colonial outposts. Disorderly persons: A broad legal term used in the seventeenth century to describe individuals who violated social norms, engaged in petty crime, or challenged the Company’s authority. Commission: A formal legal document granting specific powers to a ship’s captain or official to perform a particular duty, such as the arrest and deportation of individuals. |
95 | 74 | 74 75 76 77 | The Company expressed strong dissatisfaction with the proceedings of Mr Samuel [...], a minister on the island, finding him to be an inconsiderable charge. It was ordered that no allowances for provisions be made to him beyond ten shillings per quarter for 30 acres of land. Future ministers were to receive only their bare salary and gratuity, along with diet at the Governor’s table, provided they performed their duties as a domestic chaplain and said grace. Specific mention was made of the minister’s refusal to marry Mr Samuel’s daughter despite a licence from the Governor. The Company clarified that no laws existed on the island other than those made by the Company. Consequently, if any minister refused to marry a person upon the Governor’s licence, the Governor and Council were directed to dismiss him immediately and send him home. Furthermore, no minister was to presume to marry any person using the banns of matrimony or any other formality of the Church of England unless they possessed a specific dispensation to do so. The Governor was instructed to take care that the plantations be preserved as they currently stand and not be spoiled. Whether buildings were under construction or not, they were to be secured. The Company emphasised the necessity of religious observation for all societies of mankind, stating that without it, the world would fall into disorder. To ensure good discipline and conformity, all people were to be reduced to a single order of government. To strengthen the administration, Mr Robert Holden was sent to serve as Deputy Governor and Lieutenant of the island. He was empowered to oversee all actions of government and business concerning St Helena. Mr Gregory Field was appointed as Ensign. The Company commanded all persons to obey the Deputy Governor, pay him all duties and revenues, and follow his orders. The Governor and Council were strictly required not to allow any unauthorised person to meddle in these affairs without express written orders from the Company. Additionally, Mr Thomas [...] was appointed as a chief assistant to the Governor and Council to aid in all matters of government. Interpretations Minister: This refers to the chaplain appointed by the Company to tend to the spiritual needs of the inhabitants, who was expected to remain subordinate to the Governor’s civil authority. Say grace: A specific requirement for the chaplain to lead prayers before meals at the Governor’s table as part of his domestic duties. Banes of Matrimony: This refers to the “banns,” the public announcement in a parish church of an intended marriage, which the Company here asserts is subject to its own civil licensing authority on the island. Ensign: A commissioned officer rank, perhaps the lowest grade of subaltern, responsible for carrying the company’s colours and assisting the higher-ranking officers. St Helena: Per your standing instruction, the name of the island is rendered in this shortened form throughout the text. Meddle or intermeddle: Formal legal language used to forbid unauthorised interference in the administrative or judicial functions of the government. |
96 | 75 | 78 79 80 81 82 83 | Regarding the various forms of religion professed on the island, the Company ordered that all inhabitants contribute towards the costs of the ministry. Every master, mistress, and servant was required to pay a yearly share for every person in their household, including black servants and slaves over the age of 16 years. These funds were dedicated to the Company’s charges for building and repairing the church and maintaining the ministers. Following discussions with several individuals about the cultivation of wheat, the Company concluded that such crops grow well in similar latitudes. The Governor was directed to make trials with English wheat to determine through experience which soils and seasons of the year are most suitable for its sowing and growth on the island. The Company deemed it convenient to establish a sugar plantation equipped with the best engines and proportions. Although experienced men were yet to be sent to begin these works, orders were given for seeds and useful plants to be sent from India. Furthermore, every ship was to provide Negroes to assist and encourage the inhabitants in the improvement of their lands. The Governor was urged to use the utmost diligence in employing these labourers and the working tools provided. For the future, it was forbidden for any free planter to remove himself from his service, ensuring that he remained in his established role. It was strictly ordered that no black person should be permitted to use any firearms. Any person who violated this rule faced the penalty of forfeiting their service to the Company, either for a set time or forever, and being punished according to the law. The Company suggested that the area known as the special wood was the most fit place to be first employed for Company use. The Governor was encouraged to bring the Negroes there to establish a plantation in a convenient location where they could subsist and have the necessary materials to work without delay. Interpretations Age of 16 years: This was the standard age at which individuals were considered adults for the purposes of taxation and communal labour in the seventeenth century. Engines: This refers to the mechanical equipment, such as mills or presses, required for the processing of sugar cane. Special wood: This probably refers to the “Great Wood” or a specific densely forested area of St Helena that the Company intended to clear for agricultural use. Indies Seed: This refers to seeds sourced from the East Indies (Asia) rather than the West Indies, reflecting the Company’s primary trade routes. Firearms: The prohibition of firearms for the black population was a common security measure in colonial ordinances of this period to prevent uprisings. 168[...]: The full year in the manuscript is partially obscured but refers to the decade of the 1680s. |
97 | 76 | 16 84 85 86 87 88 | The Company suggested that some Madagascar sheep be brought to the island. It was supposed that a great supply of these would not be available immediately, but the Company believed the island would eventually be furnished with stock from either India, Madagascar, or both. The Governor was directed to manage the existing plantations so that the Company remains well furnished beforehand with all necessary provisions proper for the Negroes and other inhabitants. Free planters were likewise recommended to be well stocked with such things against that time. Regarding the manner of fencing, the Company noted that local stone is certain to be the best and cheapest material where available. In other places, a large ditch and bank well planted with a live fence was considered the most proper and profitable method for keeping out all kinds of cattle. Great care was to be taken during the first two or three years to protect the “quickset” (live hedge) from being cropped by cattle and to keep the banks constantly weeded. It was advised that horses and sheep intended for breeding should not be allowed to increase at large but should be kept “within doors” or in well-fenced enclosures. This measure was intended to prevent accidents and mischances, especially to young poultry and other vulnerable livestock. The Company observed that oxen were not currently used to carry burdens on the island as they are in India. Although this was not the custom in England, it was judged to be very advantageous in a mountainous country. The Company noted that oxen should never be in short supply where grass grows in abundance year-round. While there might be some difficulty in bringing them to eat hay when first used, it was believed they would adapt by degrees. Bringing oxen to this use was considered absolutely necessary for the benefit of the plantations. The Governor was ordered to survey the whole soil and extent of the Great Wood mentioned previously, which was understood to be nearly two miles square. Although commissions had been given to individuals such as Mr Yeamans to take possession of certain areas, the Governor was not forbidden from determining how best to employ black men or others in the management of these lands. Interpretations Madagascar sheep: A breed of fat-tailed sheep common in the region, which the Company hoped would thrive in the climate of St Helena. Quickset: A hedge formed of living cuttings of plants, such as hawthorn, set directly into the ground to grow into a dense, stock-proof barrier. Within doors: In this context, the term refers to keeping livestock in stables, barns, or pens rather than allowing them to roam freely on common land. Burthens: An archaic spelling of “burdens,” referring to the loads or freight carried by pack animals. Great wood: A significant indigenous forest on St Helena, the survey of which was vital for the Company’s plans for timber and land clearance. Perhaps: Used here to suggest that the Governor’s discretion in land management was probably intended to maximise the utility of the island’s labour force. |
98 | 77 | 17 90 We Discoursing with many men concerning methods for We suppose that some parts of your Island may be stronger Put in some [...] or small Inground Earth the ground lay | The Company made provisions for the succession of the government on St Helena. It was expressly ordered that in the event of the death or removal of the current Governor, Richard Blackmore, the Deputy Governor, Robert Holden, should immediately succeed him. Should Robert Holden also die or be removed, Ensign Gregory Field was appointed to succeed as the next Governor. These appointments were intended to ensure the stability of the revenue and the continued disposal of the Company’s business. For the better management of land, the Company directed the Governor and the Register to use printed blanks for deeds of freehold land and leases. These documents were to bear the Company’s Common Seal, which was sent with the instructions for that purpose. It was ordered that the Governor and Council subscribe as witnesses according to the provided form. The Register was required to record the specific page in the Register Book where each deed or lease was entered. These blank forms were to remain in the secure custody of the Governor. Following discussions regarding the improvement of the island, and noting reports that the land is of good quality, the Company suggested the manufacture of saltpetre. The Governor was advised to investigate whether the soil is sufficiently impregnated with nitre to produce this commodity. It was supposed that certain drier parts of the island might be more proper for this purpose than others. A specific method for trial was described: a sample of earth should be placed in a vessel and washed with fresh water several times. Once the water has settled, it must be strained through a fine cloth into a clear vessel. The remaining liquid is then to be dried until it settles into a substance which, when laid upon a board, allows the water to run through and leaves the salt behind. The Governor was instructed to weigh the resulting nitre to determine if the yield is sufficient for production. Interpretations Blackmore: This refers to Richard Blackmore, who served as the Governor of St Helena during this period of the seventeenth century. Common Seale: The official seal of the East India Company, used to authenticate legal documents, leases, and land grants on the island. Salt Peter: Also known as potassium nitrate, this was a vital ingredient for the manufacture of gunpowder and a highly valuable commodity for the Company. Nitre: Another term for saltpetre or the mineral form of potassium nitrate found naturally in certain soils. Soper earth: This perhaps refers to “soapy” or alkaline earth, which was traditionally searched for by saltpetre men as an indicator of high nitre content. 17: This number appears out of sequence in the manuscript but refers to a specific paragraph or section of the Company’s ongoing instructions. Governor [...] Blackmore: The manuscript probably contains a slight omission or blot, but clearly refers to the established Governor at that time. |
99 | 78 | India as one ounce is the most yt ever was procured out The manner of making Salt petre in England But in stead thereof we take some fresh earth When ye Liquor has lain so long till it begin to run We are told that after one bed of earth is sufficiently | The Company provided a detailed comparison between the English and Indian methods of saltpetre production, encouraging the Governor to adapt these techniques to St Helena’s environment. In England, saltpetre was typically extracted from the earth of cellars or pigeon houses. This earth was placed in large wooden casks, known as hogsheads, which had holes at the bottom. Water was poured over the earth to percolate through it, and the resulting liquor was collected in a trough below. This liquid was often repoured over the same earth to increase its strength before it was processed. The Indian method, which the Company suggested was probably more suitable, involved larger-scale infrastructure. This process used a large square case of boards, perhaps twenty feet square and up to three feet high. Saltpetre-rich earth was placed within these divisions, and water was introduced. The resulting liquor was gathered via a channel into a large cistern, which could be as long as fifty feet. A key feature of the Indian process was the use of solar evaporation. The large cisterns allowed the sun’s heat to evaporate the water, leaving the crystal salt behind. In India, it was noted that “umbrellas” or covers were used to protect the liquor from the sun or dew, though the exact timing of their use remained uncertain to the Company. The process also involved “washing” the earth multiple times, often stacking fresh earth upon a bed that had already been percolated to extract every possible grain of nitre. Interpretations Hogsheads: These were large wooden casks of a specific capacity, typically used for shipping liquids or, in this case, acting as a filtration vessel. Percolates: This referred to the process of a liquid filtering gradually through a porous substance, which was essential for extracting soluble salts from the soil. Cistern: A waterproof tank or reservoir. The Company suggested these be made tight with boards, clay, lime, or stone to prevent the valuable liquor from leaking. Umbrella: In this context, this referred to a large temporary cover or roof used in India to shield the saltpetre liquor from dilution by rain or excessive contamination. Salt water: In this manuscript, the term referred specifically to the concentrated nitre-rich liquor (brine) before it crystallised into solid saltpetre. Pigeon house: In England, the nitrogen-rich droppings in pigeon houses and stables provided a natural source of nitre in the soil beneath them. Perhaps: The Company used this word to suggest that the Governor probably had some prior familiarity with the English method of extraction. |
100 | 79 | 79 But for more certainty we have writ to our If your Earth prove good but you have not skill enough to make use We have desired Mr Robert Holden and Mr Gregory Field and Mr 92 93 | The Company provided further instructions regarding the production of saltpetre, promising that more time and diligence would bring the work to purpose. For greater certainty, the Company wrote to the Agent and Council in the Bay to procure a full description of the process, including the specific dimensions of the frames and cisterns, delivered upon oath. They also planned to send experienced workmen and the necessary equipment for receiving the liquor. The Governor was encouraged to take pains with these men, and the Company offered to send more timber, boards, and materials if the inhabitants showed proper encouragement. If the soil proved to be of good quality but the inhabitants lacked the skill to process it, the Company promised to send experts to assist. It was noted that while the initial costs might be high, the work would eventually prove cheaper if it provided a means to condense saltpetre into a form fit for trade. Large sums had already been spent on a canal and other designs to assist the island, and the Company hoped that a constant affluence of ships from England would help overcome current difficulties. Mr Robert Holden, Mr Gregory Field, and Mr Samuel were tasked with advising the Governor on these matters. Upon his settlement as Chief Governor, Mr Holden was to take immediate possession of all power and government on the island. The outgoing administration was ordered to ensure that all provisions, stores, and debts belonging to the Company were transferred or paid to him. Mr Holden was also authorised to demand all outstanding sums and revenues due to the Company. In the event of Mr Holden’s death or absence, the Company appointed a Lieutenant Governor to execute the government until further orders were received. The Company expressed its expectation for a good account of all proceedings during this employment. Interpretations The Bay: This refers to the Bay of Bengal, specifically the Company’s administrative centres in India, such as Fort St George (Madras) or Hugli, from where saltpetre expertise was sourced. Canal: This refers to an ambitious seventeenth-century engineering project on the island, perhaps intended for irrigation or to facilitate the transport of goods to the coast. Santalepa: This is a variant or perhaps a transcription error for a specific geographical location or ship name related to the Company’s designs. Agent and Councell: The high-ranking officials governing the Company’s interests in a specific region of India, who held the authority to dispatch specialists and technical knowledge. Revenue accomptant: The official responsible for maintaining the financial records and ensuring all debts and duties were paid into the Company’s treasury. |
101 | 80 | 20 95 Wee Understand our Servants have sometimes done work for 96 Wee are greatly offended at your telling Us that the Planters 97 Wee send you two Ministers which we have entertained 98 Smouth & Thurwyn are to act as you see fit to draw 99 Wee are told there is one Island there upon | The Company addressed the ongoing management of accounts and the conduct of individuals on the island, specifically noting that Mr Thomas Bran[...] must provide a full account of his activities and livestock. It was emphasised that inhabitants must be made to understand and obey the Company’s authority, as respect and obedience were considered necessary for the successful settling of the island. A strict order was issued regarding Company servants, who had previously performed work for free planters. In the future, such work was forbidden unless the full charge was paid faithfully. The Company expressed significant offence at reports that the planters were refusing to assist the island or act in an orderly manner. It was observed that the planters would likely continue to follow their own wills unless constrained by better government. To address this, the Governor and Council were authorised to publish orders and impose “pecuniary mulcts” (monetary fines) upon offenders. The Governor was directed to advise the Company of these measures and any other constraints deemed best for the public good by the next shipping. To support the spiritual and social order of the colony, two new ministers were entertained and sent to the island. They were granted salaries and directed to take their diet with the Governor. For their accommodation, they were to dwell in one or two of the new storehouses to avoid the expense of new building projects. Furthermore, individuals named Smouth and Thurwyn were appointed to act as the Governor saw fit to assist with trade and act as witnesses in administrative matters. A specific engineering instruction was given to cut a road 20 feet wide from the beginning of the old path to the top of the hill, following the lowest possible incline. Finally, the Company noted reports that Indigo and Cotton could be successfully produced on the island. As these crops grew plenteously in similar climates, the Company expressed a desire to see their production encouraged. Interpretations Pecuniary mulct: A legal term for a fine or financial penalty imposed as a punishment for an offence. Dyet: An archaic spelling of “diet,” referring here to the daily meals provided at the Company’s expense at the Governor’s table. Road of 20 foot wide: A significant infrastructure project designed to improve transport between the landing areas and the interior plantations. Indigo: A valuable blue dye extracted from plants, which was one of the Company’s most profitable trade commodities in the seventeenth century. Cotton: Along with indigo, this was a “venturable” crop the Company hoped would provide a sustainable export for the inhabitants of St Helena. Perhaps: The Company used this word to suggest that the Governor probably needed to use firmer disciplinary measures to manage the planters’ resistance. |
102 | 81 | 21 You may give them 3 l b p cent for all the Recom[m]end you & our [...] in your Resolution Hol[...]ton We have [...]d a good Letter from Lew Johnson From my Sandbrook [...] Samuell Nurse Jos: Cro[...] | The Company concluded its instructions by setting specific financial incentives for the cultivation of new crops. It was ordered that the inhabitants be paid 3 pounds per cent (likely referring to a hundredweight or a specific bulk measure) for all indigo they produced, and one shilling per pound for all cotton raised upon their land. The text referenced a disposition involving Thomas Thurwyn and other individuals, emphasizing the need for the Governor to remain firm in his resolutions and guidance. The Company also addressed a letter received from Lew Johnson; they clarified that changes to the Council were made for political reasons rather than personal dislike, as the management of the island’s interests was no small matter. The Company expressed frustration regarding past expenditures, noting that the government of the island had cost them between eight and ten thousand pounds. They instructed the Governor to maintain the established charges and to ensure that justice was administered to individuals clearing their accounts. The Governor was specifically cautioned not to allow passion or resentment to pervert his judgment, but to ensure fair treatment at all times. The document concluded with a list of signatures from the Company’s directors and officials, including John DuBois, Christopher Boone, and several others, who formally endorsed these orders for the governance of St Helena. Interpretations 3 l b p cent: This refers to the price of three pounds sterling per hundredweight ($112$ lbs) for indigo, a significant sum intended to encourage its production as a cash crop. Political change: This suggests that the restructuring of the local Council was a strategic administrative move by the Company to ensure its policies were more effectively executed. Eight & ten thousand pound: This highlights the immense financial investment the East India Company had made in St Helena by the 1680s, explaining their strict oversight of its resources. Passion or Res[...]: This probably refers to “Passion or Resentment,” a common legal and administrative warning of the era, advising officials to act with impartial reason rather than personal emotion. John DuBois and Christopher Boone: These were prominent members of the Court of Committees of the East India Company, whose names frequently appeared on official dispatches to the colonies. |
103 | 82 | Wee understand there are Quantity of beef and other Good the 10 th August 1683 Wee have now positively Resolved to Settle upon Some 20 Young Cowes | The Company observed that there was a quantity of beef and other goods on the island for which the inhabitants had no immediate use. The Governor was directed to deliver these surplus supplies on board the ship Second, commanded by Sir Thomas [...]. It was noted that such goods, if they could not be sold on the island within three years, should be disposed of by the Agent and Council to support a newly designed settlement. The Company specifically instructed that no new goods from the current ship be sent back, as they wished to avoid further expense or unnecessary accumulation. Plans were made to send another ship in eight or nine months’ time, loaded with boards and timber, but no other goods were to be dispatched until the current stocks were exhausted. On 10 August 1683, the Company positively resolved to establish a new settlement on another island. To support this venture, the Governor was required to provide a specific number of livestock from St Helena to be transported on the Second. The Master was to ensure adequate provision was made for the animals during the voyage. The required stock included:
Interpretations 10th August 1683: This date marks the final instruction in this specific dispatch, confirming the timeline for the new colonial venture. The Second: The name of the vessel assigned to transport both surplus goods and the livestock required for the new settlement. Vended: An archaic term meaning sold; the Company was concerned with the economic efficiency of the island’s stores. South Sea: In the seventeenth century, this term often referred to the Pacific Ocean or the waters around the East Indies where the Company was looking to expand. Breeding Ewes: Female sheep intended for reproduction, essential for establishing a self-sustaining flock in a new colony. Perhaps: The unnamed island mentioned for the new settlement was probably intended to be a strategic waypoint or trading post similar to St Helena. |
104 | 83 | (23) 83 London 22 August 1683 Since our last letter to you by this ship we have perused all Wee think you were not severe enough by more Upon perusal of your Accts Book we [...] [...] | The Company sent this further dispatch from London on 22 August 1683. Having perused the accounts, council books, and warrants returned by previous ships, the Company commended the Governor and Council for the well-methodised nature of their affairs and the diligence they had shown. However, the Company addressed a point of controversy regarding the legal authority of the island’s government. It was considered monstrous that any person should suggest they were not required to pay workmen or fines without a court test. The Company clarified that the execution of justice on the island was not to be hindered by the formalities of common law courts or corporations as they existed in Westminster Hall. In England, damages might be recovered by action, but on the island, the Governor’s authority to maintain order and set fines-even those above forty shillings-was absolute. The Company expressed that the Governor had perhaps not been severe enough in a recent case of contempt. Such insolence was viewed as a bold challenge to authority that required severe punishment in both “person and purse” to serve as an example. Upon a further review of the account books, the Company found a number of small balances standing out that remained unpaid. It was determined that it was not worth the Company’s while to keep books for such small concerns. Therefore, the Governor was required to raise these sums immediately by distress or other means. For the future, the Governor was ordered to prevent the accumulation of such debts, as they were difficult to recover once they had been allowed to linger. Interpretations Westminster Hall: The seat of the English high courts of law. The Company was asserting that the legal technicalities used in England did not necessarily apply to the more direct military and civil government of St Helena. Affidavit: A written statement confirmed by oath or affirmation, used here as the basis for the Governor to take summary action. Distress: A legal process in the seventeenth century whereby an officer could seize a person’s goods or property to satisfy a debt or fine without a full court trial. Person & purse: A common legal phrase of the period indicating that a punishment should involve both physical imprisonment or corporal discipline and a monetary fine. London 22 August 1683: The date of this specific addition to the Company’s general instructions, sent shortly after the previous orders. Booke councells: The official minute books of the Governor and Council, which were sent back to London for the Company’s directors to audit. |
105 | 84 | What you to take out of this Cargo must only be for The plausible petition of William [... ] Wee must advise you in all your Transactions There are two Ministers on board s r Tho: Bran[...] Wee see by your Councell Books you give leave to [...] | The Company issued strict instructions that any goods taken from the cargo must be reserved for the Company’s proper use only. These items were not to be sold but were to be kept in the storehouse until a warrant was issued as needed. Addressing the petition of William [...], the Company noted that they could not support a government that withheld a man’s money without an intimated cause. However, they deferred a final determination on the matter until they received a better understanding of the situation from the Governor. In the meantime, the Governor was directed to provide an account of the goods left in his care and to make the greatest use of the Company’s debtors. The Company observed that goods from Tobago had been sold at high rates, such as thirty shillings, which affected the subsequent value of the money and carriage. The Governor was advised that all transactions must be conducted in a manner that was strictly regular, orderly, and plausible. He was urged to apply his knowledge to the Company’s interest and profit to avoid the “misgovernment” and high charges that had been created previously. The two ministers on board Sir Thomas’s ship were to be entertained, but the Company stipulated that their salary and gratuity would not begin until their first day of preaching on the island. Furthermore, the Company reiterated that no land or provisions would be allowed to any minister; they were only to receive their diet at the Governor’s table. Finally, the Company addressed the practice of allowing persons to plant small parcels of land near their own. The Governor was required to return these parcels to the Company’s use or lease them for a term of twenty-one years at a valuable rent. The Company strictly forbade the alienation of any acre of land in fee simple under any pretence, as they believed every acre of plantable land would become highly valuable once the ground was stocked with Negroes. Interpretations Warrant: A formal written authorisation required before any goods could be legally removed from the Company’s storehouse. Tobago: A reference to goods or carriage possibly originating from the West Indies, indicating the interconnected nature of seventeenth-century colonial trade. Alienate in fee: A legal term meaning to transfer the permanent ownership of land (freehold) away from the Company. Valuable rent: A market-rate or significant rental payment, as opposed to a nominal or “peppercorn” rent. Dyet: As previously noted, this refers to the communal meals provided at the Governor’s table, which served as the primary form of maintenance for officials and clergy. Perhaps: The Company’s refusal to alienate land in fee was probably a strategic move to ensure they retained absolute control over the island’s future development. |
106 | 85 | 25 Wee have delivered to Mr Holden advice of sale Francis Tyssen Your loving friends Our Govern r & Councell By our last of y e 22 t h of August we delivered it Our Govern r & Councell London 22 t h Aug t 1683 Since the writing of our Letter to you of y e fifth Your loving friends Our Gov r & Councell 49 By our last of y e 22 t h of August we advised Signed | The Company concluded its dispatch by comparing the economic potential of St Helena to established colonies such as Barbados. It was noted that while the current production did not yet match that of England or other settled territories, the Company remained focused on the island’s future development. Mr Holden was provided with advice regarding sales and accounts to ensure the island’s records were ready for use. In a further addition dated 22 August 1683, the Company addressed a request from Ensign Young. He had expressed a desire to return on the current voyage and serve in the surgeon’s room. The Company agreed to this arrangement, stipulating that his pay should be deducted from his salary as it became due. The Governor and Council were instructed to ratify this change, discharge the accounts accordingly, and advise the Company of their proceedings. A final note confirmed that an advance of 15 shillings had been made to Mr Francis Young against his growing salary. The Governor was directed to ensure this payment was properly recorded and delivered. The dispatch was signed by the Governor of the Company, John Banckes, along with prominent directors including Josiah Child, Christopher Boone, and John DuBois. Interpretations Barbadoes: A reference to the highly profitable sugar-producing colony in the West Indies, which served as a model for the Company’s ambitions for St Helena. Surgions roome: The designated area on a ship or within a fort for medical treatment; Ensign Young was permitted to serve there in a professional capacity. Growing salary: A seventeenth-century term for salary that is currently being earned or accumulated but has not yet been paid out in full. Fifth instant: This refers to a previous letter sent on the 5th of the current month (August 1683). Your loving friends: The standard complimentary close used by the Court of Committees of the East India Company when writing to their colonial governors. Perhaps: The Company’s comparison to Barbados was probably intended to motivate the local administration to increase the island’s agricultural output. |
107 | 86 | Our Governour & Councell London y e 8 t h 1683 Being diverted from our intended warlike Expe[...] S r Thomas Bran[...] be gone from St Helena you are to Wee shall Expect that you make Us noe losse either in freight and profit If S r Thomas Bran[...] be not gone in Regard he Desired from Your ever loving Friends | The East India Company sent this dispatch from London in 1683, noting that they had been diverted from an intended warlike expedition following assurances of a diplomatic agreement with the Dutch. Consequently, the Company sent a merchant ship well-manned and laden with a cargo of provisions consigned to the Governor and Council. The Governor was directed to sell these goods to the best advantage, either to the local planters or to any shipping that touched at the island. If Sir Thomas Bran[...] had not yet departed, the Governor was instructed to sell the “Cape Rice” to any available shipping. The Company resolved to suspend making any further settlements until the outcome of the peace or ongoing compositions with the Dutch was better understood. If Sir Thomas had already left St Helena, the Governor was to encourage the present ship to complete its cargo on the island and dispatch it immediately to the Cape of Good Hope, where it would follow the orders of the Company’s Agent and Council. The Company expressed its expectation that the island administration would ensure no loss was incurred in freight or profit. Returns from these sales were to be secured for London, following the same instructions previously provided for the ship named the Second. Furthermore, if Sir Thomas required provisions for his return voyage, the Governor was permitted to spare him a reasonable proportion of any sort, provided he gave a signed receipt to account for the costs upon his return to England. Interpretations Assurance of a good Agreement: This refers to the diplomatic efforts to maintain peace between the English and the Dutch East India Companies, whose rivalry often led to naval conflict in the seventeenth century. Cape Rice: This probably refers to a specific stock of rice intended for or sourced from the Cape of Good Hope, which was a vital supply station for the Company’s fleet. Compositions: A legal and diplomatic term of the period referring to the terms of a settlement or financial arrangement made between competing parties. Cape of Good Hope: The southern tip of Africa, which served as a critical waypoint for ships travelling between Europe and the East Indies. London y e 8 t h 1683: The date of the letter, though the specific month is obscured in this part of the manuscript, it clearly belongs to the series of dispatches sent during that year. Perhaps: The Company’s decision to suspend new settlements was probably a cautious response to the shifting political landscape in Europe. |
108 | 87 | Our Governour & Councell London 5 th Aprill 1684 1 Wee have ordered the above (for the price to other you our Order and 2 Of the negroe he delivered you sell what you can among the Planters from 3 Beef Dally, water casks, and some sheep and everything that shall be con[...] 4 Wee hope you have begun with raising a proper species of Iron and for 5 You will see by our Letter to Cap t Knox that after his 6 The goods most proper to be taken out of our outward 7 What Cotton wooll or Cotton yarn [... ] [...] | The Company issued these instructions from London on 5 April 1684, directing the Governor and Council on the management of new arrivals and the development of the island’s economy. Regarding the Negroes delivered to the island, the Governor was ordered to sell as many as possible to the planters at a price between 12 and 14 pounds per head. Those who were not sold were to be employed in cultivation and other works according to the previous large instructions provided by Sir Thomas Bran[...]. The Company also sent supplies of beef, water casks, and sheep, which were to be disposed of for the use of the island and the visiting shipping. The Company expressed hope that the inhabitants had begun raising a proper species of iron and preparing for a large sugar plantation. Upon receiving further reports, the Company promised to furnish the island with coppers, stills, and other necessary utensils for sugar production. It was noted that any sugar produced beyond the needs of the island would find a ready market in Holland, Spain, and other locations, providing a convenient means to fund constant supplies of brick, lime, timber, boards, and coals. Captain Knox, after discharging his cargo of Negroes, was designed for a subsequent voyage to procure pepper. The Governor was directed to furnish him with whatever could be procured on the island, including bags of calico. An order was provided to the commanders of any Company shipping to deliver necessary goods to the Governor upon receipt of a formal discharge. Finally, the Governor was authorised to take specific goods from outward-bound shipping, such as broadcloth and serge, for the Company’s use. In cases where the Dutch might interfere with the Cape trade, the Governor was instructed to take ten bales of cotton yarn from the Company’s stores to assist in the trade. Interpretations 5 April 1684: The date of this dispatch, showing the continued oversight of the island’s administration into the mid-1680s. Coppers and Stills: The industrial equipment required for boiling sugar cane juice and distilling spirits, such as rum, which the Company hoped to produce on St Helena. Species of Iron: This perhaps refers to the search for iron ore or the preparation of iron tools necessary for the heavy labour of a sugar plantation. Cap t Knox: This refers to Captain Robert Knox, a well-known sea captain in the Company’s service who was frequently employed in the slave trade and eastern voyages. Bags of Callico: Calico was a plain-woven cotton cloth from India, here intended to be used as packaging for the transport of pepper. Holland & Spain: These European powers were identified as primary markets for the island’s potential sugar exports. |
109 | 88 | [...] you in the [...] this Wee would have you 9 Wee have given you what Cloth with which and more or [...] 10 Wee have sent you by this Ship a stock of Cattle 11 During the time upon a Survey we have ordered you absolutely 13 Wee formerly wrote you to have two planting places adjoining 14 If you plant any quick growth plant them first because in time time 15 But the more planting too great stores to encourage your Plantations 16 If any planter neglect their Husbandry and all his servants and Negroes 17 [...] | The Company provided further guidance on the management of labour and resources, suggesting that the Governor employ Negroes as colliers and in the tending of cattle. Provisions from Madagascar or other regions were to be sourced as required, with the Governor authorised to sell or exchange such goods for the benefit of the island. If needed, four or five bales of iron or other suitable goods were to be made available for sale. Instructions were given for the distribution of cloth and other goods to the French and English inhabitants. The Company noted that once these goods, including indigo and slaves, were properly distributed under the government’s oversight, the officials would stand acquitted of their responsibility for them. A new stock of cattle was sent by the present ship. The Governor was directed to manage these animals for breeding and increase, ensuring they supplied the island’s future needs according to the protocols established by Sir Thomas Bran[...]. Regarding the development of the sugar works, the Company ordered the Governor to take the advice and assistance of the commissioned managers. It was emphasized that these works must be husbanded with great care. While immediate returns were not expected, the Company anticipated results from these experiments within a few years of the work beginning. The Company reiterated the importance of consolidating planting places into entire, centrally managed estates. This method of husbandry was considered superior to fragmented plantations, particularly when the plants were young. The Governor was advised to prioritise the planting of “quick growth” crops to bring a ready advantage to the island’s economy. Finally, the Company addressed the issue of neglected husbandry. If any planter failed to attend to their lands, servants, or Negroes, the Governor was empowered to seize their corn or other defaulted goods. These were to be disposed of as the Governor saw fit, provided such actions remained within the favour of the law. Interpretations Colliers: In this context, the term refers to labourers employed in the production of charcoal or the handling of coal, which was essential for the island’s industrial tasks. French and English: This refers to the diverse makeup of the early settlers on St Helena, which included French Protestant (Huguenot) refugees as well as English planters. Husbanded: A seventeenth-century term meaning to manage resources with thrift and prudence, particularly in an agricultural or domestic context. Quick growth: Refers to crops with short maturation periods, which the Company hoped would provide immediate food security or trade value. Seize their corn: A disciplinary measure allowing the government to confiscate crops from planters who failed to meet the Company’s standards of land improvement. Perhaps: The Company’s insistence on “centrally” managed husbandry was probably an attempt to replicate the efficient plantation models found in the West Indies. |
110 | 89 | (5) 19 Wee understand by Mr [...] and others that all is very Disorderly 20 All that the Company shall most earnestly desire the future and improvement 21 We do not think that any more Cattle may be sold for this purpose or for any 22 Wee see there hath been too much liberty taken by the persons upon the Island 23 The Planters and others you shall take care to bring them under good discipline 24 In some places of Bran[...] you have said that there is great fault 25 Wee have given you these Instructions that you take care all your | The Company confirmed all previous orders and directions concerning their servants on the island, requiring the Governor to ensure they were strictly observed. Any violations were to be discovered and punished to maintain the Company’s authority. Reports from various individuals indicated that affairs on the island remained very disorderly. The Company noted that the lack of discipline among the men and soldiers had caused more apprehension than before. It was observed that St Helena, despite its potential for great wealth, was becoming merely a place of passage where persons came and went without good government. The Company insisted that all residents, including those selling stock or supplying ships, must be brought under an orderly form of government during their residence. The Company most earnestly desired the future improvement of the plantations. It was ordered that planting must be done collectively and willingly by the inhabitants rather than by just one or two individuals. The Governor was directed to ensure that these efforts were properly managed to achieve the best results for the English interest. Regarding the livestock, the Company did not think it fit that any more cattle should be sold unless there was an absolute necessity. It was judged that the greater the quantity of cattle preserved, the better it would be for the island. The Governor was tasked with ensuring that the Company’s livestock was preserved and not wasted or destroyed. Furthermore, the Company noted that too much liberty had been taken by persons on the island, which they did not approve. The Governor was required to remedy this and bring all things into good order. Planters and others were to be brought under strict discipline and made to conform to the rules and orders established for the government of the island. Finally, acknowledging reports of misbehaviour in certain areas, the Company reiterated that all plantations, particularly those near the seaside, must be well governed and ordered according to these instructions. Interpretations Place of lying: This refers to the island’s role as a temporary stopping point or “lying-in” station for ships, which the Company felt led to a transient and lawless population. Discipline: In this seventeenth-century context, the word implies a rigorous social and military order required to keep a remote colonial outpost functional. Waste: A legal and administrative term referring to the neglect or destruction of Company property, particularly livestock or timber, without authorization. Perhaps: The Company’s concern about “too much liberty” probably reflected their fear that a lack of central control would lead to the total collapse of the island’s economic utility. St Helena: The Company’s primary South Atlantic base, which they were determined to transform from a simple port of call into a disciplined and productive colony. |
111 | 90 | 27 Wee the sale in the manner intended the manner with Bagg[...] 28 For that you for the first business shall be no better then this Body 31 Wee have likewise thought upon other ways & improvements of your 32 The manner of proceeding in this is that our Plantation should buy of the 33 That which we propose to our selves in these improvements [...] | The Company directed the Governor to manage the sale and disposal of goods in a manner that ensured the security of trade and the long-term settlement of the land. It was believed that through diligent supply and traffic, the island would in a few years become a great asset to the Company, strengthening both the population and the production of wares. For the immediate commencement of business, the Governor was ordered to take out the necessary baggage and cargo from the ships. It was anticipated that the first year would require much work and the provision of arms and tools fitting for labour. These preparations were to follow the manner of the plantations in Barbados, of which the Governor was instructed to take particular care. Captain Knox was designated to inform the Governor what provisions could be had from the current ship. He was directed to transport necessary goods to and from the island to support the Company’s designs. The Company expected him to make good use of his cargo to supply the plantations, as such stability was required for the island to subsist and eventually host as many as 500 ships yearly. The Company also communicated further ways to improve the island and its trade, especially regarding the planting and drying of coffee. It was noted that coffee produced in Barbados was found to be as good as the best varieties, and the Governor was encouraged to begin sowing, gathering, and splitting coffee to create a merchantable commodity. Furthermore, the Governor was directed to manage the return of dried goods and other purchases from England. All such transactions were to be recorded in books and sold in such order as best served the Company. The inhabitants were expected to bring their trade through the Company’s hands and were forbidden from engaging in independent trade. Finally, a proposal was made to improve the production of dry fish. The Company suggested that the Negroes be employed in catching and drying fish from all parts of the island’s waters to ensure a good stock of provisions was always available. Interpretations 500 Ships yearly: This reflects the Company’s ambitious vision for St Helena as a major global hub, though the actual number of ships visiting the island was probably much lower at the time. Manner of the Plantation in Barbados: The Company frequently cited Barbados as the ideal model for colonial administration, agricultural efficiency, and the management of a slave-labour force. Merchantable Commodity: A term used to describe goods that were of sufficient quality to be traded in international markets, such as London, Holland, or Spain. Coffee: In the late seventeenth century, coffee was becoming an increasingly popular and valuable luxury item in Europe, leading the Company to experiment with its growth on St Helena. Dry fish: This refers to fish that had been salted and dried in the sun, a vital and shelf-stable food source for both the island’s inhabitants and the crews of passing ships. Baggage: This perhaps refers to the personal effects and specialized equipment brought by new settlers or officials to establish their households and works. |
112 | 91 | (5) 34 If at any time you lend any of your Negroes to one of your Ships to fish 35 The fishing Trade must not be forgotten for Anchor but the Casks 36 All the ready salted fish that you send must be known in the day 37 And at night the keeping of them must be in the best place 38 And all Boats should be furnished with all manner of materials 39 And for one stock of the Companys servants drawing fish in all places 40 You see by this we have directed that the Ships which come to the Island 41 All other Trades and especially the improvement of the Plantation 42 There is also care to be taken that the Planters do not make waste of 43 And you are to see that all persons do behave themselves well and 44 One special point is how you may preserve your Island in the event of a surprise [...] | The Company provided further instructions regarding the expansion of the fishing trade, which was considered a vital resource for both St Helena and the Company’s interests in Barbados and England. If the Governor lent any Negroes to ships for the purpose of fishing or transporting small quantities of goods and mules, he was required to obtain a signed bill for every instance. Half of the produce from such labour was to be reserved for the Governor and the island’s stock, particularly to account for the “wear and tear” of the labourers. The fishing trade was not to be neglected, and the Governor was directed to ensure that a great store of fish was kept in casks. All salted fish intended for transport was to be carefully recorded, noting when and where it was taken, the vessel used, and the best manner of its preservation. At night, these stores were to be kept in the most secure location available. Furthermore, all boats were to be furnished with necessary materials for their maintenance and building, ensuring they were preserved for the Company’s service. A specific man was to be employed on shore to oversee these stores and maintain them in good order. The Governor was authorised to make use of the boats and tackle of any ships visiting the island for the service of the colony. However, he was strictly forbidden from allowing ships to carry away goods without providing good security and a full account of all items delivered and received. General oversight of the plantations remained a priority. The Governor was directed to ensure that Negroes were well employed in all manner of work and never left idle. Likewise, care was to be taken that the planters did not commit waste upon their lands or cut down trees without cause. Instead, they were expected to plant and improve the land in the best possible manner. A special point was made regarding the security of the island. The Governor was ordered to consider and take all possible care to prevent a surprise attack and to provide for the robust defence of the colony. Interpretations Wear and tear: A seventeenth-century term used here to describe the physical toll and depreciation of the health or value of enslaved labourers when lent out for strenuous maritime work. Bill under his hand: A formal written and signed receipt or contract, serving as legal evidence of an agreement between the Governor and a ship’s captain. Salted fish: Fish preserved with salt for long-term storage, which was probably intended as a staple food for the Company’s slave-labour force in the West Indies. Waste of their Lands: A legal term referring to the permanent damage or depletion of the value of a property, such as deforestation or soil exhaustion, which the Company sought to prevent. Surprise: This refers to a sudden naval attack, perhaps by the Dutch or French, which was a constant threat to isolated island colonies during this period. Negroes: The Company viewed the enslaved population as a versatile workforce, to be moved between agricultural, maritime, and industrial tasks as the need arose. |
113 | 92 | [...] as to bring you some of that freedom will be only through 46 Wee cannot compel him to any service from his belonging upon the Island being not 47 The Slaves that are on the Island now doe belong to the Company 48 Servants and negroes you must be well regulated and not permitted to be much 49 Wee are to be informed how you and some other persons have taken to themselves 50 Some see in that is practised and brought into Trade and some Liberty 51 Wee shall expect from you good account of your plantations and how 52 Wee desire you take care that the Companys interest be well preserved 53 Wee desire you to take care of the Negroes and that they be well used 54 Wee have sent you some further directions concerning the Government 55 You are to be careful not to make any new laws or orders without [...] | The Company addressed the management of the island’s labour force and the conduct of its officials, reinforcing that the Governor and managers must be assured of their authority to preserve the Company’s interests. It was noted that while certain individuals could not be compelled into service as they once were, the Governor was left to determine who was fit to employ and how best to encourage them for the benefit of the Company. A significant portion of the dispatch focused on the enslaved population. The Company declared that the slaves on the island belonged to the Company and were to be used specifically for labour in husbandry and planting. The Governor was tasked with keeping them employed in all manner of work while ensuring they were duly supplied with necessities. Furthermore, both servants and Negroes were to be well regulated and kept under strict order and discipline. The Company expressly forbade any abuse of these labourers, ordering that a designated official inspect their treatment to ensure it was conducted in a “just and equal manner” according to the Company’s standards. The Governor was directed to ensure they were well fed, clothed, and kept in good health to prevent them from being overworked. The Company also raised concerns regarding financial irregularities. Reports had reached London that some persons had taken Company goods and disposed of them for private advantage without knowledge or authorization. The Governor was required to provide an account of these goods and ensure their return. To prevent further “private trade,” all goods brought onto the island were ordered to be delivered directly into the Company’s stores and not disposed of without an official order. Finally, the Company demanded a full account of the plantations’ progress, the increase of livestock, and a detailed inventory of all property belonging to the Company. The Governor was cautioned not to enact any new laws or orders without the Company’s explicit consent, but to govern strictly according to the provided instructions to ensure no damage was done to the Company’s interests. Interpretations Husbandry: The care, cultivation, and breeding of crops and animals. The Company viewed this as the primary economic engine for St Helena. Private trade: The act of Company employees or settlers trading goods for their own personal profit rather than for the Company’s account, which was strictly prohibited. Just and equal manner: This perhaps refers to a seventeenth-century concept of “fair” management within a hierarchical and slave-holding society, aimed at maintaining productivity and preventing rebellion. In execution: A directive meaning that the Governor must not only acknowledge the orders but must actively implement them on the island. Company’s stock: This referred to all assets-including livestock, tools, and enslaved people-that were owned by the East India Company rather than by individual free planters. Perhaps: The Company’s insistence on the health and feeding of the Negroes was probably a pragmatic measure to protect their “investment” and ensure a reliable workforce. |
114 | 93 | (157) 58 Wee have order Mr Knox and Mr Cox to bring you from Algoa or from Madagascar if 59 Our Companys Ships will receive all your Ships if you have not sent us for 60 Besides the provision we may in time have for improvement but we must 61 Wee have some horses and sheep on board for the service of the Island and you 62 Your [...] to keep them safe and to see that they be not lost and that 63 And also to take care of the Companys Lands and to see that they be not 64 Wee in respect of provisions that by sea and land in the Island 65 Wee have already written to you not to part with any foot of our Land 66 [...] | The Company noted that the mountains of St Helena possessed various types of trees that flourished in latitudes ranging from 35 to 40 degrees. To support the increase of building on the island, the Governor was directed to ensure these trees were well planted in the most suitable locations and properly utilised. Mr Knox and Mr Cox were ordered to bring wood for masts and good cattle from Algoa or Madagascar. The Governor was tasked with securing these supplies safely upon their arrival. Furthermore, the Company expressed its expectation that the island would always be provided with small ships for service. These vessels were to be employed in bringing in cattle for beef and other provisions to ensure the island remained well supplied and that such resources were not lost or destroyed. The Company emphasised the necessity of maintaining a sufficient and ready store of provisions to meet any want that might arise. To this end, horses and sheep were sent on board for the island’s service. The Governor was directed to see them delivered safely and improved for the Company’s benefit, ensuring they were neither wasted nor lost. Regarding the management of the Company’s lands, the Governor was ordered to ensure they were improved, planted, and used exclusively for the service of the Company. A strict and express order was reiterated: not a single foot of Company land was to be given or sold to any person upon any pretence whatsoever. Instead, the land was only to be let, with the Governor taking care that it was kept in good order and improved to the highest degree. Interpretations Algoa: This refers to Algoa Bay in South Africa, which served as a potential source of timber and livestock for the Company’s Atlantic outposts. Wood for masts: High-quality, straight timber was essential for repairing Company ships that had suffered damage during long voyages. Small Ships for service: These local vessels were probably used for coastal transport and shorter voyages to the African mainland to gather fresh supplies. Not to part with any foot of our Land: This absolute prohibition on the sale of land reflects the Company’s desire to maintain a permanent monopoly over the island’s territory. 35 to 40 degrees: The Company’s observation of tree growth in these latitudes suggests they were comparing St Helena’s upland climate to specific regions of the Mediterranean or the southern hemisphere. Perhaps: The Company’s focus on “small ships” was probably intended to reduce the island’s dependence on the large, infrequent East Indiamen for basic food supplies. |
115 | 94 | (8) 68 Also know is from you that you have found much in that Island 69 Wee have a Ship of 300 Tunn bound for St Helena about the middle of 70 Lea[...] our intent[...] is that you should make your Agree[...] with the 71 Wee have like[...] taken into consid[...] some gro[...] for Market places for your 72 Wee have thought of sett[...] a Comp[...] of Guards upon some places 73 Since Writ[...] this we have thought fit to send you furth[...] ord[...] that hath 74 The most mater[...] thing we think is to give you inform[...] that Madag[...] 75 [...] | The Company instructed the Governor to experiment with planting certain goods on the high land to determine if they might flourish in that climate. They expressed an interest in any new resources or “minds” discovered on the island that had not been previously considered. Every man working for the Company was expected to be employed for its direct use and profit. The Governor was cautioned not to spare any provisions but to ensure that all stores were kept carefully in storehouses where no theft could occur. Furthermore, a sufficient quantity of wood for building and work was to be secured from the appropriate parts of the ground. A ship of 300 tons was scheduled to arrive at St Helena around the middle of the year to provide assistance and further advice. The Governor was directed to observe what was proper for the Company’s service and follow all ensuing directions. Regarding the planters, the Company intended for them to be used in such a manner that the Negroes were fully employed. Planters were to be obliged to plant goods useful to the Company and encouraged in their labour. In return, they were to be supplied with necessary goods, sufficient food, and clothing, with strict orders that they must not be abused or oppressed. To improve the island’s infrastructure, the Company considered establishing market places, emphasizing that safety and order must be maintained in these areas to prevent any disorders. Plans were also made to settle a company of guards at strategic points to secure the island against potential threats. Finally, the Company noted that Madagascar and other regions could bring great advantage to St Helena. The Governor was urged to bring useful goods from those places to improve the island for the benefit of the Company, following the successful examples of Barbados and other settlements. Interpretations Mind: In this seventeenth-century context, the word probably refers to a “mine” or a newly discovered natural resource or mineral deposit. Middle of the year: This refers to the summer of 1684, when the scheduled 300-ton vessel was expected to reach the South Atlantic. Comp[any] of Guards: A formal military unit intended to provide permanent garrison duties at key defensive positions or landing points. Madag[ascar]: This island was a primary source of slaves, cattle, and exotic hardwoods for the East India Company’s Atlantic and Indian Ocean outposts. Market places: The designation of specific areas for trade was a common colonial method to regulate prices, collect duties, and monitor the interactions between settlers and sailors. Perhaps: The Company’s insistence that planters “not be abused nor oppressed” was probably a practical measure to prevent local insurrections that could jeopardise the island’s strategic value. |
116 | 95 | 75 Which came Esp[...] wee have provided Severall of them for you 76 Wee cannot more work without more hands and therefore any place fit by Sea convenient 77 Most of your Negroes you may employ one or two in one Island 78 The Madagas[...] blacks or Barbadoes are found to be most Ingenious 79 Wee have sent you 50 by this ship and should have sent you 80 Upon further consideration of the great advantages that may accrue 81 As soon as we heare from you that you have sent your people to work | The Company provided a quantity of Madagascar slaves and Negroes, noting they would be of good use to assist the growth and increase of the island. It was observed that the island could not perform more work without more hands, and therefore the Governor was directed to settle people in every convenient place near the sea to ensure the territory was environed against enemies. Most of the Negroes were to be employed in plantation work, which was considered a safe and secure use of their labour. The Madagascar and Barbados blacks were specifically noted for being the most ingenious in manual labour, such as carpentry, masonry, and bricklaying. While fifty had been sent by the current ship, the Company explained that more would have been dispatched had the season not been lost. Upon further consideration of the great advantages of keeping Negroes on the island, the Company encouraged the Governor to put on foot a regular trade with Madagascar to supply all the islands. The Governor was directed to maintain the Company’s houses and work the groups of Negroes sent there, distributing them to those employed in the Company’s service as advised. Finally, the Company expressed a desire to hear from the Governor regarding the progress of the people sent to work the land and the specific encouragements found best for them. Further directions for the government of the island and other useful materials were promised for future outward-bound ships. Interpretations Ingenious: In this seventeenth-century context, the word refers to the specific skills and mechanical aptitude of the labourers in technical trades. Season is lost: A reference to the seasonal nature of maritime travel, where missing a particular wind or weather window could delay the transport of people and goods for many months. Carpenters, Coopers, Masons: These were the essential skilled trades required to build and maintain a fortified colonial outpost and its infrastructure. Put on foot: An archaic idiom meaning to establish, initiate, or set in motion a new project or trade route. Inviron[ed]: To be surrounded or protected; the Company wanted the island’s population distributed in a way that provided a human shield against naval incursions. Perhaps: The Company’s preference for Madagascar blacks was probably due to their perceived physical resilience and the established trading relationships the Company held on that island. |
117 | 96 | 82 Wee think it may be conveni[...] That you should give an Accompt 83 It will be very conveni[...] That the English you trust in this affair should 84 Wee have mentioned before what sort of Garri[...] only consisting of [...] 85 If any of your Planters desire to have any Land of their own disposing 86 Those of your Councell and Company may be trusted with the property 87 As soon as we have any account of the Island Wee shall 88 The more Spices and other things you can send from the 89 Wee would have six or seven to be chosen of your Councell during your 90 And in all matters of importance we think that the said you make ready forward | The Company required a comprehensive account of all provisions on the island, whether grown locally or brought from abroad. This inventory was intended to inform future supply needs and ensure the colony’s subsistence. It was also deemed necessary that the English officials entrusted with these affairs possess skills in building, planting, and ordering, and that the Governor and his assistants be capable of maintaining written records and accounts. Regarding the island’s security, the Company reiterated the importance of fortifications, cannons, and other warlike stores. It was anticipated that the inhabitants would soon become useful to the Company’s service through their labour in these defensive works. Provisions were made for planters who desired to manage land. The Governor was permitted to grant them the use of land for a set number of years, provided they improved it. However, the Company strictly forbade any alienation or private disposal of these lands. Members of the Council and the Company were also permitted to enjoy land, but only on the condition that they managed it for the Company’s benefit. The Company expressed a desire for more spices and other merchantable goods to be sent from the island to demonstrate its economic value. To ensure effective governance during the Governor’s stay at St Helena, a Council of six or seven members was to be chosen to provide advice on matters concerning the Company. Furthermore, the Governor was directed to provide regular intelligence and accounts so that London might remain informed of the island’s status and provide further directions as required. Interpretations Accompt: An archaic spelling of “account,” referring here to both financial ledgers and formal written reports. Fortifications: The defensive walls, batteries, and breastworks designed to protect the island’s landing points from hostile naval forces. Alienation: The legal transfer of property ownership; the Company sought to prevent any permanent loss of its territorial control. Intelligence: In this seventeenth-century context, the word refers to the communication of strategic information and news regarding the colony’s condition. Spices: High-value trade goods, such as pepper or cloves, which the Company hoped to cultivate on St Helena to increase the island’s profitability. Perhaps: The requirement for officials to be able to write and keep accounts was probably a response to previous administrative failures or “disorderly” record-keeping on the island. |
118 | 97 | The directors informed the Governor and Council that a supply of provisions and materials had been dispatched for St Helena. These stores were to be placed in their correct stations according to the ongoing projects established by the Company. The directors expressed their desire for the Island’s resources to “spring up,” specifically noting an increase in the number of hogs and other livestock. This was intended to reduce the need for food to be bought from outside sources. Furthermore - a supply of small money was provided to address the local lack of currency - which the directors believed would be useful for the Island’s internal trade. The dispatch concluded with a blessing - signed by Governor John Banks - Deputy Jeremy Sambrooke - and several members of the Court. In a subsequent letter from London dated April 1684 - the directors acknowledged receipt of correspondence sent by the ship Leo. They expressed their satisfaction with the reports - noting that the Governor and Council had shown the prudence and care expected of them. The directors assured the authorities at St Helena that a large supply of bread and other provisions was being prepared. They also intended to send a small ship in September next - which would carry both money and goods. Additionally - plans were mentioned to dispatch one or two ships and boats to Cape Coast for a second voyage. This letter was also signed by the Company leadership - including John Banks and Jeremy Sambrooke - alongside other officials such as Peter Daniel and Chris Boone. Interpretations Small money: This refers to low-denomination coinage sent to the Island to facilitate daily transactions among the inhabitants - as the lack of a circulating currency often hindered local economic development. Spring up: An optimistic expression used by the directors to describe their hope for the natural increase of the Island’s livestock and agricultural output. Cape Coast: A reference to the Company’s trade routes and fortifications on the Gold Coast of West Africa - indicating that St Helena continued to serve as a vital link in the broader maritime network. John Banks: Sir John Banks was a prominent merchant and politician who served as the Governor of the East India Company during this period. Perhaps: The praise for the Governor’s “prudence and care” suggests that - for the moment - the directors were pleased with the local administration’s efforts to implement the Company’s increasingly strict economic and legal policies. April 1684: The date confirms that these instructions were issued during the spring - probably to ensure that the promised supplies and the small ship intended for September were part of the Company’s seasonal planning. | The directors informed the Governor and Council that a supply of provisions and materials had been dispatched for St Helena. These stores were to be placed in their correct stations according to the ongoing projects established by the Company. The directors expressed their desire for the Island’s resources to “spring up,” specifically noting an increase in the number of hogs and other livestock. This was intended to reduce the need for food to be bought from outside sources. Furthermore - a supply of small money was provided to address the local lack of currency - which the directors believed would be useful for the Island’s internal trade. The dispatch concluded with a blessing - signed by Governor John Banks - Deputy Jeremy Sambrooke - and several members of the Court. In a subsequent letter from London dated April 1684 - the directors acknowledged receipt of correspondence sent by the ship Leo. They expressed their satisfaction with the reports - noting that the Governor and Council had shown the prudence and care expected of them. The directors assured the authorities at St Helena that a large supply of bread and other provisions was being prepared. They also intended to send a small ship in September next - which would carry both money and goods. Additionally - plans were mentioned to dispatch one or two ships and boats to Cape Coast for a second voyage. This letter was also signed by the Company leadership - including John Banks and Jeremy Sambrooke - alongside other officials such as Peter Daniel and Chris Boone. Interpretations Small money: This refers to low-denomination coinage sent to the Island to facilitate daily transactions among the inhabitants - as the lack of a circulating currency often hindered local economic development. Spring up: An optimistic expression used by the directors to describe their hope for the natural increase of the Island’s livestock and agricultural output. Cape Coast: A reference to the Company’s trade routes and fortifications on the Gold Coast of West Africa - indicating that St Helena continued to serve as a vital link in the broader maritime network. John Banks: Sir John Banks was a prominent merchant and politician who served as the Governor of the East India Company during this period. Perhaps: The praise for the Governor’s “prudence and care” suggests that - for the moment - the directors were pleased with the local administration’s efforts to implement the Company’s increasingly strict economic and legal policies. April 1684: The date confirms that these instructions were issued during the spring - probably to ensure that the promised supplies and the small ship intended for September were part of the Company’s seasonal planning. |
119 | 98 | Our governour & Councell London the 26th Novemb[...] 1684 Wee shall now give particular Answers to all yo[...] letters of the 1 Wee have perused the Reasons of Mr Tomson and Mr Stephens about 2 Wee have writ for him upon your letters and a Scale with all tools 3 Bound of Money then you shall write for and have sent all our 4 Not to depart from St Helena in the night without our leave given 5 Wee have likewise sent the Ballance of all other Accounts you have sent 6 Written to you being a burden of affairs in the Dispatch thereof and 7 Wee have likewise sent you here for the better and advantage of 8 And in the mean time you must take care that all matters are ordered 9 Doctor Saul who we have dismissed from our service upon the arrival 10 And in regard we find you are not well satisfied with the Minister and 11 Wee have invoiced our pieces of 8 to 50 Dollars and have sent you | The directors provided particular answers to several letters received from the Island dated February, March 1683, and 3 May. They acknowledged the reasons given by Mr Tomson and Mr Stephens regarding their departure by ship. In response to previous requests, a scale and a set of tools were dispatched, alongside the balance of all money and other accounts that had been written for. Strict orders were issued that no ship was to depart from St Helena in the night without express leave being given. The directors made it a point that, for the future, permission must always be obtained before any such proceeding. They also reiterated their command for the Governor and Council to maintain a strict care of all Company affairs, despite the ongoing burden of business. To assist in this, an order was sent to all servants requiring them to remain obedient and to respect the Governor and officers according to the rules stated in their commissions. Significant changes were made to the Island’s professional staff. Doctor Saul was dismissed from the Company’s service and was ordered to return to England upon the arrival of the ship. Furthermore, noting that the Governor and Council were not well satisfied with the current Minister and Surgeon, the directors promised to provide replacements in the future who would be better suited to serve the Island’s needs. If any such officials were found to be negligent or ill-suited, they were to be dealt with accordingly. Regarding the local economy, the directors invoiced a supply of pieces of eight at 50 dollars, along with various materials and papers for their management. It was officially declared that, to ensure the money was properly received, pieces of eight should pass as current currency on the Island at a value of 5s, which was the price at which they were to be paid. Interpretations Doctor Saul: A medical official whose dismissal suggests a breakdown in relations with the local government or a failure to meet the Company’s professional standards. Pieces of eight: The Spanish Dollar, a widely used silver coin in international trade, which the Company was now attempting to formalise as a standard currency for the Island. Night departures: The prohibition against ships leaving in the night was probably a security measure intended to prevent smuggling, the desertion of servants, or the unauthorised departure of “interlopers” under the cover of darkness. Perhaps: The decision to fix the value of the piece of eight at 5s suggests that the directors were trying to stabilise the local economy by creating a predictable exchange rate for the most common coin in the region. 26 November 1684: This date marks the dispatch of these orders during the late autumn, ensuring that the new currency regulations and staff changes would probably reach the Island by the following spring. |
120 | 99 | 12 Wee approve of the Diſcharge you have given Col[...] Johnson upon 13 This is the third Ship we have sent you to make a Diſcovery of some By Cap[...] Gay[...] in the Soci[...] we gave you Generall Direc[...] Instruct[...] and some other advi[...] that you have from time to time And in order to your better settling we would have you send him hither By this Ship is the first Governour of the place, who is to take the Charge We have appointed the Directions Wee We shall be glad to receive from you by this Ship a full Account of the Encouragement for a settlement, and also of what you think 14 Of your Blacks by you bought or taken you can see all you can of 15 Wee take notice your buſineſs in much increaſe, eſpecially in Trade | The directors approved the discharge of Colonel Johnson upon the balancing of his accounts - though they raised a query regarding property built at the Company’s expense which he had reportedly taken into his possession. The Governor was directed to enquire into this matter and ensure the property was returned to the Company’s disposition - noting that Johnson’s reputation for honesty would probably prevent any opposition. The dispatch mentioned that this was the third ship sent to assist in discovering a safe harbour or other small advantages for the Island. While the directors considered such a harbour more than necessary for remote frontier settlements - they questioned whether the inhabitants could at present reimburse the Company for the costs. The Governor was reminded to follow the general directions and orders previously provided by Capt Gayer in the ship Society - which included instructions for establishing a good settlement based on his observations of existing faults. To ensure the better settling of the Island - the directors announced that the first Governor of the place was being sent on this ship to take charge before the departure of the former official. The current administration was instructed to follow all previously sent directions and to provide a full account of the Island’s condition - its inhabitants - and what was required for further encouragement of the settlement. Regarding the enslaved population - the directors noted that those bought or taken should be monitored for their behaviour. The Governor was tasked with ensuring they were employed in a manner most beneficial to the Company’s interests. Finally - noting an increase in business and trade - the directors ordered that additional people be sent over to assist in the management and disposal of goods. These assistants were to be encouraged and rewarded according to their merit - provided they remained diligent and careful. Interpretations Colonel Johnson: An official or military officer whose financial accounts had been settled - though his retention of Company-built property remained a point of investigation. Capt Gayer: Likely Sir John Gayer - a naval commander and later a high-ranking official of the East India Company - who had provided earlier administrative guidance. Society: The name of the vessel used by Capt Gayer to deliver previous instructions and conduct a survey of the Island’s affairs. Perhaps: The mention of a “first Governor” arriving to take charge before the departure of the “former Governor” suggests the Company was attempting to ensure a seamless transition of power to avoid any lapse in authority or order. Blacks: A reference to the enslaved people brought to the Island to provide the heavy labour required for the Company’s plantations and fortifications. Trifling: In this context - the word is used to describe smaller or less significant maritime advantages compared to a major deep-water harbour. |
121 | 100 | 100 The[...] hones[...] and Diligen[...] Under you promise to [...] them 16 Wee will send you money for the use of the Island, Wee have sent two Ships 17 Wee have agreed with you that all the Salaries of the Governour be necessary The Dutch Ships that come from the Barbadoes Islands 18 We have likewise directed Mr[...] that if you have any 19 We desire you do not accept such persons into your service that 20 Wee likewise send you by this Ship three or four Artificers at 10 | The directors addressed the management of young servants on the Island - noting that if they were well used and civilly treated during their youth - they would probably grow into their roles more effectively than grown men. The intention was for these individuals to improve the overall worth of the Island as they matured. To support the local economy and trade - two ships were dispatched carrying silver to be kept on board for the Island’s use. These vessels also carried goods intended for the South Sea - alongside previous stock - to ensure sufficient capital and materials were available to manage the first and second voyages. A new arrangement was made regarding the Governor’s plantation. A specialist servant - formerly employed at the Little Berington Plantation in Barbadoes - was sent to assist with planting and construction. This individual proposed that - after a two-year experiment - he might be employed to raise sugar or implement other agricultural improvements. The directors promised him a significant gratuity if his work resulted in a productive output for the Island. Regarding water supply - the directors noted that Dutch ships coming from Barbadoes might be used to transport water to the Island. While this could provide a large quantity of water to supply ships on their voyages - it was acknowledged that this method might be more expensive than the existing arrangements at St Helena. The Governor was tasked with determining the best locations for planting and water storage on the plantation to serve these needs. Strict instructions were given regarding personnel. The Council was advised not to accept any individuals into service who were known to be idle or disorderly. Any person proving to be so after a trial period was to be discharged and removed from the Island. If no immediate ship was available for their departure - they were to be kept secure until they could be sent away. Additionally - three or four artificers were sent on this ship at a salary of £10 per annum to be employed in the various works of the Island - with the requirement that they be well treated provided they performed their duties. Interpretations Little Berington Plantation: A specific estate in Barbadoes used as a reference point for the expertise of the servant being sent to St Helena to experiment with sugar production. Artificers: Skilled craftsmen or mechanics - such as carpenters or stonemasons - who were essential for the physical development and maintenance of the Island’s infrastructure. South Sea: A historical term for the Pacific Ocean - indicating the broad geographical reach of the Company’s trading ambitions during this period. Perhaps: The attempt to grow sugar on St Helena suggests the directors were eager to replicate the profitable plantation models of the West Indies - probably to diversify the Island’s economic output beyond its role as a mere refreshment station. £10 per annum: The fixed salary for the artificers reflects the Company’s efforts to control labour costs while ensuring a steady supply of skilled workers for the Island’s fortifications and buildings. |
122 | 101 | (4) [...] and we shall send you a further [...] Some other writ[...] to serve you in their places 21 On the sale of your Negroes upon Credit we would have you make Such an Equall Di[...] of them, that every person may have them you think fitt and give Bond and S[...] may be trusted with all such and upon the first advice from you that you have dispo[...] of the grea[...] Number of them by the next we shall pre[...] send you a Ship with a further Sup[...] and if you finde it Nec[...] not to have so many upon the Island at one time wee shall Endeavour to buy 6 or 8 Ships full Negroes of the Royall Company and send them to you being conditionall by experience of our and other European Nations that it is utterly impossible for any Europ[...] Plantation to thrive between the Tropicks upon any place without the assistance and labour Negroes the want at St Helena we justly conclude hath been the cause that the planters upon that Island have not yet found the way to produce any usefull or profitable Commodity Wm Sedwicke John mori[...] Peter Dani[...] Joseph Ashe Govern[...] for Child D[...] Jeremy Sambrooke Chris[...] Boone Jam[...] Dar[...] Hen[...] Johnson Rich Hutchinson Hen[...] Jenk[...] Edw Browne[...] Edward Bidge Tho: Canham | The directors informed the Governor that they would send further written instructions and personnel to serve in various roles. Regarding the sale of enslaved people on credit - the Governor was instructed to ensure an equal distribution so that every person deemed fit could receive them. Those trusted with such a purchase were required to provide a bond as security. Upon advice that the current number had been disposed of - the directors promised to dispatch a ship with a further supply. It was noted that if the Island required even more labour - the Company would endeavour to purchase six or eight ship-loads of enslaved people from the Royal Company to send to St Helena. This decision was based on the experience of the Company and other European nations - which concluded that it is utterly impossible for any European plantation located between the Tropics to thrive without the assistance and labour of enslaved people. The directors concluded that the lack of such labour at St Helena was the primary reason the planters had not yet found a way to produce any useful or profitable commodity. The letter was signed by Governor Joseph Ashe - Deputy Jeremy Sambrooke - and several other officials - including Wm Sedwicke - John Morice - and Peter Daniel. Interpretations Royal Company: A reference to the Royal African Company - which held the English monopoly on the trade of enslaved people during this period. Between the Tropics: This refers to the geographical region between the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn - where European authorities believed the climate was too harsh for white labour alone to sustain plantation agriculture. Bond and Security: A legal and financial guarantee required from planters to ensure they would eventually pay the Company for the enslaved people they received on credit. Perhaps: The directors’ firm conclusion that the Island’s lack of profit was due to a shortage of enslaved labour indicates a shift towards a more aggressive plantation-based economic model - similar to those used in the West Indies. Joseph Ashe: Sir Joseph Ashe was a prominent merchant and politician who served as the Governor of the East India Company - succeeding Sir John Banks. |
123 | 102 | To the Right Wor[...] Geo[...] Blackmore Esq[...] May The Hon[...] Comp[...] by their Letter to us of the 30th of March Wee must again assure you our orders and have no reason to doubt of your Ships, which come from the Coast of Afric[...] or from Europe, Wee desire not to send Cotton and Indigo Seed, make known if Wee would have you send by every Ship some pieces of 30 or 40 yards Wee shall remove any Slaves there in such things, those that Wee have taken notice in your Letter of getting very heavy timber We have sent you by the Henry and William which we desire Mr Hannock hath not sent us the Directions, desire for making We are here in great Trouble, we send Ships upon all occasions | The directors addressed Governor George Blackmore and the Council regarding the ongoing efforts to improve St Helena through the production of sugar - indigo - and cotton. They reiterated the Company’s instructions from 30 March - expressing confidence in the Governor’s diligence while urging the cultivation of these profitable commodities. To support these industries - the Governor was instructed to select specific individuals from the enslaved populations arriving from the African coast or Europe. The directors requested a preference for young boys and those already experienced in sugar works or the planting of indigo and cotton. Skilled workers - such as carpenters and coopers - were also deemed highly desirable for the Island’s infrastructure. Regarding seeds and agricultural knowledge - the directors noted that indigo seeds could not be sourced locally and suggested obtaining them from Dutch ships. They requested a detailed description of the methods for planting and curing indigo - cotton - and hemp. Additionally - specific instructions were sent from the Malabar Coast to assist in these processes - as Mr Hannock had failed to provide the necessary directions. Seeds for saffron and other plants were dispatched via the ship Henry and William - with a warning that they must be planted in shaded areas to thrive. The letter also mentioned the need for equipment - including sugar mills and pieces of fabric for the works. The Governor was directed to manage the transport of enslaved people carefully and to ensure they were not abused. Despite acknowledging “great trouble” in their own affairs - the directors affirmed their commitment to the Company’s service and promised to continue sending ships and supplies to promote the Island’s advantage. Interpretations George Blackmore: The Esq appointed as Governor of St Helena - tasked with transitioning the Island from a simple port of call into a productive plantation colony. Malabar Coast: A region on the southwestern coast of India - from which the Company drew agricultural expertise for tropical crops like indigo to be applied on St Helena. Henry and William: The specific vessel used to transport seeds - plants - and presumably other essential supplies for the experimental plantations. Perhaps: The specific instruction to select “young boys” for the plantations probably reflects a desire for a long-term labour force that could be trained in specific trades and would likely remain productive for many years. Indigo and Cotton: These were high-value cash crops in the seventeenth century - and the Company’s push to grow them on St Helena illustrates a clear intent to make the Island self-sustaining and profitable. |
124 | 103 | 6 [...] of them the Company voyages from the Coast the Ben[...] Merch[...] We should be very glad to promote any thing that may be for the [...] Your affectionate friends Jo[...] Our Command of the respective London Aprill 1684 Sir Since we have ordered our Governour and Councell of St Goods so received must be carefully managed, and disposed We would have you not faile to perform this Order that no We are John Dubois John Bankes Governour | The directors mentioned the deployment of several vessels - including the Bengal Merchant - the Lyon Merchant - the Eagle - and the John and Mary - to various destinations such as Holland and Africa. While some of these ships were carrying sugar - the directors noted a difficulty in procuring certain mills for the Island. They observed that Shutham Moore had begun work on these projects - though the results were not yet fully realised. The directors reiterated their desire to promote anything that might serve the Company’s interests on the Island - urging the local authorities to advance any endeavours that might bring improvement. A separate order from London dated April 1684 was addressed to the commanders of the ships in the Company’s service at St Helena. The Governor and Council were authorised to ship goods of any kind on board merchant vessels - paying the necessary freight and receiving returns accordingly. This order applied to all ships arriving in the bay from England or Africa. The commanders were specifically instructed to receive goods bought by the Company - providing receipts and keeping a careful account of them. These goods were to be managed and disposed of with a sufficient dispatch. The directors emphasised that this order must be performed without fail to ensure no time was lost - as they wished to encourage merchants to continue sending goods to the government at St Helena. The documents were signed by Governor John Banks - Deputy Jeremy Sambrooke - and other prominent officials including Josiah Child and Christopher Boone. Interpretations Bengal Merchant: A well known vessel in the East India Company fleet - used here as part of a wider maritime network transporting commodities like sugar. Freight: The charge paid for the carriage of goods by ship - which the local government was now permitted to pay to use merchant vessels for Company trade. Josiah Child: Sir Josiah Child was one of the most powerful and influential figures in the history of the East India Company - serving as its Governor and architect of its more aggressive commercial policies. Perhaps: The instructions to allow the Governor to use merchant ships for trading goods suggests that the Company was trying to increase the frequency of trade and supply beyond what their own official fleet could provide. April 1684: The timing of this dispatch shows a coordinated effort to streamline the logistics of the Island’s administration at the start of the spring sailing season. |
125 | 104 | By the Governour and Comp[...] of Merchants of You are upon sight hereof to deliver out of our Stores on board of Dated Bankes Governour To the respective Commanders By the Governour and Comp[...] of Whereas Wee are informed that some of our Planters upon St Helena And wee doe further require you to send us an account of the Given at the East India house this Joseph Ashe Governour | The Governor and Company of Merchants in London issued an order in September 1684 addressed to the commanders of all ships returning from India. Upon arrival at St Helena - these commanders were required to deliver specific stores for the Island’s use as demanded by the Governor and Council. These goods included materials from Masulipatnam suitable for making clothing for the enslaved population - as well as other fabrics intended for the clothing of the planters. Such deliveries were to be officially recorded as a discharge of the ship’s obligations to the Company. This order was signed by Governor John Bankes - Deputy Thomas Cooke - and several other directors including Josiah Child. In a further directive dated 26 November 1684 - the Company expressed its dissatisfaction with the lack of industry shown by some planters in the cultivation of sugar and indigo. The Governor was ordered to take special care to encourage these agricultural improvements and to ensure that any person found idle or negligent was punished. The directors insisted that all inhabitants must be made sensible of their neglect and be obliged to improve their assigned lands. The Governor was also required to provide a detailed report on the state of the Island - specifically documenting the progress made in planting sugar and indigo and the total quantity produced. This later dispatch was signed at the East India House by the new Governor - Joseph Ashe - and Deputy Josiah Child - alongside directors such as Jeremy Sambrooke and John Dubois. Interpretations Masulipatnam: A major trading port on the Coromandel Coast of India - known for its high-quality textiles and calicoes which were being repurposed here for local use on the Island. Idle or negligent: This phrase highlights the Company’s shift towards a more authoritarian style of management - where failure to produce profitable crops was treated as a punishable offence. East India House: The headquarters of the Company in Leadenhall Street - London - where these administrative and legal policies were formulated. Perhaps: The requirement for returning ships from India to offload cloth suggests that St Helena was being integrated into a triangular trade route - receiving Indian manufactured goods in exchange for its role as a strategic Atlantic base. 26 November 1684: This date marks a period of significant administrative pressure from London - probably reflecting the directors’ growing impatience with the slow pace of agricultural development on the Island. |
126 | 105 | Copy Comp[...] generall Letter pr[...] St Nyborne 1 We have rec[...] yours of [...] and the 17th of December by the 2 You are to follow in executing the first mentioned & last mentioned 3 Upon the Charter and Commission aforesaid you may observe there is no power 4 John Wyborne now in England will forthwith take his passage 5 The Engineers and Officers you shall appoint shall be careful of the fortifications 6 Sir John Wyborne will acquaint you in the manner now in use in the [...] | The directors acknowledged receipt of correspondence from St Helena dated December by the ships Royal Charles and Anne. They expressed a firm belief that the strict execution of instructions following any notorious offence was the only known way to maintain subjection and good order on the Island. The Governor and Council were commanded to follow both previous and current regulations regarding the management of the plantations - as these general rules were expected to be observed without exception. A significant clarification was made regarding legal authority. Under the Charter and Commission - the local government was informed that they possessed no power to impose taxes except where specifically authorised by His Majesty’s Commission. However - the Governor was assured that he possessed full authority to govern the Island and maintain obedience among all persons without the need for any other outside help - provided he acted strictly according to the Company’s established rules. The dispatch also announced that Sir John Wyborne - then in England - was to take his passage on a ship bound for Bombay to serve as Governor there. The authorities at St Helena were ordered to provide him with all necessary assistance and dispatch during his stay. Furthermore - the engineers and officers on the Island were tasked with the careful repair and maintenance of the fortifications. The Governor was granted the power to appoint officers and discipline the soldiers under the Company’s corporation and government. Sir John Wyborne was specifically tasked with advising the local administration on the modern methods used for managing a garrison and the proper keeping of military stores. He was to ensure that all officers performed their duties and maintained strict discipline among the inhabitants and soldiers alike. Interpretations Sir John Wyborne: A senior official and naval commander appointed as Lieutenant Governor of Bombay - whose expertise in garrison discipline was being utilised to standardise the military procedures at St Helena during his transit. Notorious offence: This legal phrasing suggests that the directors intended to use public or well-known instances of misconduct as opportunities to reinforce their authority through visible punishment. Bombay: Now Mumbai - this was one of the Company’s primary administrative centres in India - illustrating St Helena’s role as a vital stopping point for high-ranking officials travelling between London and the East. Perhaps: The reminder that the Governor had no power to impose taxes without royal authority reflects the Company’s desire to keep the local administration’s power in check while still demanding absolute obedience from the planters. 6 May 1685: This date indicates that these orders were issued shortly after the death of Charles II and the accession of James II - a period of transition that probably influenced the Company’s emphasis on legal charters and royal commissions. |
127 | 106 | It is our will next after our Governour and Capt[...] [...] 8 Wee observe you by your Letters have sent us two or three 9 Wee have seen your letter wherein you say that you need not 10 Wee cannot imagine Mr Snell should be unwilling to perform 11 Wee have desired Mr John Wyborne to enquire into your 12 While Mr John Wyborne is with you we would have you [...] | The directors established a strict protocol for official rank and remuneration - stating that the Governor and Captain were to be followed in precedence by the appointed officers. A firm instruction was given that no person should receive an allowance for their services unless specifically authorised by the King or by the Company’s direct order. The local administration was tasked with ensuring that all such financial matters were reported to his Majesty and the directors for approval. Regarding the management of supplies - the directors acknowledged receipt of letters identifying several individuals considered for the care of the stores. They noted that while some were found to be trustworthy - others had proven faulty and were subsequently removed. The directors expressed their approval of these dismissals and the appointment of new staff in their stead. Responding to reports that the Island might be overpopulated beyond what it could reasonably maintain - the directors promised to take appropriate action based on the Governor’s assessment. They also addressed concerns regarding a Mr Snell - expressing surprise that he might be unwilling to perform his duties. The Governor was requested to provide a full account of any misconduct so that the matter could be corrected - reiterating that any negligent or faulty persons would be replaced. Finally - Sir John Wyborne was formally commissioned to enquire into the Island’s affairs and report his findings to London. During his stay - the Governor and Council were ordered to provide him with every assistance in managing the Company’s business and to observe his directions in all matters without fail. Interpretations Sir John Wyborne: A high-ranking official whose temporary presence on the Island was utilised as a form of external audit to ensure local governance met the Company’s expectations. Mr Snell: Probably a local official or clerk whose performance had come under scrutiny - reflecting the directors’ intolerance for any perceived lack of commitment to their service. Allowances: These were additional payments or perks provided to officers - which the Company was now strictly regulating to prevent local corruption or unauthorised spending. Perhaps: The instruction to follow Sir John Wyborne’s directions “in all things” suggests that the directors had more confidence in their travelling officials than in the resident Council - probably due to ongoing concerns about local administrative standards. Subjection: The recurring theme of discipline and subjection in these letters indicates that the Company viewed the Island primarily as a military and commercial outpost rather than a traditional civilian colony. |
128 | 107 | For fencing in y[e] planters plantations it is a Most usefull and And for worke men where you shall find cause for such 14 Wee cannot imagine as those idle Men suggest that you should keep 15 Since there hath been a rebellion in y[e] Island by Mr [...] we We do require you that you be very vigilant and carefull in the And that you doe not suffer any disorder or neglect to be committed 16 Wee would have you also take care that all fitting and necessary 17 And we doe further require and command you strictly to forbid upon And that you take care that no person whatsoever do presume to | The directors addressed the essential task of fencing the planters’ land - describing it as a most useful and necessary project. Recognising that a lack of timber and iron might hinder progress - they granted the Governor discretion to allow additional time for the work to be completed this year. The Company provided the means for these improvements - with the costs to be accounted for and paid through the official pay office. The directors reiterated their stance on labour - refusing to allow enslaved people to be sold at anything other than reasonable prices. Sir John Wyborne was tasked with ensuring that sufficient measures were in place to compel both enslaved people and servants to work and remain obedient to the Company’s rules. The Governor was advised to ignore suggestions from idle men that enslaved people were being kept against their will after their arrival for service. Instead - he was strictly ordered to punish any who refused to work and to ensure they performed their duties. Reflecting on a recent rebellion led by Mr [...] - the directors issued firm directions to prevent future miscarriages of justice or order. The Governor was required to be extremely vigilant and to use every means necessary to suppress any further attempts at insurrection. Maintaining strict discipline among all persons under the government was paramount - and no disorder or neglect of duty was to be tolerated. The local administration was further tasked with the upkeep of the Island’s infrastructure - specifically requiring that all necessary repairs be made to the fortifications and other public works to keep them in good condition. Finally - a strict prohibition was placed on unauthorised boarding of vessels. On pain of severe punishment - no person was permitted to go on board any ship or vessel without the express leave and knowledge of the Governor. This measure was intended to maintain total control over the movement of people and goods between the Island and visiting ships. Interpretations Fencing: This practice was crucial for protecting crops from the Island’s roaming livestock and for establishing clear legal boundaries for the plantations. Rebellion: This probably refers to the 1684 insurrection on the Island - a significant event that led to the execution of several planters and a subsequent tightening of Company control. Pay office: The central financial department in London where the costs of materials like iron and tools supplied to the planters were managed and balanced against their accounts. Perhaps: The emphasis on punishing those who “refuse to goe on with any worke” suggests that the Company was facing significant resistance from the labour force and was determined to use force to maintain productivity. Severe punishment: The threat of harsh penalties for boarding ships without leave reflects the Company’s ongoing fear of “interlopers” and the potential for inhabitants to engage in illegal trade or escape the Island. |
129 | 108 | 18 Wee have sent you no Tooles but the most necessary instruments for 19 Wee have reason to think that a trade of S[...] might prove 20 You are to take care that all persons that come by the Ship do have 21 Wee have sent you directions how you are to order the Plantation 22 Wee have further directed and ordered for preventing of disputes and 23 Upon the receiving we expect from his Majesty for the Government | The directors informed the Governor that only the most necessary instruments and tools had been dispatched for the present. They promised to consider any future requests for equipment - provided they were deemed right for the Company’s service. A supply of spikes was specifically included for the use of the garrison - reflecting the ongoing focus on the Island’s physical security. The prospect of a new trade in specific commodities was discussed as a potentially profitable venture for the Company. The Governor was directed to manage and dispose of certain profitable goods recently sent to the Island - ensuring they were handled to the best advantage of the directors. Furthermore - strict orders were given to ensure that all persons arriving by ship were treated fairly and provided with what was fit for them - with a specific command that they should not be wronged or abused. Detailed directions were provided for the management and improvement of the plantation - with the expectation that all work would be carried out according to the Company’s established orders. To prevent future disputes - the Governor was granted the authority to delay or “stay away” ships in cases of necessity - provided this was done in good order and without causing any local disturbance. Finally - the directors announced their intention to settle the formal government of the Company upon receiving further authority from the King. They planned to appoint fit persons for the management of the Island and expected the current administration to conform to all such future orders and directions as they were issued from time to time. Interpretations Spikes: Large iron nails or bolts used in the construction of fortifications - specifically for securing heavy timber beams or coastal defences. Stay away: The legal and maritime power to prevent a ship from departing the harbour or to delay its voyage - often used during times of emergency or to ensure Company business was prioritised. His Majesty: A reference to King James II - whose recent accession meant the Company was awaiting new royal confirmations of its governing charters and legal powers. Perhaps: The concern that arriving persons should not be “wronged or abused” suggests the directors were aware of the potential for local officials to exploit newcomers or sailors - which probably damaged the Island’s reputation as a reliable port. Necessary instruments: This phrase indicates a frugal approach to supplying the colony - where only the most essential items were provided until the planters could prove the land was capable of returning a profit. |
130 | 109 | And protection of the Almighty God we remain Yo[...] loving fri[...] This is a true Copy Mercer Esq[...] late Govern[...] James Rex Copy King James his Charter James by the Grace of God King of England Scotland And that they may have power to appoint Governors and other Know ye therefore that we of our special grace certain knowledge And to make laws ordinances and constitutions for the good And to appoint Governors and other Officers for the managing And to punish offenders according to such laws and ordinances And further we do give and grant unto the said Governor and [...] | The directors concluded their correspondence by commending the Island and its affairs to the protection of the Almighty. They confirmed that John Brabourne had been dispatched to serve as an official - with instructions to observe the orders of the local government as detailed in his accounts. This final section was formally verified as a true copy of the original by Brabourne himself - and was signed by prominent Company figures including Deputy Child and Samuel Dashwood. The document includes a significant legal instrument: a copy of the royal charter granted by King James II. In this charter - the King acknowledged a petition from the Governor and Company of Merchants of London trading into the East Indies. Exercising his royal prerogative - the King granted the Company full power and authority to conduct trade to and from the East Indies. This authority extended beyond mere commerce - granting the Company the legal right to make laws - ordinances - and constitutions for its own governance. Furthermore - the charter empowered the Company to appoint and remove Governors and other officers as they saw fit. Crucially - it provided the legal basis for the Company to punish offenders according to its own established laws. The King granted the Company and its successors the authority to execute all actions necessary for the continued operation and management of their maritime trade. Interpretations John Brabourne: An official whose signature on this “true copy” confirms his role in maintaining the Company’s legal and administrative records on the Island. James Rex: King James II - whose charter provided the essential legal framework for the Company’s absolute authority over its territories - including St Helena. Full power and authority: This legal language confirms that the Company operated as a sovereign body - possessing the right to legislate and enforce its own laws independently of the domestic English legal system. Perhaps: The inclusion of the royal charter in the local records was probably intended to serve as a constant reminder to the inhabitants that the Governor’s power was backed by the highest authority in England. Punish offenders: The explicit mention of the power to punish indicates that the Crown expected the Company to maintain strict order in its remote settlements through the use of judicial force. |
131 | 110 | The said Acton Denison, John Rich, John Bolton, Tho: Bolton The said Acton Denison, John Rich, John Bolton If it shall happen that any of them shall die or depart And we do hereby declare that they and every of them Given at our Court at Whitehall this 14th day This is a true copy examined by me cum John Brabourne | The document formally appointed a group of individuals - including Acton Denison - John Rich - John Bolton - and others - to assist in the management of the Island’s affairs. These men were granted the legal power to execute the orders and directions issued by the Company and were required to reside upon the Island to fulfill their trust. They were explicitly instructed to govern according to the established regulations and to remain obedient to the commands of the Company - its Governor - and the Council. Provisions were made for the continuity of this local government in the event of death - departure - or removal from office. The survivors or remaining members were granted full authority to proceed with the execution of their duties and to maintain the governance of the settlement. This mandate was issued from the Court at Whitehall on 14 April 1685 - during the first year of the reign of King James II. The text concludes with a formal certification by John Brabourne - confirming it as a true copy of the original royal command. Interpretations Whitehall: The primary residence of the English monarchs in London from the mid - sixteenth century until 1698 - where significant state documents and royal charters were signed. Succession: The instruction for survivors to carry on the “trust” highlights the Company’s concern with maintaining a stable and uninterrupted administrative presence on the remote Island. Acton Denison: One of several officials appointed to provide a more robust and reliable governing body - probably to replace those previously found “faulty” or “negligent.” Perhaps: The repetition of the names and the emphasis on their power to “act and proceed” suggests that the Company was creating a more formalised bureaucracy to oversee the transition toward a plantation economy. 14 April 1685: The proximity of this date to the other dispatches from May 1685 shows that the Company moved quickly to secure new legal commissions following the change in the English monarchy. |
132 | 111 | Order to the Governour & Councell The Governour and company of Merchants of Whereas Our Governour and councell of St Helena now some Dated at the East India house this 23 day of Aprill Worcester Berkley Sir Jos: Ashe Govern[...] To the Commanders of all | The Governor and Company of Merchants in London issued an order on 23 April 1685 addressed to the commanders of all ships arriving at St Helena. Recognising that the local administration occasionally required one or two men with specific skills for particular services - or to provide temporary relief for the garrison - the directors granted the Governor and Council the authority to request such assistance from any vessel in the Company’s service. Under this arrangement - ship commanders were permitted to allow one or two men of the Governor’s choice to remain on the Island for a period of one month. These individuals were to be placed under the command of the local government and were required to obey all orders concerning the affairs of St Helena during their stay. The directors specified that these men must not be hindered or detained beyond the agreed time - and they were to return to their respective ships after the month had passed. This directive was signed at the East India House by Governor Joseph Ashe - Deputy Josiah Child - and a large assembly of directors including Jeremy Sambrooke and Christopher Boone. Interpretations East India House: The administrative centre in London where the Company’s Court of Directors met to manage its global operations and issue these specific maritime orders. Garrison relief: The practice of temporarily pulling skilled men from visiting ships to bolster the Island’s defences or perform technical tasks that the local inhabitants probably could not manage. Road of St Helena: The offshore anchorage area where ships would wait to be served - which was the primary point of contact between the global fleet and the local government. Perhaps: The strict limit of “one month” for these temporary assignments suggests that the directors were careful to balance the needs of the Island with the requirement for ships to remain fully crewed for their long voyages to India or Europe. 23 April 1685: This order was issued during the first year of the reign of James II - coinciding with a broader effort to standardise the relationship between the Company’s naval commanders and its colonial governors. |
133 | 112 | James R Copy of a Kings Commission James the Second by the Grace of God King of England Whereas wee have been informed of the great disorders And Whereas wee are further informed that several persons And forasmuch as wee are desirous to prevent the like And wee do hereby require and command all persons Given at our Court at Whitehall this third day | King James II issued a formal royal commission to Governor John Blackmore and the Council at St Helena on 3 April 1685. The document noted that the King had been informed of great disorders and irregularities committed by various inhabitants on the Island. These actions were described as being contrary to good government and prejudicial to the service of both the Crown and the Company. Specifically - many inhabitants had reportedly combined together to refuse obedience and had resisted the execution of justice in a mutinous manner. The commission also highlighted that several persons newly arrived at the Island had joined these mutinous factions - aiding them in their opposition to the local authorities. To prevent such disorders in the future and to establish an orderly government - the King granted John Blackmore full power and authority to govern the Island and its inhabitants. This governance was to be conducted according to the directions received from the Crown or the East India Company. All persons residing on the Island were strictly commanded to be obedient to the Governor and Council and to conform to all orders given for the better government of the settlement. This royal mandate was issued from the Court at Whitehall during the first year of the King’s reign. Interpretations John Blackmore: The Governor of the Island during this turbulent period who was tasked with restoring order following the 1684 insurrection. Mutinous: This term refers to the violent uprising by planters and soldiers against the Company’s rule - which had resulted in the death of the previous Governor and a period of significant instability. Whitehall: The royal palace in London which served as the centre of government - where this commission was signed to provide the legal weight of the monarchy to the Company’s local rule. Perhaps: The mention of “several persons lately come to the said Island” joining the mutiny suggests that the arrival of new settlers or sailors probably acted as a catalyst for local grievances to turn into open rebellion. 3 April 1685: The date confirms that one of the first actions taken by King James II regarding the East India Company was to personally intervene in the disciplinary affairs of St Helena. |
134 | 113 | Planters and [P][o][s][s] upon our sd Island that have byned | The royal commission identified specific ringleaders of the rebellion - including Adam Denison - John Rich - who had been designated by the rebels as their new Governor - and John Griffin - the rebel deputy Governor. Other named participants included Thomas Bolton - John Stone - and Matthew Browne - a former lieutenant. The rebellion was reportedly contrived by Robert K[...] - described as a fifth-monarchy man who had previously betrayed the Island to the Dutch. These individuals - along with Anthony Beale and their adherents - were accused of mutiny and insurrection before the arrival of the ship London at St Helena. To restore order - the King authorized a special commission consisting of Governor John Blackmore - Sir John Wyborne - Deputy Governor Robert Sewell - Joseph Blackmore - and John Toten. Any three of them were empowered to take up arms and enlist a sufficient number of soldiers to keep the peace by force. They were granted the authority to assault and capture the rebels - take prisoners - and secure those resisting the government. The commissioners were further empowered to proceed against the prisoners or - at their discretion - to pardon and discharge those whose offences were not considered extraordinary - provided such actions suited the King’s service and the future security of the Island. The commission was instructed to follow all directions received from the Governor and Deputy Governor of the East India Company. This warrant - issued under the Great Seal of England at the Court at Whitehall on 14 April 1685 - served as the legal authority for the suppression of the mutiny during the first year of the King’s reign. Interpretations Fifth-monarchy men: A radical religious and political group from the mid-seventeenth century who believed in the imminent return of Christ to establish a “fifth kingdom” on earth - often associated with anti-authoritarian rebellions. Chappell Valley: The former name for James Valley - the primary settlement and port area of St Helena where the main chapel was located. London: The name of the vessel whose arrival at the Island marked a turning point in the Company’s efforts to regain control from the rebel factions. Perhaps: The mention of Robert K[...] having “betrayed this Island to the Dutch” refers to the Dutch capture of St Helena in 1673 - suggesting that the current rebellion was led by individuals with a long history of disloyalty to the Company. Great Seal of England: The highest mark of royal authority - used to authenticate the most important state documents and to signal that the suppression of the rebellion was an act of the Crown rather than just a private Company matter. |
135 | 114 | Copy of Instructions to S[r] John W[...][...] His Ma[jes]ty taking Notice of ye late traiterous ho[s]tile Attempt All Insurrections are to be suppressed and if his Ma[jes]ty pleasure You and your Officers and Souldiers are not to begin until | The directors informed Sir John Wyborne that His Majesty had taken notice of the recent treacherous and hostile attempts upon the Island of St Helena. Consequently - the ship London was ordered to make a deviation to the Island before proceeding to Bombay. Wyborne was required to stay at St Helena to consult with the Council and the Captain of the London regarding the restoration of order. He was provided with the King’s commission - the Company’s general letter - and all other relevant papers to peruse during the voyage so that he might effectively assist in the settlement of affairs upon his arrival. A clear mandate was given to suppress all insurrections. If the Governor - the Council - and the Captain deemed it safe and necessary - they were to make a speedy example of those found guilty of mutiny and rebellion. The commission granted the authority to proceed with trials - sentences of death - and the confiscation of property against those involved in treasonable practices. However - Wyborne was granted the power to reprieve the execution of such sentences if he thought it fit to await further orders or to transmit the malefactors for a full trial elsewhere. The directors emphasised that unless the rebellion was quelled and peace restored - they could never expect to see the Island in a state of safety or settled condition. Specific financial arrangements were made for the soldiers. In light of the troubled state of St Helena - Wyborne was permitted to offer three weeks’ pay to any of his men who chose to remain on the Island to assist with its security. However - this allowance was strictly limited to those staying behind and was not to be given to any soldiers being transported from St Helena to Bombay. Interpretations Deviation: The official change in the ship London’s sailing route - prioritizing the military and political crisis at St Helena over its original commercial mission to India. Reprieve: The legal act of postponing a punishment - giving Wyborne the flexibility to exercise mercy or seek higher counsel before carrying out a death sentence. Malefactor: A person who commits a crime or offence - used here to describe the participants in the armed uprising against the Company’s government. Perhaps: The offer of extra pay to soldiers who remained on the Island suggests that the Company was struggling to maintain a loyal and sufficient military force in the wake of the recent violence. Settled condition: This phrase reflects the directors’ primary objective - which was the return of the Island to a predictable and profitable state of governance after a period of total chaos. |
136 | 115 | We have at yo[u]r req[u]est and for yo[u]r sakes omitted this charge to be Wee understanding w[ch] you have said above and his Majesties commission now The six paragraphs written on this and the other side of this paper are Jos: Blackmore Jam[e]s Edwards John Weyborne A true copy Examined | The directors informed the local administration that they had omitted certain charges and granted a month of demurrage from the time of the ship’s arrival - a concession not given to any other vessel that year. This gesture was intended to encourage a speedy dispatch from St Helena and Madeira as the ship proceeded toward Bombay. The Company expressed hope that constant care and activity for their interests would result in a successful voyage - promising to show gratitude in a manner that would satisfy those involved. Crucially - the dispatch addressed the legal proceedings following the recent rebellion. While the King’s commission provided the authority for strict justice - the directors expressed a desire to mix mercy with the law. The Governor was granted the power to despise or stay the execution of two or three individuals even after a death sentence had been passed. This clemency was to be offered to those who were judged to have done something to merit such a pardon in the eyes of the Council. The document noted that the instructions and acts contained in the six preceding paragraphs were copies of those given to the Deputy Governor of Bombay. These orders - originally dated 7 May 1685 at the East India House - were produced and read at a Court Martial. The verification was signed on 20 September 1685 by a group of officials including Joseph Blackmore - Deputy Governor Josiah Child - and Sir John Wyborne. Interpretations Demurrage: A financial allowance or penalty related to the time a ship spends in port beyond the agreed period - used here as a specific incentive for the crew to move quickly. Court Martial: A military court convened to try offences against service discipline - in this case used to process the participants of the St Helena mutiny under the Company’s martial authority. Clemency: The act of showing mercy or leniency - which the directors probably viewed as a strategic tool to de-escalate tensions on the Island after the initial executions. Perhaps: The mention of mixing “Mercy with Justice” suggests the directors were wary of turning the entire planting population against the Company by being too indiscriminate with their punishments. 20 September 1685: This date indicates that the legal proceedings and the reading of the royal commissions took place several months after the initial orders were drafted in London. |
137 | 116 | A true copy Laws & ordinances of warre Established To all the Officers of the army of Colonells Lieuten: Colonells Serjeant Which Laws and ordinances here by published all the said are Laws and ordinances of warre 1 Of Duty to God No man shall presume to blaspheme the holy and Blessed Trinity God 2 Unlawfull oaths and Execra[t][i][o][n]s and Scandalous in derogation of Gods 3 All those who upon and wilfully absent themselves from divine service Of Duty in Generall 1 All such as shall practise and Entertain intelligence with the Enem[y] | The document - verified as a true copy of the original by John Brabourne - established a set of laws and ordinances of war for the conduct of the army. These military regulations applied to all ranks - including Colonels - Lieutenant Colonels - Serjeant Majors - Captains - and all other officers and soldiers of horse and foot. All personnel were commanded to observe these rules strictly under the specific pains and penalties expressed in each article. The first section addressed duties to God. It was strictly forbidden for any man to blaspheme the Holy Trinity or the known articles of the Christian faith. The penalty for this offence was to have the tongue bored with a red-hot iron. Furthermore - unlawful oaths and scandalous execrations that brought derogation to God’s honour were to be punished with appropriate severity. All those who wilfully absented themselves from divine service and prayers - or who behaved improperly in a place of public worship - were to undergo severe censure and be proceeded against at the discretion of the authorities. The second section concerned general duties. It was declared that any person found to be practising or entertaining intelligence with the enemy - or holding any manner of correspondence with them - would be subject to the highest penalties. These laws were designed to ensure that the military forces on the Island maintained a high standard of religious and professional discipline. Interpretations Serjeant Major: At this time - the rank referred to a high-ranking field officer - roughly equivalent to a modern Major - rather than the senior non-commissioned officer rank used today. Bored with a red hot Iron: An archaic and severe corporal punishment used to deter blasphemy - which was considered a capital threat to the moral order of a military garrison. Intelligence: This refers to the sharing of strategic information or secrets with foreign powers - such as the Dutch - which was a significant concern for the Company following the recent rebellions. Perhaps: The strict requirement for attending “divine service” suggests that the Company viewed religious uniformity and regular worship as a primary tool for maintaining social control and loyalty among the troops. Laws & ordinances of warre: These were the early foundations of martial law - intended to provide a clear legal structure for the punishment of soldiers without the delays of a civilian court. |
138 | 117 | No man shall relieve the Enemy with money victualls or ammunition 4 But if so it be that the fault or defect of the provision consist in the And whereas to know in what cases and circumstances a Governour and the Cowardice shall be punished with Death and Negligence and unskilfull shall 7 Whosoever shall presume to violate a Safeguard shall die without 8 Whosoever shall come from the Enemy without a Trumpett or Drum Of Duties towards Superiours & Commanders 1 Whosoever shall use any words tending to the death of his 2 No man shall presume to quarrell with his Superiour Officer 3 No Officer shall depart from his charge without leave from his | The military ordinances further detailed the penalties for treason and failure in command. It was strictly forbidden for any man to relieve the enemy with money - victuals - or ammunition. The punishment for harbouring known enemies or for the unauthorised demolition of a town - castle - or fort was death. If a fortification was lost through the fault or neglect of the Governor or his officers regarding provisions - all such officers were to be punished with death. A specific protocol was established for common soldiers involved in mutiny and rebellion. Those who had been actors or given their consent to such uprisings were to cast lots so that every tenth man among them could be hanged. The laws also defined the narrow circumstances under which a Governor or militia might be excused for surrendering a position. They were required to prove an absolute extremity where no hope of sudden relief or succour existed. It was demanded that an oath be taken by those involved - confirming that the fort and all its magazines - ammunition - and artillery would have inevitably fallen into enemy hands. Upon such proof - a Council of War might acquit the Governor - provided the defence was not otherwise faulty. Cowardice was punishable by death - while negligence or unskilfulness were to be punished at the discretion of the authorities. Further articles declared that anyone violating a safeguard would die without mercy. Any person entering the army quarters or a garrison town from the enemy without a trumpet - drum - or a pass from His Excellency was to be hanged as a spy. Regarding duties toward superiors - any man using words tending to the death of the Lord General was to suffer death. It was forbidden to quarrel with a superior officer on pain of cashiering and arbitrary punishment - while striking a superior was a capital offence. Finally - no officer was permitted to depart from his charge without leave from a superior upon pain of death. Interpretations Cast lots: An ancient military practice known as decimation - used to punish a large group of mutineers by executing a representative tenth of their number to restore discipline through terror. Safeguard: A formal protection or guarantee of safety given by a commander to individuals or places - the violation of which was considered a supreme breach of military honour. Lord General: A high military title referring to the supreme commander of the Company’s forces - whose life and authority were protected by the strictest capital laws. Trumpet or Drum: Traditional military signals used by messengers or negotiators to identify themselves when approaching an enemy position to avoid being mistaken for spies. Perhaps: The extreme severity of these laws - particularly the death penalty for cowardice or unapproved surrender - illustrates the Company’s desperation to hold St Helena against both internal rebels and external European rivals. Cashiering: The formal and dishonourable dismissal of an officer from service - which usually involved the loss of rank - pay - and social standing. |
139 | 118 | Every private man or Souldier Upon pain of severe Imprisonment shall 6 No man shall oppose resist or draw his sword or offer to draw or lift 7 No person shall combine or joyne together to make any mutinous 8 No man shall resist the Provost Marshall or any other officers in None shall utter any words of Sedition and reproach or mutiny 9 An heavy punishment shall be inflicted Upon them who after they 10 Whosoever shall receive any injury and shall take his own Of Duties Morall 1 Drunkeness in an officer shall be punished with loss of place 2 Rape sodomy or unnaturall abuse shall be punished with Death 3 Adultery fornication and other dissolute lasciviousness 4 Theft and Robbery Exceeding the value of 12d shall be punished 5 No man shall speak [...] or reproachfull or mutinous word or act [...] | The military ordinances continued to emphasize the necessity of absolute silence and obedience within the ranks. Every soldier was commanded to remain quiet during the lodging - marching - or encamping of the army - ensuring that officers could be heard and their commands executed without delay. Any failure to maintain this silence was met with severe imprisonment. Resistance to authority was treated with the utmost gravity. It was a capital offence for any man to oppose - resist - or even offer to draw a weapon against an officer who was correcting him for an offence. Similarly - the act of resisting the Provost Marshall or any other officer in the execution of their duties - or the act of breaking out of prison - was punishable by death. The laws strictly forbade any form of collective political action or dissent. No person was permitted to combine with others to create mutinous petitions or assemblies that might disturb the state. Uttering any words of sedition or reproach was a death-eligible crime. Furthermore - an heavy punishment was reserved for those who - having heard mutinous speeches - failed to reveal them immediately to their commanders. Personal grievances were not to be settled through private violence; instead - soldiers were bound to seek reparation through a formal complaint to their Captain or Colonel - with any unauthorized self-satisfaction resulting in imprisonment by the Martial Court. The final section detailed moral duties and the regulation of personal conduct. Drunkenness in an officer resulted in the loss of his commission - while common soldiers were punished proportionally at the discretion of the court. Certain acts - including rape and sodomy - were punishable by death. Other forms of dissolute behavior - such as adultery and fornication - were punished according to the specific quality and nature of the offence. Finally - theft or robbery of any items exceeding the value of 12d was a capital crime - highlighting the Company’s zero-tolerance policy for the violation of property rights within the garrison. Interpretations Provost Marshall: The officer responsible for the military police and the maintenance of order within the army - charged with carrying out arrests and ensuring the execution of sentences. 12d: Twelve pence - or one shilling. The setting of such a low threshold for the death penalty in cases of theft indicates the extreme measures taken to prevent looting and ensure the security of stores on the Island. Correcting him orderly: This phrase refers to the legal right of an officer to administer physical or administrative punishment to a subordinate for minor infractions without fear of retaliation. Perhaps: The requirement for soldiers to report “mutinous speeches” essentially turned every member of the garrison into a potential informant for the Company - a tactic probably intended to break the trust required for another organized rebellion. Sodomy or unnaturall abuse: These terms reflect the legal and moral codes of the seventeenth century - where sexual deviance was classified alongside violent crimes as a threat to the discipline and “purity” of a Christian fighting force. |
140 | 119 | No man shall take or spoyle the goods of him that dyeth [...] Murther Murther shall be Exp[res][s]ed with the death of the Murtherer Of Duty Touching his Armes All Souldiers coming to their Colours to watch or to be Exercised 2 None shall presume to appear without their armes in fitt or under 3 If a keeper shall loose his horse or Harquebus or footman any part 4 No Souldier shall give to pawn or sell his armes or apparel 5 If the trooper shall through his negligence or willfully consent to be rid 6 If one borrow armes of another to use upon service and shall the same None shall presume to spoyle or carry away any ammunition Of Duties of marching 1 None in their march through the country shall waste 2 No souldier shall presume upon any occasion whatsoever to take or 3 No Officer horse or foot shall presume in marching to straggle | The military ordinances concluded with strict rules regarding property - equipment - and conduct during a march. It was a capital offence for any person to murder - with the death of the murderer being the express penalty. The laws also protected the belongings of those who died in service - forbidding any man from spoiling or taking their goods on pain of double restitution or arbitrary punishment. Regarding the maintenance of arms - all soldiers were required to appear fully equipped when coming to their colours for watch or exercise. Any soldier who appeared without his arms in fit condition faced arbitrary correction. If a man lost his horse - harquebus - or any part of his arms through negligence - cowardice - or gambling - he was to be imprisoned until he could replace the items at his own expense. Pawned or sold arms were to be returned to the armoury - and the soldier responsible was subject to severe punishment. Troopers who wilfully or negligently lost their horses were reduced to the rank of a pioneer to perform manual labour in the camp. Furthermore - borrowing arms for service that were subsequently lost resulted in punishment for the borrower and the forfeiture of goods for the lender. The final section established a zero-tolerance policy for the mistreatment of the countryside and its inhabitants during military movements. Any soldier who wasted - spoiled - or destroyed victuals or money while marching through the country faced the penalty of death. It was strictly forbidden to wrong husbandmen by taking their cattle or goods - or by removing them from the plough. Officers and soldiers alike were prohibited from straggling or departing from their colours to molest the country - with any such desertion or harassment of the local population punishable by death. Interpretations Harquebus: An early type of portable long gun or matchlock firearm - which was a standard and expensive piece of equipment for seventeenth-century infantry. Pioneere: A soldier tasked with manual labour such as digging trenches - building fortifications - or clearing roads - often used as a demotion or punishment for those who failed in their duties as combatants. Husbandman: A free man who tilled the land - whose protection was vital for the Company to ensure that the agricultural output of the Island was not disrupted by a lawless soldiery. Perhaps: The prohibition against gambling with military equipment suggests that “gaming Dice or Cards” was a common enough vice among the garrison to threaten the overall readiness of the Company’s forces. Plough: The specific mention of not taking animals or men from the plough reflects the Company’s desperate need for agricultural productivity on St Helena - ensuring that military activity did not collapse the local food supply. |
141 | 120 | No soldier shall presume in marching or lodging to cut down any fruit trees or to spoyle any [...] without order upon pain of severe punishment Of Duties in camp or garrison 1 No man shall depart or absent himself out of the army or company without licence upon pain of Death 2 No man shall enter or depart of the Army or garrison but by order of the Generall upon pain aforesaid 3 No man shall presume to force the guard or resist the sentinell upon pain of Death 4 No man shall give a false alarm or discharge a peece in the night to raise any voyce without order but upon pain of Death 5 No man shall draw any weapon in a private quarrell when the camp or garrison upon pain of Death 6 He that shall make known the watch word without order giving any other word but that assigned by the officers shall be punished 7 No man shall do violence to any that bring any kind of food or victualls to or sell the same to the camp or garrison upon pain of Death 8 None shall presume to Drum or trumpet or any other sounding to the enemy without order upon pain of punishment at discretion 9 Intelligence passing from the enemy or bringing them or place before they be drawn of the Army 10 No man shall fail wilfully to come to the rendezvous upon the warning appointed from the Lord Generall upon pain of Death 11 No man serving or employed in the works shall remain or stay in the same without being ordered to some camp upon pain of punishment 12 No man shall depart from the army or garrison or from his colours without licence upon pain of Death 13 No officer shall use any insolent or profane speech under the hand of a magistrate or otherwise upon pain of losing his pay all the time he is absent 14 No man shall attempt or practise any mutiny or sedition but shall be punished at discretion and such as shall be found faulty in such crimes shall be punished accordingly | The military ordinances concluded with strict protocols for conduct within a camp or garrison - as well as protections for the local environment. It was strictly forbidden for any soldier to cut down fruit trees or spoil the land while marching or lodging without an express order - an offence punishable by severe correction. Within the garrison - the movement of personnel was tightly controlled. No man was permitted to absent himself or depart from his company without a licence - nor could anyone enter or leave the garrison except by the order of the General - both of which were capital offences. Forcing a guard or resisting a sentinel also carried the penalty of death. To prevent unnecessary panic - discharging a firearm or raising a false alarm in the night was forbidden on pain of death. The regulations also addressed internal and external communication. Drawing a weapon in a private quarrel within the camp was a death-eligible crime. Anyone who compromised the security of the garrison by revealing the watchword or giving an unauthorised word was subject to punishment. Conversely - the laws protected those bringing food or victuals to the camp - with any violence against such persons being punishable by death. Unauthorised communication with the enemy via drum - trumpet - or other signals was left to the discretion of the authorities for punishment. Final instructions mandated that all men must attend the rendezvous upon the warning of the Lord General on pain of death. No man employed in the public works was permitted to remain there without being ordered to a specific camp. Furthermore - any officer using insolent or profane speech towards a magistrate faced the loss of his pay for the duration of his absence. The ordinances closed by reiterating that any attempt to practice mutiny or sedition would be punished at the discretion of the martial court - with those found faulty being dealt with accordingly. Interpretations Fruit trees: These were vital assets on St Helena - particularly for the prevention of scurvy among visiting crews - and their protection reflects the Company’s long-term investment in the Island’s resources. Watchword: A secret sign or spoken word used to identify authorised personnel at night - the compromise of which was a supreme breach of garrison security. Rendezvous: The pre-arranged meeting point for the assembly of troops in the event of an alarm or for general inspection - essential for maintaining military readiness. Perhaps: The death penalty for “giving a false alarm” illustrates how on edge the Company officials were regarding the threat of another internal uprising or an external attack. Insolent or profane speech: The inclusion of this as a punishable offence suggests that the Company was attempting to uphold the dignity of the local civil magistracy against a potentially unruly military force. |
142 | 121 | Whoever shall desert his colours or quit his guard or be found absent No officer or souldier whatsoever shall go out of the quarters to Dinner or supper 17 All officers whose charge it is shall see the quarters kept clean and 18 None shall presume to sett their horses loose on any ground without 19 Whoever shall in his quarters beat or fight his Landlord or any Of Injunction No man shall stay behind or go away with the Army (Except he be 2 No man shall beat his fellow or flye upon him in armes upon pain 3 No man through cowardice shall forsake or run away from his colours 4 No man shall burn any house or barn or kill or hurt any person or take 5 None shall kill an Enemy who yields and throws down his armes 6 Whoever in the March shall fling away his arms or desert or leave 7 No souldier shall discharge any piece or weapon till it be commanded 8 No officer or souldier shall conceal a prisoner but shall without delay 9 No man upon any goods or victuall shall make pillaging but 10 | These articles of the military ordinances focused on the personal conduct of the garrison - the protection of civilians - and the strict laws of engagement. Any soldier who deserted his colours - quitted his guard - or was found absent from his company without leave was to be punished as a runaway. Officers and soldiers were strictly forbidden from leaving their quarters for meals or drink without the permission of an appointed officer. Furthermore - all officers were held responsible for ensuring their quarters were kept clean and sweet - with severe punishment for those who neglected the sanitary condition of the camp. The laws provided significant protections for the local inhabitants of St Helena. It was forbidden to set horses loose on any ground without an order - particularly where it might endanger a husbandman. Any soldier who beat or fought his landlord - or behaved uncivilly or with violence towards a landlord’s family - was to be punished according to the severity of the offence. During active service - the penalties became even more absolute. Staying behind or leaving the army without a signal was a capital crime. It was a death-eligible offence for any man to beat a fellow soldier or fly upon him in arms. Cowardice was met with the highest penalty; any man who forsook his colours or stood still in action was to be punished with death. The ordinances also prohibited the burning of houses or barns - the killing or hurting of any person - and the violent theft of goods or breaking into homes - all of which carried the death penalty. Rules for the treatment of the enemy and the management of spoils were also established. No man was permitted to kill an enemy who had yielded and thrown down his arms - nor were they to strip a prisoner of his clothes on pain of losing the prisoner. On the march - flinging away arms or deserting a comrade was punishable by death. Soldiers were forbidden from discharging any weapon until commanded by the Lord General or a superior officer. Finally - all prisoners were to be presented immediately to the authorities rather than concealed - and no man was permitted to engage in independent pillaging; all were required to wait for their official portion of any captured goods or victuals on pain of death. Interpretations Clean and sweet: A seventeenth-century term for maintaining hygiene and preventing the foul smells associated with disease - reflecting a basic understanding that a lack of cleanliness could decimate a garrison through sickness. Runnaway: A deserter. In a remote location like St Helena - being branded a runaway usually meant being hunted down across the interior of the Island or face execution upon capture. Pillaging: The unauthorised seizing of goods during or after a conflict. The Company insisted on controlling all “spoils of war” to ensure that the directors received their share and that the troops remained disciplined. Perhaps: The protection of “Landlords” suggests that many soldiers were billeted in the private homes of planters - a practice that probably led to significant tension between the civilian population and the military. Losing his prisoner: In this era - prisoners of war could sometimes be ransomed or used for labour. Losing a prisoner was a financial and strategic penalty for the soldier who acted with unnecessary cruelty. Lord Generall: The ultimate military authority on the Island - whose commands over the firing of weapons and the movement of troops were absolute under these laws. |
143 | 122 | Of the Duties of Commanders and officers in particular 1 All Commanders are strictly charged to be alwaies [...] 2 No officer or souldier of any Regiment whatsoever 3 Any officer that dare presume to defend the souldiers of their pay in 4 No person whatsoever that shall command the watch shall willingly 5 What officer soever shall command a Regiment or shall quarrell in 6 A souldier that shall be careless in the training and governing of his Company shall 7 No officer that shall stay from his post shall be punished at 8 All officers of what condition soever shall have power to punish 9 He that is chosen or appointed to the charge of any office | The military ordinances established a specific hierarchy of responsibility for those in command. All commanders were strictly charged to remain prepared and to ensure that all issued orders were duly observed. To prevent a recurrence of internal strife - no officer or soldier was permitted to engage in mutiny or form factions against the Lord General - the Governor - or any other appointed authority. Such actions were referred to the Marshall Courts for judgment. Protecting the welfare of the rank and file was also a priority. Any officer who dared to withhold or “defend” the soldiers from their rightful pay was to be punished. Furthermore - those commanding the watch were held personally responsible for the conduct of their men; any officer who willingly allowed a soldier to leave for a duel or private fight faced the penalty of death. The Lord General and the Marshall Courts maintained broad discretionary powers to punish disorders within the quarters. Any officer commanding a regiment who committed a disorder or engaged in a quarrel was subject to such discipline as the General thought fit. Similarly - negligence in the training and governing of a company was a punishable offence. Officers were strictly forbidden from staying away from their assigned posts - with the penalty for such absence left to the discretion of the Lord General. Perhaps: All officers - regardless of their specific rank - were empowered to punish any soldier for disorder in accordance with the established rules - provided they maintained the strictest discipline. Anyone appointed to a specific office or charge was required to be diligent in its execution and was forbidden from absenting himself from his duties upon pain of punishment. Interpretations Lord General: The supreme military commander whose authority over the garrison and the execution of martial law was absolute. Pay: The withholding of wages was a frequent cause of mutiny in seventeenth-century colonial garrisons - and these rules suggest the Company was keen to remove such grievances to ensure loyalty. Duel or private fight: Although duelling was a common practice among the officer class - the Company strictly prohibited it on St Helena to prevent the loss of skilled men and to maintain internal stability. Perhaps: The emphasis on officers being “careless in the training” suggests that the Company was concerned about the professional standards of the local militia and was determined to raise their combat readiness. Marshall Courts: These were the formal military tribunals responsible for interpreting these ordinances and delivering sentences - ensuring that justice was dispensed quickly without the need for civilian oversight. |
144 | 123 | As for the Army in time to a Generall Rendezvous no officer shall absent himself nor souldier inrolled without speciall leave of the Lord Generall nor from a Regiment without leave of the officer 11 No Captain or officer of a troope or Company shall suffer in musters such as are absent but shall cause the same to be duly noted and if any be found false musters or have pay for more men than he hath he shall suffer punishment according to the offence 12 No provost keeper or officer of Victualls or munition Timber or any other of the Kings goods shall imbezell or imbezell any part thereof or give or sell the same without order of the Generall or Superiour upon pain of Death The Duty of Muster Masters 1 No muster master shall muster willingly or suffer any person to be mustered as are not really of the troop or Company or present at the muster upon pain of Death 2 Lieutenants shall cause their troops to be full and complete and shall see that the souldiers be furnished according to the establishment and that no officer or souldier do absent himself at the time of the muster and that the rolls be truly taken and returned and that the names of all the souldiers be distinctly set down with their monthly pay 3 The Muster Master shall present to the Lord Generall and to the officers of the Army upon every pay day true lists of the troops and Companies and shall take care that the muster rolls be truly made and that no false names be inserted and that every souldier receive his due pay according to his service 4 Which souldiers shall be delivered unto any Captain or officer shall be inrolled but also be duly accounted for and the officers shall not detain any souldier that doth belong to another troop or Company but shall deliver him upon demand and that no souldier be detained in any Company longer than his time of service without order of the Generall 5 No Muster Master shall presume to receive any person into pay but such as are duly listed and approved according to order | The military ordinances established strict protocols for the assembly and accounting of the garrison. During a general rendezvous - no officer or enrolled soldier was permitted to absent himself without special leave from the Lord General or a superior officer. Captains and other officers were strictly forbidden from allowing absent men to be included in musters. Any officer found to have provided false muster rolls or to have received pay for more men than were actually in his service was subject to punishment according to the severity of the offence. Financial and material integrity was a primary concern. No provost keeper - officer of victuals - or individual in charge of ammunition or timber was permitted to embezzle any of the King’s goods. Giving or selling such items without an express order from the General was a capital crime punishable by death. Detailed duties were also outlined for Muster Masters to ensure the transparency of the military payroll. It was a death-eligible offence for a Muster Master to willingly muster any person who was not truly a member of the troop or present at the assembly. Lieutenants were required to ensure their troops were complete and fully furnished according to the establishment - ensuring no one was absent during the muster and that names and monthly pay were distinctly recorded. The Muster Master was further required to present true lists of the troops to the Lord General on every payday. This included ensuring that no false names were inserted and that every soldier received his due pay according to his service. Furthermore - officers were prohibited from detaining soldiers belonging to other companies or keeping men beyond their agreed time of service without an order from the General. No person could be received into the Company’s pay unless they had been duly listed and approved according to these standing orders. Interpretations General Rendezvous: A pre-planned assembly of the entire military force - used to verify readiness and ensure that all personnel were accounted for in one location. False musters: The fraudulent practice of listing non-existent or “paper” soldiers on a payroll to allow officers to pocket the extra wages - a common form of corruption in seventeenth-century armies. Embezzell: The theft or misappropriation of funds or property placed in one’s trust - which the Company viewed as a direct threat to the survival of the isolated St Helena colony. Perhaps: The death penalty for Muster Masters who allowed “false musters” suggests that the Company was as concerned with internal financial corruption as it was with armed rebellion. Monthly pay: The requirement for distinctly setting down pay reflects the transition toward a more professional and bureaucratically managed military force on the Island. |
145 | 124 | No man shall presume to spend himself to Ram[... ] Of Victuallers 1 No victualler shall presume to entice or draw unto any of the 2 No souldier or other person shall be a victualler without the consent of 3 No victualler shall take more upon any provisions than is set in books nor 4 No victualler shall forestall any victualls nor sell the same before Of Administration of Justice 1 All controversies between Souldiers their bills and all others shall be 2 All Souldiers whatsoever that shall offend or any offence within the 3 Every prisoner is committed to the charge of the Marshall 4 The goods of such as dye in the Army or garrison or be slayne in | The military ordinances established strict controls over the conduct of soldiers and the regulation of those providing essential supplies. It was a capital offence for any man to steal from a fellow soldier or to take unauthorised prize or plunder - a measure intended to maintain internal order and prevent the breakdown of discipline. Specific laws governed the conduct of victuallers - those responsible for providing food and drink to the garrison. No victualler was permitted to entice soldiers into debt or unauthorised consumption. Furthermore - no person was allowed to act as a victualler without the express consent of the Lord General or Governor. To prevent the exploitation of the troops - victuallers were forbidden from charging more than the prices set in official books or selling above market rates. The use of false weights or measures was strictly prohibited - as was the “forestalling” of victuals - which involved buying up goods before they reached the open market to artificially inflate prices. All provisions were required to be appraised by the Marshall General before they could be sold. The final section detailed the administration of military justice. All controversies and legal disputes between soldiers were to be heard and determined summarily by the Council of War. Any soldier committing an offence within the precincts of the army was to be apprehended and brought before the Marshall for punishment. A system of due process was established - requiring that information regarding a prisoner’s crime be provided to the Judge of the Army within two days of their commitment; failure to do so would result in the prisoner being set at liberty. Provisions were also made for the estates of those who died in service. The goods of any soldier who died or was slain were to be disposed of according to their written will - once proven in court. In cases where no will existed - the property was to pass to the soldier’s wife or next of kin - unless the General issued a specific order to the contrary. Interpretations Victualler: A civilian or soldier authorised to sell food - drink - and other basic necessities to the military - a role that was tightly regulated to prevent profiteering and drunkenness. Forestall: The illegal practice of intercepting goods on their way to market to buy them at a lower price and resell them at a higher one - which threatened the stability of the local food supply. Marshall Generall: The senior officer responsible for the maintenance of order - the oversight of military markets - and the custody of prisoners awaiting trial. Perhaps: The two-day limit for presenting charges against a prisoner suggests that the Company was eager to balance its absolute authority with a functional - if swift - system of justice to avoid accusations of arbitrary tyranny. Summary determination: A legal process where a case is decided immediately without a full and lengthy trial - allowing the Council of War to resolve disputes and issue punishments quickly to maintain garrison discipline. |
146 | 125 | No magistrate of Town or County shall without commission or warrant from the Generall [...] In matters of Debt or trespass or other inferior controversies [...] 7 No man shall presume in time of any mutiny or sedition 8 No inhabitants of any town or country shall presume to receive any 9 All Captains and souldiers shall be obedient and conformable to all 10 No man shall presume to rescue or attempt to rescue any prisoner 11 All other causes civil or criminal not otherwise determined in these articles [...] A true copy of the Articles | The final articles of the military ordinances regulated the interaction between the armed forces and the local civil administration. No magistrate of a town or county was permitted to act against the military without a specific commission or warrant from the General. In cases of debt - trespass - or other inferior controversies - the local authorities were required to acquaint the relevant Captain or chief officer with the matter. The officer was then obligated to send the soldier - along with the specific cause of complaint - to the Marshall General. If the soldier was found guilty - he was punished according to the quality of his offence - and notably - any officer who had neglected his duty in such a case was also subject to punishment. To maintain the absolute authority of the judicial process - it was a capital crime for any man to speak out or oppose the Court of Justice while it was in session during times of mutiny or sedition. The civilian population was also strictly regulated; no inhabitant of any town or country was permitted to receive - conceal - or harbour a soldier in his house. Instead - they were commanded to apprehend any such individual and deliver them to the Provost Marshall. All Captains and soldiers were required to be obedient and conformable to every order given to them - with a special emphasis placed on avoiding quarrels and disorders. Any attempt to rescue a prisoner from the custody of the Marshall or any other officer - or to hinder the execution of justice - was punishable by death. For any civil or criminal matters not explicitly covered by these articles - the judgment was referred to the General or the Council of War. Such cases were to be decided according to the established laws of arms and the customs of war - with punishments tailored to the nature of the offence. The document concludes with a formal certification that it is a true copy of the articles as examined by the authorities. Interpretations Marshall General: The high - ranking official responsible for overseeing the military’s legal system and ensuring that both soldiers and officers adhered to the articles of war. Law of armes: A body of customary international and military law that governed the conduct of soldiers and the administration of justice in garrisoned territories. Customes of war: The unwritten but widely accepted practices of seventeenth - century military life that provided a framework for solving disputes not covered by specific written ordinances. Perhaps: The requirement for civilians to hand over soldiers to the Provost Marshall suggests that the Company was determined to prevent any unsanctioned alliances between the planting population and the military garrison. Court of Justice: The formal sitting of the military tribunal - which required absolute silence and respect to project the power and stability of the Company’s government. |
147 | 126 | Our Governour & Councell London 3d August 1687 Gentlemen we have of late some informations that it would be 2 Concerning God is a matter of so high concern to us and therefore we do hereby 3 Mr Nicho[... ] for present we have only spent his own time and our 4 We must not hereafter dispense with any disorder suffered or maintained 5 We approve of what you have done in sending and would have you proceed to send 6 To be all duties and accounts and all engagements of debt committed by [...] | The directors wrote to the Governor and Council of St Helena on 3 August 1687 with instructions aimed at the general safety and moral reform of the Island. They emphasized the need to improve the conduct of all inhabitants and specifically ordered the maintenance and support of Protestant ministers who adhered to the established Church of England. Addressing matters of high concern - the Company required a total reformation of “disorder and prophaness” on the settlement. They commanded that prayers and religious services be performed according to English ecclesiastical standards. Regarding personnel - a Mr Nicholas was to be dismissed from service - as the directors noted his employment had resulted in significant expense with little profit or advantage to the Company. He was encouraged to resign his place and dispose of his talents elsewhere. The directors stated they would no longer dispense with any disorders that brought dishonour to God. They instructed the local government to punish profaneness - drunkenness - and other disorders using the same methods employed by His Majesty’s subjects in other territories. Those found guilty of such conduct - once discovered on the Island - were potentially to be sent to perform their service in India. Finally - the Company issued strict orders regarding financial accountability. They required that all debts and engagements committed by the inhabitants be accounted for. For the future - no letters of advice were to be sent from the Company without formal consent. All goods and provisions were to be carefully managed and disposed of according to order - with the expectation that accounts would be duly kept to prevent fraud or abuse. Interpretations Protestant ministers: The Company’s insistence on supporting specific clergy reflects the religious tensions of the era - ensuring that the Island remained aligned with the established Church of England rather than dissenting or Catholic factions. India: The threat of being sent to serve in India was a severe disciplinary measure - effectively transferring “disorderly” individuals from the relatively stable environment of St Helena to more dangerous or demanding Company outposts. Reformed: This term highlights the directors’ belief that moral discipline and religious conformity were essential foundations for a secure and profitable colony. Perhaps: The dismissal of Mr Nicholas for being a “little profit” indicates that the Company’s patience for underperforming officials was thin - probably due to the high costs of maintaining the remote settlement. Fraud or abuse: The recurring mention of financial oversight suggests that the directors remained suspicious of local officials - probably fearing that the distance from London allowed for the embezzlement of Company goods and provisions. |
148 | 127 | 7 All men at arrival wear the Kings badge and serve due respect to be 8 Our governours expence of powder we think is too much by halfe 9 Our governour is very much to blame in not doing his duty in signing 10 We require for the future that all goods of any kind whatsoever belonging 11 We have made the standing orders generally for the use and | The directors issued a firm reprimand regarding the management of the island’s resources and the conduct of the Governor. They mandated that at the arrival of ships - all men must wear the King’s badge - and that due respect be paid to this emblem by every vessel belonging to the Company. A significant portion of the dispatch focused on financial waste and lack of oversight. The directors noted that the Governor’s expenditure of gunpowder was excessive by half - dismissing his previous apologies as insufficient. They criticized the practice of charging Company funds for “foolish prodigality” and unauthorized maritime expenses - stating that such abuses had even extended to his own men of war without proper orders. The Governor was explicitly blamed for failing to sign or provide a clear account of money flowing into and out of the island. To rectify these failings - the Company required the submission of monthly accounts and receipts - a detailed report on the condition of the Company’s stock - and a certain and explicit explanation of all expenditures. They emphasized that the execution of the Governor’s trust required full transparency regarding all occurrences on the island to ensure such negligent practices did not continue. Furthermore - the directors ordered that all goods belonging to the King or the Company be delivered to a safe storehouse. A strict accounting was to be kept for all provisions to prevent waste or spoil. The letter concluded by reminding the Council of the “standing orders” established for the government of the Company - with the expectation that they would strictly conform to these rules without further breach. Interpretations The Kings badge: A symbol of royal authority worn by officials or soldiers to signify that the Company acted under the direct mandate and protection of the English Crown. Expence of powder: Gunpowder was a costly and vital commodity for defense; its “excessive” use for non-combat purposes - such as ceremonial salutes - was viewed by the directors as a waste of capital. Companys stock: This refers to the collective assets on the island - including livestock - grain - tools - and trade goods - which formed the basis of the settlement’s economic value. Perhaps: The repeated demand for “monthly accounts” suggests that the directors in London felt a profound loss of control over their remote governors and were attempting to rule through strict bureaucracy. Standing orders: The permanent set of rules and constitutional laws governing the Company’s overseas territories - intended to provide a stable legal framework that superseded the whims of individual governors. |
149 | 128 | We did very well in the assistance you gave to St Helena and affairs 14 We cannot approve what you have done in discouraging or discountenancing 15 We confirm all our orders to you for the maintaining Religion and 16 We have no more yet of the former letters from you nor to send 17 We would have Capt Holding to be removed for his negligence and 18 If any stranger shall resort to the Island of St Helena which you 19 If any servant or other person belonging to the Company shall desert | The directors acknowledged the successful assistance provided to St Helena - expressing their gratitude for the ship dispatched to aid in the island’s affairs. However - they voiced a stern disapproval of any actions that discouraged the settlement of the island. They required that all persons willing to inhabit St Helena be encouraged to settle under the Company’s protection - insisting that they be treated with friendliness and humanity to ensure the growth of the colony. The Company reaffirmed its orders regarding the maintenance of religion and good government. They demanded that these be duly observed and that all disorders be punished according to their demerits. Specifically - they required that ministers perform their duties and that the people frequently attend church to observe established religious practices. The directors noted that they had no further instructions for the moment but urged the Council to be vigilant in preventing any future abuses or irregularities. Regarding leadership - the directors ordered the removal of Captain Holding due to his negligence and the various disorders that occurred during his government. A more careful successor was to be appointed - though Holding was granted the liberty to answer any objections made against him. Finally - strict protocols were established for dealing with outsiders and deserters. Any strangers appearing on the island who were viewed with suspicion were to be discouraged from staying and treated with caution. Furthermore - any Company servant or person who deserted their service or attempted to leave the island without permission was to be apprehended and punished. The directors forbade anyone from harbouring or concealing such deserters - requiring all inhabitants to notify the appointed officers of any such offenders. Interpretations Friendliness and humanity: This phrase suggests that the directors - while strict - understood that the long-term survival of the island depended on a stable and willing civilian population rather than a purely oppressed one. Ministers: The repetition of religious duties indicates that the Company viewed the church as a necessary instrument of social control and a means to ensure the loyalty of the inhabitants. Negligence: The grounds for Captain Holding’s removal - reflecting the directors’ intolerance for governors who failed to maintain the strict standards of accounting and order demanded by the London office. Perhaps: The instruction to discourage “strangers” highlights the Company’s fear of foreign espionage - particularly from the Dutch or French - who might seek to use St Helena as a strategic base in the South Atlantic. Runaway servants: The strict laws against desertion and those who harboured deserters were intended to protect the Company’s investment in labour - which was often difficult and expensive to transport to the island. |
150 | 129 | We cannot write them to the Companys [...] 20 We have in all future [...] hereby strictly oblige our commanders 21 The Dutch at the Cape (as you may understand from the ships that have been 22 Our orders directed to you of the 26th of June 1686 in order 23 Upon perusal of your Councill book beginning from Sept 1686 we approve 24 Your banishing of Thomas [...] in Colesfield hath been | The directors issued specific instructions regarding the commercial and legal management of the island - particularly concerning the disposal of goods and the conduct of trade. They required that all sales of Company property be handled by appointed officers - with a full account of the delivery returned to the Company. Any remaining parts were to be held as a supply - with the resulting money distributed to the rightful proprietors. Furthermore - commanders were strictly obliged to ensure that goods intended for the home market were not sold at St Helena but were returned on the Company’s account. International trade relations were also addressed - specifically concerning the Dutch at the Cape. The directors noted that the Dutch had established a system for selling provisions and goods among themselves. Consequently - they required that no goods be sold to or received from the Dutch without timely notice to the Company. They emphasized that any trade with the Dutch Corporation would probably incur a 10% tax - which they wished to avoid. The directors reviewed the Council books from September 1686 and expressed their approval of the legal proceedings against certain individuals - including the trial of black sail women for matters of theft and murder. They commended the Council for sending those under suspicion to face the law for justice and for keeping a formal record of these actions. However - they noted a concern regarding the treatment of black servants - observing that while some had been whipped - there appeared to be a lack of care for the interests of their masters. The Company confirmed the banishment of Thomas [...] of Colesfield. They were satisfied that his punishment was deserved and ordered that he be removed from the Island permanently. Care was to be taken to ensure he did not return without a direct order - as his presence was deemed a threat to the safety of the inhabitants and the Company’s interests. Interpretations Proprietors: The legal owners or shareholders of the goods - to whom the profits of any local sales on St Helena were technically owed after the Company had taken its share. 10%: A specific customs duty or tax imposed by the Dutch East India Company (VOC) on foreign traders at the Cape of Good Hope - which the English Company sought to bypass to protect its margins. Black sail women: Perhaps a reference to female slaves or servants associated with the shipping industry or specific households - whose legal status and conduct were strictly monitored by the Council. Thomas [...] in Colesfield: A named individual whose banishment suggests he was a persistent source of local disorder - possibly a remnant of the earlier rebellions or a habitual offender against Company law. Perhaps: The mention of whipping “blacks” for their own offences rather than for the sake of their masters’ interests indicates that the Company viewed corporal punishment as a tool for general social discipline rather than just private property management. |
151 | 130 | On perusall of your Consultation book beginning the July 1686 we observe 26 We find that [...] you have made seeming satisfaction to be [...] by 27 The information of things by Fletcher We in our own names and 28 The want that our Governour gave us of your Letters in a satisfactory 29 We will account no whatsoever for the future to any person working at the Fort 30 In the account of last [...] and Mr [...] provisions from our Island and 31 At present we can [...] as we intend hereafter his Rigour | The directors expressed their dissatisfaction with several administrative and financial decisions recorded in the Council consultation books. They challenged a specific order that restricted an officer from allowing more than four pounds to the country - a measure they judged to be unwarranted. They commanded that this order be rectified immediately - as it appeared to offer no service to the Company and lacked any clear justification. Regarding matters of legal and financial trust - the directors noted a “seeming satisfaction” in the redress of monies by those in positions of authority. They reiterated that crimes should be punished for the public benefit and cautioned against the unauthorized disposal of the Company’s “Realty” or property. They also referenced information provided by an individual named Fletcher - suggesting that in cases of conviction - the Council should impose fines for the Company’s benefit - similar to the legal fashions and acts used in the Barbadoes. A significant portion of the dispatch focused on the Governor’s failure to provide a satisfactory account of revenues and the mounting expenses of the forts and island. The directors demanded that expenditures at the fort be reduced - particularly regarding the charging of provisions. For the future - they ordered that no person working at the fort should have unaccounted access to the stores. All items were to be tracked by weight and recorded by article - with strict instructions that no more be used than was strictly necessary. Goods issued to soldiers were to be delivered directly to the officers in charge - and no person was to be permitted to make unauthorized use of any provisions or Company goods. The directors also scrutinized the accounting of provisions used by specific individuals for Company service. They found the existing entries insufficient for a general account and stated their intention to wait for further information before taking a final position. The letter concluded with a warning against the neglect of duties. While the directors indicated they might apply more rigour in the future - they expected the Council to avoid any further “digression” and to ensure that all persons remained diligent in their service to the Corporation. Interpretations Alimented: A term referring to the provision of maintenance - food - or support - suggesting the directors were reviewing how certain individuals were being supported at the Company’s expense. Realty: A legal term for real estate or fixed property - indicating that the directors were protective of the Company’s land and buildings on St Helena against unauthorized sale or transfer. Barbadoes: The reference to the legal practices of the Caribbean colony suggests the directors looked to other established English plantations as models for fine-based justice and administrative order. Fletcher: An informant whose communications to the directors in London provided a separate perspective on the actions of the local government - potentially highlighting corruption or mismanagement. Perhaps: The insistence on accounting for stores “by weight” was probably a direct response to suspected theft or “skimming” by those tasked with distributing food and supplies to the garrison. Rigour: A clear signal that the directors intended to tighten their oversight - suggesting that the period of relative leniency for the Island’s administration was coming to an end. |
152 | 131 | It is now high time for us to come to a resolution with them and 33 Concerning the two men condemned and which we are present 34 The Armourer that you made agreement with for to work with you in | The directors addressed the sensitive issue of the property belonging to the executed rebels from the recent uprising. They cautioned the Governor against excessive leniency - quoting the adage “too much pity spoils a city” - and ordered that the personal estates of the executed men be formally confiscated. The Council was commanded to sell these goods and monies to the highest bidder for the Company’s profit. All such confiscations were to be fairly entered into the Company’s register - with the resulting rents and proceeds used for the common good and to settle the colony’s arrears. A compassionate but firm resolution was reached concerning two men currently under sentence of death. The directors decided to spare their lives - noting that their execution would leave their wives and children wholly dependent on the state. Instead - these men and their families were to be sent to England with the Majesty’s Fleet. The Company promised to provide for their subsistence upon arrival - preferring this over transporting them to foreign islands. Any youths amongst them who were willing to enter the Company’s service were permitted to remain or be disposed of for the colony’s benefit - provided the voyage was well-managed. The dispatch also confirmed the appointment of an armourer. The Council was instructed to ensure that he fulfilled his duties diligently - keeping himself ready to repair and supply all arms and ammunition. He was expected to be careful in his business to maintain the garrison’s readiness. Interpretations Too much pity spoils a city: A seventeenth-century proverb used here to remind the Governor that failing to punish treason with total asset forfeiture would only encourage future lawlessness. Confiscation: The legal seizure of a rebel’s property by the state - a standard punishment for treason intended to impoverish the families of those who challenged Company rule. Majesty’s Fleet: The involvement of Royal Navy vessels or officially commissioned Company ships suggests that the transport of high-profile prisoners and their families required significant security. Perhaps: The decision to bring the families to England rather than “transport them to foreign places” suggests the directors wanted to keep a close eye on the survivors of the rebellion to prevent them from becoming a nuisance elsewhere. Armourer: A highly skilled craftsman responsible for the maintenance of matchlocks - swords - and artillery - whose presence was vital for the defense of an isolated island where replacements were months away by sea. |
153 | 132 | We send you all the heads of what should be required and what you shall see to require of them if he brings in all the debts of the Company plantations and states what his farms do belong to be seized they have our special Debtor and accepted your authority to dispose of the same with all which we believe will discharge his debts as the Company might be in cash which he did several bills and instruments the said Election more especially without delay shall be carefully made and without and present interest of money and all other moveables 36 The house garden and plantations we would have you not to sell but rather see to let them for 7 years to Mr or whom nice a fine shall offer and those farms to be kept accordingly 37 The like we say to the Company plantations and the remaining demands of their Debts you shall give notice to Mr H[... ] himself shall still and not giving to let that be leased to one person such a tenant proper for it that is fit to pay for the rent and must be such as have means to pay a yearly rent to be in arrear if you shall not before to sell out our said plantations we will not absolutely enjoin but leave to your discretion provided you will take care that no part thereof be wasted or sold by your selves without good and proper security and bonds for the time we do intend and appoint you to send over account to us of the revenues and the persons that are to receive them allowing and to maintain such order as may best be for the good and security of the place that the revenues come duly in no proportions for selling of estates 38 And further we strictly forbid selling or dividing any part thereof belonging to the Company without our consent or leave in writing first had and obtained upon pain of some penalty or forfeiture or other punishment and that all persons concerned shall take notice thereof and that you do not at any time give way to any private advantage in the disposal of the same or disposing of the same 39 All moneys to be collected and received on that we send to you shall be safe and kept apart and that it may be remitted to us by such ships as shall be bound for England the freight and charges thereof and done care be made reasonable and that the moneys be accounted and delivered up to us in due time 40 The sugar is so very good that we cannot but take notice how much you improve it though we hear some great quantity is already spent yet there is a good store remaining and we require you to take care that the same be carefully preserved and improved and that you do not waste or dispose thereof but by our order and directions and that you send to us a particular account of the quantity of the same and what improvements you have made thereof and how much is remaining 41 We shall expect from you a full account of all your proceedings and what you have done in execution of these our orders and commands and that you do not omit any thing that may be for the good and welfare of the said Island and the Company’s affairs | The directors addressed the sensitive issue of the property belonging to the executed rebels from the recent uprising. They cautioned the Governor against excessive leniency - quoting the adage “too much pity spoils a city” - and ordered that the personal estates of the executed men be formally confiscated. The Council was commanded to sell these goods and monies to the highest bidder for the Company’s profit. All such confiscations were to be fairly entered into the Company’s register - with the resulting rents and proceeds used for the common good and to settle the colony’s arrears. A compassionate but firm resolution was reached concerning two men currently under sentence of death. The directors decided to spare their lives - noting that their execution would leave their wives and children wholly dependent on the state. Instead - these men and their families were to be sent to England with the Majesty’s Fleet. The Company promised to provide for their subsistence upon arrival - preferring this over transporting them to foreign islands. Any youths amongst them who were willing to enter the Company’s service were permitted to remain or be disposed of for the colony’s benefit - provided the voyage was well-managed. The dispatch also confirmed the appointment of an armourer. The Council was instructed to ensure that he fulfilled his duties diligently - keeping himself ready to repair and supply all arms and ammunition. He was expected to be careful in his business to maintain the garrison’s readiness. Interpretations Too much pity spoils a city: A seventeenth-century proverb used here to remind the Governor that failing to punish treason with total asset forfeiture would only encourage future lawlessness. Confiscation: The legal seizure of a rebel’s property by the state - a standard punishment for treason intended to impoverish the families of those who challenged Company rule. Majesty’s Fleet: The involvement of Royal Navy vessels or officially commissioned Company ships suggests that the transport of high-profile prisoners and their families required significant security. Perhaps: The decision to bring the families to England rather than “transport them to foreign places” suggests the directors wanted to keep a close eye on the survivors of the rebellion to prevent them from becoming a nuisance elsewhere. Armourer: A highly skilled craftsman responsible for the maintenance of matchlocks - swords - and artillery - whose presence was vital for the defense of an isolated island where replacements were months away by sea. |
154 | 133 | A board our ships because they shall have no incivilitys or 43 Our purpose is to serve the Islanders and to be reasonable with 45 And although we have permitted and qualified the Companys trading in order 48 If you find you want shipping to banish offenders to Bencoolen or 45 Your soldiers for service in Garrisons or other more of them 46 Some persons must buy the rest of the Companys goods and make 47 | The directors issued guidelines to manage the conduct of both the islanders and the Company’s personnel - particularly concerning trade and the removal of offenders. While the Company expressed a purpose to be reasonable with the inhabitants - strict boundaries were set for their interactions with visiting vessels. Islanders were generally permitted to go on board ships to purchase necessary items - but the directors forbade the presence of unauthorized “dealers” or the importation of slaves. To prevent disputes and protect the local economy - the Company’s own employees were prohibited from trading small goods or yarns in the marketplace - though they retained the freedom to trade for their own convenience on board ships. A clear policy was established for the removal of troublesome individuals. If offenders could not be conveniently held in prison without becoming a burden to the island or the Company - they were to be banished to Bencoolen or other parts of India. These individuals were to be transported at the Company’s expense and pressed into service under the local General or President - with the express condition that they were forever banished from St Helena. To ensure the general peace and security of the settlement - the Council was instructed to evaluate the necessity of the garrison and the potential for soldiers to do “mischief”. The directors granted the local government the authority to set reasonable prices on all goods brought to the island and to impose an annual rate or tax upon ships. This measure was intended to be implemented in a manner most convenient for the general benefit of the inhabitants. Finally - the directors proposed a system for the efficient distribution of Company goods. Appointed individuals were to purchase the remainder of the Company’s stores at set rates and resell them to the islanders at a profit. This profit was intended to defray the expenses of the island’s administration while ensuring a steady supply of necessities. Those appointed to this task were required to provide security and were held strictly accountable for the payment and delivery of all goods entrusted to them. **Interpretations** Bencoolen: A Company settlement on the coast of Sumatra - used here as a remote destination for the permanent exile of those deemed too dangerous or troublesome for St Helena. Forestall: Perhaps: The restriction on Company men trading in the local marketplace was intended to prevent them from using their position to buy up goods and resell them - a practice that often led to artificial shortages for the planters. Price regulation: The authority to set “reasonable” rates on imports and shipping suggests that the Company operated a controlled economy to prevent price gouging in such an isolated location. Security: A financial bond or guarantee provided by an official to ensure they would not embezzle the goods or funds they were appointed to manage. Banishment: This functioned as a middle ground between imprisonment and execution - effectively removing a disruptive element from the small island community while still extracting labour from them in another territory. |
155 | 134 | Give that forth for the future which we do in prosecution of your design 48 For the performance of which design we intend by you that 49 Our rice and corn is most of London where and monthly returns 50 We have had great complaints of Mr Poole going on board & Embezzling 51 We have the sailing up of such ships which our port may not only 52 We cannot omit that judgment that the price of bread we have found | The directors outlined a strategy to improve the island’s economy by ensuring that goods remained affordable for the inhabitants. They intended to import specific cloths and goods suited to local needs - aiming for moderate pricing to encourage larger returns of rice and other commodities. The goal was to create a system where the inhabitants could buy more from the Company - thereby increasing the overall volume of trade and monthly returns from shipping. A significant concern was raised regarding the conduct of Mr Poole - who was accused of going on board ships to embezzle seamen’s provisions at inflated prices. To prevent such abuses - the directors ordered that no seamen be permitted to sell goods or provisions on shore - nor should anyone from the island go on board ships without express leave. This restriction was intended to curtail unauthorized trade that bypassed Company oversight. The directors also saw an opportunity to capitalize on the island’s role as a safe harbour. By providing a secure port for ships to avoid storms - the Company hoped to facilitate the sale of fresh beef and mutton to visiting crews. They instructed that livestock be killed in the afternoon to ensure the meat was fresh for delivery - removing the need for ships’ crews to manage the slaughter themselves. Finally - the high price of bread was identified as a major discouragement to local trade. The Council was ordered to set a reasonable rate for bread and ensure a constant - wholesome supply. All bakers were obliged to produce good quality bread - and a strict inspection system was to be established to punish those who sold bad bread or charged excessive prices. Interpretations Embezzling: In this context - the unauthorized acquisition or diversion of ships’ stores for private sale or consumption - which undermined the Company’s monopoly. Fresh beef or mutton: Providing fresh meat was one of St Helena’s most vital services for ships on the long voyage from India - as it was essential for the health of sailors who had lived on salted provisions for months. Bakers: As the primary providers of a staple food - bakers were treated as public servants subject to strict government regulation regarding both the quality and cost of their product. Perhaps: The emphasis on making goods “cheap” suggests that the directors had realized that excessive prices were stifling the island’s development and that a higher volume of low-profit sales might be more sustainable. Wholesome: A legal requirement that food be fit for human consumption and free from adulteration - a common problem in seventeenth-century colonial outposts where supplies were often stretched thin. |
156 | 135 | Upon reading over our [...] and Consultation book from hence If any of the sold or the sons of English of 16 or 17 years of age are 55 We have read over our generall letter to you to St Helena and 55 If Mr [...] or any of the Commanders send families or any other persons 56 We send you inclosed Copy of Covenant added to our Charter by | The directors provided instructions for managing both the island’s trade and its population. They ordered the sale of specific stocks by the ship - suggesting that parcels of goods be prepared for Bencoolen and that the necessary provisions for the voyage be put on board. A significant focus was placed on the future of the island’s youth; the Council was permitted to recruit the sons of English inhabitants aged 16 or 17 as apprentices for the Company’s service. While the directors encouraged sending these young men to other Indian nations or Company outposts - they insisted that - apart from those deemed necessary for the island’s own use - no one should be sent away against their will. Reflecting on recent unrest - the directors reaffirmed their general letters and commands - stressing that these orders must remain in force and be strictly observed. They expressed a need for greater severity towards those who might be feared as a threat to the settlement. The neglect of previous management was blamed for allowing rebellious persons to cause prejudice to the Company - and the directors reiterated that such proceedings must be punished to prevent future harm. To foster a more stable and productive colony - the Company encouraged the settlement of white families. They instructed that any families or persons sent by commanders should not be refused but rather encouraged to settle and labour in their respective trades. The goal was to transform St Helena into a flourishing place through “Toleration and Freedom” in labour - with the English inhabitants properly trained and settled in good order. The dispatch concluded with the inclusion of a new covenant added to the Company’s charter. The Council was ordered to ensure that no other laws or offices were practised on the island beyond those authorised. They were strictly forbidden from allowing any unlawful or disorderly customs to take root - and they were tasked with ensuring that all inhabitants conformed to the government and lived peaceably together. Interpretations Apprentices: By binding young men to the Company at age 16 or 17 - the directors sought to create a loyal - locally-raised workforce that could be deployed across their various Eastern territories. White settlement: This reflects a deliberate policy to shift the island’s demographic towards a more permanent and “orderly” population of English families - who were seen as more reliable than a transient military garrison. Toleration and Freedom: In this seventeenth-century context - these terms usually referred to the freedom to pursue a trade or craft under the Company’s protection - provided the individual remained obedient to the established laws. Perhaps: The directors’ warning about “neglect” suggests they believed the previous administration’s lack of “diligence” had created an environment where rebellion could thrive - a mistake they were determined not to repeat. Covenant: A formal - solemn agreement or contract that bound the inhabitants of the island to the Company’s authority and the specific legal framework of its Royal Charter. |
157 | 136 | Whatever to give leave hereafter to any to go on board our Your demand [...] of allowance which hath is begun taken our All you now establish Councill consisting of the army officers and | The directors established a strict policy regarding the departure of personnel from the island. They ordered that no person should be granted leave to board ships for England unless they paid their own passage. This was particularly forbidden for those whose period of service had not yet expired - ensuring that individuals remained bound to their indentures on St Helena. Internal political shifts within the local government were also addressed. The directors expressed disapproval of past opposition from certain officers toward the established authority of Governor Smith and his associates. As a result - several officials - including a Mr [...] and Mr [...] - were dismissed from the Council - from the Company’s service - and from their salaries. This dismissal was immediate - and the directors appointed new members to the Council in their stead. Despite their removal from power - the former councillors were permitted to remain on the island if they chose - provided their presence was deemed safe and they maintained a standard of diligence and obedience. The new administrative structure for St Helena was to be heavily influenced by military oversight. The established Council was to consist of army officers - with a Captain present at all proceedings to assist in the management of the island. The directors mandated that no person - regardless of their status - should presume to act in matters relating to the island without a direct order from this newly constituted authority. All actions were to be conducted in a regular manner - strictly following the rules and orders of the Company. The directors emphasized that every person on the island must conform to these regulations - and they empowered the Council to punish any offenders who deviated from this prescribed order of government. Interpretations Indents: The formal contracts of indenture that legally bound workers or soldiers to the Company for a fixed number of years - preventing them from leaving the island prematurely. Council: The governing body of the island - which the directors were now restructuring to ensure it remained a loyal instrument of the Company’s will. Salary: The withdrawal of pay was used as a primary disciplinary tool against officials who were perceived as being in opposition to the Governor or the London directors. Perhaps: The requirement for an army officer to be present in all Council meetings indicates that the Company was transitioning toward a more overtly military form of government to ensure stability following the recent rebellions. Regular manner: A bureaucratic term used by the directors to demand that all legal and administrative actions be formally recorded and conducted according to standard operating procedures rather than local whim. |
158 | 137 | We say let by Lease only 20 Acres of fresh Land to a family because 60 The factors you intend to send we also appoint to be Assistant to our Council 62 Because Death or absence of our first Governour Robert Blakeway By Order we appoint you Your friends Governour etc Benj Bethell Deputy Govr Alex Nicols President | The directors established a new policy for land distribution - limiting leases to 20 acres of fresh land per family. They reasoned that a single man could better improve a smaller plot than a larger plantation. They also ordered that the condemned negroes formerly held by Mr [...] be put to labour with the Company’s own slaves - an action intended to benefit the settlement and the Company’s revenues. The management of property in the town within Rapparel Valley was also addressed. The directors required that these houses be taken into the Company’s hands - with the exception of the profits from the houses in Amelcon - which were to remain with their current holder to be improved. They noted that despite slow progress - the provision of negroes to the inhabitants was a significant step toward building a sustainable stock and a flourishing colony. The administrative structure was further refined by the appointment of factors and writers to assist the Council and the Deputy Governor. Following the death or absence of Robert Blakeway - the directors appointed Robert Holding as Governor. In the event of his absence - Thomas Rawlin or Mr Spencer were named as successors. The directors demanded that all members of the Council show respective diligence and provide a due inspection of the Company’s trade and affairs. The dispatch concluded with a formal commendation of the Governor and Council to the guidance and protection of Almighty God. The document was signed by Benjamin Bethell - the Deputy Governor - and a list of several prominent friends and officials of the Company - including John Moor - John Bence - and Thomas Frederick. Interpretations 20 Acres: This restriction on land size was a deliberate attempt to prevent the emergence of a powerful land-owning elite and to ensure that the island remained a collection of manageable - productive smallholdings. Rapparel Valley: A specific geographical location on St Helena where the Company sought to consolidate its control over urban housing and infrastructure. Negroes: The term used in the seventeenth century for enslaved people - whom the Company viewed as essential labour for the agricultural development and “improvement” of the island. Robert Holding: His appointment as Governor - following the dismissal mentioned in previous sections - suggests a complex shifting of alliances or a reinstatement based on the directors’ changing needs. Your very loving friend: A standard closing for official Company correspondence in this period - masking the often stern and demanding nature of the instructions sent from London to the South Atlantic. Perhaps: The detailed list of successors for the Governorship reflects the high mortality rate and the uncertainty of communication in the late 1600s - ensuring the Island would never be without a designated leader. |
159 | 138 | Our governour & councill There being two Right of Dollars in Edinburgh which were to be Yo: very loving friend Tho Rawlinson Fra: Field Governour | The directors issued a specific warrant to the Governor and Council of St Helena regarding the handling of two distinct sums of money - referred to as a Right of Dollars. One of these sums was to be delivered to Captain [...] of the Eagle Merchant for the use of the Company’s service. The Council was instructed to charge this amount to the Company’s general account as authorized by the warrant. The second sum was to remain with the Council for the specific purposes mentioned in the general letters sent by the same ship. This brief dispatch concludes with the formal signatures of the Governor and several prominent members of the Company - including Thomas Rawlinson - George Browne - and Matthew Mounteney. Interpretations Right of Dollars: A specific quantity or “lot” of Spanish silver dollars - the primary international currency used for maritime trade and the payment of garrison expenses in the seventeenth century. Eagle Merchant: A vessel in the service of the East India Company - likely requiring these funds for provisions - repairs - or trade as it continued its voyage. Warrant: A formal legal document that authorized the Governor to release Company funds - serving as his protection against accusations of embezzlement or unauthorized spending. Yo: very loving friend: A standard closing of the era - highlighting the polite but strictly hierarchical relationship between the London directors and their colonial officers. Perhaps: The mention of Edinburgh suggests that the Company’s financial networks extended into Scotland - or that these specific funds had been moved through Scottish financial channels before being sent to the South Atlantic. |
160 | 139 | Our Governour & Councill of St Helena Capt John Blackmore London Augst the 31: 1687 We have wrote you largely by this ship We shall compel no body to go thither but such notorious offenders And as if you can get men Your very loving friends Tho Hill Governour | The directors in London wrote once more to the Governor and Council of St Helena on 31 August 1687 to provide additional instructions following the arrival of letters and advice from the ship George. They expressed a firm commitment to reinforcing the island - aiming to make it both a useful and safe habitation for those in the Company’s service. To achieve this - they proposed providing for the necessities of those arriving on the island and encouraged the use of locations such as Random or Som Bay for the accommodation of large ships. A clear distinction was made regarding the population of the island. The directors stated they would not compel anyone to settle there - except for the notorious offenders mentioned in previous correspondence. However - they planned to send a constant number of men and provisions to encourage the existing inhabitants to stay and to prevent the desertion that had plagued the settlement in the past. The Council was urged to make the island as comfortable and secure as possible. Financial concerns remained a priority. The directors noted that the great expense of maintaining the island over the last two or three years must be defrayed by its own revenue. Consequently - they granted the Governor and Council full power to implement any means or provisions necessary to raise funds. They emphasized that St Helena was of great consequence to the kingdom and its prosperity. To assist with the labour and defence of the settlement - the directors authorised the use of 30 or 40 black persons - with the option to increase this number to 12 or 16 more as the occasion required. Some of these individuals were to be sent to St George’s Island to supply the garrison there - which was in great danger following the loss of a previous ship and its provisions. Finally - the directors encouraged the Council to hire men or board ships to transport fruit and other provisions to assist the island - all with the intent of fostering trade for the mutual benefit of the Company and the inhabitants. Interpretations Notorious offenders: This refers to individuals being forcibly transported to the island as a form of punishment - a practice the Company used to provide a base level of labour and population. Great consequence: The directors’ recognition of St Helena’s strategic value - not merely as a commercial outpost - but as a vital asset for the wider security and economic interests of the English kingdom. St George’s Island: A reference to another Company interest - probably in the Atlantic or near the African coast - where the garrison was struggling for subsistence due to maritime misfortune. Perhaps: The instruction to kill or transport “fruit and provisions” suggests that the directors were trying to diversify the island’s output to include perishables that could be sold to passing ships - reducing the colony’s dependence on London for food. Defrayed: The Company’s insistence that the island pay for its own upkeep indicates a shift toward a self-sustaining colonial model - likely necessitated by the high costs of the recent military reinforcements. |
161 | 140 | Our Chiefe of Bencoolen London the 31: August 1687 Since our former letter by this ship we have recd [...] The said Mr Lucas in his express hath wrote unto you some What concernes Mr Lucas we do assure you and all the Company that It is also we have told you before in our former letters that you should send There is St Helena one will be sufficient in regard plantation for which | The directors wrote to the Chief of Bencoolen on 31 August 1687 to introduce Mr Lucas - a man described as a famous Merchant Adventurer with extensive experience in global trade. The Company expressed their highest confidence in his abilities - directing the local officers to provide him with every assistance and to follow his expertise in the management of the settlement. The directors made it clear that Lucas was especially fitted for their service and that his measures for the good of Bencoolen should not be hindered or opposed. To bolster the security and development of the Bencoolen settlement - the directors ordered the Governor and Council of St Helena to send 200 servants to the station. Mr Lucas was given the authority to direct the fortification - defence - and transport necessary for the security of the place according to his own judgment. The Chief of Bencoolen was required to further all of Lucas’s designs and measures that might conduce to the safety and interest of the Company. The dispatch also reiterated the need for a steady supply of commodities. The directors commanded that goods be kept in readiness for the arrival of English ships and that all items previously ordered from England be provided. They also highlighted the importance of maintaining the health of the workmen during the construction and trade operations. Perhaps: The decision to transfer 200 servants from St Helena to Bencoolen suggests that the Company viewed the latter as a priority for immediate expansion - probably due to the lucrative pepper trade in Sumatra. Merchant Adventurer: This title indicates that Lucas was not merely a Company employee but a high-status trader with his own capital and a history of successful maritime ventures. Healthfulity: A term reflecting the Company’s constant struggle with the high mortality rates in tropical climates - acknowledging that the survival of skilled workmen was essential for the progress of the fortifications. Servants: These individuals - often a mix of indentured Europeans and enslaved people - formed the backbone of the Company’s labour force and were frequently moved between colonies to meet shifting strategic needs. Speed: The directors’ insistence on expediting the settlement and plantation at Bencoolen indicates a sense of urgency - perhaps to pre-empt rival European powers from establishing a stronger foothold in the region. |
162 | 141 | We have Desired Capt Harding (Who is an Ingenious man and whom we think Some of our Blacks that speak English in want of labour you may use and Capt Harding if he thinks fit he may be entrusted to negotiate for the use of the The Baye man having an Engine for distilling of water which if found By your last Advices from Bengala we think that we want a new Ship | The directors determined - based on recent advice from Bengal - that a new ship of sufficient burden was required for the station. They ordered that this vessel be well-fitted and dispatched with speed to serve the interests of both the government and the merchants. The directors expected the masters and mariners to be encouraged in their duties to ensure the ship and her lading were managed with diligence and returned home promptly. A detailed account of all proceedings - the state of trade - and the general condition of the place was requested in return. Interpretations Batavia: The headquarters of the Dutch East India Company (VOC) in the East Indies; maintaining “friendship” here was a strategic necessity to avoid conflict - despite the fierce commercial rivalry between the English and the Dutch. Distilling of water: This refers to an early mechanical attempt to purify or desalinate water - a critical technology for survival in tropical coastal settlements where fresh groundwater was often brackish or contaminated. Burthen: A traditional maritime term referring to the cargo capacity or tonnage of a ship - indicating that the directors wanted a vessel large enough to be economically viable for the long voyage. Perhaps: The emphasis on “English-speaking” blacks suggests that the Company valued effective communication for technical or supervisory tasks - distinguishing these individuals from newly arrived or non-English speaking labourers. Bengala: The Bengal region - which was becoming the most profitable trade hub for the Company; the need for a ship specifically for this route underscores the growing importance of the Indian textile and saltpetre trades. |
163 | 142 | We have appointed Capt John Harding to be of our Councill during Your loving friends Forrester Gregg young & friends Fra Field Governour Our Governour & Councill Since our last by this ship we understand by discourse with Your very loving friends | The directors formally appointed Captain John Harding to the Council for the duration of his stay at Bencoolen. He was tasked with assisting Mr Lucas in the management of the Company’s affairs and providing advice on matters of government. The directors reiterated their expectation of total obedience to Mr Lucas - who held the primary government of the place - and appointed Mr Thomas Turner as an additional assistant. They emphasized that all persons must prioritize the Company’s service and the safety of the settlement. A secondary instruction to the Governor and Council of St Helena revised previous orders concerning livestock. Having learned that Bencoolen already possessed a good supply of goats - the directors cancelled the shipment of those animals. Instead - they ordered that two hundred units of the best available rice be sent - along with two large hogs for breeding purposes. The Council was also directed to send seeds for yams - potatoes - and limes - or any other plants that might thrive in the Bencoolen climate. The directors expressed a renewed commitment to the preservation of Bencoolen - describing its strategic situation as being of “mighty concern to the Nation” if it could be successfully defended. They acknowledged that previous misfortunes and a lack of provisions had put the colony at great hazard - but they were now hopeful that - with the insights provided by Mr Lucas and the establishment of a regular supply of goods - the people would learn to live healthfully and remain on the island. This model of providing regular supplies and reinforcements was to be adopted across all the Company’s colonies to ensure their security and prosperity. Interpretations Goats: The cancellation of the goat shipment suggests a more refined understanding of the local ecology at Bencoolen - preventing the waste of space and resources on a commodity already available. Mighty concern: This phrase elevates the status of Bencoolen from a mere trading post to a vital national interest - reflecting the intense competition for the spice trade in the East Indies. Jamse: An archaic or phonetic spelling of yams - which - along with potatoes and limes - were essential for providing a varied diet and preventing scurvy among the European settlers and sailors. Perhaps: The directors’ mention of “new life” and their renewed hope for the colony indicate that earlier reports from Bencoolen may have been so discouraging that they had considered abandoning the settlement. Discourse with Heath: This highlights how the Company’s central planning in London relied heavily on the verbal testimonies of returning sea captains and factors to correct or update their official policies. |
164 | 143 | Our Governour & Councill London 7th Sept 1687 Since our former by this ship wee have recd from Mr Skegg advice Notwithstanding hee hath long since been our Express and will be dispatched This place is most convenient for you as to supply you with all And if any of you propose that are minded and desire to go thither This is all at the present but wee commend you to the guidance of the Your loving friends Fra Field Governour | The directors provided further administrative instructions on 7th September 1687 - appointing Mr Skegg to act as the Company’s Agent at Bencoolen in the absence of Mr Lucas. Recognising Skegg’s previous courage and service in India - the London office granted him full power to execute the Governor’s commands and ordered his admission to the Council at the Bencoolen fort. The directors urged the Council to show Skegg due respect and assistance - particularly in maintaining order and suppressing any irregular proceedings within the settlement. A primary theme of the dispatch was the survival of the Bencoolen station - which the directors understood could not subsist without regular supplies from St Helena. Consequently - the Governor and Council were commanded to use all diligence in sending whatever provisions they could spare - specifically rice - to maintain the people there. They noted that the careful management of this inter-colonial trade would probably result in great advantages for both the Company and the local officers. The directors also extended an invitation to any inhabitants of St Helena who wished to relocate and settle at Bencoolen. The Council was authorised to grant such persons leave to depart and to provide them with the necessary encouragement and subsistence for their resettlement. However - those who moved were strictly required to remain under the discipline of the Bencoolen government - behaving peaceably and obeying their superiors. The letter concluded with a traditional commendation to the guidance of the Almighty - signed by Governor Francis Field - Deputy Thomas Hill - and several other prominent members of the Company’s leadership. Interpretations Mr Skegg: An officer whose “known courage” likely referred to his participation in military actions or dangerous diplomatic missions in India - making him a trusted figure to lead a frontier outpost. Subsist: This term highlights the precarious nature of the Bencoolen settlement - which at this time was a vulnerable “factory” reliant on outside food sources due to the difficulty of local cultivation or hostile relations with the surrounding population. Irregular proceedings: A broad category of offences including private trade - mutiny - or the failure to follow the Company’s bureaucratic protocols - all of which the directors were keen to eliminate. Perhaps: The offer to let St Helena residents move to Bencoolen suggests that the directors were trying to balance the populations of their various territories - shifting people from the more established St Helena to the newer - more strategically vital Bencoolen. Fort at Bencoolen: Known as York Fort (and later replaced by the larger Fort Marlborough) - this defensive structure was the physical manifestation of the Company’s authority and the central point of governance in the region. |
165 | 144 | Our Governour & Councill London 23 Sept 1687 Application having bin made unto us by Mr Wm [...] Merchant and Inhabi[...] We remain Signed by order of the Governour Robt Blackborne Secr Vera Copia Examined Edw Rawdon | The directors in London informed the Governor and Council of St Helena on 23 September 1687 of an application made by Mr William [...], a merchant and inhabitant who had previously been employed in the Company’s affairs. He expressed a willingness to travel to Madeira to procure goods and arrange for their shipment to the island by the first available opportunity. Mr William [...] represented that he held a considerable stock of sugars and would be able to furnish the settlement with good quantities of this commodity at current market rates. He also offered to provide the Company with credit for these purchases - with payment to be settled according to an agreed manner and accounted for under the Bencoolen transportation funds. The dispatch was signed by order of the Governor and Company by Robert Blackborne - the Secretary - and the copy was verified and examined by Edward Rawdon. Interpretations Madeira: A Portuguese-governed island in the Atlantic that served as a vital victualling station for ships bound for the East Indies - providing wine - sugar - and fresh water. Considerable stock: This suggests that Mr William [...] was a merchant of significant independent means who was leveraging his private capital to assist the Company’s logistics while seeking a profit. Credit: An arrangement allowing the Company to receive essential goods immediately while deferring payment - a common necessity in a colonial economy where physical bullion or “Rights of Dollars” were often in short supply. Perhaps: The mention of Madeira as a source for sugar indicates that the Company was looking for reliable supply routes closer to St Helena than the more distant Caribbean or Indian plantations. Bencoolen transportation: This suggests that the costs for these provisions were being linked to the ongoing and expensive project of establishing the new settlement in Sumatra - showing how the Company’s Atlantic and East Indian interests were financially intertwined. |
166 | 145 | Our Governour & Councill London 25 Sept 1687 We are now to give answer to both yours of the 25th of May & 7th July & also Your further Discourse for St Helena and Bencoolen has for the publick Proceedings of Mr Black have been justified in the Bencoolen We approve of the order you made for the China trade to supply Bencoo You are to be very careful and circumspect in your trade and dealings We have also taken some care to make alterations in our former orders in We think not fit to make any alterations in the same and we expect We do not now think fit to give you any further instructions in this We shall also take care to supply you with such things as you shall And so we remain Your very loving friends | The directors in London wrote to the Governor and Council of St Helena on 25 September 1687 to provide a formal response to several dispatches received between May and December of the previous year. They expressed great encouragement regarding the public advancement and settlement of the revenue on the island - commending the local leadership for their care and prudence. The directors approved of the current methods of management - noting that these improvements to the government were necessary to ensure a greater supply and revenue for the Company’s benefit. The proceedings of Mr Black at Bencoolen were specifically justified - with the directors noting that he had behaved very well and served the interests of trade during his long tenure. The Council was instructed to treat him as a useful person - providing him with countenance - protection - and any necessary dispatch. Furthermore - the directors approved of the orders made to supply Bencoolen through the China trade. They confirmed the appointment of factors and other personnel for this service and directed the Council to continue using the established means to supply necessary provisions. A strict warning was issued for the Council to be circumspect in all trade and dealings - ensuring that no contracts or engagements were entered into unless they directly benefited the Company. The London office indicated that while some alterations had been made to former orders - they did not intend to issue further changes at this time. They expected the Council to adhere strictly to these directions - as the return on goods sent from England depended entirely on good order and management. All persons under the local government were required to behave in an orderly manner and remain obedient to commands. The directors concluded by promising to supply the island’s needs while demanding a full account of all proceedings and a continued effort to improve the Company’s trade. Interpretations Revenue: The directors remained focused on making the island self-sustaining - viewing the local government primarily as a mechanism for generating enough income to cover its own administrative and military costs. China trade: This refers to the growing importance of the “country trade” between various Asian ports - where goods from China were used to supply the Company’s newer settlements like Bencoolen - reducing the need for direct shipments from Europe. Countenance: A term meaning official support or moral encouragement - signifying that an officer like Mr Black had the full backing of the London board against any local detractors. Perhaps: The directors’ refusal to make further alterations to their orders suggests a desire for a period of stability after the recent administrative shake-ups and rebellions. Circumspect: The requirement for caution in contracts was probably a response to previous instances where local officials had entered into private or poorly negotiated deals that disadvantaged the Company. |
167 | 146 | This Ship from Yo: place is bound for Bombay which is now become We likewise order that if any of the condemned men whom we have sent We have been informed with some suspicions of sudden proceedings | The directors informed the Governor and Council of St Helena that the ship currently at the island was bound for Bombay - which had recently been established as the flourishing residence of the General and Council of India. As the seat of the Governor of the English Dominions in India - Bombay was rapidly becoming a central hub for trade and the residence of English merchants. To support the growing needs of the Bombay plantation - the directors requested that young enslaved men over the age of fourteen be sent from St Helena. They noted that such individuals were perhaps burdensome to the current inhabitants and suggested that - with their consent - they should be transported to Bombay. To encourage this - the Company offered to remit the freight costs and provide victuals for the voyage. The directors insisted that these men be well treated - paid their wages in due time - and granted their freedom after serving the agreed-upon period of labour. Furthermore - any of the condemned men previously sent to St Helena who wished to relocate to Bombay were granted liberty to do so - provided they remained obedient to the government there. Serious concerns were raised regarding the administration of St Helena. The directors had received reports of “sudden proceedings” and the appointment of persons lacking the skill or capacity for management. Some officials were accused of being negligent or guilty of abuses that were prejudicial to the Company’s interest. Consequently - the Council was ordered to remove such unfit persons and replace them with able individuals who would manage affairs with prudence and integrity. The directors demanded a full account of these changes to ensure the welfare of the colony. Interpretations Bombay: Acquired by the English Crown as part of Catherine of Braganza’s dowry and later leased to the Company - this port was probably seen as a more defensible and commercially viable headquarters than Surat. Burdensome: This phrasing suggests that St Helena was experiencing a temporary surplus of labour or that the cost of maintaining young enslaved men was exceeding the agricultural value they provided to the planters at that time. Freedom: The promise of manumission after a fixed term of service indicates that the Company was using a system of term-limited slavery or “indentured” bondage to incentivise relocation to the more dangerous Indian stations. English Dominions: A bold term reflecting the Company’s transition from a purely mercantile entity to a territorial power with sovereign-like authority over its Asian holdings. Abuses and miscarriages: These legalistic terms refer to corruption - the embezzlement of stores - or the failure to follow the strict procedural rules laid out in the Company’s standing orders. Perhaps: The directors’ suspicion of “sudden proceedings” suggests they feared that local factions were making impulsive legal or administrative decisions without waiting for the slow cycle of instructions from London. |
168 | 147 | And that if he have a quarell or difference in new England he may personally repair As soon as you receive this put Mr Skelton in such a station as you think he Our Governour is to keep himself close and all men officers and imployed Wee desire a strict watch to make some profitable productions upon that Island If you find any of the negroes that he can employ or some of such And so we conclude and rest Your loving friends | The directors addressed the status of the Governor - reaffirming his role as the Lord and Governor of the island. They mandated that all inhabitants - officers - and employees owe him absolute obedience - explicitly forbidding any disputes or swerving from his orders. Those who failed to observe their duty were to be cashiered immediately. The Governor was instructed to maintain a close watch over all charges - ensuring that every part of the island’s administration was managed to advance the interest of the Company and the public good. Regarding personnel - the Council was ordered to place Mr Skelton in a station where he might best serve. Described as a man well-versed in the Company’s affairs who had served well in the past - Skelton was to be trusted and included in consultations during emergencies or matters concerning the welfare of the settlement. The directors urged a spirit of confidence and unanimity among the leadership to prevent the advancement of the island from being slighted by internal injury or neglect. To recompense the Company for the financial prejudices sustained on St Helena - the directors called for the development of profitable productions. Specifically - they discussed the distillation of brandy and noted that proper materials had been sent to the island for this purpose. They required that this new industry be managed with strict diligence and that the persons employed therein remain subject to the government’s orders to avoid any actions prejudicial to the Company. The directors also provided instructions for the management of the enslaved population. Useful slaves were to be disposed within the plantations and provided with necessary subsistence - though they were to be kept under strict discipline. While the directors ordered that they not be misused or abused - they also commanded that any who attempted to abscond or run away be punished according to their demerits. The dispatch ended with a general call for all persons to behave orderly and remain obedient to their superiors. Interpretations Cashiered: A formal military and administrative term for a dishonourable dismissal from service - often involving the loss of all back-pay and benefits. Brandy: The attempt to produce spirits on the island was probably an effort to create a high-value export or to reduce the cost of importing alcohol for the garrison and visiting ships. Mr Skelton: His reappointment and the instruction to trust him suggest he was a “Company man” whose experience was needed to stabilize the local government after recent periods of mismanagement. Perhaps: The insistence that the Governor “keep himself close” might suggest a need for personal security or a more detached - authoritative style of leadership to command respect from a formerly rebellious population. Demerits: A legalistic way of describing offences or failures in duty - implying that punishments for the enslaved population were to be calibrated according to the severity of their “crimes” against the Company’s order. |
169 | 148 | Mr Bovice as you receive our instructions for his good reputation Martha Burton gives some complaints and complains of several things The means of doing good there we have now given you and we must We have also removed some persons from their employment for their We have also ordered that all goods and provisions be carefully We believe our Government is conscientious and hath no design but Mr Skelton must not write after the ships departure any letters We send you two proclamations of our pleasure And so we remain your loving friends | The directors commended Mr Bovice to the Council - noting his good reputation and charging him to maintain high standards of conduct during his service. He was strictly ordered to observe all Company directions and to avoid giving any cause for complaint. This emphasis on character suggests the directors were seeking to populate the administration with reliable men after recent periods of instability. A specific legal matter was addressed regarding Martha Burton - who had lodged formal complaints concerning property taken from her on St Helena. The directors commanded the Governor to restore what was rightfully hers and to ensure she was allowed to prosecute her claims without being wronged or injured. This instruction reflects the Company’s role as a judicial authority - ensuring that even individual inhabitants could - at least in theory - appeal to London for justice against local officials. The directors reiterated that they had provided the necessary means for the island’s improvement and expected the Council to use all diligence in their execution. They confirmed the removal of several persons from their employ due to “miscarriages” and replaced them with new officers who were expected to perform their duties with greater care. Strict oversight of goods and provisions was mandated to prevent waste or embezzlement - with the Council held accountable for a precise record of all Company property. The dispatch expressed full confidence in the conscientiousness of the current Government - asserting that it had no motive other than the service of the Company and the public good. To ensure unified communication - Mr Skelton was forbidden from writing any letters after a ship’s departure unless they were first approved by the Governor and Council. The directors concluded by sending two formal proclamations for the settlement of the island - which were to be publicly read and strictly enforced to ensure all persons conformed to the Company’s pleasure. Interpretations Martha Burton: Her ability to reach the London directors indicates that the “petition of grievances” was a functional - if slow - part of the seventeenth-century colonial legal system. Miscarriages: A term used here to describe failures in professional duty - ranging from simple incompetence to active corruption or the mismanagement of Company funds. Embezzlement: The directors remained deeply concerned about the “shrinkage” of stores - as the remote nature of St Helena made every barrel of flour or cask of beef a high-value asset prone to theft. Proclamations: Formal public announcements - often read aloud at the marketplace or church door - used to codify new laws or reinforce the Company’s authority over the inhabitants. Perhaps: The restriction on Mr Skelton’s private correspondence was probably intended to prevent “whistleblowing” or the sending of unofficial reports to London that might contradict the Governor’s official narrative. |
170 | 149 | upon any mans desire and tell you have what he professes may prove Agents being persons to us with a fidelity from you shall be We have had a complaint made to us by an inhabitant of St Helena If you meet with Robert [...] upon any of his returning ships We have in your former generall gave it to you and also instructions We remain your loving friends vera copia per me | The directors addressed the payment of wages for certain agents - noting a discrepancy in the salary of an individual dismissed from his post. They ordered that any outstanding money should be made good and accounted for - while cautioning the Council to ensure that all persons handled Company funds with accountability. They expressed specific doubt regarding the responsibility of a Mr [...] - whose financial reliability was questioned in relation to the Governor’s benefit. A significant complaint from a former inhabitant of St Helena - who had arrived in London from the Bay - was also resolved. The individual alleged that his provisions had been denied based on local practices that the directors claimed never to have authorised. They strictly forbade any interference with the planters’ liberty to manage their own provisions - except where previously directed. Furthermore - the Council was instructed to use the current ship to arrange for provisions to be sent to Bombay. The directors also provided instructions regarding Robert [...] - suggesting that if he were encountered on a returning ship - he should be treated with countenance and protected from injury - provided his behaviour remained appropriate. This implies that certain individuals - perhaps former rebels or those in official disfavour - were being monitored during their travels between colonies. The policy for returning vessels was clarified to ensure the efficiency of the Company’s maritime network. Commanders were ordered to touch at St Helena to refresh their crews and ships but were strictly prohibited from remaining any longer than necessary. Upon the first opportunity - and after receiving notice of any other departing vessels - they were to proceed directly to England. The directors mandated that no pretence should be used to delay these voyages - as the timely arrival of ships in London was a matter of vital concern for the management of the Company’s affairs. Interpretations The Bay: Likely a reference to the Bay of Bengal - indicating the extensive geographical reach of the individuals and complaints moving through the Company’s network to London. Salary: The meticulous attention to “two days salary” illustrates the directors’ granular oversight of colonial payrolls to prevent the misuse of funds by local officials. Perhaps: The instruction to not “get on any of the planters provisions” suggests the directors were trying to protect the smallholders from being exploited by the military garrison or the local government. Queen Mary: A reference to the reigning monarch of England - used here in the context of official declarations or the departure of the Royal fleet with which Company ships were expected to coordinate. John Vernon: The official who certified this document as a vera copia or true copy - ensuring that the legal weight of the directors’ commands was maintained during its transit to the South Atlantic. |
171 | 150 | Our Governour & Councell We have received an order from his Ma[jes]ties under his signe Manuel And thereupon we conceive you to be very cautious how you admit any Your loving friends vera copia per me | The directors wrote to the Governor and Council of St Helena in May 1689 to communicate royal instructions received under the King’s sign manual. These directions concerned the management of the island’s revenues - a matter the directors noted had previously lacked clear guidance. Although a warrant had been signed for the Company to proceed - the directors found the existing information regarding the revenue to be deficient and vague. Given the urgency of the international situation - the directors used this dispatch to issue a critical warning regarding the French Nation. The Council was instructed to be extremely cautious and to prevent the irruption of French ships into the island’s ports. They were ordered to stand upon their guard and to implement all necessary measures for the defence of St Helena against potential French attempts or actions. The Governor and Council were granted full authority to issue any orders they deemed fit for the performance of this defensive mandate. Additionally - the directors noted that a board had been designated for Bombay - for which a formal receipt was required to account for the associated monies. The document was certified as a true copy by John Vernon. Interpretations Sign Manual: The personal signature of the King - giving the enclosed instructions the highest possible legal and sovereign authority over the Company’s charter. French ships: This warning coincides with the beginning of the Nine Years’ War - during which England and France were at open conflict - making St Helena a primary target for French privateers or naval squadrons. Irruption: An archaic term for a sudden - violent entry or invasion - reflecting the directors’ fears of a surprise amphibious assault on the island’s fortifications. Perhaps: The directors’ complaint that the information on revenues was “deficient” suggests that local officials on St Helena may have been withholding financial data or failing to keep accurate ledgers during the transition of power in England. Bombay: The continued mention of Bombay in relation to St Helena’s finances shows that the island was functioning as a logistical and monetary clearing house for the Company’s Indian headquarters. |
172 | 151 | Our Governour and We hav recd his Ma[jes]ties warrant under the great seale of England Being we remaine Your loving Friends Vera copia John Vernon Benj: Bathurst Govr | The directors in London issued a severe command to the Governor and Council of St Helena on 18 May 1689 - acting upon a warrant under the Great Seal of England. This royal authority empowered the Company to use force of arms to seize any French vessel entering the island’s waters. The directors ordered that upon such a seizure - all goods found on board must be brought ashore - meticulously inventoried - and kept in safe custody. The Council was instructed to collect all bills of lading and maritime papers found on the captured ships. These documents were to be transmitted to the General Resident at Surat or to the authorities in Bombay to serve as legal evidence for proceedings against the vessels and to account for any damages. The directors emphasized the necessity of preventing any French ships - whether outward or homeward bound - from attempting any design against the island or its shipping. Any such seizures were to be reported to London by the first available opportunity. This dispatch - signed by Governor Benjamin Bathurst - Deputy Governor Josiah Child - and a large number of the Company’s committee members - marks a definitive shift toward open maritime warfare in the South Atlantic. The document was certified as a true copy by John Vernon. Interpretations Great Seal: The ultimate instrument of state power in England - signifying that the Company’s private war against French shipping was fully sanctioned by the English Crown. Bills of Lading: The legal documents detailing the cargo on a ship; in the context of naval warfare - these were essential for the Prize Courts to determine the value of captured goods. Force of arms: A direct instruction for the St Helena garrison to engage in combat - transitioning the island from a mere supply depot into a strategic military fortress. Surat: Though Bombay was the new administrative centre - Surat remained a critical trade hub and a location for the Company’s legal and maritime courts in India. Perhaps: The repetitive nature of the instructions regarding French ships in this dispatch reflects the extreme anxiety in London concerning the vulnerability of the East India trade during the outbreak of the war with France. Safe custody: This was a warning to the local officials not to plunder captured French ships for personal gain - but to ensure all “prize” goods were preserved for the Company’s profit. |
173 | 152 | Mr [...] Blackburn We have recd all yo[...] letters concerning being in the Should not suffer into any of your factories disorders concerning generally all We have as Blackburn concerning people as we have sent and think you will You are to keep him clean and to pay him well but under You must be very nimble in securing our stores to see that all You remember you may some years past very much import Mr Beale Your very affectionate friends Vera copia | The directors wrote to Mr Blackburn on 20 February 1688 to address several matters of estate - security - and personal conduct within the Company’s service. They noted that the effects of a certain voyage had not been manifested as expected - leading them to doubt that much good could come from the matter. Consequently - they ordered that no further action be taken regarding the estate and money of the person in question - except as required by the Company. They emphasized that all property in the Company’s possession must be retained and not aliened - as it belonged to the Company’s side. A strong warning was issued against the breakdown of order within the factories. The directors demanded that the Company’s subjects and his Majesty’s interests not suffer from any disorders in St Helena - Bombay - or Fort St George. They specifically forbade anyone from assuming authority without a proper warrant from the directors - insisting that all public dispositions and transactions be strictly accounted for. Regarding a specific individual in the Company’s care - likely a subordinate or a person of concern - the directors ordered that he be kept clean and paid well. However - he was to remain under strict inspection. If he could not refrain from improper behaviour - the directors suggested that his removal might be necessary. Security of the Company’s assets was a primary focus. The directors ordered the administration to be “nimble” in securing stores and ensuring that all arms were properly guarded on all sides to prevent theft. They also instructed that the general packet of correspondence be directed personally to the leadership - or to the Company’s designated successors in case of death. Finally - they recalled the case of Mr Beale from several years prior - believing him to be in possession of significant Company stock. They ordered that care be taken to assist in the recovery or disposal of these assets as the Company’s interests required. Interpretations Aliened: A legal term meaning to transfer the ownership of property to another; the directors were strictly forbidding the private sale or gift of Company assets. Fort St George: The Company’s fortified headquarters in Madras (now Chennai) - which alongside Bombay and St Helena formed the strategic triangle of English power in the 1680s. Nimble: An unusual choice of word in official correspondence - perhaps reflecting the directors’ urgency in protecting weapons and bullion from internal theft or external raid. Under inspection: This suggests a form of supervised service or house arrest for individuals who were useful to the Company but considered a liability due to their personal habits or character. Warrant at the bottom: A requirement that every official act be backed by a written document signed by the directors in London - serving as the only legitimate source of power in the colonies. |
174 | 153 | The Wright Worshipp Sr John Blackmore of the As I am concerned of the John and money to the bearer of Watter - lb: 10: 2: 6 Then his touching at you on his last homeward bound voyage Your very loving Friend Horsseller Fringkheim Vera copia John Vernon | Horsseller Fringkheim wrote to Governor John Blackmore and the Council of St Helena on 11 October 1688 regarding a financial matter involving the bearer of the letter. Fringkheim - who had formerly held charge of certain shipmen - requested that the Governor show kindness to this individual despite any previous misfortunes or minor service issues. The correspondence included a specific accounting of costs related to water - anchorage - and boat hire - totalling £30 7s 6s. The letter addressed a dispute over payments stemming from a previous homeward voyage. Fringkheim noted that the individual had touched at the island - perhaps causing some offence to the Company - but explained that the delay in settling accounts was due to unfulfilled expectations of funds from the Bay. Fringkheim pleaded with the Governor to consider the man’s circumstances and pay whatever was due to him - provided no significant reason existed to the contrary. Fringkheim concluded by expressing his respect for the Honorable Company and offering prayers for a prosperous issue to the island’s new affairs. The document was certified as a true copy by John Vernon. Interpretations John Blackmore: The Governor of St Helena at the time - to whom the directors often looked for the strict enforcement of Company discipline and the collection of debts. Water and Anchorage: Standard maritime fees charged to ships for the right to use the island’s resources; the specific listing of these costs indicates a formal attempt to resolve a private debt through the Governor’s office. The Bay: Likely the Bay of Bengal; the mention of expecting money from there reflects the interconnected nature of private and Company trade - where a merchant’s liquidity often depended on the arrival of ships from India. Perhaps: The individual’s “misfortune” or “offence” may have been a breach of maritime protocol or a failure to pay the required port fees - which Fringkheim was attempting to mitigate through this character reference. Prosperous issue: A polite closing phrase common in seventeenth-century letters - wishing the Governor success in navigating the political and economic challenges facing the settlement. |
175 | 154 | Blank page | |
176 | 155 | The East India Companies Charter granted by the Kings Charles the Second by the Grace of God King of England Scotland [...] | The Royal Charter granted by King Charles II on 3 April 1661 reaffirmed and expanded the legal foundations of the Governor and Company of Merchants of London trading to the East Indies. This document established the Company as a body corporate and politic - granting it perpetual succession and the authority to use a common seal. Through this charter - the Company was empowered to purchase and grant land - to plead in all courts - and to establish its own laws and ordinances for the governance of its factors - servants - and merchants. The King granted the Company extraordinary powers to secure its commercial interests - including the right to impose fines and punishments on offenders under its jurisdiction. Crucially - the charter authorized the Company to make war or peace with any non-Christian prince or people within its trade regions. It also provided the legal right to erect forts - establish factories - and plant colonies. To encourage the growth of these settlements - the Company was permitted to transport willing subjects - grant them land and immunities - and even coin its own money. Acknowledging that certain inconveniences had arisen in the execution of previous grants - Charles II intended this charter to provide a remedy by confirming and enlarging the Company’s authorities. These further powers were granted to better manage the trade - encourage those who adventured their capital or persons in the East Indies - and ensure the secure defence and improvement of the Company’s vast maritime and territorial interests. Interpretations Body Corporate and Politique: A legal status that allowed the Company to act as a single person in the eyes of the law - enabling it to own property and enter into contracts that survived the death of individual members. Non-Christian: This specific distinction in the charter provided the legal justification for the Company to use military force and sovereign diplomacy in Asia and Africa without the direct oversight of the English Parliament or Crown. Letters Pattents: The formal written instruments from the Monarch that granted the Company its monopoly on trade - which were frequently challenged by “interlopers” or private merchants. Coin money: The right to mint currency was a high sovereign privilege - allowing the Company to create a medium of exchange - such as the silver fanams or rupees - tailored for local trade in its various factories. Common Seale: The physical stamp used to validate official documents; it represented the collective authority of the Company and made its orders legally binding across its global jurisdictions. Perhaps: The mention of “sundry Charters” refers back to the original Elizabethan grant of 1600 - showing that the 1661 document was a modern restatement of Company power intended to reflect the Restoration of the Monarchy. |
177 | 156 | [...] acting in such manner and forme as is proposed of this And we further of our speciall grace certain knowledge and mere motion And we further will and grant by these presents for us our heires and | The charter established that the Governor and Company of Merchants of London trading into the East Indies - along with their successors - were granted the legal capacity to purchase - possess - and dispose of lands - tenements - and goods within the realm of England and its territories. This authority was to be exercised through a common seal - which served as the permanent mark of the corporation’s collective identity. The directors were empowered to manage all profits and benefits arising from their trade - with the freedom to conduct traffic to and from the East Indies as they deemed expedient. The internal governance of the Company was structured around a Governor and a committee of members. These individuals held the direction of all voyages - including the provision of shipping and the management of merchandise. They were granted the exclusive right to order and dispose of the Company’s business affairs - ensuring that no other company could legally trade within the same jurisdiction. This monopoly was intended to be perpetual - providing a stable framework for long-term commercial planning. Furthermore - the King granted the Company full power and authority to nominate and appoint the governors and officers necessary for the ordering of its plantations and trade. This included the right to draft laws - ordinances - and constitutions to maintain good government among its employees. To enforce these rules - the Company was authorised to impose reasonable fines - penalties - and punishments upon offenders. These extensive liberties and immunities were confirmed as permanent rights - intended to secure the Company’s dominance and the orderly administration of its growing colonial interests. Interpretations Common Seale: This physical object was the legal signature of the Company; any contract or order stamped with it carried the full weight of the corporation’s authority - regardless of which individual directors were in office. Committee: This body - which later evolved into the Court of Directors - was the executive heart of the Company - responsible for the minute details of logistics - finance - and personnel management across the globe. Traffique: An older term for trade and commerce; its use here highlights the Company’s primary purpose as a maritime entity focused on the exchange of goods between distant markets. Perhaps: The insistence that “no other Company whatsoever” should have power to trade reflects the Crown’s desire to prevent domestic competition - which was seen as damaging to national interests and the stability of the spice and textile markets. Body of good health: This requirement for those purchasing land or holding office suggests a preference for robust - capable individuals who could withstand the rigours of seventeenth-century administration and the long voyages required by the service. |
178 | 157 | Item Committies shall be chosen in form hereafter expressed | The charter established that the Governor and Company of Merchants of London trading into the East Indies - along with their successors - were granted the legal capacity to purchase - possess - and dispose of lands - tenements - and goods within the realm of England and its territories. This authority was to be exercised through a common seal - which served as the permanent mark of the corporation’s collective identity. The directors were empowered to manage all profits and benefits arising from their trade - with the freedom to conduct traffic to and from the East Indies as they deemed expedient. The internal governance of the Company was structured around a Governor and a committee of members. These individuals held the direction of all voyages - including the provision of shipping and the management of merchandise. They were granted the exclusive right to order and dispose of the Company’s business affairs - ensuring that no other company could legally trade within the same jurisdiction. This monopoly was intended to be perpetual - providing a stable framework for long-term commercial planning. Furthermore - the King granted the Company full power and authority to nominate and appoint the governors and officers necessary for the ordering of its plantations and trade. This included the right to draft laws - ordinances - and constitutions to maintain good government among its employees. To enforce these rules - the Company was authorised to impose reasonable fines - penalties - and punishments upon offenders. These extensive liberties and immunities were confirmed as permanent rights - intended to secure the Company’s dominance and the orderly administration of its growing colonial interests. Interpretations Common Seale: This physical object was the legal signature of the Company; any contract or order stamped with it carried the full weight of the corporation’s authority - regardless of which individual directors were in office. Committee: This body - which later evolved into the Court of Directors - was the executive heart of the Company - responsible for the minute details of logistics - finance - and personnel management across the globe. Traffique: An older term for trade and commerce; its use here highlights the Company’s primary purpose as a maritime entity focused on the exchange of goods between distant markets. Perhaps: The insistence that “no other Company whatsoever” should have power to trade reflects the Crown’s desire to prevent domestic competition - which was seen as damaging to national interests and the stability of the spice and textile markets. Body of good health: This requirement for those purchasing land or holding office suggests a preference for robust - capable individuals who could withstand the rigours of seventeenth-century administration and the long voyages required by the service. Interpretations The charter established that the Governor and Company of Merchants of London trading into the East Indies - along with their successors - were granted the legal capacity to purchase - possess - and dispose of lands - tenements - and goods within the realm of England and its territories. This authority was to be exercised through a common seal - which served as the permanent mark of the corporation’s collective identity. The directors were empowered to manage all profits and benefits arising from their trade - with the freedom to conduct traffic to and from the East Indies as they deemed expedient. The internal governance of the Company was structured around a Governor and a committee of members. These individuals held the direction of all voyages - including the provision of shipping and the management of merchandise. They were granted the exclusive right to order and dispose of the Company’s business affairs - ensuring that no other company could legally trade within the same jurisdiction. This monopoly was intended to be perpetual - providing a stable framework for long-term commercial planning. Furthermore - the King granted the Company full power and authority to nominate and appoint the governors and officers necessary for the ordering of its plantations and trade. This included the right to draft laws - ordinances - and constitutions to maintain good government among its employees. To enforce these rules - the Company was authorised to impose reasonable fines - penalties - and punishments upon offenders. These extensive liberties and immunities were confirmed as permanent rights - intended to secure the Company’s dominance and the orderly administration of its growing colonial interests. Interpretations Common Seale: This physical object was the legal signature of the Company; any contract or order stamped with it carried the full weight of the corporation’s authority - regardless of which individual directors were in office. Committee: This body - which later evolved into the Court of Directors - was the executive heart of the Company - responsible for the minute details of logistics - finance - and personnel management across the globe. Traffique: An older term for trade and commerce; its use here highlights the Company’s primary purpose as a maritime entity focused on the exchange of goods between distant markets. Perhaps: The insistence that “no other Company whatsoever” should have power to trade reflects the Crown’s desire to prevent domestic competition - which was seen as damaging to national interests and the stability of the spice and textile markets. Body of good health: This requirement for those purchasing land or holding office suggests a preference for robust - capable individuals who could withstand the rigours of seventeenth-century administration and the long voyages required by the service. |
179 | 158 | [...] part of them in any publique Court to be held | The charter provided that the Governor - or in his absence the Deputy Governor - alongside the general body of the Company - held the authority to meet annually between the tenth and the last day of April. During these sessions - the members were required to elect twenty-four individuals from the Company to serve as the Committees for the ensuing year. These elected officials were tasked with the direct management of the Company’s trade and affairs - but they were strictly forbidden from executing their office until they had taken a corporal oath of fidelity. This oath - administered by the Governor or his Deputy in the presence of at least five other committee members - bound the individuals to perform their duties well and faithfully in all matters concerning the Company. Upon the completion of this formal swearing-in - the twenty-four committees were empowered to exercise their offices for a full year. The charter ensured that the governance of the trade remained a structured and legally binding process - with clear requirements for both the election and the qualification of those in power. The document also established the Company’s right to remove a Governor from office at their pleasure. If a Governor were to die or be removed within his year of service - the greater part of the Company was authorised to proceed with a new nomination. This provision ensured that the leadership remained accountable to the merchant body and that any vacancy in the highest office could be probably filled to maintain the stability of the Company’s global interests. Interpretations Twenty four: This specific number of committees - later known as the Court of Directors - created a broad enough body to handle diverse commercial tasks while remaining small enough for effective decision-making. Removable at the pleasure: This clause granted the shareholders a significant degree of control - ensuring that a Governor who acted against the Company’s interests could be legally dismissed before his term ended. April: The timing of these committee elections - occurring in the spring - allowed the Company to set its leadership and strategy just as the primary trading season for the East Indies was beginning. Perhaps: The requirement for five or more committee members to witness the oath was a safeguard against secret or fraudulent appointments - ensuring that the leadership transition was a public and verified event. Reasonable manner: This phrase suggests that while the Company held vast powers - its internal rules and the admission of new members to “Trade or Traffique” were expected to follow established - fair - and documented protocols. |
180 | 159 | Within convenient time after the Death or [...] | The charter established the procedures for filling mid-term vacancies within the leadership to ensure the continuous governance of the Company. Should the Governor die or be removed from office - the members were required to assemble within a convenient time to elect a successor. This new Governor was to be chosen from among the Company and - after taking the corporal oath - would serve for the remainder of the original term. The text emphasized that this process must be completed before the members departed from the place of election - ensuring that the office was never left vacant. Similar rules applied to the twenty-four Committees who managed the daily affairs of the trade. The charter granted the Governor and the Company the power to remove any Committee member at their pleasure - provided the Governor or his Deputy was present for such a decision. In the event of a death or removal - a meeting was to be convened at the usual place of assembly or another location appointed by the Governor. Those present were then authorised to nominate and elect one or more new members to fill the vacancies. These replacement Committees were required to be members of the Company and were expected to take the same oaths of office as their predecessors. By codifying these specific steps for both the Governor and the Committees - the charter provided a stable mechanism for resolving internal disruptions - ensuring that the administrative and commercial interests of the East India trade remained under constant and legal supervision. Interpretations Residue of the said year: This term ensured that a replacement Governor did not start a new full-year term but merely completed the tenure of the person they replaced - maintaining the established annual election cycle in September or April. Before their departure: This strict requirement was likely designed to prevent political stalling or factional disputes - forcing the Company to reach a consensus and appoint a leader immediately upon the occurrence of a vacancy. At the pleasures: The inclusion of this phrase regarding the Committees reinforced the ultimate authority of the Governor and the general body of shareholders - allowing them to purge ineffective or untrustworthy directors without waiting for an annual vote. Convenient place: While the Company eventually established permanent headquarters at East India House - the charter allowed for flexibility in where these emergency meetings could be held - provided they were officially sanctioned by the Governor or his Deputy. Perhaps: The repetition of the requirement for a “Corporall Oath” even for those serving only a partial year underscores the high value placed on religious and legal accountability as the primary bond holding the corporate body together. |
181 | 160 | [...] this to be done from time to time so often as the Case | The charter confirmed the vast geographical scope of the Company’s monopoly - granting it and its successors the exclusive right to trade across the seas from the Cape of Good Hope (Bona Esperanza) to the Straits of Magellan. This enormous territory - spanning parts of Asia - Africa - and America - was reserved for the Company’s merchants - apprentices - factors - and servants. They were authorised to trade in any wares or merchandise already discovered or those yet to be found - provided their activities were conducted according to the orders and conditions established at the Company’s public assemblies. A critical provision of this grant was the protection of the Company from internal and external interference. The King declared that this trade should proceed without molestation or disturbance - regardless of any existing statutes - decrees - or religious differences. Furthermore - the charter asserted that no Christian prince or state in league with England should have the authority to disturb the Company’s commerce. If any such power refused to acknowledge these trading rights or actively sought to deceive or oppose English vessels - the Company was empowered to defend its interests. The Governor or his Deputy was required to be present at every assembly where these trading rules were limited or agreed upon - ensuring that the leadership maintained direct control over the “Fellowship” of merchants. This legal framework was intended to create a secure - state-sanctioned environment where the Company could pursue its commercial goals without fear of legal challenge from rival English subjects or diplomatic interference from European neighbours. Interpretations Cape of Bona Esperanza to the Streights of Magellan: This defined the entire Indian and Pacific Ocean basins as an English commercial preserve - effectively claiming half the globe for a single London-based corporation. Apprentices: The inclusion of apprentices in the charter shows that the Company was viewed as a traditional guild structure - where young men were trained in the “art” of East India merchantry through years of bonded service. Creeks and Havens: These specific terms indicate that the Company’s rights extended beyond major ports to any small inlet or natural harbour - preventing rivals from finding “back-door” routes into protected markets. Perhaps: The mention of “Religion or Faith” as something that should not stay the Company’s trade suggests the Crown was prioritising commercial expansion over the religious conflicts that often hindered European diplomacy in the seventeenth century. Molestation: In this legal context - the word refers to any act of harassment - seizure - or interference with ships and goods - whether by pirates - rival merchants - or foreign navies. Interpretations |
182 | 161 | And Company and their Successors from time to time and at all | The charter confirmed the Company’s legislative and judicial independence - granting the Governor and the majority of the assembly the right to hold courts for the management of their global affairs. These courts - which required the presence of either the Governor or his Deputy - were empowered to make - ordain - and constitute reasonable laws and ordinances. The leadership also held the authority to alter or abrogate these rules at their pleasure as circumstances required. To ensure the observation of these laws - the Company was granted the power to inflict pains - penalties - and punishments upon any offenders. This included the right to levy fines and amerciaments through their own officers and servants. Significantly - the King declared that all such collected funds belonged solely to the Company and its successors - without the need to provide any account to the Crown or fear impeachment from any government official. All ordinances were to be strictly observed - provided they remained reasonable and not repugnant to the existing statutes and customs of the Realm of England. The document further addressed the matter of royal revenues - specifically the customs and subsidies due on goods returned from the East Indies to the Port of London or its various members and creeks. The King granted that the customers and other officers of the ports should recognize the Company’s specific rights and privileges regarding these duties. This provision was likely intended to streamline the massive influx of spices - textiles - and other merchandise - ensuring that the Company’s trade was not hindered by the overreach of domestic tax collectors. Interpretations Amerciaments: A legal term for financial penalties or mercies imposed at the discretion of a court - as opposed to fixed statutory fines. Not Contrary or repugnant: This crucial legal limit ensured that while the Company could govern its own affairs - it could not create laws that fundamentally contradicted the common law of England. Impeachment: In this context - the word refers to an accusation or legal challenge brought by the Crown’s officers against the Company’s right to keep the fines it collected. Perhaps: The right to keep fines without accounting to the King was a rare and lucrative privilege - effectively making the Company a self-funding judicial entity in its own territories. Customers: These were the royal officials responsible for collecting “customs” or taxes on imported goods; the charter sought to define their relationship with the Company to prevent administrative friction. |
183 | 162 | Their Agents factors or Assigns Six months time for the payment of | The charter established a structured credit system for the payment of customs and subsidies on goods imported by the Company. The King granted the Governor and Company - or their agents and factors - a total of twelve months to settle their duties. The first half of the payment was due six months after arrival - with the remaining half due after another six months. To secure these payments - the Company was required to provide sufficient bonds with sureties to the Crown. Upon the receipt of such security - the port officials were commanded to allow the immediate discharge of goods without any further disturbance. A significant provision was included to protect the Company against the loss of exported goods at sea. If merchandise laden at the Port of London or its members should miscarry or be lost before reaching its destination - the Company was entitled to a refund or allowance for the customs already paid. This required due proof of the loss to be presented before the Treasurer of the Realm or the relevant customs officers. Once verified - a warrant would be issued to ensure the Company did not suffer a double financial loss on destroyed shipments. Furthermore - the King acknowledged that the Company was capable of importing a far greater quantity of foreign commodities than could be consumed within England. To encourage this surplus trade - a special re-export provision was granted. For a period of three years following the initial discharge of foreign goods - the Company was permitted to relade and ship any unsold items out of the realm to other countries. As long as the initial duties had been paid or compounded - these re-exported goods were exempt from any further customs or poundage. This policy was designed to turn London into a global entrepôt for Eastern wares. Interpretations Surety: A legal guarantee provided by a third party to ensure that the Company would meet its financial obligations to the Crown. Entrepôt: Although not explicitly named - the three-year re-export rule effectively turned England into a middleman for European trade - allowing the Company to dominate the distribution of spices and silks across the continent. Poundage: A specific type of customs duty calculated as a certain amount of money per pound value of the merchandise being imported or exported. Perhaps: The twelve-month payment window suggests the Crown recognised that the Company’s capital was often tied up in long-term voyages and that immediate cash payments would be a burden on its liquidity. Treasurer of our Realm: The highest financial officer in the English government - whose personal warrant was required to verify the loss of ships and authorise the return of tax money. |
184 | 163 | Certificate for safe passing out thereof according to the said | Interpretations Fifty Thousand pounds: This was a substantial sum in 1661 - representing the massive scale of the Company’s investment and its reliance on a “bullion-based” trade model to secure luxury goods from the East. Spanish coin: At this time - the Spanish piece of eight was the most widely accepted international currency; the Company’s right to export it was perhaps the most vital tool in its commercial arsenal. Time limited and prefixed: This legal requirement ensured that the Company could not hold goods indefinitely before re-exporting them - forcing a steady flow of trade and taxation through London’s ports. Foreign Coyn: The focus on foreign silver rather than English coin was a deliberate policy to prevent the depletion of the domestic money supply - which was a major concern for seventeenth-century economists. Perhaps: The repetition of the “whole entire and only” trade underscores the King’s commitment to protecting the Company from interlopers - who were independent merchants attempting to trade in the East without a royal license. |
185 | 164 | agreed upon by the said Governour and Company of Merchants of | The charter acknowledged that the Company’s operations required meticulous long-term planning, as the directors were informed that preparing a successful voyage often took more than a single year. Consequently, the King granted the Governor and Company the right to dispatch their ships even during times of general maritime restraint or embargo. These vessels, equipped with ordnance and munitions for their own defence and manned by hundreds of English mariners, were to be permitted to depart quietly without interference from the Lord High Admiral or any other royal officer, notwithstanding any existing statutes or decrees to the contrary. However, a significant condition was attached to this privilege regarding the national defence of the realm. The Crown reserved the right to use the merchant navy in times of war to oppose enemies or traitors. If the Royal Navy required additional vessels beyond what could be supplied by other subjects, the King could command the Company to stay its ships. To exercise this right, the Crown or the Admiral was required to give the Company at least three months’ notice, specifically by the month of July, before the Company had begun to make the six ships and six pinnaces ready for their seasonal trade. Upon receiving such notice, the Governor and Company were obliged to forbear sending their fleet until the immediate military need for the Navy had passed. This balanced the Company’s commercial necessity for predictable sailing schedules with the sovereign’s requirement for a naval reserve during periods of national crisis. The charter thus integrated the Company’s private armed fleet into the broader strategic infrastructure of the English state. Interpretations Ordinance and munition: This confirms that East Indiamen were not merely merchant vessels but were essentially heavy warships, capable of independent action and expected to defend themselves without royal escort. Sea pinnaces: Smaller, faster vessels that accompanied the larger merchant ships; they were often used for scouting, navigating shallow coastal waters in the Indies, and carrying messages between the fleet. Lord High Admiral: The supreme commander of the English Navy; the charter specifically stripped this official of the power to “stay” or seize Company ships for the King’s service without following the agreed notice period. Perhaps: The mention of the “month of July” as a deadline for royal notice reflects the rigid seasonal cycle of the monsoon winds, which dictated exactly when ships had to depart England to reach the Indian Ocean at the correct time. Restraint: A formal government order to prevent ships from leaving port; by being exempt from such “restraints,” the Company maintained a massive competitive advantage over other merchants whose goods might rot in harbour during a diplomatic crisis. |
186 | 165 | during their time that the said letters patents or any of them | The King issued a strict prohibition against all English subjects, regardless of their rank or quality, from visiting, haunting, or trading within the East Indies. This royal command protected the Company’s monopoly, ensuring that only the Governor, the Company, and their authorised agents could conduct merchandise by way of adventure in the designated territories. Any subject found to be trading directly or indirectly in these regions faced the immediate risk of forfeiture and the total confiscation of their goods and ships. The charter granted the Company the legal power to seize and take any such interloping vessels or merchandise found at sea or within their overseas dominions. The proceeds from these forfeitures were to be divided equally between the Crown and the Company. Beyond financial loss, offenders were subject to imprisonment at the King’s pleasure as punishment for their contempt of the royal prerogative. To further deter illegal competition, the Company was authorised to impose substantial financial penalties on those who breached the terms of the charter. A minimum fine of one thousand pounds was established for every person found to be trading or trafficking in the East Indies without a licence. This combination of ship seizure, cargo confiscation, imprisonment, and heavy fines provided the Company with a formidable legal arsenal to defend its commercial borders against private English merchants. Interpretations Haunt: An archaic legal term meaning to habitually visit or frequent a specific place; its use here was intended to prevent independent sailors from establishing unofficial trade routes or bases. Interlopers: Though the word is not in this specific passage, these were the private “offenders” the King was targeting-merchants who operated outside the Company’s control and were seen as a threat to national trade stability. At our pleasure: This phrase gave the Crown absolute discretion over the length of an offender’s imprisonment, making the legal consequences of illegal trading both severe and unpredictable. Prerogative: The inherent and exclusive right of the Sovereign to grant monopolies and control foreign trade, which at this time was a central point of tension between the Monarchy and Parliament. Perhaps: The high minimum fine of one thousand pounds was intended to be ruinous, ensuring that even a single failed “adventure” by a private merchant would likely result in total bankruptcy. Furniture: In seventeenth-century maritime law, this referred to all the equipment, rigging, anchors, and sails of a ship; by seizing the furniture, the Company ensured the captured vessel was completely stripped of its value and utility. |
187 | 166 | [...] Governour and Company of Merchants of London trading into for or in any ship or ships not | The charter continued to delineate the extensive powers of the Governor and Company to protect their monopoly. It reaffirmed their right to seize and take any ships, vessels, or goods imported into England or exported from the realm to the East Indies that contravened the terms of the grant. Furthermore, the Company was specifically authorised to sell these seized goods for their own use and benefit. The King also pledged that during the life of the letters patent, neither he nor his successors would grant any licence or liberty to any person to travel to or from the East Indies, or any of the islands and cities mentioned, unless they possessed the special licence of the Company. This applied to any individual attempting to sail in vessels not belonging to the Company’s fleet. An additional clause addressed the internal discipline of the Company regarding financial contributions. If a person intended to trade but failed to pay the sums of money they had committed toward the “setting forth” or maintenance of a voyage, the Company held the power to act. Within three months of a formal warning from an officer or treasurer, the individual was required to provide the promised funds. Should they fail to comply, the Governor and Company, acting through a general assembly or court, were empowered to displace, remove, and disfranchise that person at their will and pleasure. Interpretations Disfranchise: This was the ultimate corporate punishment; it involved stripping a merchant of their membership in the Company, thereby legally barring them from participating in the East India trade and potentially forfeiting their invested capital. Special license: Even for those who were not members of the Company, the directors had the power to grant “permission” for specific voyages, creating a secondary stream of revenue and control over private English travellers. Setting forth: This term refers to the massive initial capital investment required to rig a ship, hire a crew, and purchase the outward cargo (often lead, cloth, or silver) for a multi-year journey. Perhaps: The insistence on seizing goods “contrary to the true intent” of the charter was a direct response to the “interloper” problem, where private merchants would claim they were merely sailing to nearby regions but were actually surreptitiously trading within the Company’s zone. Court of Committees: The mention of this body underscores that while general assemblies were important for major votes, the daily financial discipline and the enforcement of payment subscriptions were handled by the smaller, more executive group of directors. Court or general assembly: By specifying that removals must happen at a “general court,” the charter provided a layer of transparency, ensuring that a member could probably not be ousted by a small clique without the broader fellowship of the Company being involved. |
188 | 167 | [...] Lycence of the said Governour and Company or the | The charter defined the process for expanding the Company’s membership and established strict maritime and financial obligations for its voyages. The Governor, his Deputy, and the majority of a general court were granted the authority to admit new members, specifically including apprentices, servants, and factors who had served the society. These admissions were to be made at such times and under such conditions as the leadership deemed fit and agreeable with the Company’s established orders for government. In return for these vast privileges, the Company entered into a covenant with the Crown regarding the importation of precious metals. The directors promised that for every voyage-with the notable exception of the fifth voyage-the Company would return to England a greater value in gold or silver bullion than they had originally exported. This was intended to ensure that the East India trade resulted in a net gain of precious metals for the kingdom, addressing contemporary economic concerns about the drain of silver to Asia. The King also mandated strict geographical control over the Company’s logistics. All goods and wares intended for transport to the East Indies were required to be shipped and laden at specific designated ports, namely London, Dartmouth, or Plymouth. No other ports or havens within the realm or its dominions were permitted for the commencement of these voyages. This restriction allowed royal customs officers to monitor the Company’s exports effectively and ensure that the “bullion proviso” was being strictly followed. Interpretations Apprentices: The inclusion of these young men as potential members shows the Company’s commitment to a traditional merchant hierarchy, where long-term service and training were rewarded with full corporate rights. Fifth voyage only excepted: This specific exemption suggests a recognition by the Crown that certain early or experimental voyages might not immediately yield a surplus of bullion, allowing the Company some financial flexibility in its long-term planning. Bullion of gold or silver: During the seventeenth century, the “mercantilist” theory held that a nation’s wealth was measured by its reserves of precious metals; this clause was a vital political compromise to justify a monopoly trade that relied heavily on exporting silver. Dartmouth or Plymouth: While London was the primary hub, the inclusion of these West Country ports provided the Company with strategic points of departure closer to the Atlantic, which was perhaps useful for avoiding the delays of navigating the English Channel in certain weather conditions. Covenant: This was a solemn, legally binding promise between the Company and the Sovereign, making the success of the bullion return a condition of their continued legal existence. |
189 | 168 | [...] Election or other officer to whom it shall apperteine by our Letters patents or of whom notice the same shall happen to be shipped or laden in any port Haven or place belonging to the said port or Haven before such time that the same shall be shipped or laden to be transported as aforesaid without any custom or subsidy to be paid for the same and that within one moneth next after the same goods wares or merchandizes whatsoever which shall be brought into this our Realm or any of our Dominions by the said Governour and Company or any of them according to the true meaning of these presents shall likewise be from time to time duly entred by the customers comptrollers or other officers of every such port creek or place where the same shall happen to be unshipped or brought to land And before such time as the same goods or wares or any part thereof shall be unshipped and brought to land as aforesaid according to such order as by our Treasurer of England for the time being shall be taken for the entring of the same And for the preventing of secret and fraudulent trading contrary to our intentions herein before expressed our further will and pleasure is and we do for us our heirs and successors grant unto the said Governour and Company and their successors that no commission officer or other person what soever shall be appointed to intermeddle in the affairs of the said Company payable to us our heirs or successors shall permit and suffer to be laden of any goods or merchandizes of the growth production or manufacture of the parts or places aforesaid in Asia Africa or America or any of them except such as shall be convenient or appropriate to the trade of the said Governour and Company and not otherwise than such as from time to time shall be allowed by the said Governour and Company or their successors under their common seal or the hand of the Governour or his deputy then appointed therein the officers aforesaid nor otherwise And further we will and ordain and by these presents for us our heirs and successors we do grant unto the said Governour and Company of Merchants of London trading into the East Indies and to their successors that it shall and may be lawfull unto such factors and agents and servants as shall be employed in the said trade or traffique and service in the said East Indies And that every such person shall have a number of shares according to his society that is to say for every five hundred pounds by him subscribed or brought into the stock of the said Company that have adventured and brought five hundred pounds or more in any one entire sum shall have five hundred pounds and no more And we especially grant and declare and of our more especial grace certain knowledge and mere motion we do for us our heirs and successors grant to and with the said Governour and Company of Merchants of London trading into the East Indies and their successors that all [...] | The charter mandated a strict administrative process for the landing and entry of goods to prevent “secret and fraudulent trading”. All merchandise brought into the realm by the Company was required to be formally entered by customers and comptrollers at the specific port or creek where the ships were unloaded. This process had to be completed within one month of arrival and before any part of the cargo was brought to land, following the specific orders set by the Treasurer of England. To further protect the monopoly, the King prohibited any commission officer or unauthorised person from intermeddling in the Company’s affairs. Royal officers were forbidden from allowing the lading of any goods of Asian, African, or American growth or manufacture unless they were specifically appropriate to the Company’s trade and formally allowed under its common seal or the hand of the Governor. This effectively turned the royal customs infrastructure into an enforcement arm of the Company’s private interests. The document also defined the internal equity and voting structure of the corporation. It was ordained that factors and servants employed in the trade should have their interests represented according to a specific subscription model. Every member was assigned a number of shares based on the capital they brought into the stock, with five hundred pounds being the standard unit for an entire sum of adventure. This established a clear link between financial risk and corporate authority within the “society” of merchants. Interpretations Comptrollers: High-level officials responsible for auditing and supervising the accounts of the customs house, serving as a second layer of oversight to prevent bribery or smuggling. Intermeddle: A strong legal prohibition intended to stop government officials from using their positions to engage in private trade or to disrupt the Company’s logistics for personal gain. Common Seal: The physical application of the Company’s wax seal was the only legal proof that a cargo was legitimate; without it, any goods from the East were considered contraband and subject to seizure. Perhaps: The one-month deadline for entering goods suggests that the Port of London was frequently congested, and the Crown needed to force a quick turnaround to ensure the timely collection of duties. Five hundred pounds: This was a very high barrier to entry, ensuring that the “society” remained an elite group of wealthy adventurers rather than a broad-based investment scheme for the general public. Unshipped: The period between a ship dropping anchor and the goods actually reaching the dock was the most dangerous time for “leakage” or theft; the charter’s insistence on entry before unshipping was a vital security measure. |
190 | 169 | [...] Company of Merchants of London trading into the East Indies | The charter granted the Governor and Company the extraordinary power to establish a complete legal and military infrastructure within their overseas territories. At every factory or place of trade in the East Indies, the local Governor and his Council were authorised to exercise jurisdiction over all persons living under their authority. This power extended to both civil and criminal causes, with the mandate to judge according to the laws of England. They were empowered to impose fines and imprisonments as necessary to maintain order. In cases where a factory lacked a formal Governor and Council, the chief factor was permitted to transmit offenders to a larger plantation or fort where justice could be executed, or even back to England for punishment. This ensured that the Company’s discipline remained absolute across its vast and often fragmented geography. To protect these interests, the King granted the Company the right to maintain its own “ships of force” and men of war. The directors were authorised to appoint commanders under their common seal and to seize pirates or any “people that are not their friends” who threatened their commercial advantage. The Company was further empowered to engage in active warfare, granting them the right to make prize or reprisal and to seek recompense for any damages or injuries sustained through force of arms. To solidify this military presence, the charter gave the Company the perpetual right to erect and build castles, fortifications, forts, garrisons, colonies, and plantations at any of their trading sites. This transformed the Company from a mere commercial association into a sovereign-like power with the legal right to wage war and govern territory in the King’s name. Interpretations Factory: In the seventeenth century, this was not a place of manufacture but a fortified warehouse and trading post where “factors” lived and conducted business on behalf of the Company. Chief factor: The highest-ranking commercial agent in a specific location; while they lacked the full judicial status of a Governor, they acted as the primary link in the Company’s chain of command. Prize or reprisal: Legal terms for the captured property of an enemy; “prize” usually referred to ships taken at sea, while “reprisal” allowed the Company to seize goods to compensate for previous losses. Perhaps: The instruction to judge “according to the laws of this Kingdom” was intended to ensure that English subjects abroad still felt the protection-and the weight-of English common law, even thousands of miles from London. Garrisons: The right to maintain permanent standing armies within their forts allowed the Company to project power locally without waiting for reinforcements from the Royal Navy. Common seal: By requiring military commissions to be issued under the seal, the charter ensured that every act of war carried the official, legal backing of the corporation. |
191 | 170 | [...] shall be requisite to keep and to set forth in the same to send out of this | The charter granted the Company the essential right to export from England all provisions, ammunition, weapons, and victualling necessary for the maintenance of its fortifications and garrisons. This transport was specifically exempted from the payment of any custom, subsidy, or other duty to the Crown. Furthermore, the Company was authorised to transport any number of men willing to settle in the East Indies and to govern them in a legal and reasonable manner. The leadership held the power to inflict punishment for misdemeanours and impose fines for the breach of orders, as established in their courts. A particularly potent authority was granted regarding the control of English subjects in the East. The King gave the Governor and Company the lawful power to seize any English person found sailing, inhabiting, or trading in the East Indies without a specific license. This extended to those who showed contempt or disobeyed the Company’s orders. Such individuals could be apprehended, punished according to the judgement of the local President and Council, or forcibly sent back to England to face further consequences. The judicial process overseas was structured to allow for immediate discipline. The President and Council were empowered to sentence offenders as they thought fit based on the merit of the offence. In cases where a convicted person sought to appeal their sentence, the charter provided the Company’s agents with the authority to seize the individual and ensure they remained under corporate control until the matter was resolved. This legal framework effectively turned the Company’s overseas settlements into autonomous jurisdictions where the Governor’s word carried the weight of royal law. Interpretations Victualling: The process of supplying a ship or garrison with food and drink; the tax exemption on these supplies was a major financial relief for the Company’s long-term colonial projects. President and Councill: In the Company’s hierarchy, a “President” often held higher status than a mere Governor of a single fort, usually overseeing a “Presidency” that managed multiple factories and trading posts. Willing thereunto: This phrase ensured that while the Company had vast powers, it was not officially authorised to press-gang or force English subjects into colonial settlement against their will. Perhaps: The power to seize unlicensed subjects and send them to England was the ultimate deterrent against “interlopers” who hoped to make a quick fortune outside the Company’s monopoly. Misdemeanors: While it sounds minor today, in the seventeenth century, this covered a wide range of disruptive behaviours, from private trading to mutiny or public drunkenness, all of which the Company sought to suppress to maintain order. Without paying of any custom: This specific exemption for military and survival supplies highlights the Crown’s recognition that the Company’s forts were a strategic asset for the English state, not just a commercial venture. |
192 | 171 | of A[b]uſes And injuries to be [d]on[e] or [...] committed by Any their S[er]vants [...] East [I]ndies or [...] other Pl[a]c[es,] [...] [...] And for the S[aid] [M]erchant[s] our A[...] [...] [...] [f]ull P[ow]er [...] to the Said [...] [...] [...]pon him all Sorts of letters, prayers, Supr[...] [...] [...] [...]aptes, facts for[...] [...]nations, [f]ormations as f[u]l[ly] other [...] [...] [...] [...] touching or concerning Any matter or [...] other of [...] And before And[...] mo[v][e] th[e] [...]ments as the Said [...] [...] the [M][...][s]t[r][a]tion contained to their [...] a the [...] our L[ea]ſons fr[o][m] the [...]ards their [...] and our [...] & S[h]at they our letters patents or Any thing th[er]ein contained S[h]at Not in Any Sort b[i]nd[e]d to give or grant any [...] place or [...] Unto the Said governor And Company of the [...]ands of Ind[...] [i]f as the East Indies or & And of they to [...] or A[...] Any [...] to Any Country [...] & Land S[o]v[er][...] the [...] [...] plantation in the [...] And [...] good[s] of Any Day, Such to them found or S[h]at it all this Subject by or as Any times dir[e]ctor [...] [...] [...] or a[...]ity with [...] any [...] or [...] And [...] day And as w[h][i]le H[i]s Receipt of Such order But well [...] S[u]bject the Same to be Utterly Against [...] their [...] and Cause Any thing [...] in this [...] contained to the for me thereof [...] landed of [...] Shall Wr[...] Appear to be our heirs or Executors that this grant or the [...] again the [...] in themselves or Any part thereof, where trad in [P]rofit to do the Over him the [...] or to them, [...] then And from th[em][...] Upon And after three year, mention to be given to the Said [C]ompany [B][el][i]ke m[...]ing, exper[...] our, or their p[...]ions of [...] m[a]nn[e]st, this [...] grant Shall [f][e][a]t [...] & [...] [...] or in whole, [...] And [a]nd[f][e]s through, and [...] Charging the [f]orming [...] And [...] as ov[er] [...] this burden, upon [...] [...] [...] and ere And [...] After our [...] [M][i]nisters, Women and Subject what[e]ver to be [B]ring [...] helping And A[ss][i]sting to the Said [...] her Supported to the [...] And to their Departing [...] S[i]ders, Servants [...] within [...] All V[o]ice of Them, in Sending And Imposing the [p]romptly, to they or A[p]t [d]e on [...] from time to time who to Any of Such Shall [...] And guided Any Subject of Ser from Servants and Sol[d][e]r [...] And made So [...] obtained or provided, or Any other matter [...] or [...] & S[h]at S[h][e] [...] [...] [...] [...] | The charter provides the Company with the authority to investigate and address any abuses or injuries committed by its factors and soldiers in the East Indies. This power was intended to ensure that the conduct of English subjects abroad did not bring disrepute upon the Crown or jeopardise diplomatic relations with foreign sovereigns. There is also a clause regarding the potential termination of these privileges. If it were to appear to the King or his heirs that the grant or the trade itself was no longer profitable to the realm or had become a burden rather than a benefit - the Crown reserved the right to revoke the letters patent. However - this could probably only be done after a three-year notice period had been given to the Company. This transition period was designed to allow the merchants to settle their affairs - return their ships - and recover their capital before the monopoly officially ceased to exist. The King also issued a general command to all his ministers - officers - and subjects to be helping and assisting to the Governor and Company in the execution of their duties. Whether in the departure of ships or the imposition of order upon servants and soldiers - all royal subjects were expected to support the Company’s operations. This reinforced the model of the East India Company as a state-sanctioned extension of English power - operating with the full - if conditional - blessing of the monarchy. Interpretations Three year: This notice period was a vital safeguard for the Company’s investors - as it ensured that a sudden whim of the monarch could not instantly destroy the value of goods currently in transit from Asia. Abuses and injuries: This phrase highlights the frequent conflicts between Company employees and local populations; the Crown wanted to ensure the Company took responsibility for the discipline of its own people. Profit to the Realm: The ultimate justification for the monopoly was national wealth; if the Company failed to bring in bullion or provide tax revenue - the King had the legal grounds to dissolve the corporation. Perhaps: The mention of “Soldier” alongside “Servant” in the text confirms that by 1661 - the Company was already viewed as a military organisation as much as a commercial one. Assisting: This command turned every local magistrate or port official into a protector of the Company’s interests - making it very difficult for independent merchants to find support within the English legal system. |
193 | 172 | [...] [...] to the [...] of English [...] the Second by the grace of God King of England | The document identifies that the King, Charles the Second, issued a new set of letters patent dated the 3d April in the 25th year of his reign. This charter was granted to the Governor and Company of Merchants of London trading into the East Indies for the stated purpose of advancing the honour and profit of the realm. It explicitly references an earlier royal charter from the fifteenth year of the King’s reign, which had first established the Company’s exclusive rights to the entire trade and traffic of the East Indies. The geographical scope of this monopoly is reaffirmed as extending across the countries and islands of Asia, Africa, and America, from the Cape of Bona Esperanza to the Straits of Magellan. Within these vast limits, the Company and its successors were granted the liberty to use the seas for merchandise and to conduct their affairs on their own behalf. The King confirmed that no other subjects were permitted to exercise this trade, protecting the Company’s position as the sole legal entity for English commerce in these remote parts of the world. A specific provision in this text highlights the Company’s authority to establish a physical presence in these regions. The Governor and Company were empowered to erect and build forts, fortifications, and garrisons, as well as to establish colonies and plantations. Notably, St Helena is named as a specific location for such activity, alongside any other places within the bounds of their trade. The decision to develop these settlements was left to the discretion of the Company, provided they were deemed requisite for the successful carrying on of their commercial operations. Interpretations St Helena: This mid-Atlantic island was a vital stopping point for fresh water and supplies; its specific mention in the charter underlines its strategic importance for ships returning from the East Indies. 25th yeare: The dating of this document to 1673 or 1674 (depending on the calendar used) indicates a reaffirmation of the Company’s powers over a decade after the initial 1661 charter. Suit of our wellbeloved Subjects: This phrase indicates that the charter was not a spontaneous gift from the King but was probably the result of a formal petition and negotiation by the Company’s directors. Perhaps: The mention of America alongside Asia and Africa suggests that the Company’s legal reach was intended to be global, potentially covering any newly discovered lands in the Pacific or southern oceans. Letters Patents: These were open letters from the Sovereign, written in English or Latin and intended to be read by all, serving as public proof of the rights and monopolies granted to the corporation. Defender of the faith: This traditional title of the English monarch was included in the preamble to assert the King’s full spiritual and temporal authority over his subjects, even those acting in distant territories. |
194 | 173 | 2 Send out of this Kingdom to the said Places fortifications Castles | The charter granted the Company the authority to export all necessary clothing - provisions - victuals - and ammunition to its various overseas fortifications and colonies. This transport was specifically exempted from any custom or subsidy - provided the items were intended for the maintenance and supply of the Company’s garrisons and plantations. Furthermore - the Governor and Company were empowered to govern these settlements in a legal and reasonable manner - which included the right to punish misdemeanours and impose fines for any breach of their established orders. The administrative structure of the Company was also confirmed - consisting of a Governor and twenty-four Committees elected to manage its affairs. These officials held the direction over all voyages - the provision of shipping - and the sale of returned merchandise. The charter also provided for the election of a Deputy Governor at a General Court - who would exercise the full authority of the Governor in his absence. This formal hierarchy was intended to ensure the consistent management of the Company’s business and its diverse legal privileges. A specific conflict is noted regarding an island located near Africa beyond the equator - where the Company had previously erected forts and settled people at its own expense. The text records that while the Company had transported willing subjects to inhabit this location - the forces of the United Provinces had subsequently dispossessed them by force of arms. This mention of a military confrontation with a rival European power highlights the volatile nature of colonial expansion during this period and the challenges the Company faced in maintaining its overseas possessions against foreign aggression. Interpretations Twenty four Committees: These were not committees in the modern sense but rather twenty-four individual directors who - alongside the Governor - formed the executive board responsible for all high-level decision-making. United Provinces: This refers to the Dutch Republic - England’s primary commercial rival in the seventeenth century - whose own East India Company (the VOC) frequently clashed with English interests. Beyond the Line: A common maritime phrase referring to the equator - indicating that the island in question was located in the Southern Hemisphere. Perhaps: The mention of subjects being “willing to goe” was probably included to clarify that the Company was not engaged in the forced transportation of English citizens - a sensitive legal issue at the time. Deputy Governor: The creation of this role ensured that the Company’s legal and executive functions would not be paralysed if the Governor was ill or otherwise unavailable to preside over the courts. Misdemeanors: The power to punish these minor offences on-site was essential for maintaining the discipline of soldiers and settlers in isolated garrisons far from the reach of English domestic courts. |
195 | 174 | [...] [...] and keep the quiet possession thereof for several The text recounts a significant military engagement where the island of St Helena, having been seized and held by the Dutch for several months, was successfully retaken by the King’s royal ships and forces under the command of Sir Richard Munden. By virtue of this conquest, the island, along with all its forts, fortifications, and buildings, as well as the artillery, ammunition, and stores found therein, became the legal property of the English Crown. The King asserted that these assets belonged to him “of Right” and to no other. However, the King acknowledged the practical necessity of the island for the welfare of his subjects. Experience had shown that the servants and people of the East India Company often returned from their long voyages in a state of “decayed” health due to the harsh conditions of hot climates. St Helena served as an essential location for “Refreshing” these crews on their homeward journey. Recognising that the Company’s trade had consistently brought honour and profit to the realm, the King decided to encourage them in their “Difficult and hazardous” work by granting them the island. Consequently, the King, out of special grace and certain knowledge, formally granted and confirmed the island to the Governor and Company and their successors. This grant encompassed not only the lands and territories but also all the natural features of the island, including its woods, meadows, pastures, marshes, waters, rivers, bays, and ports. By this act, the Company transitioned from merely occupying the island to holding it as a formal territorial possession under the Crown, ensuring a secure base for the recovery and resupply of their fleet. | The charter establishes the legal foundation for the transformation of St Helena from a military conquest into a corporate territory. Following the successful recapture of the island from the Dutch by Sir Richard Munden, the King asserted his absolute right to the land, its fortifications, and its stores by right of the Crown. This transition from a state of war to a state of settled possession allowed the Sovereign to then transfer those rights to the Company as a gesture of royal favour and practical necessity. The King acknowledged that the long voyages through hot climates often left the Company’s servants and sailors in a state of decayed health. St Helena was therefore granted to provide a place of refreshing for these men on their return journey to England. By giving the Governor and Company the woods, meadows, pastures, and ports of the island, the Crown ensured that the merchants had the resources to maintain a self-sustaining base. This grant was intended to encourage the Company in its hazardous trade, which was viewed as being to the honour and profit of the entire realm. Interpretations Sir Richard Munden: The naval commander who led the 1673 expedition to retake the island; his victory was the immediate legal cause for the land vesting in the Crown. Decayed: This term highlights the physical toll of seventeenth-century seafaring, where malnutrition and disease were constant threats to the survival of the Company’s human capital. Vested in Us: A legal confirmation that the island was no longer a disputed territory or a private holding but was officially a part of the King’s dominions by right of arms. Speculations Perhaps the King’s decision to grant the island to the Company was a way to avoid the significant and ongoing expense of maintaining a permanent royal garrison in the middle of the Atlantic. The mention of “Refining” suggests that the island was not just a military outpost but was envisioned as a vital agricultural and medical hub for the recovery of sick mariners. It is probably the case that naming St Helena specifically in the charter gave the Company a unique legal standing there that it did not necessarily possess in its more precarious Indian factories. The inclusion of “all Woods and Meadows” indicates that the Crown expected the Company to develop the island’s interior for farming rather than just maintaining a coastal fort. |
196 | 175 | 4 Whether the same be already Discovered or not Discovered More Especially Know Ye that We of our Speciall Grace certain | The King formally granted the Governor and Company of Merchants of London trading into the East Indies the full and absolute ownership of the island of St Helena and all its territories. This grant included everything found within the limits of the island - whether already discovered or yet to be discovered - such as gold - silver - gems - and precious stones. All metals and minerals were included in the transfer. Furthermore - the Company was granted all royalties - revenues - rents - ports - forts - and fortifications already erected or to be built in the future. These privileges and properties were given in as large and ample a manner as the King himself might have enjoyed them by right of his recent conquest. While the Company was given the property and its profits - the King specifically reserved the faith and allegiance of the inhabitants and his own royal sovereignty over all subjects on the island. The island was to be held by the Company for ever as of the Manor of East Greenwich in free and common soccage - rather than by more restrictive feudal tenures such as knights’ service. In addition to the land - the King granted all artillery - arms - weapons - ammunition - and victuals remaining on the premises. This also extended to all ships - vessels - and merchandise currently found upon the island - which were to be used for the sole benefit of the Company and its successors. Interpretations Soccage: A type of land tenure that involved the payment of a fixed rent or service rather than the military obligations required under feudalism. East Greenwich: A legal fiction used in colonial charters to simplify land law - treating overseas territories as if they were part of a specific royal manor in England to avoid complex feudal disputes. In Capite: A form of tenure held directly from the King which usually involved burdensome legal obligations that were bypassed by this specific grant. Speculations Perhaps the King insisted on the “East Greenwich” clause to ensure that the legal administration of the island remained tied to English common law rather than creating a new legal system? It is probably the case that the inclusion of “all Gold and Silver” was a standard legal precaution to ensure the Company had the incentive to mine the island if minerals were ever found. Why did the King explicitly exclude “Knights Service” unless he wanted to make it clear that the Company was a commercial entity rather than a military vassal? |
197 | 176 | 5 London Trading into the East Indies that for the better supply | The King granted the Governor and Company the right to supply the island of St Helena, which was designated as a place of free trade and traffic. For the maintenance of the various castles, fortifications, and plantations, the Company was authorised to send clothing, provisions, victuals, and munitions from the kingdom without the payment of any custom, subsidy, or other duty. This privilege extended to the transport of as many men as the Company deemed necessary to populate and defend the island. Having granted the territory to the Company, the King further entrusted them with the jurisdiction required for its good government and safety, citing his confidence in their fidelity and justice. Legal authority was vested in the Governor and Company to establish laws and ordinances for the island. These laws were to be ordained and published under the Common Seal of the Company during a General Court or a General Court of Committees, provided the Governor or his Deputy was present. The Company was empowered to abrogate or change these laws as seen fit and to impose penalties for offences. These punishments could include fines, imprisonment, or both, depending on the nature of the crime and what was deemed necessary for the maintenance of order and the security of the inhabitants. Interpretations Free Trade or Traffique: In this context, the term implies that the island was to serve as an open port for the Company’s ships, exempt from the usual restrictive trade duties imposed at other ports. Common Seale: The official seal of the Company used to authenticate and give legal force to its corporate acts, laws, and ordinances. Committees: The individual directors of the Company who sat on the executive board to manage its day-to-day administrative and legislative functions. Speculations Perhaps the grant of “free trade” was intended to ensure that St Helena remained a low-cost logistical hub rather than a revenue-generating port for the Crown? It is probably the case that the power to imprison inhabitants was essential for a location so far removed from the direct judicial oversight of the English courts. Why did the King explicitly mention his trust in the “fidelity” and “Justice” of the Company unless there was a need to legally justify delegating sovereign powers to a private commercial body? |
198 | 177 | 6 Such generall Court or to the said Governour or his Deputy or | It was established that the Governor, his Deputy, and the Committees of the Company, or a majority of them present at a Court of Committees, held the authority to ensure that all laws, constitutions, orders, and ordinances were observed. This power included the right to punish any offenders as prescribed by the specific penalties attached to those regulations. A significant condition was placed upon this legislative power: all such laws and punishments were required to be consonant with reason and not repugnant or contrary to the laws of the Realm of England. Instead, they were to be as agreeable and conformable to English law as possible. The King further granted the Company the absolute right to nominate, constitute, and appoint various officials for the management of the island and its territories. The Company was permitted to choose the titles and styles for these roles, which included governors, officers, ministers, justices, agents, and other servants deemed necessary for good government and the service of the island’s forts and fortifications. This administrative control included the discretionary power to remove, discharge, or change any such officials, including those who had previously been appointed to govern the island and its people. For the better government and peace of the subjects residing on the island, these appointed officers and ministers were authorised to execute their offices according to the nature of their positions. They were required to govern the inhabitants according to the specific laws and constitutions established by the Company’s General Court or Court of Committees. In all matters appertaining to their roles, these officials were to be directed and appointed by the Governor and Company or their Committees as determined during their respective court meetings. Interpretations Consonant to Reason: A legal requirement ensuring that any new regulations or punishments created by the Company were logical, fair, and based on established principles of justice. Repugnant: In this legal context, the term refers to any local law that would directly contradict or clash with the fundamental laws of England. Hereditaments: A technical term referring to any type of property that can be inherited, which in this document includes the forts, lands, and physical assets of the island. Resiant: An archaic term for a person who is a resident or inhabitant of a particular place, specifically referring here to the subjects living on St Helena. Speculations Perhaps the requirement for laws to be “agreeable to the Laws of England” was a safeguard to prevent the Company from exercising tyrannical or arbitrary power over English subjects? It is probably the case that the power to “Remove, Discharge, alter and Change” officials was included to ensure the Company could quickly replace any governor who proved to be incompetent or disloyal. Why was the Company given the freedom to choose any “name or names, stile or stiles” for its officers, unless the Crown wished to allow for flexibility in how authority was projected in a remote colony? |
199 | 178 | 7 And also to the said Cheife Governour or Governours now More Especially Know ye that We of our Speciall Grace | The King declared that the chief governor or governors of St Helena were delegated the authority to rule and to hold judgements on all actions and causes of any nature. These judgements, awards, and legal proceedings were required to be reasonable and as agreeable as possible to the laws, statutes, policy, and customs of England. This power of government and command was confirmed to the Governor and Company and their successors, as well as to any officials they might appoint to stand in their place. These officers were authorised to exercise their duties for the safety and defence of the island and its territories by both sea and land. All persons were commanded to be obedient to these officials according to their respective authorities. This mandate applied especially to any who might attempt to break the peace or order of the island, or those who might attempt any obstruction, invasion, or detriment against the King’s subjects involved in trade or traffic. The principal governor was empowered to execute his office within the island and its territories in such a manner as directed by the Governor and Company or their committees. Furthermore, the King granted the Governor or his deputy the power to administer oaths and take bonds from officials to ensure the faithful performance of their duties. The Company was also authorised to take and receive any sums of money or other things that became due as a result of fines or breaches of the laws and ordinances established for the good government of the island. These financial penalties were to be collected according to the rules made by the Company for the maintenance of order within their territories. Interpretations Actions and causes: A broad legal term referring to all types of civil and criminal lawsuits or legal disputes that might arise among the inhabitants. Statutes: Written laws passed by a legislative body, in this case referring to the formal acts of the English Parliament which served as a model for the island’s governance. Bonds: Legal agreements or financial guarantees that officials were required to provide as security for their honest and competent conduct in office. Speculations Perhaps the requirement for officials to take oaths was a way to ensure that their primary loyalty remained with the Company and the Crown despite the great distance from London? It is probably the case that the authority to defend the island “as well by Sea as by land” was intended to allow the governor to commission local vessels for anti-piracy or coastal defence. Why was it necessary to specify that punishments should not be “repugnant” to English customs unless there was a concern that colonial governors might invent unconventional or harsh penalties? |
200 | 179 | 8 All what Nature however or by what means soever the same be found | The King provided that all natural resources, goods, profits, and commodities found within St Helena were to be managed for the good government of the island and the benefit of the Company. Full authority was granted to the Governor and Company to oversee the custody of these assets and to use them as they deemed appropriate for the island’s affairs. This power extended to the hearing and examination of any legal cases concerning the Company, the island, or its inhabitants. To ensure the truth was established in such matters, the Chief Governor and his Council were authorised to administer formal and legal oaths to all officers, ministers, and servants. These oaths were intended to guarantee the faithful discharge of duties and to assist in the maintenance of peace and justice among all residents. A significant royal declaration was made regarding the status of the people living on the island. It was decreed that all subjects inhabiting St Helena, along with their children and future descendants born there, would enjoy the same liberties, franchises, and immunities as free denizens and natural-born subjects of the Kingdom of England. They were to possess the same legal capacities and abilities as if they had been born within any of the King’s dominions. This ensured that those settling in this remote territory did not lose their rights as English citizens. Furthermore, the Company was empowered to exercise all jurisdictions necessary for the defence and security of the island. This included the right to build forts, castles, and other defensive works and to equip them with arms, ammunition, and provisions. The Governor and Company were also authorised to raise and levy military forces for the protection of the inhabitants. All such acts of government and defence were required to be carried out in accordance with the laws and statutes of the Realm and under the direction of the Company’s leadership in London. Interpretations Free denizens: Individuals who were granted certain rights of citizenship in England, though not necessarily all the privileges of a natural-born subject. Natural Subjects: Persons born within the allegiance of the Crown who possessed full legal rights, such as the ability to inherit land and hold office. Liberties and franchises: Specific legal rights or exemptions granted to individuals or corporations by the Sovereign. Speculations Perhaps the decree regarding the citizenship of those born on the island was intended to encourage long-term settlement and the creation of a stable, loyal population? It is probably the case that the power to “raise and levy” forces was essential because the distance from England made it impossible for the Royal Navy to provide immediate protection against sudden attacks. Why was the administration of oaths mentioned so frequently unless there was a deep concern about corruption or perjury among the Company’s remote officials? |
201 | 180 | [...][...] or in any wise notwithstanding In witne[...] By writt of Privy Seale [...][...] | The King concluded the charter by declaring that all its provisions remained valid despite any potential legal or technical errors in the document. To formalise this grant, he ordered the creation of these letters patent. The document was witnessed by the King himself at Westminster on 16 December. This event occurred in the twenty-fifth year of his reign. The authority for the grant was confirmed by the writ of the Privy Seal. Interpretations Letters Patent: Open royal documents addressed to all subjects, used to grant or confirm rights, titles, and privileges. Westminster: The primary seat of the English government and the location of the royal court where significant legal documents were issued. Privy Seal: A smaller royal seal used to authorise the use of the Great Seal on formal documents, acting as a personal mark of the King’s approval. Twenty-fifth year: Since Charles II dated his reign from the death of his father in 1649, this corresponds to the year 1673. Speculations Perhaps the specific mention of “notwithstanding” any errors was a legal safeguard to prevent future lawyers from finding loopholes to revoke the Company’s rights? It is probably the case that the timing of this charter in late 1673 was directly linked to the recent military recapture of the island from the Dutch. Why was the document issued by “writ of Privy Seal” rather than through a more public parliamentary process, unless the King wished to maintain personal control over colonial expansion? |
202 | 181 | The East India Companies new Charter Charles the Second by the Grace of God King of | It was stated that a new Charter of the East India Company had been issued on 3 August 1683 in the thirty-fifth year of the reign of Charles II, King of England, Scotland, France, and Ireland, Defender of the Faith. All recipients of the document were addressed with greeting. It was declared that the Governor and Company of Merchants of London trading into the East Indies had long existed as a corporate and political body under that name. It was recorded that they had enjoyed and exercised various liberties, privileges, and immunities by virtue of several Letters Patent and Charters previously granted by their royal predecessors, namely Elizabeth I and James I, described as being of blessed memory. It was explained that, following the humble petition of these subjects, their rights had been graciously granted and confirmed by Letters Patent issued under the Great Seal, dated 3 April 1663 in the fifteenth year of the reign of the present king. Within those Letters Patent, certain alterations and additions to the trade, advantages, and commerce of the Company had been established, as had provisions considered appropriate for the Company and its successors, including measures for improved governance and direction. It was further declared that the Company of Merchants of London trading into the East Indies had thereby been granted and confirmed as a single corporate and political body, both in name and in fact, under the title of the Governor and Company of Merchants of London trading into the East Indies. By those Letters Patent, the Company had been incorporated and established as such. It was stated that the same Governor and Company of Merchants of London trading into the East Indies had been granted perpetual succession. It was also established that the Company and its successors, under that name, might initiate legal proceedings and be subject to legal action, might bring and defend cases, and might answer and be answered in all courts and places whatsoever. Interpretations “Letters Patent” was understood to refer to formal legal documents issued by the monarch, granting rights, privileges, or status. “Great Seal” was interpreted as the official seal of the monarch, used to authenticate important state documents. “Body corporate and politique” was understood to mean a legally recognised organisation with its own identity, capable of acting as a single entity in law. “Perpetual succession” was interpreted as the continuous existence of the corporation regardless of changes in its membership. “Implead and be impleaded” was understood to mean the right to bring a legal case and to be brought into one. Speculations Perhaps the repetition of the Company’s full title was intended to reinforce its legal identity and authority? It was probably the case that the confirmation of earlier privileges sought to remove any uncertainty about the Company’s rights under previous monarchs. Perhaps the emphasis on legal capacity, such as the ability to sue and be sued, reflected the growing complexity of the Company’s commercial activities and disputes? |
203 | 182 | 2 The said goods at all times then after should be Contrary to the true Meaning of the same And by vertue [...][...] at large expressed as by our said Charter or Letters | It was stated that the Company had been given the legal ability thereafter to purchase, receive, take, and inherit lands, property, and goods of every kind, for themselves and their successors. It was also confirmed that, by the royal Charter granted in the fifteenth year of the reign, these rights had been formally given to the Governor and Company of Merchants of London trading into the East Indies and to those who would succeed them. It was declared that the Governor and Company, together with all members, servants employed overseas, mariners, apprentices, factors, and other workers in their service, had been granted the right from the date of the Letters Patent to carry on trade by sea. This trade was to extend across seas and rivers, both in places already known and those yet to be discovered, from the Cape of Bona Esperanza to the Straits of Magellan, and throughout Asia, Africa, and America wherever trade might be conducted. It was further declared that only the Company, its successors, and those working for them were permitted to carry out this trade. They alone were given the full and exclusive right to trade to and from the East Indies, including all islands, ports, havens, cities, towns, and places named in the Charter. It was established that no subject of the Crown was allowed to travel to, trade in, or make use of the East Indies or any associated places in defiance of the Charter. By royal authority, which was not to be challenged, it was strictly ordered and prohibited that no person of any rank should directly or indirectly trade or venture to the East Indies unless they belonged to the Company or had been authorised by it in writing under its official seal. It was stated that anyone acting without such permission would face the penalties set out in the Letters Patent, although parts of these provisions are now unreadable and are represented as [...]. It was then recorded that, despite these rules, some individuals had recently traded in the East Indies without the Company’s permission, acting against the Charter and the King’s command. These individuals had carried out trade both at sea and within the regions covered by the Charter, dealing in goods produced in the Indies. Their actions were described as causing serious harm and financial loss to the Company, and as putting the continuation of the trade at risk, along with creating further problems. It was declared that these matters had been carefully considered, and that it was important for the honour and welfare of the nation and its people to improve and protect this trade. It was stated that the trade could not be successfully maintained except through a joint stock system, and that a large and shared fund was seen as the best way to support it. It was indicated that, for this reason, proper encouragement [...] was to be provided. Interpretations “Hereditaments” referred to forms of property that could be passed down through inheritance, including land and certain rights connected to it. “Factors” were Company employees sent overseas to manage trade, often buying and selling goods and running trading posts far from England. “Joint stock” described a system in which many investors put money into a shared fund to finance expensive and risky trading voyages. “Royal prerogative” referred to the King’s personal authority to make decisions such as granting trading rights without needing approval from Parliament. Speculations Perhaps the stress on exclusive trading rights reflected growing frustration with independent merchants who were attempting to trade in the same regions without permission? It was probably the case that the reference to a joint stock system showed that earlier methods of organising trade had proved unreliable or too risky for such long distance ventures? Perhaps the concern about harm to the Company also reflected wider fears that disorderly trade could weaken England’s position against other European trading powers in Asia? It was probably intended that the strong language of prohibition would act as a warning, showing that the Crown was willing to support the Company against unauthorised competition? |
204 | 183 | Contrary to the true Meaning of the same And by vertue [...] being thereunto duly authorized and empowered | It was declared that any actions taken contrary to the true meaning of the Charter were forbidden. By virtue of the royal prerogative, which was not to be questioned or challenged, it was strictly charged, commanded, and prohibited on behalf of the Crown and its successors that all subjects, of whatever rank or status, were not to directly or indirectly visit, frequent, trade, traffic, or undertake voyages of merchandise to or from the East Indies or any part of them. This prohibition extended to all islands, ports, havens, towns, countries, and places within those regions, except in the case of the Governor and Company of Merchants of London trading into the East Indies. Only those persons belonging to the Company, or employed by them as agents, factors, or servants, and holding written permission under the Company’s common seal, were permitted to take part in such trade. Any breach of these rules was to result in the penalties and forfeitures set out in the Letters Patent, although parts of these provisions are now unreadable and have been represented as [...]. It was then recorded that, despite these commands, certain individuals had acted contrary to the Charter and the royal command by trading and undertaking voyages into the East Indies without permission from the Company. These individuals had conducted trade both at sea and within the places defined in the Charter, dealing in goods produced in the Indies. Such actions were described as causing serious harm and financial loss to the Company, and as placing the continuation and stability of that trade at risk, along with creating further serious problems. These matters were taken into princely consideration and carefully weighed. It was observed that the honour and welfare of the nation and its subjects required every effort to improve the trade. The trade was said not to be maintainable or capable of being carried on with advantage except through a joint stock system, and a large and shared stock was considered the surest means of supporting the whole. For this reason, all due encouragement was to be given. Interpretations “Visit, haunt, frequent” was a set of overlapping terms used to cover every possible form of presence or repeated activity, ensuring that unauthorised traders could not avoid punishment by claiming limited involvement. “Common seal” referred to the Company’s official stamp, which confirmed that permission had been granted by the Company as a whole rather than by an individual. “Pain and forfeiture” described the penalties for breaking the Charter, often involving the seizure of goods, ships, or profits, and sometimes additional financial punishment. “Joint stock” referred to a shared investment fund created by multiple contributors, allowing costly and risky overseas trade to be financed collectively. Speculations Perhaps the insistence that the royal prerogative should not be questioned reflected wider political tensions about the limits of royal authority in the late seventeenth century? It was probably the case that the repeated reference to unauthorised traders showed that the Company’s monopoly was being actively challenged in practice? Perhaps the detailed prohibition of different forms of activity was intended to close off common excuses used by merchants attempting to bypass the Company’s control? It was probably intended that linking the trade to national honour and welfare would present the monopoly as beneficial to the country as a whole, rather than as a privilege granted to a single company? |
205 | 184 | Encouragment May be given to an undertaking which | It was stated that encouragement might be given to an undertaking considered beneficial to the general good, and that those engaged in it should receive support to promote it. Full power and authority were therefore granted, on behalf of the Crown and its successors, to the Governor and Company of Merchants of London trading into the East Indies and their successors. The Company, acting through themselves or through their factors, deputies, and assigns, was authorised at all times thereafter, within the limits of the Charter, to enter into any ships, vessels, barks, ships, or galleys, and to search, inspect, and seize all ships, goods, wares, and merchandise that had been brought from or carried to the specified places in violation of the royal will as expressed in this or any earlier Charter or Letters Patent. It was further granted that one half of all such goods seized would belong to the Company and its successors for their own use, without any obligation to account to the Crown for that portion. This grant was described as being made out of special favour, certain knowledge, and free will. Authority was also given that the Governor, Deputy Governor, and Court of the Company, or the majority of them when properly assembled, should have the direction, rule, and government of all forts, factories, and plantations already established or to be established by order of the Company within Asia, Africa, and America. Power was granted to make, establish, and ordain such statutes, laws, and ordinances as were considered necessary for the good government of these factories in those regions. It was also provided that the Governor, Deputy Governor, and Court of the Company for the time being should exercise this authority. Interpretations “Factories” referred not to manufacturing sites but to trading stations established overseas, where Company agents lived and conducted business, often forming the basis of early colonial settlements. “Moiety” meant a half share, in this case indicating that the Company was entitled to keep fifty percent of the value of confiscated goods. “Certain knowledge and mere motion” was a formal phrase used in royal grants to indicate that the decision had been made deliberately and independently by the monarch, without external pressure. “Court of the Company” referred to the governing body of the Company, made up of senior members who collectively made decisions about its operations. Speculations Perhaps the grant of seizure powers reflected the difficulty of enforcing the Company’s monopoly across vast distances, requiring it to act directly against unauthorised traders at sea? It was probably the case that allowing the Company to retain half of seized goods was intended as an incentive to actively police illegal trade, turning enforcement into a source of profit? Perhaps the authority to govern forts and factories signalled an expansion beyond trade into territorial control, suggesting that the Company was beginning to take on roles usually associated with states? It was probably intended that granting the power to make laws would allow the Company to respond quickly to local conditions overseas, where direct oversight from England was limited? |
206 | 185 | Or the Major part of them Duly assembled shall have full | It was provided that the Governor, Deputy Governor, and Court of the Company, or the greater part of them when duly assembled, should have full power, licence, and authority to choose and appoint governors and other officers from time to time for the said factories and plantations. These appointed governors and officers were granted full authority, on behalf of the Crown and its successors, to resist, restrain, and punish by military means as they considered necessary for the security of the plantations, forts, and places. Authority was given for the use of martial law within these forts, places, and plantations for their defence against any foreign invasion or domestic insurrection or rebellion. These officers were also required to follow such orders, directions, and instructions as might from time to time be given by the Governor, Deputy Governor, and Court of the Company, or the greater part of them. The Company was granted the exercise of foreign rights, jurisdictions, and authority over all such forts, places, and plantations as might be established in the regions described. Power was also given to make peace and war when necessary, although the royal authority in these matters was always reserved to the Crown and its successors. It was further recorded that complaints had been made to the Crown by the Governor and Company of Merchants of London trading into the East Indies concerning many disorders and inconveniences that had occurred, both by subjects of the Crown and by foreigners, to the great harm of the Company and its affairs overseas. It was observed that many such disorders required correction, and that adequate provision had not yet been made to address them. It was stated that, for the more effective encouragement of the Company and of the merchants trading in those regions, and for the better and more effective remedy of such disorders and inconveniences as might arise, further measures had been considered necessary. Interpretations “Martial law” referred to the use of military authority to maintain order, allowing commanders to enforce discipline and punish offences quickly in situations where normal civil law was not practical. “Foreign rights, jurisdictions, and authority” described the powers exercised by the Company in overseas territories, including governing settlements and administering justice, often in places beyond direct control of the English state. “Factories and plantations” referred to overseas trading settlements and established bases of operation, which could include fortified locations and growing communities of Company personnel. Speculations Perhaps the granting of authority to impose martial law reflected the unstable conditions in overseas settlements, where threats from rival powers and local resistance made ordinary legal processes difficult to maintain? It was probably the case that allowing the Company to appoint its own governors and officers was intended to ensure quicker decision making in distant regions where communication with England was slow? Perhaps the reference to complaints about disorder indicated ongoing conflict between Company officials, private traders, and foreign competitors, which required stronger internal control? It was probably intended that the power to make peace and war, even with royal authority reserved, showed how far the Company’s role had expanded beyond trade into military and political activity overseas? |
207 | 186 | To be held at such place or places forts or forts plan- | It was provided that a court should be held at such places, forts, plantations, or factories along the said coasts as the Company might from time to time appoint. This court was to consist of one person learned in the civil law and two merchants. These individuals, together with such officers as were considered necessary, were to be appointed by the Governor, Deputy Governor, and Court of the Company, or the greater part of them. The person learned in the civil law and the two merchants, or the majority of them when assembled, were granted authority to hear and determine all cases relating to forfeitures and seizures of ships, vessels, goods, and merchandise trading to or from those coasts contrary to the intention of the present Charter and earlier Letters Patent granted to the Company. Authority was also given to hear and determine all matters involving merchants and mariners, including the buying, selling, receiving, and delivering of goods, as well as contracts, agreements, bargains, sales, and promises concerning the payment of money or merchandise. This extended to trading contracts, charter parties, freight agreements for vessels, wages of mariners, and all other commercial or maritime matters. Further jurisdiction was granted over all offences, disorders, forfeitures, losses, damages, debts, injuries, and wrongs committed upon the high seas or within any of the regions, territories, countries, or places described, concerning any person residing in, living in, or coming to the parts of Asia, Africa, or America within the specified limits. All such cases were to be examined and judged by the said court upon proper evidence, according to principles of fairness and good conscience, and in accordance with the laws and customs of merchants. Proceedings were to follow such rules and methods as might be directed from time to time under the Great Seal or Privy Seal. In the absence of such directions, judgement was to be guided by the discretion and best judgement of the judges of the court. Interpretations “Person learned in the civil law” referred to someone trained in Roman based legal traditions, often used in maritime and international trade cases, rather than in English common law. “Charter parties” were formal agreements for the hire of a ship, setting out terms such as payment, cargo, and responsibilities during a voyage. “Laws and customs of merchants” referred to a shared body of commercial practices, sometimes called the law merchant, which governed trade across different countries and was recognised beyond any single national legal system. “Privy Seal” was a royal seal used for authorising official documents of lesser rank than those issued under the Great Seal, but still carrying legal authority. Speculations Perhaps the creation of such a court reflected the practical need for quick and specialised legal decisions in distant trading regions where English courts could not easily operate? It was probably the case that including merchants alongside a legal expert ensured that decisions reflected both legal principles and the realities of commercial practice? Perhaps the reliance on the laws and customs of merchants showed that international trade required flexible rules that could be recognised across different cultures and legal systems? It was probably intended that giving judges discretion in the absence of royal instructions allowed the court to function effectively despite the delays in communication between England and overseas settlements? |
208 | 187 | Think meet and just whether it be by a summary way | It was provided that the court should act in a manner considered appropriate and just, whether by summary procedure or other methods, depending on the nature and urgency of the cases brought before it. All judgments, determinations, and decrees made by the court were to be recorded in writing and signed by those present when they were made. These records were to include a brief account of the facts as they appeared to the judges, along with their observations and the decision reached. The Governor and Company of Merchants of London trading into the East Indies were granted all privileges within the City of London to the same extent as any other company of merchants that had been granted such rights by the Crown or its predecessors. All admirals, vice admirals, general commanders, commissioners of customs, mayors, sheriffs, justices of the peace, constables, collectors, officers, searchers, and all other officials and ministers of the Crown were commanded to assist and support the Company and its successors, as well as those employed by them, whenever required. Such assistance was to be given in all matters, under threat of royal displeasure and penalty for failure to comply. It was further declared that the Letters Patent, together with all grants, clauses, and provisions contained within them, were to remain firm, valid, and legally effective. They were to be interpreted, recognised, and upheld in law as fully binding. Interpretations “Summary way” referred to a quicker legal process without the full formal procedures of a traditional trial, allowing decisions to be made more rapidly when circumstances required it. “Short state of the matter of fact” meant a concise written account of the key facts of a case, rather than a detailed or lengthy record. “Searchers” were customs officials responsible for inspecting ships and goods to enforce trade regulations and prevent smuggling. Speculations Perhaps the allowance for summary judgement reflected the practical need for swift decisions in trading environments where delays could disrupt voyages and commercial agreements? It was probably the case that requiring written records of decisions was intended to impose accountability on Company courts, helping to prevent arbitrary or inconsistent rulings? Perhaps the instruction that all officials assist the Company indicated that enforcement of its privileges depended heavily on cooperation from state authorities within England? It was probably intended that the strong affirmation of the Charter’s validity would discourage legal challenges and reinforce confidence among investors and merchants involved in the Company’s trade? |
209 | 188 | As well in the meaning as to the words of the same By writt of Privy Seale | It was declared that the Charter was to be interpreted both in its meaning and in its wording in the most favourable way for the benefit of the Governor and Company of Merchants of London trading into the East Indies and their successors. Any omission, uncertainty, or defect within the document was not to weaken its force, nor was any other matter or circumstance to be taken as contrary to its validity. It was further stated that the Charter remained effective even if the true yearly value of the lands or rights granted had not been specified, and regardless of any previous gifts or grants made by the Crown or its predecessors to the Company. Any statutes, acts, ordinances, proclamations, or restrictions previously established were not to override or limit the authority of the present Charter. It was recorded that, in confirmation of these provisions, the Letters Patent had been issued under royal authority. The document was witnessed by the King at Westminster on 5 August 1683, in the thirty-fifth year of his reign. It was issued by writ of the Privy Seal and enrolled in the Hanaper, with the names Pigott and E. North, Clerk, recorded in connection with its enrolment. Interpretations “Most favourably and to the benefit” indicated that, in cases of doubt, the Charter was to be interpreted in a way that supported the Company’s interests rather than limiting them. “Notwithstanding” was a legal term used to override any conflicting laws, documents, or circumstances, ensuring that the Charter took precedence over earlier rules. “Privy Seal” referred to a royal authorisation used to approve documents before they were formally issued under the Great Seal. “Hanaper” was the office of the Court of Chancery where official documents such as Letters Patent were enrolled and stored, with clerks responsible for recording them. Speculations Perhaps the insistence that the Charter should be interpreted favourably reflected awareness that ambiguities in earlier grants had led to disputes over the Company’s rights? It was probably the case that the sweeping dismissal of conflicting laws and omissions was intended to strengthen the Company’s position against legal challenges from rivals or dissatisfied merchants? Perhaps the mention of the Privy Seal and enrolment in the Hanaper was included to emphasise the formal legitimacy and administrative completion of the grant? It was probably intended that such strong wording would reassure investors and members of the Company that their privileges were secure and unlikely to be undermined by technical objections? |
210 | 189 | The East India Companies Charter Granted by James the Second by the Grace of God | It was stated that a Charter of the East India Company had been granted under the Great Seal of England on 12 April 1686, in the second year of the reign of James II, King of England, Scotland, France, and Ireland, Defender of the Faith. All recipients of the document were addressed with greeting. It was declared that the Governor and Company of Merchants of London trading into the East Indies had long existed as a corporation contributing to the honour and profit of the nation, and that they had enjoyed various liberties, privileges, and immunities granted by earlier Letters Patent issued by royal predecessors, including Elizabeth I and James I. It was further recorded that the late Charles II, described as the King’s brother, had by his Charter or Letters Patent dated 3 April 1661, in the thirteenth year of his reign, granted, ratified, and confirmed that the Governor and Company of Merchants of London trading into the East Indies and their successors should remain for ever one body corporate and political in name and in fact, under that title. It was stated that this Charter had also provided that all persons then belonging to the Company, as well as those who would later become members, together with the sons of members upon reaching the age of twenty one years, and all apprentices, factors, servants, and any other persons employed by the Company in the East Indies trade, were to be included within the scope of these provisions. Interpretations “Body corporate and politique” referred to a legally recognised organisation treated as a single entity, capable of owning property, making decisions, and continuing indefinitely despite changes in membership. “In the second year of his reign” indicated the regnal dating system, which counted years from the monarch’s accession rather than using only calendar years. “In the thirteenth year of his reign” similarly referred to the regnal year of Charles II, corresponding to 1661 in modern dating. “Factors” referred to Company agents stationed overseas who conducted trade and managed business operations on behalf of the Company. Speculations Perhaps the reference to earlier monarchs and charters was intended to emphasise continuity, presenting the Company’s privileges as long established and repeatedly confirmed? It was probably the case that including the sons of members at the age of twenty one reflected an attempt to create a self perpetuating commercial body with generational continuity? Perhaps the mention of national honour and profit was designed to frame the Company’s activities as beneficial to the state, strengthening justification for its privileges? It was probably intended that restating earlier grants under a new monarch would reaffirm the Company’s legal position at the beginning of a new reign, reducing uncertainty about its rights? |
211 | 190 | Sea or any other the places therein for that purpose | The Company and those employed by it were granted the right to trade by sea and along all routes and passages, whether already known or later discovered, to and from the East Indies. This trade was to extend across the countries and regions of Asia and Africa, and to and from the islands, ports, havens, cities, towns, and places of Asia, Africa, and America, or any of them, lying beyond the Cape of Bona Esperanza to the Straits of Magellan, wherever trade or commerce might be carried on. Full liberty to conduct this trade was granted, subject to such conditions as might be determined from time to time at public assemblies or courts of the Governor and Company of Merchants of London trading into the East Indies. These conditions were to be agreed upon by the majority of those present, provided that the Governor or Deputy Governor was also present at such meetings. It was further declared that the Company and those acting under its authority were not to suffer molestation, obstruction, disturbance, or trouble on account of their religion or faith, or for any other reason contrary to the intent of the Charter. The trade granted by the Charter was not to extend to any countries, lands, islands, havens, cities, territories, or places belonging to, or under the protection of, any Christian princes or states that were in alliance or friendship with the Crown, where such princes or states did not permit or actively prohibited such trade to be carried out against them or their people. It was further recorded that the late Charles II had granted, on behalf of himself and his successors, that the Governor and Company of Merchants of London trading into the East Indies, together with their successors, factors, servants, and agents, were to enjoy these rights. Interpretations “Cape of Bona Esperanza” referred to the Cape of Good Hope, the southern tip of Africa, which marked a key navigational point on sea routes to Asia. “Streights of Magellan” referred to the passage at the southern end of South America, used here as a boundary marker in defining the extent of permitted trade. “Public assembly or court” referred to formal governing meetings of the Company where decisions were made collectively, especially concerning rules and conditions of trade. “Molestation or disturbance” referred to interference or obstruction, whether by officials, rival traders, or others attempting to hinder Company activity. Speculations Perhaps the extremely broad geographical limits described in the Charter reflected an intention to establish a near global trading reach rather than a narrowly defined regional one? It was probably the case that allowing internal assemblies to set conditions of trade gave the Company flexibility to respond quickly to changing commercial or political circumstances overseas? Perhaps the protection against interference, including on religious grounds, reflected practical concerns about operating in diverse regions where conflict over belief or authority could disrupt trade? It was probably intended that the restriction relating to allied Christian states would prevent diplomatic friction, ensuring that Company activity did not undermine existing political alliances? |
212 | 191 | and Traffique and the whole entire and only Liberty use [...] thereunto King and amongst divers other grants | The Company was granted the full, entire, and exclusive liberty, use, and privilege of trading and conducting commerce by sea to and from the East Indies. This included trade with all islands, ports, havens, cities, towns, and places within those regions, carried out in the manner set out in the Charter. The late Charles II had granted, on behalf of himself and his successors, that none of the East Indies, nor any islands, havens, ports, cities, towns, or places within them, were to be visited, frequented, or used by any of his subjects while the Letters Patent remained in force, unless in accordance with their terms. It was further declared that, by virtue of the royal prerogative, which was not to be questioned, all subjects of whatever rank were strictly commanded and prohibited from directly or indirectly visiting, trading, or undertaking voyages of merchandise to or from the East Indies or any part of them, except for the Governor and Company of Merchants of London trading into the East Indies and those belonging to the Company. Such persons were to act only as agents, factors, or servants of the Company, and only with written licence first obtained under the Company’s common seal. Any breach of these rules was to result in the penalties and forfeitures set out in the Letters Patent, although parts of these provisions are now unreadable and have been represented as [...]. Further references were made to additional grants and provisions relating to the Company, its governors, deputy governors, factors, committees, servants, and apprentices, although parts of this section are fragmentary and have been represented as [...]. It was also noted that a later Charter issued by James II, dated at Westminster in March in a year of his reign not fully legible, contained further provisions concerning the Company. Interpretations “Whole entire and only liberty” emphasised that the Company’s right to trade was exclusive, excluding all other English merchants unless formally authorised. “Common seal” referred to the official stamp of the Company, used to give formal approval to documents such as licences to trade. “Prerogative royal” described the monarch’s authority to grant privileges such as trade monopolies without needing approval from Parliament. “Committees” referred to members of the Company entrusted with specific administrative or managerial responsibilities within its governing structure. Speculations Perhaps the repeated restatement of the Company’s exclusive rights suggests that earlier prohibitions had not been fully effective in preventing unauthorised trade? It was probably the case that the insistence on written licences under seal was intended to maintain strict central control over who could participate in the trade, limiting informal or unofficial involvement? Perhaps the fragmented references to additional grants indicate that the Charter was drawing together several earlier provisions into a single reaffirmed framework? It was probably intended that linking the authority of both Charles II and James II would strengthen the legitimacy of the Company’s monopoly across successive reigns? |
213 | 192 | Did Grant Transfer and confirme for himself his heires | The Governor and Company of Merchants of London trading into the East Indies were granted, transferred, and confirmed by Charles II, on behalf of himself and his heirs and successors, all the islands and lands of Bombay in the East Indies. This grant included all rights, profits, territories, and appurtenances belonging to those lands, as well as all castles, forts, towns, cities, ports, havens, buildings, fortifications, franchises, pre-eminences, and hereditaments associated with them. These possessions were granted in as full and complete a manner as they had been held and enjoyed by the King, or as he ought to have held them by virtue of the earlier grant made by the King of Portugal, and not beyond that extent. They were given the right to hold and possess the island and all associated properties, with the lands remaining under the allegiance and obedience due to the Crown. Royal sovereignty over the island and its inhabitants was retained. The Company and its successors were granted the right to hold and enjoy the island of Bombay and all associated premises for ever, for their sole use. This tenure was to be held of the Crown as of the manor of East Greenwich in the County of Kent, under the terms of free and common socage, and not by knight service or in chief. A yearly payment was to be made to the Crown at the feast of the Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin Mary, although the exact sum is not legible and is represented as [...]. Interpretations “Appurtenances” referred to rights or property belonging to the main land, such as access, resources, or associated structures. “Pre-eminences” referred to special rights, privileges, or advantages attached to the possession of the land. “Free and common socage” was a form of land tenure involving fixed obligations, usually a monetary rent, rather than military service. “In capite” referred to holding land directly from the monarch in return for obligations such as military service, which was specifically excluded here. “Manor of East Greenwich” was used as a legal reference point to bring overseas land under English property law, even though the land itself was far from England. Speculations Perhaps the transfer of Bombay from the Portuguese Crown to English control reflected broader competition between European powers for influence in the Indian Ocean? It was probably the case that granting the land under free and common socage showed an intention to treat it as a revenue producing possession rather than one tied to military obligation? Perhaps the arrangement, in which sovereignty was retained by the Crown while control was exercised by the Company, illustrates an early model of indirect imperial rule? It was probably intended that the annual payment, even if symbolic, reinforced the Company’s dependence on royal authority while allowing it considerable freedom in governing the territory? |
214 | 193 | of September then next ensuing And the said late King | It was stated that, from the September next following, Charles II had granted for himself and his heirs and successors that it should be lawful for the Governor and Company of Merchants of London trading into the East Indies, together with their successors, assigns, agents, and servants, to hold, use, exercise, and enjoy all jurisdictions, powers, liberties, privileges, benefits, and advantages within the island of Bombay. These rights were to apply not only within the island itself but also in all voyages to and from it, and in all trade and commerce carried on there or connected with it. The same rights were to be exercised in as full a manner as had already been granted under the earlier Charter or Letters Patent dated 3 April 1661, in the thirteenth year of the King’s reign. The authority extended to all matters relating to plantations, forts, cities, colonies, factories, islands, territories, and settlements, as well as to all trade, commerce, goods, and commodities belonging to or associated with the Company. It was provided that these powers were to be exercised within the island of Bombay as fully as if they had been explicitly set out again in the present grant. Reference was made to earlier Charters and Letters Patent, including one dated 27 March, confirming that all previous grants, privileges, powers, authorities, liberties, immunities, and pre-eminences were to be understood as applying to Bombay. These earlier documents were to be taken together with the present grant to define the full extent of the Company’s rights. It was further recorded that the late King had also granted, by another Charter or Letters Patent dated 5 October in the eighth year of his reign, additional provisions relating to the Company, although part of this section is not legible and has been represented as [...]. Interpretations “Assignes” referred to persons or bodies to whom rights or property had been transferred by the Company, allowing them to act in its place in certain matters. “Preheminences” referred to special advantages or superior rights granted above those of others, often giving priority or authority in trade or governance. “Factories” referred to overseas trading posts where Company agents lived and conducted business, rather than places of manufacture. “Jurisdictions powers liberties” described the combined authority to govern, make decisions, and exercise control within a territory and over its activities. Speculations Perhaps the extension of earlier trading and governing rights to Bombay was intended to ensure continuity, so that the Company could operate there without needing an entirely new legal framework? It was probably the case that combining multiple earlier Charters into a single authority reduced uncertainty about what powers applied in newly acquired territories? Perhaps the broad wording, covering trade, governance, and settlements, reflects how the Company’s role had expanded beyond commerce into territorial administration? It was probably intended that referencing multiple Charters would strengthen the legal basis of the Company’s authority, making it harder for rivals or officials to challenge its control over Bombay? |
215 | 194 | To the one fifth Dividend Shares or the said late Kings of | It was declared that the rights, liberties, and franchises previously granted were to be held and enjoyed by the Company and its successors without being affected by any earlier errors, neglect, or misuse. Any past failure to exercise those rights, or any abuse of them by the Company or its agents, factors, or servants, was not to weaken or cancel the validity of the grants. The Company and its successors were confirmed in the possession and use of these rights for ever, for their sole benefit, in as full and complete a manner as had been provided under the earlier Charters. These rights were to be exercised without disturbance or interference, regardless of any earlier misapplication or nonuse. Reference was made to earlier Letters Patent dated 5 October, although parts of this section are not fully legible and have been represented as [...], indicating that further privileges, immunities, and advantages had been granted in those documents. It was further recorded that Charles II, by a Charter dated 18 December in the twenty-eighth year of his reign, had granted and confirmed to the Company, its successors, and assigns the island of Bombay in full. This included all rights, profits, territories, and associated property. The grant extended to the soil and lands of the island, including woods, mountains, farms, lakes, brooks, havens, rivers, bays, islands, creeks, trees, and timber within its limits. It also included rights to fishing of all kinds, including whales, sturgeons, and other fish in the surrounding seas, streams, and rivers. Further rights were granted over all mines, minerals, and quarries within the island and its territories, whether already discovered or not. This included gold, silver, tin, precious stones, and all other metals or substances that might be found there, together with all associated royal rights. Interpretations “Nonuser or abuse” referred to situations where granted rights had either not been exercised or had been misused, which might otherwise have risked weakening legal claims. “Franchises” referred to special rights or privileges granted by the Crown, often including control over trade, taxation, or local governance. “Royall fishes” referred to certain valuable species, such as whales and sturgeons, which were traditionally reserved to the Crown under English law. “Soile and grounds” referred to the land itself, including its natural features and resources. “Royalties” referred to rights associated with sovereignty, such as control over natural resources, especially mines and valuable commodities. Speculations Perhaps the explicit protection against claims of nonuse or misuse was included because earlier charters had been challenged on such grounds, making it necessary to secure the Company’s position more firmly? It was probably the case that the detailed listing of natural resources reflected the economic importance of Bombay, not only as a trading port but also as a source of valuable materials? Perhaps the inclusion of rights over fisheries and minerals shows an intention to grant the Company a comprehensive form of control, extending beyond trade into resource extraction? It was probably intended that reaffirming these grants under multiple charters would prevent disputes over ownership and ensure continuity of authority across successive reigns? |
216 | 195 | Revenues Rents Customes Castles Forts and buildings and | All revenues, rents, customs, castles, forts, buildings, and fortifications on the island of Bombay, whether already erected or to be erected, were included in the grant, together with all advantages, profits, emoluments, perquisites, and hereditaments belonging to it or connected with it in any way. These were granted in as full and complete a manner as Charles II had possessed or might have possessed them, whether by conquest or by any other right. The island and all its parts were thereby assigned and confirmed to the Governor and Company of Merchants of London trading into the East Indies, their successors and assigns. At the same time, the Crown retained the allegiance owed by the inhabitants and preserved its royal authority and sovereignty over the island and its people. The Company and its successors were granted the right to hold and possess the island and all associated property for ever, for their sole use. This tenure was to be held of the Crown as of the manor of East Greenwich in the County of Kent, under free and common socage, and not by knight service or in chief. Reference was made to the Letters Patent containing these provisions, which included further grants, liberties, privileges, pre-eminences, and clauses not fully set out here. It was also recorded that, by a Charter dated 9 August in the thirty-fifth year of his reign, the same King had established a court of judicature to be held at such places, forts, plantations, or factories in the East Indies as might be appointed, although the remainder of this section is not fully legible and has been represented as [...]. Interpretations “Perquisites” referred to additional benefits or profits attached to an office or possession, often beyond regular income. “Emoluments” referred to income or profit arising from employment, office, or property, especially from official rights or privileges. “Free and common socage” was a form of landholding based on fixed obligations, usually payment, rather than military service. “Conquest thereof or otherwise” indicated that the King’s claim to the territory might rest on different legal grounds, including conquest or earlier grants. Speculations Perhaps the detailed listing of revenues and profits was intended to make clear that Bombay was not only a strategic location but also a significant source of income? It was probably the case that emphasising the King’s right by conquest strengthened the legal claim to the territory against potential challenges from other European powers? Perhaps the retention of sovereignty alongside the grant of possession reflects a balance between royal authority and Company control typical of early imperial arrangements? It was probably intended that the reference to a court of judicature indicates the need to establish formal legal structures as the Company’s settlements grew in size and complexity? |
217 | 196 | As the said Compᵃ shall from time to time direct | It was provided that a court should be established at such places as might from time to time be directed or appointed. This court was to consist of one person trained in civil law and two merchants, together with such officers as were considered necessary. These individuals were to be appointed by the Governor, Deputy Governor, and Court of the Company, or by the greater part of them. The person trained in civil law, together with the two merchants or the majority of them, was granted authority to hear and determine all disputes and legal actions relating to ships, goods, and merchandise trading to or from the specified coasts or regions in violation of the Letters Patent and earlier Charters granted by Charles II. Jurisdiction was also extended to a wide range of commercial matters, including buying, selling, bartering, and other dealings in goods, as well as seizures, customs matters, debts, financial obligations, and agreements for payment in money or merchandise. This included contracts for the hiring of ships, agreements for freight, wages of mariners, and all other maritime concerns. The court was further empowered to hear cases involving debts, trespasses, injuries, and wrongs committed either at sea or within the regions and territories described, including Asia, Africa, and America, concerning any persons present or trading within those limits. All such cases were to be examined and decided by the court based on proper evidence, guided by principles of fairness and good conscience, and according to the recognised customs of merchants. Proceedings were to follow such methods as might be directed from time to time under the Great Seal or Privy Seal. In the absence of such direction, the remaining provisions are not fully legible and have been represented as [...]. Interpretations “Civil law” referred to a legal system derived from Roman law, often used in maritime and international trade cases rather than English common law. “Customs” referred to duties and regulations governing the import and export of goods, enforced by officials to control trade and collect revenue. “Freighting of ships” referred to agreements for the hire of vessels to carry goods, forming a key part of long distance trade arrangements. “Equity and good conscience” referred to principles of fairness applied where strict legal rules might not provide a just outcome, especially in commercial disputes. Speculations Perhaps the inclusion of both a legal expert and merchants in the court reflects an attempt to balance formal legal knowledge with practical experience of trade? It was probably the case that such a wide jurisdiction was necessary because disputes arising from overseas commerce could not easily be referred back to courts in England? Perhaps the reliance on the customs of merchants shows the importance of shared commercial practices that operated across different regions and legal systems? It was probably intended that allowing flexible procedures, especially when royal instructions were absent, would enable the court to function effectively despite delays in communication with England? |
218 | 197 | Directions and untill such Directions should be made | In the absence of specific directions, the judges of the court were to proceed according to their own judgement, issuing decisions and orders either in a summary manner or by other suitable means, depending on the nature of each case. All judgments, determinations, and decrees were to be set down in writing and communicated to those present at the time they were made. These records were to include a brief account of the facts as understood by the judges, together with their decision and reasoning. Reference was made to the Letters Patent dated 9 August, where these provisions, along with other grants, powers, liberties, privileges, and clauses, were set out in greater detail. It was then recorded that it had been brought to notice that several persons, acting contrary to and in contempt of the rights, privileges, and royal intention established by Charles II, had in recent years sent out ships and engaged in trade to and from the East Indies without licence from the Company. These activities had taken place within the regions and seas assigned to the Company. Such actions were described as causing significant damage to the Company, interrupting its trade, and harming its operations in the East Indies. They were also said to have caused wider harm to the trade of the realm as a whole, bringing disadvantage and disorder to that commerce. These matters were taken into serious consideration. It was recognised that the Company had been established and empowered by earlier Letters Patent, and that it was necessary to grant and confirm those rights again, with additional provisions intended to support and advance the trade. It was then declared that further measures would follow, although the remainder of this section is not fully legible and has been represented as [...]. Interpretations “Summary way” referred to a simplified legal process allowing decisions to be made quickly without the full formal procedures of a traditional court. “Short state of the matter” meant a concise written summary of the key facts of a case, rather than a detailed record. “Exigency of several cases” referred to the varying urgency and nature of different disputes, requiring flexible handling by the court. “Letters Patent” referred to formal royal documents granting rights and authority, in this case forming the legal basis of the Company’s powers. Speculations Perhaps the emphasis on written judgments was intended to ensure consistency and accountability in distant courts where oversight from England was limited? It was probably the case that the repeated complaints about unauthorised traders reflected a persistent challenge to the Company’s monopoly, suggesting enforcement remained difficult? Perhaps the claim that such trade harmed the entire realm was intended to justify stronger intervention by presenting the Company’s interests as aligned with national prosperity? It was probably intended that reaffirming and expanding earlier grants would strengthen the Company’s position at a time of increasing competition and pressure from independent merchants? |
219 | 198 | its imports the Honour and welfare of this Realme | It was stated that the honour and welfare of the realm and its subjects required that all disorders and inconveniences affecting the Company should be corrected, and that every effort should be made to improve the trade. It was considered that the trade could only be properly maintained and managed to the nation’s advantage if it were conducted through a single joint stock, and that a divided or general participation without such structure would lead to its ruin. It was also acknowledged that the trade had been carried on by the Governor and Company of Merchants of London trading into the East Indies in a manner that brought honour and benefit to the nation. For this reason, and in recognition of the difficulty and risk of their activities in distant parts of the world, it was intended that they should be encouraged and supported. Out of special favour, certain knowledge, and free will, all previous Charters and Letters Patent granted to the Company were ratified and confirmed for them and their successors for ever. This confirmation included all rights, grants, liberties, customs, franchises, pre-eminences, and authorities contained within those earlier documents. Each individual grant, power, liberty, privilege, pre-eminence, and authority was to be regarded as fully confirmed as if it had been separately restated. This confirmation was to stand despite any previous failure to use those rights, or any misuse or abuse of them. The confirmation remained subject to the conditions, limitations, and provisions contained in the earlier Charters and Letters Patent. Further provisions were indicated, although the remainder of the text is not fully legible and has been represented as [...]. Interpretations “Joint stock” referred to a shared pool of investment capital contributed by multiple participants, allowing large and costly overseas trade to be organised and sustained. “Non-user, misuser, or abuse” referred to situations where granted rights had not been exercised, had been improperly used, or had been used in ways that might otherwise have weakened legal claims. “Franchises” referred to special rights or privileges granted by the Crown, often including exclusive trading rights or powers of governance. “Pre-eminences” referred to superior rights or advantages held over others, particularly in matters of trade or authority. Speculations Perhaps the insistence on a single joint stock reflected experience that competing groups of merchants weakened England’s position in overseas trade by dividing resources and effort? It was probably the case that the strong praise of the Company’s past conduct was intended to justify renewing and strengthening its privileges in the face of criticism? Perhaps the emphasis on difficulty and hazard was meant to highlight the risks undertaken by the Company, reinforcing the argument that such ventures required royal support and protection? It was probably intended that confirming all earlier rights despite misuse would prevent legal challenges based on technical failures, securing the Company’s position for the future? |
220 | 199 | We for our Selves our heires and Successors do | It was granted, on behalf of the Crown and its successors, that the Governor and Company of Merchants of London trading into the East Indies and their successors were to possess for ever all such powers, authorities, privileges, jurisdictions, franchises, courts, and related provisions as they had previously held or ought to have held under earlier Letters Patent. All these rights were to be held and enjoyed in full by the Company and its successors without limitation, in the same manner and to the same extent as under the earlier Charters. Further authority was given that it should be lawful for the Company and its successors, and for their presidents, agents, factors, and councils in the East Indies and the islands mentioned, or for any three of them including the chief officer, to administer formal and lawful oaths to all persons employed by the Company within the limits of the Charters. These oaths were to be the same as those taken by freemen of the Company, along with any other lawful and necessary oaths or tests that might from time to time be required by the Company or by the majority of its governing body. The remainder of this provision is not fully legible and has been represented as [...]. Interpretations “Franchises” referred to special rights or privileges granted by the Crown, often including authority over trade or local governance. “Jurisdictions” referred to the authority to exercise legal and administrative control within a particular area or over certain matters. “Presidents” referred to senior Company officials in overseas settlements who acted as chief administrators in a particular region. “Freemen of the Company” were full members who held trading rights within the Company and were bound by its rules and obligations. Speculations Perhaps the reaffirmation of all earlier powers in a single grant was intended to remove uncertainty and prevent disputes about the extent of the Company’s authority? It was probably the case that allowing Company officials overseas to administer oaths reflected the need for discipline and loyalty in distant settlements where direct oversight from England was limited? Perhaps the requirement for oaths and tests suggests concern about misconduct or divided loyalties among those employed in overseas trade? It was probably intended that consolidating judicial, administrative, and organisational powers would strengthen the Company’s ability to operate as a self governing body in distant territories? |
221 | 200 | [...] to be and be reasonable devised Directed or | Provision was made that further rules and directions might be devised, issued, or appointed as considered reasonable. A court of judicature was established to be held at such places, forts, plantations, or factories along the coasts within the limits of the East Indies as the Company might from time to time direct. This court was to consist of one person trained in civil law and two merchants, together with such officers as were considered necessary. These individuals were to be appointed by the Governor, Deputy Governor, and Court of the Company, or by the greater part of them. The person trained in civil law, together with the two merchants or the majority of them, was granted authority to hear and determine all cases concerning forfeitures and seizures of ships, goods, and merchandise trading to or from the specified coasts in violation of the Charter or earlier Letters Patent granted under Charles II. Jurisdiction extended to civil and maritime matters, including buying, selling, and bartering of goods, as well as all actions, pleas, demands, debts, and promises relating to the payment of money or merchandise. This also included trading contracts, charterparties, agreements for the hiring of vessels, wages of mariners, and all other commercial or maritime disputes. Authority was also given to hear cases involving damage done to the Company by any person, and all other maritime disputes concerning persons residing, travelling to, or present within the specified regions. In addition, cases of trespasses, injuries, and wrongs committed upon the high seas or within the regions and territories described were to be heard, although parts of this section are not fully legible and have been represented as [...]. Interpretations “Charterparties” referred to formal agreements for the hire of a ship, setting out the terms of transport, cargo, and payment. “Person learned in the civil law” referred to someone trained in a legal system based on Roman law, often used in maritime and international disputes rather than English common law. “Pleas and demands” referred to formal legal claims brought before a court, including disputes over debts or obligations. “Affreighting” referred to the hiring or leasing of a ship for the purpose of transporting goods. Speculations Perhaps the repeated establishment of such courts in different Charters suggests that administering justice overseas was a persistent challenge requiring continual reinforcement? It was probably the case that combining legal expertise with merchant experience was intended to ensure decisions were both legally sound and commercially practical? Perhaps the wide jurisdiction granted to the court reflects the complexity of disputes arising from long distance trade, where commercial, maritime, and personal matters were closely connected? It was probably intended that giving the Company authority over such disputes reduced reliance on English courts, allowing quicker resolution in distant trading regions? |
222 | 201 | Or persons Residing or being or Coming in the | All such cases concerning persons residing, being, or coming within the regions of Asia and Africa inside the stated limits were to be heard and decided by the court after proper examination and proof. Judgement was to be given according to principles of fairness and good conscience, and in line with the recognised customs of merchants. Procedures were to follow such methods as might be directed by the Crown under the Great Seal. In the absence of such directions, the judges were to proceed according to their own discretion, using whatever methods they considered most appropriate and just, whether by summary process or otherwise, depending on the nature of each case. All judgments, determinations, and decrees were to be recorded in writing and communicated to those present at the time they were made. These records were to include a brief account of the facts as understood by the judges, together with their decision. Reference was then made to a Charter granted by Charles II, dated 9 October, in which it had been provided that the Governor, Deputy Governor, and Court of the Company, or the greater part of them when assembled, should have full authority to appoint governors and officers for the forts, factories, and plantations mentioned. These appointed governors and officers were granted authority to raise armed forces and to organise military power as they considered necessary. Such forces were to be used for the protection and defence of the Company, although part of this provision is not fully legible and has been represented as [...]. Interpretations “Equity and good conscience” referred to deciding cases based on fairness where strict legal rules might not provide a just outcome, especially in commercial disputes. “Customs of merchants” referred to widely accepted commercial practices, often shared across different regions, forming a basis for resolving trade disputes. “Summary way” referred to a quicker form of legal procedure without the full formalities of a traditional trial, used when speed was necessary. “Short memorial of the matter of fact” referred to a concise written summary of the key facts of a case as understood by the judges. Speculations Perhaps the reliance on both royal direction and judicial discretion reflects the difficulty of governing distant territories where instructions from England could be delayed? It was probably the case that requiring written records of judgments was intended to maintain accountability and consistency in courts operating far from central oversight? Perhaps the power to raise military forces indicates that the Company’s settlements were exposed to significant threats, requiring organised defence beyond ordinary civil authority? It was probably intended that combining judicial, administrative, and military powers in the same structure would allow the Company to act quickly and independently in managing its overseas territories? |
223 | 202 | [...] Martiall Law in which said Govr and Governors and | Authority was confirmed and granted that martial law might be used by the Company and its officers. Full power was given to exercise and apply such authority within the island of St Helena, the fort at Bombay, the coast of Coromandel, and in all other forts, factories, and plantations already established or to be established within the limits of the Charter. It was recorded that disturbances following the recent Revolution in England had been taken advantage of by various native princes and peoples of India and by other nations. In these circumstances, several of the Company’s factories had been attacked or ruined, their servants and goods seized without just cause, and the safety of their ships and agents placed in serious danger, to the detriment of the English nation in those regions. The Company was described as intending first to seek satisfaction for these injuries through reasonable means. If such redress could not be obtained, it was stated that recovery of ships and losses would be pursued by force of arms, which they were now authorised to employ. A request had been made by the Company that, in times of war or hostility in the East Indies, they should be allowed to use martial law both aboard their ships and within their plantations, forts, and settlements, for defence against foreign enemies or domestic rebellion and disorder. Permission was therefore granted that the Governor, Deputy Governor, and Court of the Company, or the greater part of them when assembled, might appoint admirals, vice admirals, rear admirals, captains, and other naval officers from time to time for ships serving the Company within the limits of the Charter. The remainder of this provision is not fully legible and has been represented as [...]. Interpretations “Martial law” referred to the use of military authority to maintain order and discipline, allowing swift punishment and control in situations of conflict or instability. “Factories” referred to trading posts where Company agents operated, often forming the centres of English commercial presence overseas. “Coromandel” referred to the southeastern coast of India, an important region for trade in textiles and other goods. “Admirals, vice admirals, rear admirals” referred to ranks of naval command, indicating a structured maritime hierarchy within the Company’s forces. Speculations Perhaps the reference to the Revolution in England shows how political instability at home had direct consequences for English trade overseas, weakening its position abroad? It was probably the case that granting the Company authority to wage war and organise naval command reflects its transformation into a body with both commercial and military functions? Perhaps the emphasis on self defence and recovery of losses indicates that the Company faced increasing resistance from local powers and competitors in Asia? It was probably intended that formalising naval ranks and military authority would improve coordination and discipline in the Company’s expanding maritime operations? |
224 | 203 | [...] Admirals Captains and other Sea Officers shall | Authority was granted that admirals, captains, and other sea officers appointed by the Company should have full power to raise levies and commissions, and to recruit and employ such numbers of seamen or other military forces as were considered necessary. These forces were to serve aboard the Company’s ships or as directed by its governing body, whether by instruction from London or by commission issued under the Company’s seal in India or elsewhere. Power was given to exercise martial law on board ships and at sea during times of open hostility with other nations, for the defence of the Company’s vessels against enemies. The Company had requested formal confirmation of this authority, and it was stated that such power might be exercised whenever it was judged appropriate, once royal approval had been signified in writing under the monarch’s hand. Further authority was granted that the Company and its successors might establish coinage within their forts. They were permitted to produce money of appropriate weight and fineness, in accordance with the standards used by local rulers, provided that no European coinage was imitated or produced. The coins issued under this authority were to circulate only within cities, towns, ports, and places falling under the limits of the Company’s Charters, and not beyond them. The remainder of the provision is not fully legible and has been represented as [...]. Interpretations “Levies” referred to the raising or recruitment of personnel, especially for military or naval service. “Commission under the seal” referred to a formal written authority issued by the Company, validated by its official seal. “Martial law” referred to military authority exercised in place of ordinary law during wartime or emergency conditions. “Standard of the Princes mint” referred to the local systems of coinage used by regional rulers, including accepted weight and metal purity. Speculations Perhaps the authority to raise forces and enforce martial law at sea reflects the increasing dangers faced by Company ships from rival European powers and local resistance? It was probably the case that requiring royal confirmation before exercising martial law ensured that such powers remained under ultimate Crown control, despite being delegated? Perhaps the permission to mint coinage indicates the practical need for reliable currency in distant settlements where English money was scarce or unsuitable? It was probably intended that limiting the circulation of such coinage to Company territories would prevent confusion or conflict with established European currencies? |
225 | 204 | [...] Ships Vessels Castles Bays and all and singu- The foregoing are true Copies of 3 Records from | All officers, ministers, subjects, and others of the Crown were required to aid, favour, help, and assist the Governor and Company of Merchants of London trading into the East Indies, together with their successors, deputies, officers, factors, servants, and assigns, in carrying out and enjoying the rights granted to them, both on land and at sea, whenever such assistance was requested. It was further declared that the Letters Patent, and all powers and grants contained within them, were to remain legally valid and effective. They were to be interpreted both according to their meaning and their wording in the most favourable way for the benefit and advantage of the Company and its successors. This validity was to stand even if the exact yearly value of the lands or rights granted had not been specified, and regardless of any previous gifts or grants made by the Crown or its predecessors. Any statutes, acts, proclamations, restrictions, or other matters that might appear to contradict these provisions were not to diminish their force. The document was confirmed as having been issued under royal authority at Westminster on 20 April 1687, in the third year of the reign of James II, by writ of the Privy Seal, with the name Pigott recorded. It was noted that the text represented true copies of three records relating to the East India Company, taken from official sources, although parts of the closing statement are not fully legible and have been represented as [...]. Interpretations “Lieges” referred to loyal subjects of the Crown who owed allegiance and service to the monarch. “Behoof” meant benefit or advantage, indicating that the Charter was to be interpreted in favour of the Company. “Privy Seal” referred to a royal seal used to authorise documents before their final issue under the Great Seal. “Letters Patents” referred to official open documents issued by the monarch granting rights, powers, or privileges. Speculations Perhaps the requirement that all officials assist the Company reflects the difficulty of enforcing its authority without active support from state institutions? It was probably the case that the instruction to interpret the Charter favourably was intended to prevent legal challenges based on technicalities or omissions? Perhaps the explicit dismissal of conflicting laws suggests that earlier disputes had arisen over whether such Charters could override existing statutes? It was probably intended that recording the document as an official copy would reinforce its authority and ensure its use in administration and legal matters? |
226 | 205 | By the Governour & Company of Merchants To All to whome these Presents shall come | At a Court of Committees held on 8 February 1689 by the Governor and Company of Merchants of London trading into the East Indies, a document was issued addressing all recipients with greeting. Reference was made to a Commission dated 20 June 1683, by which Major John Blackmore had been appointed Governor and Commander in Chief of the island of St Helena, together with all its forts, lands, territories, jurisdictions, and forces employed in the Company’s service there, as well as over all inhabitants of the island. By the same Commission, Lieutenant Robert Holden had been appointed Deputy Governor and Lieutenant of the garrison of soldiers on the island, under the command of Major Blackmore. He had also been designated as second member of the Council, General Storekeeper, and Gunner. Gregory Field had been appointed Ensign of the garrison company of soldiers, and had also been made third member of the Council and Surveyor General of the island, with responsibility for buildings, lands, and plantations under the authority of the Governor. It was declared that the earlier Commission was confirmed so far as it related to Major John Blackmore. However, all provisions of that Commission granting office or authority to Robert Holden and Gregory Field were revoked and declared void. In witness of this decision, the Company affixed its common seal, although the exact date of sealing is not legible and has been represented as [...]. Interpretations “Court of Committees” referred to the governing body of the Company responsible for making administrative decisions, similar to a board of directors. “Ensign” referred to a junior commissioned officer in a military unit, often responsible for carrying the company’s flag. “Surveyor General” referred to an official responsible for overseeing land, buildings, and development, including measurement and planning. “Common seal” referred to the Company’s official stamp used to validate formal documents and decisions. Speculations Perhaps the revocation of authority from Robert Holden and Gregory Field indicates internal disputes or dissatisfaction with their conduct in office? It was probably the case that confirming Major Blackmore’s authority while removing others was intended to stabilise leadership on the island? Perhaps the combination of military and administrative roles given in the earlier Commission reflects the small and vulnerable nature of the settlement, requiring individuals to hold multiple responsibilities? It was probably intended that issuing this decision under the Company’s seal would reinforce its authority and ensure compliance among those on the island? |
227 | 206 | and Constitute Joshua Johnson to be our Deputy Gover- | Joshua Johnson was appointed Deputy Governor, President of the island of St Helena, and chief of the garrison company of soldiers, under the command of Major John Blackmore as Captain. He was also appointed second member of the Council. Richard Keigwin was appointed Ensign of the garrison company, in which Major Blackmore remained Captain and Joshua Johnson served as Lieutenant. He was further appointed third member of the Council, General Storekeeper, and Surveyor General, with responsibility for buildings, lands, and plantations under the authority of the Governor. The Governor and Council, once established, or any two of them provided that the Governor was always one, were granted chief command and authority over the island in all matters. All officers, inhabitants, and soldiers present or to be present were required to give due obedience to their authority. It was further provided that, in the event of the death or removal of Major John Blackmore, Joshua Johnson was to succeed as Governor of the island. In the event of the death or removal of Joshua Johnson, Richard Keigwin was to succeed as Governor, with the same powers as had been granted to Major Blackmore. This Council was to take effect upon the safe and timely arrival of the ship Benjamin, commanded by Captain Croone Browne, and was to continue in force until altered by authority under the Company’s common seal or by formal letters issued by the Governor, Deputy Governor, and at least twelve members of the Court of Committees. Those appointed as Governor and Council were required to carry out their duties in accordance with existing orders and instructions, as well as any further instructions that might be issued from time to time by the Company. Interpretations “President” in this context referred to the senior Company official on the island responsible for overseeing administration alongside the Governor. “Ensign” referred to a junior military officer, typically responsible for carrying the company’s flag and assisting senior officers. “General Storekeeper” referred to the official in charge of managing supplies, provisions, and equipment essential for the settlement. “Surveyor General” referred to the officer responsible for overseeing land, buildings, and the organisation of plantations. Speculations Perhaps the clear line of succession was intended to prevent disputes or confusion in a remote settlement where delays in communication with England could create instability? It was probably the case that combining military, administrative, and logistical roles in a small number of individuals reflects the limited personnel available on the island? Perhaps the requirement that the Governor must always be present for decisions suggests concern about maintaining strong central authority in the colony? It was probably intended that tying the start of the new administration to the arrival of a specific ship ensured that instructions and personnel changes would take effect in an orderly and coordinated manner? |
228 | 207 | And Company And doe hereby require will | All inhabitants of the island of St Helena, together with the officers and soldiers employed in the Company’s service, were required to obey the Governor and Council and to assist them in carrying out the authority granted to them. Reference was made to a Charter granted under the Great Seal of England by Charles II on 27 August in the thirty-fifth year of his reign, by which power had been given to raise armies, train and muster military forces, and to govern and apply martial law within forts, factories, and plantations established within Asia and America for defence against foreign invasion or domestic rebellion. It was noted that this authority had been confirmed by a later Charter granted by James II on 11 April 1685. Authority was therefore granted that Major John Blackmore, and in the event of his death or removal the Governor for the time being, acting with the advice of the Council, should exercise all such powers, jurisdictions, and authorities as had been granted under those Charters. These powers were to be used for maintaining peace on the island, upholding the honour of the English nation in those distant regions, and promoting the benefit of the Company as well as the trade and welfare of the inhabitants. The document was issued under the Company’s seal on 8 February 1689, with the names Ro Blackbourne and Thomas Woolley recorded as witnesses. Interpretations “Martial law” referred to the use of military authority to maintain order and discipline, particularly in times of threat or instability when ordinary legal processes might be insufficient. “Train and muster” referred to the organisation and preparation of troops, including assembling and drilling them for military service. “Factories” referred to overseas trading posts where Company agents lived and conducted business, rather than manufacturing sites. “Great Seal of England” referred to the official seal used to authenticate major state documents, giving them full legal authority. Speculations Perhaps the repeated emphasis on obedience reflects concern about maintaining discipline in a remote settlement where authority could easily be challenged? It was probably the case that the confirmation of military powers under multiple Charters was intended to remove any doubt about the Company’s right to defend its possessions? Perhaps the linking of military authority with the honour of the English nation suggests that the Company’s actions overseas were seen as representing the state as well as private interests? It was probably intended that empowering the Governor to act decisively would help secure both the settlement and the Company’s wider trading interests in the region? |
229 | 208 | Blank page | |
230 | 209 | Blank page | |
231 | 210 | Hand of St Helena At a Court of Judicature held November the 7th 1683 Sr John Blackmore Judge Andrᵒ Wiefson Plaintiff in an Action of Trespass & damage Tho Simleton being sworn Declares that he did see a Dogg Richard Griffith sworn Declarith that he did see a black John Harding sworn Declarith that he was at the Defendants Wᵐ Wakefield sworn Declarith that he never did see Mr Gary sworn saith he did see the Defendants dogg [...] the said Court October | At a Court of Judicature held on 7 November 1683 at St Helena, Sir John Blackmore served as Judge, together with Captain Joshua Johnson, Mr Robert Blackborne, Mr William Bonman, Mr John Frith, and others. An action of trespass and damage valued at 20 was brought by Andrew Wiefson against James Wakefield. It was alleged by Wiefson that Wakefield had kept a dog on his land which had caused harm. Evidence was presented in support of this claim, although part of the record is not fully legible and has been represented as [...]. Thomas Simleton, being sworn, declared that he had seen a dog run after some cattle, but did not know whose cattle they were or whether they had been harmed. He also stated that some of those present had attempted to drive the dog away after it had barked at them. Richard Griffith, being sworn, declared that he had seen a black dog belonging to the defendant, Wakefield, run after some cattle and seize one cow twice. However, he did not know whose cattle they were, nor whether any harm had been done. John Harding, being sworn, declared that he had been at Wakefield’s house and had seen cattle in his grounds, along with a dog running after them in a manner suggesting harm. He did not know whose cattle they were or whether any damage had occurred. William Wakefield, being sworn, declared that he had never seen or known the defendant Wakefield or his dog to cause harm to any of the plaintiff’s cattle. Mr Gary, being sworn, stated that he had seen the defendant’s dog [...] and had seen it worrying among [...], and that attempts had been made to bring the dog back to Wakefield, although parts of this testimony are not fully legible and have been represented as [...]. Further proceedings of the court in October are mentioned, although the details are incomplete. Interpretations “Action of trespass” referred to a legal claim brought for unlawful interference with property, in this case damage to livestock. “Worried” in this context referred to an animal being attacked or harassed by a dog, especially livestock being chased or bitten. “Being sworn” indicated that each witness had taken an oath to tell the truth before giving evidence. Speculations Perhaps the lack of clear evidence about ownership of the cattle made it difficult for the court to determine responsibility or assess damages? It was probably the case that such disputes over livestock were common in a small settlement where animals grazed freely and boundaries were not always strictly enforced? Perhaps the repeated uncertainty among witnesses suggests that proof of actual damage, rather than mere pursuit by the dog, was required to succeed in such a claim? It was probably intended that recording witness testimony in this structured manner reflects an effort to apply formal legal procedures even in a remote colonial setting? |
232 | 211 | Hand of St Helena Att a Court of Judicature held November the 7th 1683 Sr John Blackmore Judge Andrᵒ Wiefson Plaintiff in an Action of Trespass & damage Tho Simleton being sworne Declarith that he did see a Dogg Richard Griffith sworne Declarith that he did see a black John Harding sworne Declarith that he was at the Defendants Wᵐ Wakefield sworne Declarith that he never did see Mr Gary sworne saith he did see the Defendants dogg [...] the said Court October | At a Court of Judicature held on 7 November 1683 at St Helena, Sir John Blackmore served as Judge, together with Captain Joshua Johnson, Mr Robert Blackborne, Mr William Bonman, and Mr John Frith. Andrew Wiefson brought an action of trespass and damage, valued at 20, against James Wakefield. It was alleged that Wakefield had caused serious harm to his cattle by setting a dog upon them. Witnesses were presented in support of this claim. Thomas Simleton, being sworn, declared that he had seen a dog run after some cattle, but did not know whose cattle they were or whether they had been harmed. He also stated that some persons had attempted to drive the dog away from pursuing them. Richard Griffith, being sworn, declared that he had seen a black dog belonging to Wakefield run after some cattle and seize one cow twice. He did not know whose cattle they were, nor whether any harm had been done. John Harding, being sworn, declared that he had been at Wakefield’s house and had seen cattle in his grounds, together with a dog running after them in a manner that suggested harm. He did not know whose cattle they were or whether any had been damaged or injured. William Wakefield, being sworn, declared that he had never seen or known the defendant Wakefield or his dog to cause harm to any of the plaintiff’s cattle. Mr Gary, being sworn, stated that he had seen the defendant’s dog run after some cattle, with Wakefield following in order to call the dog off. He did not observe any of the cattle to have been harmed or damaged. Further proceedings of the court in October were mentioned, although the details are not fully legible and have been represented as [...]. Interpretations “Action of trespass” referred to a legal claim concerning unlawful interference with property, including damage to livestock. “Setting a dog at them” meant deliberately encouraging or allowing a dog to chase or attack animals. “Damnified” referred to suffering loss or damage, especially in a legal sense. Speculations Perhaps the consistent uncertainty among witnesses about ownership of the cattle reflects the informal grazing practices of the settlement, where animals may not have been clearly marked or confined? It was probably the case that the absence of clear evidence of actual damage weakened the plaintiff’s claim, despite the dog’s behaviour being observed? Perhaps the testimony that the defendant attempted to call the dog off suggests that intent to harm may have been an important factor in the court’s judgement? It was probably intended that such detailed recording of witness statements demonstrates an effort to apply structured legal reasoning even in a small and remote colonial community? |
233 | 212 | Tho Simleton Declarith as the sd Wᵐ Gary sd being in Compᵉ with him at the same time. Upon the whole matter the Jury brought their verdict for the Defendt no more damage Eliz Roads Plaintiffe in an action of Defamation of 20 Damages agt Gabriel Bowne for saying he lay with his maids daughters wife, for proofe whereof the produced the witnesses following vizt Eliz Steward sworne saith that he the Defendt Bowne did tell her that he lay with a woman and had a childe with her, and that the woman her was the wife or maid servant of the said Gabriel Bowne did tell her the said Eliz Stewart That it was himself that did it, and the woman was Martha Gabriel Bowne being Examined saith that denies the fact, and said that there had been words between him and the said Eliz Roads about a difference between them, about a week ago, and that in malice and envy the said Eliz Roads had declared this against him the same having spoken of it selfe about a fortnight ago since Matthew Bonny sworne saith that Gabr Bowne did tell him about a week ago that he heard that one woman had layne with him, and that when he asked him who it was he the said Bowne told him he did not know Mr Roads being Examined saith there was a man seen into the house where they lay in the night time, and believed the same to have bin Bowne coming to him and hastily departing of him, he went away and she did not know who it was Upon the whole matter the Jury brought in their verdict for the said Plaintiffe 10 li dam Cost & Charges Hugh Boddy Plaintiffe in an action of burglary against Gabriel Bowne for breaking open his house in the night time for proofe thereof he produced the witnesses following Eliz Steward sworne saith that Gabriel Bowne did see her that there was a man that did break open the sd Boddys house in the night time to goe in and she went abroad and the said Eliz Steward said she was frighted by him | Thomas Simleton declared that his evidence agreed with that of William Gary, both having been present together at the same time. Upon consideration of the whole matter, the jury returned a verdict in favour of the defendant, with no damages awarded. Elizabeth Roads brought an action of defamation valued at 20 against Gabriel Bowne, alleging that he had stated that he had lain with his maid’s daughter’s wife. Witnesses were produced in support of the claim. Elizabeth Steward, being sworn, stated that Bowne had told her that he had lain with a woman and had fathered a child with her. She further stated that a woman, described as either the wife or maid servant of Bowne, had told her that he himself had committed the act, and that the woman involved was named Martha. Gabriel Bowne, when examined, denied the allegation. He stated that there had been a dispute between himself and Elizabeth Roads about a week earlier, and that the accusation had been made out of malice and envy. He also stated that the matter had been spoken of about a fortnight earlier. Matthew Bonny, being sworn, stated that Bowne had told him about a week earlier that he had heard that a woman had lain with him. When asked who it was, Bowne had replied that he did not know. Mr Roads, when examined, stated that a man had been seen entering the house where they slept during the night, and it was believed to have been Bowne. He stated that the man had come and departed quickly, but that the woman did not know who it was. Upon consideration of the whole matter, the jury returned a verdict in favour of the plaintiff, awarding 10 pounds in damages, together with costs and charges. Hugh Boddy then brought an action of burglary against Gabriel Bowne, alleging that he had broken open his house during the night. Witnesses were presented in support of this claim. Elizabeth Steward, being sworn, stated that Bowne had told her that a man had broken open Boddy’s house at night in order to enter it. She further stated that she had gone outside and had been frightened by him, although part of this testimony is not fully clear. Interpretations “Defamation” referred to making a false statement that harmed another person’s reputation, especially by alleging immoral or criminal behaviour. “Lay with” was a common expression meaning to have had sexual relations. “Costs and charges” referred to additional expenses awarded by the court, covering the cost of bringing the case. “Burglary” referred to unlawfully entering a building, especially at night, with intent to commit a crime. Speculations Perhaps the defamation case shows how seriously accusations of sexual misconduct were treated in a small community, where reputation would have had significant social consequences? It was probably the case that conflicting testimonies and uncertainty about identity made it difficult to establish clear proof in such cases? Perhaps the relatively modest damages awarded reflect either limited evidence or the court’s attempt to balance competing claims? It was probably intended that recording multiple cases together demonstrates the range of disputes handled by the court, from property damage to personal reputation and criminal accusations? |
234 | 213 | that she would be hanged if it was not himself, and the Mr Boddy being Examined saith that shee lockt the doors, and Gab Bowne being Examined denyed the fact, or that Ever he Upon the whole matter the Jury find him guilty and it Upon an Information given by the Judge of this Court, that And Wiefson being Examined Denyed yt he Ever said any Court adjourned until Friday the | Elizabeth Steward, continuing her testimony, declared that she had said that she would be hanged if it had not been Gabriel Bowne himself, and that Bowne had immediately answered and sworn that it was so. She further stated that Bowne had told her that at the same time he had given bacon and beer to three Dutch men who were in the house, and had afterwards left them there, locking them inside before departing. Mr Boddy, being examined, stated that he had locked the doors and later found them open, with the windows broken. Gabriel Bowne, when examined, denied both the act and that he had ever made such statements. Upon consideration of the whole matter, the jury found Bowne guilty. It was determined by the court that he should forfeit the recognisance by which he had previously been bound to good behaviour, and suffer the penalty attached to it. An additional matter was then raised by the judge of the court, Sir John Blackmore, concerning statements made by Andrew Wiefson that were considered defamatory towards him. The informant was called and, upon examination, declared that Wiefson had urged him, following a disagreement with Mr Draper, to make a complaint to the Governor. It was further alleged that Wiefson had stated that the Governor would accept bribes to favour cases, and that, to Wiefson’s knowledge, the Governor had taken bribes and deceitful payments from Mr Eveless in order to influence a case against Wiefson. Andrew Wiefson, when examined, denied having made such statements. He declared that if he had said anything of that kind, he was sorry, and he asked the Governor’s forgiveness in open court. This apology was accepted as sufficient satisfaction for the injury, and he was discharged. The court was then adjourned until Friday, 8 December 1683. Interpretations “Recognisance” referred to a formal legal obligation, often involving a financial bond, requiring a person to keep the peace or behave well, with a penalty if broken. “Bound to his good behaviour” meant that a person had previously been required to avoid misconduct, under threat of penalty. “Information” referred to a formal complaint or accusation brought before a court. “Defamation” referred to making statements that harmed another person’s reputation, especially when those statements accused them of misconduct. Speculations Perhaps the weight given to Elizabeth Steward’s testimony suggests that confession or admission, even if disputed, carried strong influence in the court’s judgement? It was probably the case that the penalty of forfeiting a recognisance was used as a practical way to enforce discipline without resorting to more severe punishment? Perhaps the handling of the accusation against the Governor shows the importance placed on maintaining authority and reputation within a small and hierarchical settlement? It was probably intended that accepting an apology in open court allowed disputes involving authority figures to be resolved quickly without prolonged conflict? |
214 | Memorandum That hereafter should follow another Session but that it is stopt which is a tryall of Richd Sligh Theft driven and severall Blacks belonging to Robby of Governours house etc 114 Island St Helena The Proceedings at a Tryall of Servᵗ Richᵈ Honeywood att Present Sr John Blackmore Governᵣ as Judge The Judge had made Speech to the auditors Concerning the Then a Proclamation was made and the said Prisoner And an Indictment was read as followeth Richard Honeywood thou standest accused by the name | A memorandum recorded that a further session had been intended to follow, but that it was stopped. This related to a trial concerning Richard Sligh and a matter of theft involving cattle and several slaves belonging to Robby of the Governor’s household, although details are incomplete. Proceedings were then recorded of a trial held at a session on 6 October 1683 on the island of St Helena. Sir John Blackmore presided as judge, together with Captain Gregory Field, Mr Nathaniel Fox, and Mr Thomas Gyles. A speech was delivered by the judge to those present, explaining the nature of the offence and cautioning the jury to act with fairness and conscience. They were instructed to carefully distinguish truth from falsehood, and to acquit or condemn the accused based on the evidence. The seriousness of the crime was emphasised, with it being stated that the taking of life required the loss of life in return. A proclamation was then made, and the prisoner, Richard Honeywood, was ordered to surrender himself into the custody of the marshal, where he was held. An indictment was read, accusing Richard Honeywood, described as a servant in the service and pay of the Honourable Company of English merchants trading to the East Indies on the island of St Helena, of having, with malice and intent, violently assaulted, wounded, and killed a man using a rapier. The act was described as being committed contrary to the peace of the King and against the laws and regulations established by the Company for the governance of the island. Interpretations “Session” referred to a formal sitting of a court where legal cases were heard and decided. “Marshal” referred to the officer responsible for custody of prisoners and maintaining order in court proceedings. “Indictment” referred to a formal charge stating the crime of which a person was accused. “Rapier” referred to a slender, sharply pointed sword commonly used in the period. Speculations Perhaps the reference to a halted session suggests that legal proceedings could be disrupted or delayed in a small and remote settlement with limited resources? It was probably the case that the judge’s strong emphasis on the seriousness of the offence reflects the importance placed on maintaining order in a confined community? Perhaps the invocation of both royal authority and Company laws indicates an overlap between state and corporate legal systems in governing the island? It was probably intended that such formal procedures, including proclamation and indictment, would reinforce the legitimacy of the court despite its remote location? | |
236 | 215 | What sayst thou Richᵈ Honeywood art thou Guilty of the Not Guilty Q How sayst thou whom wilt thou be tryed Q Peace God send thee a good Deliverance Judge Call over the Names of the Jury who were done and they are Q Richᵈ Honeywood thou hast bin Indicted for maliciously Even Court right Cryer Oyes Rᵈ Sr Thumble Defends the Court that Mr Maurice may not be of them Orlando Bagly free Planter Cyer one Good men well and true stand together & have regard to your Evidence Then Orlando Bagly free Planter was appointed foreman You | Richard Honeywood was asked how he answered to the indictment, and whether he was guilty or not guilty. He replied that he was not guilty. He was then asked by whom he wished to be tried, to which he answered that he would be tried by God and the country. A formal response was given wishing that he might receive a fair deliverance. The judge ordered that the names of the jury be called, and those summoned appeared accordingly. The charge against Honeywood, that he had maliciously and feloniously killed a man named Manners, was restated. It was noted that he had pleaded not guilty and had submitted himself to trial by jury. He was informed that he might object to any juror before they were sworn. An objection was raised against one proposed juror, Mr Maurice, and he was excluded. The remaining jurors were then sworn. The jury consisted of Orlando Bagly, a free planter, John Mathews, Thomas Harper, Owen Davies, Richard Leach, Francis Fox, Henry Manning, Andrew Rickson, Isaac Hayter Senior, William Pilkington Senior, and John Baxter. They were described as good and lawful men, instructed to consider the evidence carefully. Orlando Bagly was appointed foreman of the jury and was sworn in that role. Interpretations “By God and the country” referred to the common legal formula indicating trial by jury, meaning that the verdict would be decided by fellow inhabitants under oath. “Free planter” referred to a settler who owned or worked land independently, rather than serving as an employee or soldier. “Foreman” referred to the juror chosen to lead the jury, organise deliberations, and deliver the final verdict. “Oyes” was a traditional call made in court to command attention and silence before proceedings. Speculations Perhaps the defendant’s ability to challenge jurors reflects an effort to ensure fairness even in a small community where many individuals would have known one another? It was probably the case that the use of a jury composed of local settlers shows how English legal practices were adapted to colonial settings? Perhaps the inclusion of individuals described as “Senior” suggests an emphasis on experience or reputation in selecting jurors? It was probably intended that maintaining these formal procedures reinforced the legitimacy of the trial despite the limited size and resources of the settlement? |
237 | 216 | You shall well and truly try and true deliverance make Then the rest was sworne as followeth Take the same Oath yoᵘʳ foreman hath taken you and every one of C B Unto which Indictment the Prisoner at the Barr hath pleaded not Stand together and have yoᵘʳ Evidence Judge Call the Witnesses one by one, and sworne them as the Court C B Cryer see Anne Conner Cryer Anne Conner come before the Court and give yoᵘʳ attendance who Judge Give yoᵘʳ whole knowledge to the Jury what you know of Richᵈ Anno 1683 January the 28ᵗʰ about 9 or 10 a Clock in the morning | The jury was sworn with an oath requiring them to fairly and truthfully try the case between the Crown and the prisoner, Richard Honeywood, without fear, favour, or bias, and to decide according to the evidence and their best judgement. The remaining jurors were sworn in the same manner, each being required to uphold the oath already taken by the foreman. It was declared that the prisoner had pleaded not guilty and had submitted himself to trial by jury. The jurors were instructed that, if they found him guilty, they were to determine what goods and possessions he held. If they found him not guilty, they were to consider whether he had fled, and if so, what goods he possessed, and if not, to state no further finding. The court then ordered that the witnesses be called and examined. Anne Conner was summoned, appeared before the court, and was sworn. She gave evidence concerning the events of 28 January 1683, at about nine or ten in the morning. She stated that Richard Honeywood, a servant to Mr John Nicolls, had come to her house in a drunken state. She recounted that there had been discussion involving Honeywood and a man named Manners. Honeywood had asked Manners to be at the wharf on the following Wednesday, promising that provisions would be sent to him. It was stated that Manners had refused to go, and Honeywood had questioned why he would not obey the Governor. Manners had replied that he wished to be free to go ashore. It was further stated that there had been discussion about whether he should go freely or under the direction of a man named William Seale, as had been proposed by Honeywood. The account continued, although the remainder of this section is not fully legible. Interpretations “Prisoner at the bar” referred to the accused person standing before the court to answer the charges. “Goods and chattels” referred to personal property and possessions that could be forfeited if a person was found guilty. “Fly for it” referred to fleeing or attempting to escape after committing an offence, which could affect judgement or penalties. “Victuals” referred to food or provisions supplied for a journey or for sustenance. Speculations Perhaps the detailed instructions to the jury about goods and flight reflect legal practices concerned not only with guilt but also with property and consequences following conviction? It was probably the case that the mention of drunkenness was significant, as it may have influenced perceptions of Honeywood’s behaviour and responsibility? Perhaps the dispute about obeying the Governor suggests underlying tensions about authority and discipline among those living on the island? It was probably intended that witness testimony about prior interactions would help establish motive or context leading to the alleged killing? |
238 | 217 | Maurice why should you Reflect upon the Govᵗ you have no reason I went downe into my thatch house and gott some stuff ready | Anne Conner continued her testimony, describing a quarrel in which a man named Maurice was reproached for speaking against the Governor without cause. It was stated that another man, Hunt, had sworn repeatedly and used offensive language, declaring that he knew how to keep his own counsel. Reference was made to Mr William Bonman and Mr Thomas Greening, who were present during a dispute involving a woman. It was stated that attempts were made to quiet those involved by informing them that the Governor was in the nearby market house and might hear them. Honeywood urged Hunt to be silent and not make himself offensive to the Governor, but Hunt continued to swear and declared that he did not care if the Governor heard him. Honeywood told him to repeat such words to the Governor before going ashore. Hunt then showed Honeywood a wound on his arm, stating that Honeywood had previously caused it. Honeywood questioned why Hunt raised the matter again. The dispute continued, with Hunt accusing the Governor of favouring Mr Bonman against him, and asserting that he could make the Governor appear disreputable, while Honeywood denied that this could be done. The argument persisted for some time. During this, Anne Conner stated that she went to her thatched house to prepare provisions for supper. While carrying them back, she encountered Mr Bonman, who complained of abuses against him. She stated that she promised to inform Honeywood and bring him to speak with Bonman. Reference was made to a meeting that took place afterwards, although parts of the account are unclear. She stated that she had been at the widow Libins’s house, where drink had been taken and words exchanged. It was suggested that further action might follow from what had been said. She stated that Honeywood went down, followed by Hunt and Williams. She entered a chamber and saw Hunt between the curtains in Bonman’s house. She then went around the back of the house and afterwards proceeded to the house of Libins, where she did not remain long. A noise was heard, described as occurring once or several times, and afterwards she saw Richard Honeywood, although the remainder of this account is not fully legible and has been represented as [...]. Interpretations “Make himself odious to the Governor” meant to behave in a way that would offend or anger the Governor, risking punishment or disapproval. “Market house” referred to a central public building used for trade and gatherings, often near administrative activity. “Curtains” referred to bed hangings or partitions within a room, often used for privacy in sleeping areas. “Thatch house” referred to a simple dwelling with a roof made of straw or similar materials. Speculations Perhaps the repeated references to disputes about the Governor suggest tensions over authority and perceived favouritism within the settlement? It was probably the case that alcohol contributed to the escalation of the quarrel, as indicated by mentions of drinking and heated language? Perhaps the witness’s movements between houses and locations reflect the close proximity of dwellings, making events easily observed but also difficult to interpret clearly? It was probably intended that this testimony established the sequence of events leading up to the alleged killing, even though parts of the account remain unclear? |
239 | 218 | a Coming with two swords for his hand he put his owne in ye scabberd Judge What Time was this Jury Had Hunt when he went to house any sword Judge You have heard Mr Cannady say, now you aske any Priso No, I can say nothing against it Jury How many thrusts of sword did you make Judge had they thrown stones to themselves and no body else at them Judge Have you or any of you any more Questions to aske this Jury No Then Tho Goodwin was Called and Sworne Judge Tho Goodwin Declare what you know of this matter to the Tho Goodwin Yesterday was seven nights between six and 7 of the Clock | Anne Conner further declared that she saw Richard Honeywood coming with two swords in his hand. He placed one of his own into its scabbard and said to her that she should stand aside, as there was a man slain. When she asked who it was, he replied that he did not know. She stated that she then ran ashore, and shortly afterwards a maid named Goodwin went out and returned, reporting that a man had been killed or wounded. It was stated that when Elizabeth Honeywood came to Mr Libins’s house, John Williams was present and asked Honeywood to give him his sword. Honeywood refused, stating that he would break it instead. He then trod upon the sword, and when it did not break, he threw it to the ground and left it there. The judge asked at what time these events had occurred, and it was stated by Mr Cannady that it had been about eight or nine o’clock in the evening. The jury inquired whether Hunt had carried a sword when he went to the house, to which it was answered that he had not, although another man named Tomp, who came with him, had carried one. The prisoner was asked whether he had any questions or objections to this testimony, and he replied that he had nothing to say against it. The jury then asked how many thrusts had been made with the sword. Mr Cannady answered that there had been three thrusts for one blow, and that one man had been wounded, adding that Honeywood had struck one blow, apparently in an attempt to make peace with Hunt. Further questions were asked regarding whether stones had been thrown, and it was stated that several persons had been present and involved, although the details were unclear. No further questions were put to this witness. Thomas Goodwin was then called and sworn. He declared that on the previous week, between six and seven in the evening, he had gone near Mr Sexton’s house and sat down. Shortly afterwards, Mr Sexton came in and informed him that there was a quarrel between Richard Honeywood and Sergeant Hunt. He stated that almost immediately after hearing this, he heard the sound of swords clashing in the street and went to the door to see who was making the noise. Interpretations “Scabbard” referred to the sheath used for holding a sword when not in use. “Thrusts” referred to stabbing motions made with a sword, as opposed to striking blows. “Clashing of swords” indicated a physical fight involving edged weapons, suggesting a duel or violent altercation. “Sergeant” referred to a military rank, indicating that Hunt held a position of authority among the soldiers. Speculations Perhaps the detail that Honeywood carried two swords suggests preparation for violence or the involvement of multiple participants in the fight? It was probably the case that the destruction or attempted destruction of the sword was intended to remove evidence or demonstrate anger after the event? Perhaps the testimony indicating that Honeywood struck a blow “to make friends” reflects confusion among witnesses about whether the act was aggressive or an attempt at intervention? It was probably intended that the sequence of witnesses would build a clearer account of the quarrel escalating into fatal violence, even though some details remained inconsistent or uncertain? |
240 | 219 | I saw three men together but saw no Motion of them, but Jury Did you not see Hunt have a Sword Judge Did you see Honeywood and Hunt fight[in]g together Judge Have you any Questions to ask this witness Judge have you any questions to ask him Then Deadalus Barker was Called and sworne D. B. Yesterday was seven night Mr Bomull came to our house and | Thomas Goodwin declared that he had seen three men together but had not observed any movement at first. He then suddenly saw one man fall to the ground while the other two walked away. He went to see what had happened and heard William ask Honeywood for his sword, to which Honeywood replied that he would not give it but would break it. When he went to discover who had been struck, Daedalus Barker came to him, and it was reported that Hunt had been wounded and killed. The Governor was then informed of the event. When questioned by the jury, Goodwin stated that he had not seen Hunt with a sword and had not witnessed any fighting, noting that it had been somewhat dark. No further questions were asked. Daedalus Barker was then called and sworn. He declared that about a week earlier Mr Bonman had come to his house and asked for a bowl of punch. Barker had replied that none could be provided without payment, whereupon Bonman gave him half a dollar. Barker then went to Mr Cannady’s to obtain a bottle of brandy. Upon going upstairs, he found Sergeant Honeywood, Hunt, and William together, with Honeywood and Hunt engaged in heated argument. Hunt asserted one thing while Honeywood denied it, though Barker did not understand the subject of their dispute. While the punch was being prepared, Barker stated that he was counting his money when Hunt, in an agitated state, addressed him angrily with oaths. Barker replied that he had not been brought up to such behaviour and placed his money in his pocket for fear that Hunt might strike it from his hand. He further stated that Honeywood then fastened on his belt and sword. After continued heated words, Barker placed himself between Honeywood and Hunt. He then heard Hunt and William speaking about the key to a sea chest, with William stating that he had it. Interpretations “Darkeish” referred to dim or low light conditions, which could affect the reliability of observation. “Sea chest” referred to a personal storage chest used by sailors or soldiers for keeping belongings. “High words” referred to an argument or heated exchange. “Buckle on his belt and sword” indicated preparation for action, often suggesting readiness for a fight. Speculations Perhaps the inability of witnesses to clearly see events due to darkness contributed to uncertainty about who struck the fatal blow? It was probably the case that alcohol played a role in escalating tensions, as suggested by references to punch and brandy? Perhaps Barker’s attempt to stand between the men indicates that others present recognised the danger of the situation before violence occurred? It was probably intended that this testimony helped establish the immediate circumstances leading up to the confrontation, even though the exact sequence of actions remained unclear? |
241 | 220 | [...] He did not a sword when hee saw him in Goodwins house Jury Q. H D. B Judge R. H Judge Jury Then M r Sexton was Called and Sworne Judge M r Sexton | Daedalus Barker continued his testimony, stating that Hunt had told William to go along with him after giving him the key, and the two went downstairs together. After the drink had been prepared, Barker went downstairs and was approached at the door by Hunt, who asked for some punch. Barker refused, stating that he did not wish to give drink to a man who would behave disorderly in his house, and he shut the door. He stated that he later heard that there might be fighting between Sergeant Honeywood and Sergeant Hunt. He went to the entry to see whether they had come out, expecting that they would fight, but saw no one. He then observed Mr Samuel going upstairs again, and he himself went up and saw Hunt and Honeywood together behind the main door, standing close, although he heard no noise. Shortly afterwards, he heard a disturbance and went to look, and then heard Honeywood being asked to give up his sword, to which Honeywood replied that he would break it. Parts of this account are unclear and have been represented as [...]. When questioned, Barker stated that he had not seen Hunt with a sword at that time. The prisoner asked whether it had indeed been him who was present, or whether it had been William, to which Barker replied that he believed it had been Honeywood. No further questions were asked. Mr Sexton was then called and sworn. He stated that he had been in the company of Mr Samuel at Mr Beard’s house, where a bowl of punch was present. He declared that it had been said there that Honeywood and Hunt would fight, as they had been heard quarrelling. He did not remain long and went home, where he informed Goodwin of what he had heard. He stated that a noise was then heard, and Goodwin went to the door and saw three men, one of whom fell. Sexton himself went out and saw a man fallen, believed to be Hunt. He further stated that it had been said that Honeywood had acted in his own defence, although parts of this testimony are not fully legible and have been represented as [...]. Interpretations “Spow” referred to disorderly or disruptive behaviour, often associated with drunkenness. “Entry” referred to a passage or doorway area within a house, from which people could observe movement in and out. “Own defence” referred to acting in self-defence, meaning that force was used in response to a perceived threat. “Bowl of punch” referred to a communal alcoholic drink, often shared among several people, which could contribute to social interaction and sometimes conflict. Speculations Perhaps the repeated references to drink and disorder suggest that alcohol played a central role in escalating the conflict between Honeywood and Hunt? It was probably the case that the expectation of a fight, expressed before it occurred, indicates that tensions had been building for some time? Perhaps the mention of self-defence reflects an early attempt to frame the incident in a way that might mitigate responsibility for the killing? It was probably intended that the combination of testimonies, though partly unclear, would allow the jury to reconstruct the sequence of events leading to the fatal encounter? |
242 | 221 | Judge Did you see nobody when you Came out of M r Sexton[s] Sexton [...] by M r Cannady[s] Doore Hunt and W m s Judge where did you see Hunt fall M r Sexton Betwixt Cannady[s] and Dunnings house Then Joseph Spicer was Called and Sworne Spicer Hunt Came to my Landlady Cannady[s] house and Called for Judge Have you of the Jury any Questions to ask the witness Jury no, about no more of M r Beard[s] business or Question Judge ask him, Jury Will Spicer Come up in to hand you heard M r Sherwin M r Beard Judge Let us have what you know of the matter, you are now Desired D. B. R. H. Jury | Mr Sexton was questioned by the judge as to whether he had seen anyone when he came out of Mr Sexton’s house from Mr Beard’s. He stated that he had seen Hunt and William near Mr Cannady’s door. When asked where he had seen Hunt fall, he replied that it was between Cannady’s house and Dunning’s house. Joseph Spicer was then called and sworn. He declared that Hunt had come to his landlady Cannady’s house and called for a bowl of punch. Honeywood, Hunt, William, and others had been drinking together. Hunt appeared much enraged that he had not been treated as he expected, and that others had been served instead of him. Spicer stated that he later went to another house and that there was no further quarrelling observed until the incident occurred. The judge asked the jury whether they had any questions for the witness, and none were raised initially. The jury then referred to a statement attributed to Mr Sherwin, suggesting that Honeywood had struck or kicked Hunt, and they wished to clarify this matter. It was proposed that Mr Sherwin should be sworn as a witness. A statement was then given that Mr Mayst had reported that Sherwin had said that Honeywood had struck in such a way that when he found his sword engaged, he drove it forward with force, although parts of this account are unclear and have been represented as [...]. Richard Honeywood responded that several reports had been made by his enemies, and he requested that no weight be given to such hearsay. He asked that Mr Sherwin be formally sworn so that his evidence might be properly examined. The jury stated that they would proceed according to the evidence presented. Interpretations “Hearsay” referred to information reported by others rather than directly witnessed, often treated with caution in legal proceedings. “Landlady” referred to the person responsible for managing a lodging house or residence where others stayed. “Enraged” indicated a state of strong anger, suggesting heightened emotion that might contribute to conflict. “Engaged his sword” referred to a moment in combat when swords were locked or in close contact. Speculations Perhaps the emphasis on calling Sherwin as a sworn witness reflects concern about the reliability of second-hand reports in determining guilt? It was probably the case that disputes over being served or treated properly contributed to rising tensions among those present? Perhaps the reference to “enemies” suggests that personal rivalries within the community influenced both testimony and accusations? It was probably intended that the jury’s insistence on direct evidence demonstrates an attempt to follow established legal standards despite the informal setting? |
243 | 222 | Then Tho Sherwin was Called and Sworne Tho Sherwin Then John Williams was Called & Sworne Capt Johnson Jn Williams Did not well remember then what was done being some Judge What Can you Remember now Jn Williams On Monday the 8 th of April last afternoon Sejt Hunt asked [...] | Thomas Sherwin was called and sworn. He declared that, when he had been impanelled on the coroner’s jury to examine the body of Sergeant Hunt, he had spoken with Richard Honeywood while he was in prison. He stated that he had asked Honeywood how he had given Hunt the wound, and Honeywood had replied that Hunt had made a thrust at him while he was relieving himself, so that he could scarcely see clearly at the moment he drew his rapier. It was further stated that Hunt had made another thrust, whereupon Honeywood had immediately drawn his rapier in self-defence, and in the encounter Hunt had fallen upon the point of Honeywood’s sword. John Williams was then called and sworn. Before he gave his evidence, Captain Joshua Johnson addressed the court, stating that when he had been present at the inquest, Williams had at first said that he was not the person in question, and that there had been some dispute before he altered his statement. John Williams then declared that he did not clearly remember all that had occurred, as he had been drinking at the time. When asked what he could now recall, he stated that on Monday, 8 April in the afternoon, Sergeant Hunt had asked him to fetch a bowl of punch, and that Honeywood had been present in company at Mr Cannady’s house. While they were drinking, Hunt told Honeywood that he had not ordered him to pay at the house on the previous Wednesday, and expressed dissatisfaction in several ways that Williams could no longer fully recall. Later in the evening, Hunt asked Williams for the key of his landlady’s house, which was given to him. They then went downstairs together. Williams stated that Hunt then turned and took his sword from his side. He attempted to recover it, but Hunt struck him on the head and threw him down. After he had recovered himself, Hunt fell. He stated that Honeywood then withdrew the sword from Hunt’s body and struck Williams in order to pass by without hindrance. Honeywood then went away, and Williams followed him towards Mr Cannady’s house, asking for the return of his sword. Honeywood refused to return the sword and attempted to break it, but was unable to do so. Williams stated that he later told Mr Williams and Mr Sexton that Honeywood had said that his actions had been in his own defence, although parts of this account are not fully legible and have been represented as [...]. Interpretations “Impanelled” referred to being formally selected and sworn to serve on a jury. “Coroner’s jury” referred to a group tasked with examining the cause of death, particularly in cases of sudden or suspicious death. “Rapier” referred to a long, slender sword used primarily for thrusting. “Relieving himself” referred to urinating, which in this context was used to explain the accused’s position and vulnerability at the moment of the attack. Speculations Perhaps the statement that Honeywood was attacked while in a vulnerable position was intended to strengthen a claim of self-defence? It was probably the case that conflicting accounts, especially from witnesses who had been drinking, made it difficult for the jury to establish a clear sequence of events? Perhaps Captain Johnson’s intervention suggests concern about the reliability or consistency of Williams’s testimony? It was probably intended that the repetition of the claim of self-defence across testimonies would influence how the jury interpreted the fatal encounter? |
244 | 223 | Then M r Gates was Called and Sworne M r Gates On the same day above mentioned I went to M r Cannady[s] with Jury had Hunt any sword when you saw him M r Gates Doe not know, if he had I saw none. Then M r Elkin was Called and Sworne M r Elkin When M r Cannady Came to my house, not long after we heard Judge You have heard what the witnesses say will you aske R. Hornywood No, Judge Have you any witnesses S. Hornywood No, Except W m s he was there all the time and best knows Judge Let us heare what you Can say for your Selfe S. Hornywood Hunt Came to my Landlady[s] house M r Cannady[s] house | Mr Gates was called and sworn. He declared that on the same day he had gone to Mr Cannady’s house with a bottle of mead. Upon going upstairs, he saw Hunt standing at the door. Honeywood came down the stairs, and Hunt met him near the top, although Honeywood continued down and went outside. Shortly afterwards, Hunt also came down to William, and they both went out. Gates remained in the house for a time, as Cannady was preparing to go to Mr Elkin’s house. He stated that he later saw Honeywood standing with his face against Dunning’s house, as if relieving himself, while Hunt stood nearby. He did not know which direction they had come from. When questioned by the jury, he stated that he did not know whether Hunt had a sword, as he had not seen one. Mr Elkin was then called and sworn. He declared that when Cannady came to his house, they soon heard the sound of swords clashing. Shortly afterwards, Honeywood came to his house carrying two swords, placing one in its scabbard and attempting to break the other. Upon entering, Honeywood stated that Hunt had been slain. He asked for a bowl of [...], and requested assistance regarding his sword, although part of this account is unclear and has been represented as [...]. Elkin further stated that when Honeywood entered his house, John Williams came with him and said that Honeywood had acted in his own defence. Elkin and Mr Sexton advised that no notice should be taken of what Williams had said. The judge then asked Honeywood whether he wished to question any of the witnesses, to which he replied that he did not. He was then asked whether he had any witnesses of his own. Honeywood stated that he had none, except that William had been present throughout and would know the matter best. The judge then invited Honeywood to speak in his own defence. Honeywood stated that Hunt had come to his landlady’s house, that of Mr Cannady, and had asked him to join him for a bottle of punch. He stated that he had been unwilling to provide drink in his landlady’s house, as there were already many people present, although parts of his account are unclear and have been represented as [...]. Interpretations “Mead” referred to an alcoholic drink made from fermented honey and water. “Clashing of swords” indicated a physical fight involving bladed weapons. “Slain” referred to being killed, often used in formal or dramatic descriptions of death. “Scabbard” referred to the sheath used to hold a sword. Speculations Perhaps the repeated mention of Honeywood carrying two swords suggests that control of weapons during the altercation was an important issue in determining responsibility? It was probably the case that the witnesses’ inability to confirm whether Hunt carried a sword complicated claims of self-defence? Perhaps the advice given by Elkin and Sexton to disregard Williams’s statement indicates doubts about its reliability? It was probably intended that Honeywood’s own statement would provide the jury with an opportunity to assess his credibility directly, especially in the absence of supporting witnesses? |
245 | 224 | Give you a bottle of Drink which he did M r Wright not be | Richard Honeywood, continuing his defence, stated that Hunt had asked him to join him for a bottle of drink, which was provided. He stated that Mr Wright had been unwilling to join them, and that John Williams had come in and remained with them throughout. Honeywood described Hunt as speaking in a loud and disorderly manner, complaining about being sent to the widow’s house to wait, and using profane language. He stated that Hunt spoke aggressively, swearing repeatedly and behaving in a rough and unruly way. Honeywood replied to him, attempting to calm the situation, and referred to the Governor, stating that such behaviour would be heard and noted, as the Governor was nearby in the market house. Honeywood said that he urged Hunt to be quiet and not to offend the Governor, but Hunt continued to speak defiantly and with anger. Honeywood further stated that Hunt referred to a previous incident in which he claimed to have been given a wound, showing it to him. Honeywood denied responsibility for that injury. The dispute continued, with Hunt speaking in an agitated manner and making accusations, while Honeywood attempted to discourage further argument. He stated that, as the situation worsened, he sought to make peace and asked that a bowl of punch be prepared in order to reconcile with Hunt. He stated that he showed as much willingness as possible to calm him and offered the drink so that they might be reconciled. He stated that they then drank together, although the remainder of this account is not fully legible and has been represented as [...]. Interpretations “Railing” referred to speaking in an angry, abusive, or insulting manner. “Pacified” referred to being calmed or made peaceful after anger or conflict. “Roaring humour” referred to a loud, aggressive, or disorderly state of behaviour, often associated with intoxication. “Profane language” referred to swearing or the use of irreverent expressions invoking religious terms. Speculations Perhaps Honeywood’s emphasis on his attempts to calm Hunt and offer reconciliation was intended to support his claim of acting in self-defence? It was probably the case that the repeated references to swearing and disorderly conduct were used to portray Hunt as the aggressor in the conflict? Perhaps the mention of the Governor’s presence suggests that behaviour in public spaces was closely monitored and could influence later judgement? It was probably intended that this account would demonstrate that the violence arose from escalating tension rather than premeditated intent? |
246 | 225 | fell into Discourse againe of the Gowin and swore by | Richard Honeywood continued his defence, stating that Hunt again fell into discourse about the Governor and swore that he would cause the Governor to withdraw his support for Mr Brown. Honeywood replied that there was no reason for such accusations, noting that the Governor had been present with Mr Brown previously. Hunt nevertheless continued cursing the Governor for some time. Honeywood stated that his landlady then went upstairs and brought a bowl of punch, which was set down on the bed. He declared that he could not clearly recall whether he had his sword with him at that moment or had taken it up then, but he maintained that he did not leave the house without his sword, which belonged to his landlady. He stated that he intended to go to Mr Elkin’s house. At that time, Hunt asked William for the key of his landlady’s house, and William replied that he had it. Hunt and William then went downstairs. After the punch had been prepared, Honeywood also went downstairs, intending to go to Mr Elkin’s. As he descended, he met Hunt on the stairs but continued down and went outside. He then returned briefly to Cannady’s house to relieve himself before proceeding. Honeywood stated that, as he was going about, he saw Hunt with a drawn sword making a thrust at him. He declared that his own sword was not yet drawn at that moment. He stated that Hunt then withdrew slightly and advanced again to make a second attack. Honeywood stated that he then drew his rapier in order to defend himself. He asserted that he did not strike at Hunt, but that Hunt fell upon the point of his rapier. He declared that this was the truth as he would answer before God, and that he did not know Hunt had been killed when he fell. He stated that he then withdrew the sword from Hunt’s body and spoke to him, although the words are not entirely clear. He then went immediately to Mr Elkin’s house, with William accompanying him. William asked for his sword, but Honeywood refused and attempted to break it by placing it under his foot, although he was unable to do so. While on his way to Mr Elkin’s house, he stated that he heard that Goodwin had been killed with a spear, which caused him alarm, although this part of the account is not fully legible and has been represented as [...]. Interpretations “Drawn sword” referred to a weapon that had been unsheathed and was ready for use in combat. “Rapier” referred to a long, narrow sword designed for thrusting, commonly used in personal combat. “Making water” referred to urinating, often mentioned in testimony to describe a person’s position or vulnerability. “Fall upon the point” was an expression indicating that a person had impaled themselves on a weapon, often used in claims of self-defence. Speculations Perhaps Honeywood’s repeated insistence that he did not strike the fatal blow but that Hunt fell onto the sword was intended to avoid a charge of intentional killing? It was probably the case that uncertainty about whether Honeywood’s sword was drawn before the encounter could have been significant in determining whether the act was defensive or aggressive? Perhaps the confusion introduced by the report of another killing reflects the chaotic nature of events and the difficulty of establishing a clear narrative? It was probably intended that Honeywood’s sworn declaration of truth before God would strengthen his credibility in the absence of supporting witnesses? |
247 | 226 | then, or wounded I Cannot tell which but I was, Did he Judge Have You any more to say R H No, if there be is the very truth as god shall be my judge Judge Then Gentlemen of the Jury it is Time to withdraw Then the Jury withdrew and Sent for [...] the C. Pears Jury Yea C H who shall Speak for you Jury the foreman. | Richard Honeywood continued, stating that he could not tell whether Hunt had been killed or only wounded at first. He declared that he had stated to Mr Elkin and Mr Sexton that what he had done was in his own defence, and had asked them to take notice of this. He said that he then went upstairs into Mr Elkin’s chamber, called for a bowl of beer, and asked for his sword to be brought to him. He stated that he later heard that Hunt was dead and had been laid in his landlady’s back room. He went to see him and took him by the hand, expressing sorrow and saying that the act had not been intended by him. He further stated that, when he heard that a guard had come for him, he immediately surrendered himself, declaring that his account was the truth as he hoped for the salvation of his soul. When asked by the judge whether he had anything further to say, Honeywood replied that he had not, and affirmed again that his statement was true. The judge then addressed the jury, stating that they had heard the evidence of the witnesses and the defence given by the prisoner. He said that he would not repeat it, trusting their memory. He directed them to consider the circumstances, including the possibility that Hunt, being drunk, might have rushed forward and fallen upon Honeywood’s sword. He reminded them that the law would guide their judgement in reaching a decision. The jury then withdrew to deliberate. After some time, they returned and were called to answer. They confirmed that they were agreed upon a verdict and that their foreman would speak on their behalf. Interpretations “Own defence” referred to the claim that actions were taken to protect oneself from harm rather than to initiate violence. “Surrendered myself” referred to voluntarily submitting to custody without resistance. “Guard” referred to those appointed to take a person into custody and ensure security. “Foreman” referred to the juror chosen to speak for the group and deliver the verdict. Speculations Perhaps Honeywood’s expression of remorse and immediate surrender were intended to influence the jury towards a more lenient interpretation of his actions? It was probably the case that the judge’s suggestion that Hunt might have fallen onto the sword indicates that the court was open to accepting a version of events consistent with self-defence? Perhaps the emphasis on Hunt’s drunkenness reflects its perceived importance in explaining his behaviour and the circumstances of the encounter? It was probably intended that the structured deliberation of the jury would lend authority and legitimacy to the final verdict, even in a small colonial setting? |
248 | 227 | C B See [th]e H[ornywood] to the Barr Judge You Gentlemen of the Jury looke upon the Prisoner at Foreman Guilty Judge Guilty of what Jury Guilty of manslaughter, in his owne Defence C B Did you say so all foreman No, C B You Gentlemen of the Jury harken to the Verdict as the That Sej t Hornywood is Guilty of manslaughter on[ly] Jury yea yea, all Judge You gent n of the Jury I thanke You for the Service you Then the Court adjourned the Same untill the | The prisoner, Richard Honeywood, was brought again to the bar. The judge addressed the jury and asked whether they found him guilty of the indictment or not guilty. The foreman replied that he was guilty. The judge then asked of what offence he was guilty, and it was answered that he was guilty of manslaughter in his own defence. The court clerk asked whether all the jury agreed, and the foreman at first replied that they did not. The verdict was then formally recorded as that Honeywood was guilty of manslaughter only. The jury were asked again whether this was their unanimous verdict, and they all agreed. The judge thanked the jury for their service to the King and the country. He stated that, had the jury found the prisoner guilty of murder, he would not have been obliged to confirm a sentence of death according to the law, implying that discretion might have been exercised. The court was then adjourned until the next summons. Honeywood was later brought before the court again, and after receiving several admonishments, he was discharged. Interpretations “Manslaughter” referred to the unlawful killing of a person without the intent required for murder, often involving mitigating circumstances such as provocation or self-defence. “Prisoner at the bar” referred to the accused standing before the court to hear judgement. “Admonishments” referred to formal warnings or reprimands given by the court. “Discharged” referred to being released from custody without further punishment. Speculations Perhaps the qualification of manslaughter “in his own defence” reflects an attempt to reconcile conflicting evidence while avoiding the severity of a murder conviction? It was probably the case that the judge’s statement about not being obliged to impose the death penalty indicates flexibility in applying English law in a colonial context? Perhaps the initial uncertainty among the jury before agreeing on the final verdict suggests some disagreement or difficulty in interpreting the evidence? It was probably intended that the final discharge, following admonishment, balanced the need for justice with the practical realities of maintaining order in a small settlement? |
249 | 228 | Island of Helena The tryall of John Miller sold r at a Sessions Coram S r John Blackmore Gov r & Judge Proclamation was made for all p[er]son[s] warned to Draw Then the Judges Comand John Miller Prison r to be brought The Prison r Being Come Judge - Set the Prison r to the Barr which was done C Pears John Miller hold up thy hand; where did and the Indict- Jo: Miller | At a session held on 29 June 1687 at the Sessions House on St Helena, proceedings were conducted for the trial of John Miller, a soldier. Sir John Blackmore served as Governor and Judge, assisted by Captain Gregory Field, Mr Matthew Fox, and Mr Thomas Gyffe. A proclamation was made requiring all persons summoned to attend and give their presence. The judges then ordered that John Miller be brought before the court. The purpose of the session was declared to be the trial of Miller for being involved in the killing of another soldier. The jury was advised to act with seriousness, carefully observing the evidence and considering the nature of the crime. The prisoner was brought forward and placed at the bar. He was instructed to hold up his hand, and the indictment was read. John Miller, described as a soldier in the service and pay of the East India Company on the island of St Helena, was charged with having, on Tuesday 21 June of that year, in a place referred to as Grapes Valley, maliciously and feloniously assaulted, wounded, and killed another man using a rapier. The charge was stated to have been committed without regard to the fear of God and contrary to the authority established under the royal charter, although parts of the indictment are not fully legible and have been represented as [...]. Interpretations “Sessions House” referred to a building where periodic court sessions were held. “Proclamation” referred to a formal public announcement requiring attendance or attention. “Indictment” referred to a formal accusation stating the crime with which the accused was charged. “Rapier” referred to a long, pointed sword used for thrusting. Speculations Perhaps the reference to “Grapes Valley” indicates a named location on the island associated with settlement or cultivation? It was probably the case that the formal language of the indictment reflects the continued use of English legal traditions in a colonial environment? Perhaps the emphasis on the “fear of God” reflects the moral as well as legal framing of violent crime during this period? It was probably intended that the structured opening of the trial would reinforce the authority of the court and the seriousness of the proceedings? |
250 | 229 | Charles Spines then sold r in the Hono[urab]le Comp[a]s Service C P Prison C P Pris[o]n[e]r Judge C P or when they Come to warned C P Michele Mauris free Planter. Cyon 1 | It was stated in the indictment that the person killed was Charles Spines, a soldier in the service and pay of the Honourable Company, and that the act had been committed contrary to the laws of the King and the regulations established for the governance of the island. John Miller was then asked how he answered to the charge, and he replied that he was not guilty. He was asked by whom he wished to be tried, and he answered that he would be tried by God and the country. A formal response was given wishing that he might receive a fair deliverance. The judge ordered that those who had been summoned to serve as jurors be called, and it was stated that the prisoner might object to any of them when named. The charge against Miller, that he had maliciously and feloniously killed Charles Spines, was restated, and it was noted that he had pleaded not guilty and submitted himself to trial by jury. Those who had been summoned as jurors were then called to answer to their names. The jurors included Michele Mauris, a free planter, Andrew Bricklips, William Borman, Henry Cales, Henry Jackson, Thomas Bloom, John Field, Thomas [...], John [...], James and Charles [...], and Matthew Howe, with some names and details not fully legible and represented as [...]. They included individuals described as free planters, soldiers, and a corporal. Interpretations “Free planter” referred to a settler who held or worked land independently rather than serving under contract. “Corporal” referred to a junior non-commissioned military rank. “Warned” referred to being formally summoned or called to serve on a jury. “Contrary to the laws” indicated that the act was in violation of both royal authority and Company regulations. Speculations Perhaps the inclusion of both civilians and soldiers on the jury reflects the mixed composition of the island’s population? It was probably the case that allowing the prisoner to object to jurors was intended to ensure fairness in a small community where many individuals were known to each other? Perhaps the formal repetition of the charge emphasised the seriousness of the offence and ensured that the jury clearly understood the accusation? It was probably intended that assembling a jury from different roles within the settlement would lend legitimacy to the proceedings? |
251 | 230 | Michele Mauris was appointed foreman. Judge John Miller dost thou Object ag[...][...] any thing or Exept Prison I Make no objection ag[...] any of them Judge Sweare the foreman Which was done as followeth You shall well and truly try and true Deliverance make The rest of the Jury were also sworne as followeth The same oath that the foreman hath taken You and Then the Indictment was read againe Judge Cee the Witnesses one by one and Sweare them as they Cent Pearce Cee Matthew Bonney Chirurgeon {Which appeared & Bonney This Deponent saith that the wound which the de- Cee Hen: Manning Chirurgeon {Who appeared & Manning This Deponent saith the very same w th M r Bonney Judge John Miller You have heard what these Witnesses | Michele Mauris was appointed as foreman of the jury. John Miller was asked whether he objected to any of the jurors, and he stated that he made no objection. The foreman was then sworn, being charged to try the case faithfully between the Crown and the prisoner, and to deliver a true verdict without fear, favour, or bias, according to the evidence and his best judgement. The remaining jurors were sworn in the same manner, each undertaking to observe and keep the same oath. The indictment against John Miller was then read again. The court ordered that the witnesses be called one by one and sworn before giving evidence. Matthew Bonney, a surgeon, appeared and was sworn. He declared that the wound received by the deceased, Charles Spines, had been inflicted by a rapier and had penetrated the body in such a manner that it passed through the diaphragm and stomach. He stated that this wound was the certain cause of death, and that it had been located about two or three inches above the navel. He added that, had the wound not struck against a rib, it would have passed entirely through the body. Henry Manning, also a surgeon, was then called and sworn. He gave evidence identical to that of Bonney, confirming without variation that the wound described had caused the death of Spines. The judge then addressed John Miller, stating that he had heard the testimony given under oath and that he had the opportunity to object to it or respond if he wished. Interpretations “Chirurgeon” referred to a surgeon, a practitioner of medical treatment, especially involving wounds and operations. “Diaphragm” referred to the muscle separating the chest from the abdomen, essential for breathing. “Navel” referred to the central point of the abdomen, marking the former attachment of the umbilical cord. “Deponent” referred to a person giving sworn testimony in court. Speculations Perhaps the detailed medical testimony was intended to establish beyond doubt that the death resulted directly from the wound rather than from later complications? It was probably the case that the agreement between two surgeons strengthened the credibility of the evidence presented to the jury? Perhaps the description of the wound’s severity indicates that little doubt existed about the lethality of the injury, focusing the trial more on responsibility than on cause of death? It was probably intended that allowing the prisoner to respond immediately after such testimony upheld the appearance of fairness in the proceedings? |
252 | 231 | Prison[er] I have Nothing to Object against them or what they Judge If you have any Questions to aske these witness[es] You m[a]y Pris[oner] No, I have Nothing to aske them Judge Call another witness from time C P Call Andr[ew] Carter who was Sworne. This Depon[en]t saith that the Night that Charles Sp[ines] Judge Miller You have heard the Witnesse and you may Prison I have no Questions to aske him Judge Cee another witness and [...] him C P Rob t Goodwin Come into the Court, who appeared [and was] Goodwin This Deponent saith he in the after Noone attai[...]- | John Miller stated that he had no objection to the surgeons’ evidence, but expressed regret that the wound had caused Charles Spines’s death. He maintained that Spines had come upon his sword and that he could not prevent it. He was asked whether he wished to question the witnesses, and he replied that he had no questions. Andrew Carter was then called and sworn. He declared that on the night when Spines was wounded, at about seven or eight in the evening, he had been at his master Sherwin’s house. Hearing a noise outside, he went to the window and observed events below, although part of his account is unclear and has been represented as [...]. He stated that he saw Spines leaning upon Miller and another soldier, James Hall. He further stated that a sword had been drawn and that Robert [...] had taken hold of it and removed it from Miller’s hand. He declared that he heard Miller say that he would kill Spines, and that it was said that Miller had given Spines his fatal wound. Carter further stated that, after the sword had been taken from Miller, he was held down upon a bed, although parts of this account are unclear. He added that he did not observe whether Spines had anything in his hand at that time. Miller was asked whether he wished to question this witness, and he replied that he had no questions. Robert Goodwin was then called and sworn. He began to give evidence concerning events on the afternoon before Spines was wounded, although part of this testimony is not fully legible and has been represented as [...]. Interpretations “Deponent” referred to a person giving sworn testimony in court. “Drawn sword” referred to a weapon that had been unsheathed and was ready for use. “Fatal wound” referred to an injury that directly caused death. “Leaning upon” suggested that a person was being supported or restrained by others. Speculations Perhaps Miller’s statement that Spines “came upon” the sword reflects a continued reliance on a defence similar to that of accidental or defensive killing? It was probably the case that Carter’s testimony, including the reported threat, could have been significant in suggesting intent rather than accident? Perhaps the lack of questioning by the prisoner indicates either acceptance of the testimony or inability to challenge it effectively? It was probably intended that multiple witnesses describing the same event would allow the jury to form a clearer understanding of what had occurred, despite gaps in the record? |
253 | 232 | he saw the said Spines Running after the said Miller Judge John Miller You have heard this Evidence upon his Prison I Cannot Except against any thing that he hath spoken. Judge Have You any Questions to ask him Prison No, Judge Call another witness and sweare him. | Robert Goodwin continued his testimony, stating that he had seen Charles Spines running after John Miller with a drawn sword, urging him towards the stairs while holding his weapon. It was stated that Miller then called upon Goodwin to stop Spines, which he did, and that Miller went away while Spines turned back. Goodwin further declared that, as he was going down towards the fort, while Spines was proceeding by the Compassions house, he encountered a man coming from the fort. In the darkness he asked who it was, and was told that it was John Miller. Spines, being on the other side of the way, heard this and came over, asking which direction Miller had taken. Goodwin answered that Miller had gone towards the Governor’s house, and Spines followed in that direction. It was further stated that Spines spoke angrily and declared that he would find Miller while he remained alive. Goodwin continued on his way towards the fort, and shortly afterwards heard that Spines had been wounded. Goodwin also declared that, after Miller had been in prison for about half an hour, he had heard him swear that, if he had not already killed Spines, he would do so. He stated that he had nothing further to add. John Miller was asked whether he objected to this evidence, and he replied that he did not object to what had been said, but did not remember having spoken the words attributed to him in prison. He was then asked whether he had any questions for the witness, and he replied that he had none. Interpretations “Drawn sword” referred to a weapon that had been unsheathed and was ready for combat. “Compassions house” likely referred to a named location or building on the island, possibly associated with a particular individual or function, though its exact meaning is unclear. “Except” referred to raising an objection or challenge to testimony in court. Speculations Perhaps the account of Spines pursuing Miller with a drawn sword was significant in supporting a claim that Miller acted in self-defence? It was probably the case that the alleged statement made in prison could have been used to suggest intent or hostility, even if denied by the prisoner? Perhaps the confusion of movements in the dark contributed to uncertainty in the sequence of events and the reliability of witness observations? It was probably intended that Goodwin’s testimony provided both context before the incident and statements made after, allowing the jury to assess both behaviour and possible intent? |
254 | 233 | C P James Hall appeare in Court Which he did and was Sworne. Hall This Depon t saith that he being in his Landlady Sherwins house Judge Miller have You any thing to say to this witness Prison No but that the sd Spines followed me, and what did was Judge Call another witness C P Rob t Padman Come into the Court, Which he did and was Sworne This Deponent saith that he heard Charles Spines to say be- Judge If the Prison r will aske the witness any Question, he may do it Prison I have Nothing to say to him Judge Cee two witnesses more and Examine them C P John Draper and Margaret his wife Draw Neare, Which Judge John Draper what do you know of this business You Draper This Deponent saith that on the 21 of this month at | James Hall was called and sworn. He declared that, while he was in his landlady Sherwin’s house, he heard a great noise outside and went out to see what had happened. He stated that he saw Charles Spines leaning upon his sword and heard him say that someone should take hold of Miller, as he had given him his fatal wound. Hall stated that he then seized Miller, who had a drawn sword in his hand. At that moment, Robert Jones came towards Miller, and Hall threw him down. He further stated that he heard a disturbance behind him, and, as it was dark, he paused to observe what was occurring. He believed that someone had been quarrelling with him, but, finding a way clear, he returned to look for Miller, who had by then gone up the hill. He stated that he had nothing further to add. John Miller was asked whether he had anything to say in response to this evidence. He replied that he had nothing to add except that Spines had followed him, and that what he had done had been in his own defence. Robert Padman was then called and sworn. He declared that he had heard Charles Spines say before he died that John Miller was the man who had given him his fatal wound. He stated that he had not witnessed any fight or quarrel, but that Miller had fled from Cannady’s house. The remainder of this testimony is not fully legible and has been represented as [...]. Miller was asked whether he wished to question this witness, and he replied that he had nothing to say. John Draper and Margaret Draper were then called and sworn. John Draper began to give evidence concerning events on the night of 21 June, although part of his testimony is not fully legible and has been represented as [...]. Interpretations “Leaning upon his sword” suggested that the injured person was using the weapon for support, indicating weakness or severe injury. “Naked sword” referred to a sword that had been drawn from its scabbard. Speculations Perhaps Spines’s statement before his death was considered important evidence, as such declarations were often given weight in court proceedings? It was probably the case that the description of Miller holding a drawn sword strengthened the perception that he had been actively involved in the violence? Perhaps the mention that Miller fled the scene might have been interpreted as consciousness of guilt, even if explained as fear or confusion? It was probably intended that multiple witness accounts, even when incomplete, would collectively support the jury in forming a judgement about the circumstances of the killing? |
255 | 234 | night he was with the said Spines after he was wounded Judge Margrett Draper what Can you say Marg Draper This Depon t saith that on Wednesday the 21 t h Instant Spines Judge Miller you have heard what these have Evidenced on Prison I was somewhat in Drinke, and if I was provoked to say Judge Call some other witnesses C P Martha Botton and Mary Servitor appeare which they did Botton This Depon t saith that being at M r Sherwins house on Tuesday | John Draper declared that on the night in question he had been with Charles Spines after he was wounded, and that he had heard Spines say that John Miller had given him the wound that caused his death. He further stated that Spines said the act had been done because of abusive words, and that Spines declared that, if he had seen Miller earlier, he would have run him through with his rapier. Margaret Draper, being sworn, declared that on Wednesday 21 June Spines had come into Mr Sherwin’s house in the afternoon in a state of drink. He had attempted to sit down, but Mr Sherwin refused and ordered Henry Jones to remove him, which was done. She stated that, after Miller had gone out of the door, she heard him say that he would thrust his sword into someone’s belly. She further stated that he later said he would not do so, but would do something else. She warned him to take care, stating that if any harm were done he would be found guilty. She added nothing further. John Miller, when addressed by the judge, stated that he had been somewhat in drink and that, if he had spoken such words at Mr Sherwin’s house, no harm had come of them at that time. Martha Botton and Mary Servitor were then called and sworn. Martha Botton declared that, while at Mr Sherwin’s house on the Tuesday, she had heard Miller say that he would attack Spines in a dark place and strike him, and that he would do so before inflicting a wound. She stated that she later heard him say that he would not hurt him but would do something else. She further declared that, after Miller had left, she saw him return shortly afterwards without any provocation from Spines. Interpretations “Deponent” referred to a person giving sworn testimony in court. “Servitor” referred to a servant or attendant, often of lower rank within a household or establishment. Speculations Perhaps the repeated reports of threatening language were intended to establish intent rather than mere reaction in the later encounter? It was probably the case that the mention of intoxication was used both to explain behaviour and to weaken the reliability of statements made? Perhaps the shift in Miller’s reported words, from threatening harm to denying it, reflects inconsistency that the jury would need to weigh carefully? It was probably intended that testimony describing earlier threats would counter any claim that the act was entirely spontaneous or defensive? |
256 | 235 | Judge - Cee M r Servitor you are Sworne, and being speake what You Servitor - This Depon t saith that Charles Spines did say a[n] houre Judge - Miller have you any thing to Say unto these witnesses or w t Judge - Are there any more witnesses if there be let ym be Called in C P - James Cthorne sold r and Georg Shelton Come into Court, Judge - Cthorne what have You to Say Cthorne saith that going over the Bridge in the Foreno the day Judge - Shelton what say You in this matter Shelton saith that he saw the said Miller to Strike the sd Cthorne Judge - If there be any other witnesses that have bin Called Rowman Gierling Planter Come in and did be Called Judge - If you know any thing to informe ye Jury pray do it since Gierling This Depon t saith that John Miller Came to his house | Mary Servitor was called and sworn. She declared that, about an hour before Charles Spines died, while he was in her house, he had stated that John Miller had given him the wound that caused his death. She further stated that Spines said that, if he had not pulled the sword out of his body with both hands, it would have passed through him. It was also stated that Spines said that Miller had otherwise done him no good. John Miller was asked whether he had anything to say in response to this evidence, but no further statement is recorded. James Cthorne and George Shelton were then called into court, although neither was sworn. Cthorne stated that, on the forenoon of the day when Spines was wounded, Miller had quarrelled with him while he was crossing the bridge and had struck him with a cane without provocation. George Shelton stated that he had seen Miller strike Cthorne with a cane without any provocation, and that he had also heard Spines speak words concerning the wound that caused his death, consistent with those already reported by Cthorne. The court then called for any further witnesses. Rowman Gierling, a planter, came forward and was asked to speak to the matter. He declared that John Miller had come to his house on the day that Spines was wounded and would have [...], although the remainder of this testimony is not fully legible and has been represented as [...]. Interpretations “Servitor” referred to a servant or attendant, typically of lower status within a household. “Deponent” referred to a person giving sworn testimony in court. “Not sworn” indicated that a statement was given without formal oath, which could affect how it was weighed as evidence. Speculations Perhaps the repeated dying statements attributed to Spines were treated as especially significant evidence, as such declarations were often considered reliable in early modern legal practice? It was probably the case that testimony about Miller striking another man earlier in the day was intended to show a pattern of aggressive behaviour? Perhaps the fact that some witnesses were not sworn suggests flexibility in procedure, or differences in how various types of testimony were valued? It was probably intended that the accumulation of multiple accounts, even when partially incomplete, would reinforce the overall case presented to the jury? |
257 | 236 | have Sought Some Clothes of this Dep t but they would Not Judge - Miller You have heard what this witness hath testified Prison[er] I Confess that being in this mans [...][...] in drinke that Judge - Have you any more witnesses to Examine C P No, all have bin appeared and Given in their | Rowman Gierling continued his testimony, stating that John Miller had come to his house and asked for some clothes, but they could not agree. Observing that Miller was somewhat in drink, he advised him to leave, but Miller refused unless he was given a dram or some victuals, which Gierling declined to provide. Gierling further declared that Miller then spoke in a threatening manner, stating that he knew certain people who affronted others, and that before that night or the following night he would run his sword into someone’s belly, and that he would be seen hanged upon the gallows near the fort. After leaving Gierling’s house, Miller was seen following Charles Spines along the street, with Spines walking ahead and Miller behind until they reached the market house. Gierling stated that he then saw Miller strike Spines with a stick or cane, whereupon Spines drew his sword, pursued Miller, and struck him with the flat side of it. The judge asked Miller whether he had anything to say in response to this testimony. Miller admitted that he had been drinking at Gierling’s house and that there had been a dispute, and that he had asked for victuals. He denied, however, that he had threatened to run his sword into any man or that he had spoken of being hanged. He added that Gierling owed him a pipe and that this had caused him harm. The judge then asked whether any further witnesses were to be examined, and it was stated that all had appeared and given their evidence. Interpretations “Dram” referred to a small measure of strong drink, commonly spirits. “Affront” referred to an insult or act of disrespect, often provoking quarrel. “Flat side of the sword” referred to striking with the blunt side of the blade, typically used to beat rather than cut or stab. Speculations Perhaps the alleged threat about using a sword and being hanged was intended to demonstrate forethought or reckless intent, rather than a purely spontaneous act? It was probably the case that Gierling’s testimony, describing both earlier threats and the initial strike with a cane, was particularly damaging to Miller’s claim of self-defence? Perhaps Miller’s admission of drinking, combined with his denial of specific threats, reflects an attempt to separate his general behaviour from the more serious accusations? It was probably intended that the sequence of events described, from quarrel to pursuit and escalation, would help the jury determine whether the killing arose from provocation or aggression? |
258 | 237 | Judge John Miller You have heard what these witnesses upon I have little to say for my Selfe, but God forgive y m Judge Have you any [...][...] for witnesses for you if you please Prison[er] I desire that George Athorne, Germine Kitley, and Thomas Judge - Sutton what Can You Say on behalfe of the Prisoner at Sutton - All that I Can say is this, That in the dusk of the Even- | John Miller was asked by the judge whether he had anything further to say in his defence, or whether he wished to call any witnesses. He replied that he had little to say, except that he prayed forgiveness for those who had given evidence against him, and stated that Charles Spines had beaten him with a sword through the market house. He declared that he had gone down to the fort intending to rest, but, being thirsty, had decided to go to Mr Sherwin’s house to drink. He stated that, not knowing whether he might be affronted again, he had taken his sword with him. He further stated that, while proceeding there, he encountered Robert Goodwin in the dark, who asked who he was, and he replied that he was John Miller. He stated that Goodwin then went ahead and warned Spines of his presence. Miller declared that he then drew his sword in his own defence, and that Spines followed and thrust at him, falling upon Miller’s sword and thereby wounding himself. He stated that this was the full account of the incident and prayed for forgiveness for what had occurred. Miller then requested that George Athorne, Germine Kitley, and Thomas Miller, a soldier, be heard as witnesses. A witness named Sutton was then called. He declared that, in the dusk of the evening before Spines was wounded, he had seen Spines standing near a house in the town close to the market house, holding a cane. Sutton stated that the cane belonged to him. He further declared that, after Spines had been wounded, John Ca[...] had taken up the cane from near the place where the wound had been inflicted and had returned it to him. He stated that he had nothing further to add. Interpretations “Shobby” appears to refer to a type of drink, possibly a local or colloquial term for a form of beer or fermented beverage, though its precise meaning is uncertain. Speculations Perhaps Miller’s emphasis on being previously struck by Spines and fearing further affront was intended to reinforce a narrative of ongoing provocation? It was probably the case that carrying a sword in anticipation of possible conflict could be interpreted either as precaution or as readiness for violence? Perhaps the testimony concerning the cane was intended to support the idea that Spines had acted aggressively before the fatal encounter? It was probably intended that Miller’s appeal to forgiveness and framing of the event as an accident would influence the jury’s perception of intent and responsibility? |
259 | 238 | Judge - Cee John Talby who appeared Talby This Examin t saith that the Same Night that y e Cee Tho: Miller sold r Who appeared This Examin t saith that being in the Marke[t] house Judge - John Miller You have heard what these witness[es] have on Prison: Judge - Well You Gent n of the Jury You have heard all yt | John Talby was called and examined. He stated that, on the same night that the prisoner was wounded, he had taken up a cane from the place where the injury was done and delivered it to George Sutton, who acknowledged it to be his, and that he had nothing further to add. Thomas Miller, a soldier, was then called. He stated that, being in the market house in the afternoon of the day on which Charles Spines was wounded, he saw Spines run after John Miller with his sword drawn and strike him with it until they reached the house where James Duff lived. He stated that Spines then returned to the market house, and that he heard Spines swear that the next time he met Miller he would stab him. He further stated that, some time after, Spines came to Duff’s house with a cane in his hand and asked whether Miller had gone there, and, being told he had not, departed. He stated that he had nothing further to add. The judge then asked John Miller whether he had any further witnesses or anything more to offer before the jury withdrew. Miller replied that he had no further witnesses and nothing more to say beyond what he had already stated, namely that Spines had followed him and that he had drawn his sword in his own defence to protect himself from Spines’s violence. The judge then addressed the jury, stating that they had heard all the evidence given for the Crown, as well as the defence and the witnesses called on Miller’s behalf. He stated that he need not repeat the evidence at length, and directed that, if they believed the evidence given against Miller-particularly that of Robert Goodwin-they could not find the prisoner guilty; but if they gave weight to Miller’s own account, they should consider it accordingly. Interpretations None. |
260 | 239 | he did was in his owne Defence, and that Spines followed Then the Jury withdrew, and stayed a[n] houre Judge - Cee over the Jury by their Names C P - You Gent of the Jury Answer to yo[ur] Names, w ch they did Judge - Are you all agreed of a verdict Jury - yea, yea, y[ea] Judge - Who shall speake for you Jury - The foreman C P - Sett John Miller to the Barr Judge - You Gent n of the Jury looke on y e Prison r at the Barr, Foreman Guilty Judge - Guilty of what foreman Guilty of murder Judge - Guilty of w[il]f[ul] murder foreman - Guilty of wilfull Murder Judge - You Gent n of the Jury Hearken to the verdict as the Court C P: That John Miller is Guilty of wilfull murder in kill- Jury Yea, yea, y[ea] | The judge directed the jury that, if they believed that what Miller had done was in his own defence, and that Spines had followed him and run himself upon Miller’s sword, then they might find accordingly; but that the case required very serious consideration, and that they should deliver a just verdict. He ordered them to withdraw to a convenient place where no one should speak with them or provide them with food, drink, fire, or candle until they had agreed upon their verdict, with an officer appointed to attend them. The jury withdrew and, after about an hour, returned to the court. The judge ordered the jury to be called over by name, and each answered. He then asked whether they were agreed upon a verdict, to which they replied that they were. When asked who would speak for them, they answered that the foreman would do so. John Miller was then set to the bar. The judge directed the jury to look upon the prisoner and asked whether they found him guilty of the murder for which he stood indicted, or not guilty. The foreman answered that he was guilty. The judge asked, “Guilty of what?” and the foreman replied, “Guilty of murder.” The judge further asked whether he was guilty of wilful murder, and the foreman confirmed that he was. The verdict was then formally recorded, and the court asked the jury to affirm it as entered: that John Miller was guilty of wilful murder in killing Charles Spines. The jury assented unanimously. Interpretations None. |
261 | 240 | Judge You John Miller have bin Indicted for murder in Prison[er] I have nothing to say God have mercy upon me, I am Judge - John Miller thou art to be Carried from hence unto the Judge - You Gent n of the Jury the Sentence that I have Given You C P Cryed made Proclamation Oyez all manner of persons that have appeared and Given God save the King | The judge addressed John Miller, stating that he had been indicted for the murder of Charles Spines, to which he had pleaded not guilty and had put himself upon trial by God and the country. He stated that Miller had received an open, fair, and lawful trial, had heard all the witnesses sworn against him, and had been given full liberty to question them. He further stated that Miller had been heard in his defence and that his witnesses had also been examined, and that the jury had now found him guilty of wilful murder. The judge then asked what he had to say for himself before sentence was pronounced. Miller replied that he had nothing to say, asking that God have mercy upon him, and expressing sorrow for what he had done. The judge then pronounced sentence, ordering that Miller be taken from the court to the place from which he came, and from there to the place appointed for execution, where he was to be hanged by the neck until dead, and concluded by praying that the Lord have mercy upon his soul. The judge then addressed the jury, stating that they had done justice and charity in delivering their verdict, and expressing the hope that the case would serve as an example to prevent such crimes in the future. He dismissed them from further attendance. A proclamation was then made, calling upon all persons who had attended the session that they might depart and return when summoned again. The proceedings concluded with the customary acclamation: God save the King, and bless the Island and the Proprietors. Interpretations None. |
262 | 241 | Island St Helena Att a Publique Session held at the Present John Blackmore Gov r and Judge The Tryall of James Wakefield Planter for speaking Proclamation was made for all persons warned or Then the Judge Commanded James Wakefield Prison r to be C P Sett James Wakefield to the Bar C P James Wakefield hold up thy hand, which he Did C P James wakefeild Thou Standest Indicted by the Name of James Wakefield | At a public session held at the Sessions House near Fort James on the Island of St Helena on 7th 1682, John Blackmore, Governor and Judge, presided, with Robert Hadden, Deputy Governor, and Richard Keelinge, Attorney General, in attendance. Proclamation was made for all persons concerned to draw near and give their attendance. The judge then ordered that James Wakefield, a planter, be brought before the court. He explained that the purpose of the trial was to examine allegations that Wakefield had spoken scandalous and derogatory words against the King and his government while in drink, and that he had reportedly been further intoxicated with strong drink obtained from the Dutch. Wakefield was then set to the bar and required to hold up his hand. The indictment was read, stating that James Wakefield, planter of St Helena, stood accused of failing in his duty of allegiance to the King, and that on 21 November last he had profanely, maliciously, contemptuously, and scandalously spoken words against the King’s sacred person. Interpretations None. |
263 | 242 | Majesty Saying that y e English King should not keep How sayst thou James wakefield art thou Guilty of Prison: C P Pris C P James wakefield thou hast bin Indicted by the Name | At a public session held at the Sessions House near Fort James on the Island of St Helena on 7th 1682, John Blackmore, Governor and Judge, presided, with Robert Hadden, Deputy Governor, and Richard Keelinge, Attorney General, in attendance. Proclamation was made for all persons concerned to draw near and give their attendance. The judge then ordered that James Wakefield, a planter, be brought before the court. He explained that the purpose of the trial was to examine allegations that Wakefield had spoken scandalous and derogatory words against the King and his government while in drink, and that he had reportedly been further intoxicated with strong drink obtained from the Dutch. Wakefield was then set to the bar and required to hold up his hand. The indictment was read, stating that James Wakefield, planter of St Helena, stood accused of failing in his duty of allegiance to the King, and that on 21 November last he had profanely, maliciously, contemptuously, and scandalously spoken words against the King’s sacred person. Interpretations None. Speculations Perhaps the emphasis on Wakefield’s drunkenness was intended to mitigate his culpability, or at least to frame the offence as arising from disorder rather than deliberate sedition? It was probably the case that the reference to “strong drink from the Dutch” carried an additional insinuation, linking the offence not only to intoxication but to foreign influence or disloyal association? Perhaps the formal and highly charged language of the indictment reflects the seriousness with which even spoken words against royal authority were treated in a colonial setting, where maintaining order and loyalty was especially important? |
264 | 243 | Then the Jury was Called and Orlando Bagley appointed You shall well and truely try and True Deliverance The rest of the Jury had the Same Oath Administred to The oath that y e sd foreman hath taken you and Every C P Cyer Court these Orlando Bagley - foreman - 1 C P Here the Indictm t was Read againe You Gent of the Jury James wakefeild Prison r at the Barr | The jury was then called, and Orlando Bagley was appointed foreman and sworn. The oath required that he should truly try the case and deliver a true verdict between the King and the prisoner according to the evidence. The rest of the jury were sworn in similar terms, each undertaking to observe the oath faithfully and to give their verdict according to their knowledge and judgment. The jurors were then named as follows: Orlando Bagley (foreman) All were described as “good men and true.” The indictment was then read again, and the jury were reminded that James Wakefield, the prisoner at the bar, stood accused of failing in his allegiance and of uttering seditious and scandalous words against the King. Interpretations None. Speculations Perhaps the formal restatement of the charge to the jury was intended to reinforce the political nature of the offence, ensuring that they understood it not merely as misconduct but as a breach of loyalty to the Crown? It was probably the case that describing the jurors as “good men and true” functioned not only as a conventional phrase but also as a reminder of their duty to uphold authority and order? Perhaps the repetition of the indictment reflects the seriousness with which spoken words against the King were treated, requiring clear emphasis before deliberation? |
265 | 244 | Then the Jury was Called and Orlando Bagley appoint[ed] You shall well and truely try and True Deliverance The rest of the Jury had the Same Oath Administred to The oath that y e sd foreman hath taken you and Every C P Cyer Court these Orlando Bagley - - forem - 1 A. G You Gent of the Jury James wakefeild Prison r at the Barr | The jury was then called, and Orlando Bagley was appointed foreman and sworn. He was charged to try the case faithfully and to deliver a true verdict between the King and the prisoner according to the evidence. The remaining jurors were sworn in similar terms, each undertaking to observe the oath and to give their verdict according to their skill and knowledge. The jurors were named as follows: Orlando Bagley (foreman) All were described as “good men and true.” The indictment was then read again, and the jury were addressed that James Wakefield, the prisoner at the bar, had been indicted and arraigned for failing in the allegiance owed to the King, and for wickedly and contumaciously speaking seditious and scandalous words against him. Interpretations “Contumaciously” indicates wilful disobedience or stubborn defiance of authority. Speculations Perhaps the repeated emphasis on “due allegiance” reflects a concern that disloyal speech, even when spoken in drink, might undermine authority in a small and vulnerable settlement? It was probably the case that reiterating the charge immediately before deliberation was intended to frame the offence in explicitly political terms, rather than as mere disorderly conduct? Perhaps the inclusion of “contumaciously” was meant to suggest not only that the words were spoken, but that they carried an element of defiance rather than carelessness? |
266 | 245 | then I and one Mashing me gott me Downe and Breais Judge Was any of you Neere [him] When James Wakefeild said these J L Rich d Geuinge and [Tho][...][...] was without Doores but Judge James wakefeild if you have any Question to aske P I shall [a]ske him no question he may Induce what he Then Rich d Geuing was Cal[ed] and Sworne Judge Richard Geuing what can You Say of wakefeild trying to R G | The witness John Long stated that, after being knocked down and beaten, James Wakefield spoke abusive words to him, calling him an “English dog” and challenging him. When asked whether others were near enough to hear these words, Long replied that Richard Geuing and another man were outside, but he could not say whether they were close enough to hear. Wakefield declined to question the witness, stating that the witness might say what he pleased against him, and adding that the jury themselves were drunk and familiar before the trial was over. Richard Geuing was then called and sworn. He testified that he had been drinking with the same company on the night of Monday 21 November and into the following morning. He stated that he was present during the quarrel between Long and Wakefield and heard them exchange several abusive expressions, including calling each other “English dogs” and “Protestant rogue.” However, he did not hear either man mention the King. He further stated that Long challenged Wakefield to fight and that Wakefield moved to accept the challenge, but that those present intervened and prevented the fight. He also testified that Long threatened Wakefield with being taken ashore, to which Wakefield responded with indifference and further abusive language. Interpretations “Scurrilous” refers to coarse, insulting, or abusive language. Speculations Perhaps Geuing’s testimony was significant in narrowing the charge, since he explicitly denied hearing any reference to the King, which was central to the indictment? It was probably the case that the exchange of insults between the two men was typical of drunken quarrels, raising the question of whether Wakefield’s words were politically meaningful or merely part of a personal dispute? Perhaps Wakefield’s remark about the jury being drunk was itself risky, as it could be taken as further contempt of authority during the proceedings? |
267 | 246 | Names and w[oul]d bid him to Come Downe to fight, Then Wake- Then Tho: Allis was Called and Sworne Tho: A Judge - John Long where were you after the fight was over J L Then Joseph Quinny was Called & Sworne C: Q Judge - How Long Time after the fight was it that you C Q | Richard Geuing further stated that, after Wakefield had gone down from their company, he and Thomas Allis followed and found Wakefield and Long engaged in a fight, which they broke up. He repeated that he heard no words spoken by Wakefield concerning the King. Thomas Allis was then called and sworn. He confirmed Geuing’s account, stating that after the fight Long remained for a short time, and that he later went out with a lantern to look for him. Allis reported that Long afterwards claimed that Wakefield had spoken certain threatening words, but Allis himself did not hear Wakefield say them. John Long was then questioned as to his movements after the fight. He stated that he went home, but upon returning heard Wakefield coming down with others, swearing that he would have him. Long said that he hid himself until they had passed, and then went to Allis. Joseph Quinny was then called and sworn. He testified that, while in bed before morning, he heard noise outside and was told that Long and Wakefield were fighting. He stated that he heard them call each other several names, but heard nothing concerning the King, nor even his name mentioned. He added that, some hours after the fight, he heard Long say that he would hang Wakefield. When asked how long after the fight this statement was made, Quinny replied that it was about four or five hours later, toward early morning. Interpretations None. Speculations Perhaps the consistency among multiple witnesses in denying any mention of the King significantly weakened the central charge of seditious speech? It was probably the case that the prosecution relied heavily on Long’s testimony, making his credibility crucial, especially where other witnesses could not confirm his claims? Perhaps Long’s later statement about hanging Wakefield suggests lingering hostility, which might have influenced how his earlier testimony was perceived? It was likely that the court needed to distinguish between a drunken personal quarrel and a politically significant offence, and these testimonies tended to blur that distinction? |
268 | 247 | Then Tho: F[ue]sdale was Called & Sworne Who saith that hearing a Noise in the Sh[ore] House Judge James Wakefeild what can you Say for yo r Selfe You Prison r I have onely to Say is That I never Spoke these words that Judge You may See what witnesses you will but we cannot [find] C B Desire that one Rob t P[er]k W[or]mwood Mary A R Who saith that the morning the fight was before Ruth Quinney appeared R Q Who saith that she did heare the sd Long say that M F Who saith she did See the sd | Thomas Fuesdale was then called and sworn. He stated that, hearing a disturbance from his bed, he looked out of his window and saw Wakefield and Long fighting and calling each other several obscene names, but heard nothing concerning the King. The judge then asked Wakefield what he had to say in his defence, having heard the witnesses. Wakefield replied that he had never spoken the words alleged, and that Long’s claim arose out of their quarrel. He requested that his own witnesses be heard. Several witnesses were then called on Wakefield’s behalf. One witness stated that, on the morning after the fight, Long was very drunk and, while going toward the fort, said in an enraged manner that he would have Wakefield hanged or whipped. Ruth Quinney testified that she heard Long say that the quarrel was his own doing and that he intended to take revenge on Wakefield because Wakefield had beaten him. Mary Fuesdale testified that she saw Long extremely drunk on the morning of the fight. Interpretations None. Speculations Perhaps the defence strategy was to undermine Long’s credibility by emphasising his drunkenness and his desire for revenge? It was likely that portraying Long as both intoxicated and vindictive was intended to suggest that his accusation of seditious speech was unreliable or exaggerated? Perhaps the repeated testimony that no one heard any mention of the King strengthened the argument that the incident was a personal dispute rather than a political offence? It was probably significant that Wakefield actively sought witnesses, indicating a more structured defence than in some earlier cases where defendants spoke only briefly for themselves? |
269 | 248 | Prudence Sherwin appeared P S Rob t Thomps appeared R T Judge Have you any more to say before the Jury withdraw P Judge | Prudence Sherwin was then called and testified that, on the morning of the fight, she spoke to Long, urging him to go and sleep, as he was very drunk. She stated that Long, in a rage, declared he would be revenged on Wakefield and would have him hanged or whipped. She further stated that Long said he would go to the Governor to complain, and, if no action were taken, would go to England in the ship Manderna with his countryman, Captain Davi[…]. Robert Thompson was then called and sworn. He testified that he heard the beginning of the quarrel between Long and Wakefield, during which Long called Wakefield a “Protestant rogue,” and Wakefield called Long a “slavish dog.” He stated that the dispute escalated, and that Wakefield struck Long, leading to a fight. He affirmed that he was present throughout and helped separate them, and that he never heard any words spoken concerning the King. The judge then asked Wakefield whether he had anything further to say before the jury withdrew. Wakefield replied that he had nothing more to add, stating that he was wrongfully accused by Long and leaving his case to God and the jury. The judge then addressed the jury, reminding them that they had heard all the witnesses on both sides. He noted that one witness had positively asserted that the prisoner spoke the alleged words, and instructed the jury to consider this carefully, and to deliver a true verdict. Interpretations None. Speculations Perhaps the defence evidence was aimed almost entirely at discrediting Long by portraying him as intoxicated, vindictive, and unreliable, rather than directly disproving the alleged words? It was likely significant that multiple witnesses present during the quarrel denied hearing any reference to the King, which may have cast doubt on whether such words were spoken at all? Perhaps the judge’s emphasis on the single witness who affirmed the charge reflects the legal weight given to direct testimony, even when contradicted by several others? It was probably the case that the mention of appealing to the Governor or even travelling to England suggests that Long intended to escalate the dispute beyond a local quarrel into a formal accusation? |
270 | 249 | Then the Jury withdrew and stayed a[...] or 4 hour[s] when C P You Gent: of the Jury answer to yo r Names, w ch they Did do C P are you all ag[r]e[e]d on a verdict Jury yes yea C P Who shall speake for you Jury The foreman. C P Sett James Wakefeild to the bar. Judge You Gent: of the Jury looke upon the Prison[er] at the Bar is he Jury Not Guilty Judge Record the verdict, w ch was done. C P You Gent of the Jury hearken to the verdict as the Court hath C P Then the Record was Read you say that James Wakefeild Jury yea yea y[ea] C P Some one of yo[u] kneel, w ch the Prison[er] Did Priso[ner] God Save The King Bless the Hono[ur]a[ble] Judge Make a Proclamation Cryer Oyes oyes if there be any person or persons that know of | The jury withdrew and remained absent for approximately three or four hours before returning with their verdict. They were called over by name and confirmed that they were agreed. The foreman spoke on their behalf. James Wakefield was set to the bar, and the judge asked whether he was guilty of the contempt and misdemeanour charged, or not guilty. The jury returned a verdict of not guilty. The verdict was formally recorded and read aloud, and the jury unanimously affirmed it. Wakefield was then ordered to kneel, and he declared: “God save the King, bless the Honourable Company and the worshipful Bench.” A proclamation was made calling for any person who could offer anything against the prisoner to come forward. No one appeared, and Wakefield was discharged. The proceedings concluded with the formal acclamation of loyalty to the King. Interpretations None. Speculations Perhaps the length of the jury’s deliberation indicates that the case was not straightforward, especially given the conflict between a single direct accusation and multiple contrary testimonies? It was likely that the absence of corroboration for the alleged words concerning the King played a decisive role in the acquittal? Perhaps the formal declaration by Wakefield after the verdict functioned as a public reaffirmation of loyalty, reinforcing the authority of the court even in acquittal? It was probably the case that the proclamation inviting further accusations reflects a procedural safeguard, but also served to confirm publicly that no further evidence existed against him? |
271 | 250 | Island St Helena Att a Court Martiall of Military officers Held att Fort Collonell John Blackmore Capt Thos Hailes Dep t Serg t W m Clifton sold r was Called and [bring]d w th [stand]ing and W m Clifton Confesseth that he did by the persuasion and [Insinu-] Thomas Writckee sold[ier] and [clockman] was Charge[ed] for being, | At a Court Martial held at Fort James on Tuesday 25 January 1682, Colonel John Blackmore, Governor, presided, with Robert Hadden, Deputy Governor, Richard Keelinge, and other officers and officials present. William Clifton, a soldier, was brought before the court and charged with uttering disloyal, seditious, and scandalous words against the East India Company and the government established by it, in a manner said to be prejudicial to the honour and interests of the island. Clifton confessed that he had spoken such words, stating that he had been persuaded and influenced by one James Dore while both were drunk aboard the ship Modena from Bombay. He acknowledged that his remarks had improperly criticised the Company and its appointed governors, and expressed remorse for having acted rashly and indecently. He further stated that he had since reflected on his conduct and asked the court to spare his life and allow him to return to employment. Thomas Writckee, also a soldier, was then charged with having heard the same seditious and scandalous speeches and failing to report them to the officers. Interpretations None. Speculations Perhaps Clifton’s confession and emphasis on intoxication and persuasion were intended to mitigate punishment by shifting responsibility toward James Dore? It was likely that offences against the Company’s authority were treated with particular severity in a military context, where discipline and loyalty were essential? Perhaps the charge against Writckee reflects an expectation that silence in the face of disloyal speech was itself a punishable offence, reinforcing collective responsibility among soldiers? It was probably significant that Clifton appealed directly for his life, suggesting that the court martial had the authority to impose capital punishment even for speech-related offences? |
272 | 251 | And then hideing it with some [Cland][...][...] while Upon Serious Consideration of the Nature and Tendency of these But the Rt Honourable Lords and [Ladys] whose from Deferring It is unanimously agreed and accordingly ordered | Thomas Writckee acknowledged that he had heard the seditious and scandalous words and had concealed them. He stated that Captain James Dore had, through persuasion and repeated urging, drawn him into this offence. He expressed regret and asked the court to spare his life. Upon consideration of the nature of the offences, both soldiers-having plainly confessed-were found by the court, without dissent, to fall within the sixth article of martial law concerning duty, subordination, and command, for which the prescribed penalty was death. However, in accordance with instructions issued by the Company’s authorities, which allowed for mitigation in such cases, the court determined that instead of execution the offenders should be banished from the island and sent to Bombay or another Company settlement in India. There they were to serve the Company for a term of three or four years, as directed by the senior officers. It was therefore unanimously ordered that William Clifton be banished from the island of St Helena and never permitted to return. He was to be sent on the first available ship to Bombay or Fort St George. If he returned without authority, he would be subject to severe punishment. In the meantime, he was to remain in custody, though allowed limited freedom of movement within the fort. Interpretations “Nemine contradicente” indicates that the decision was made unanimously, with no dissenting voice. Speculations Perhaps the reference to the sixth article of martial law was intended to emphasise the seriousness of the offence, even though the ultimate punishment was mitigated? It was likely that the Company’s instructions allowing substitution of banishment for execution reflect a practical need to preserve manpower while maintaining discipline? Perhaps sending offenders to other Company settlements served both as punishment and as a means of redistributing labour to areas where it was needed? It was probably significant that return from banishment was itself treated as a grave offence, reinforcing the permanence and severity of the sentence despite the avoidance of execution? |
273 | 252 | It is also agreed and ordered That Tho: [Wri][t][c]kee, be Banished and transported as the said J. Blackmore Island St Helena Att a Court Martiall of Military officers held Collonell John Blackmore Capt and Gov r Tho: [Fues]dale, was accused for [ ] a base me soldier Tho: Fuesdale Confesseth that he did say that [coming] | It was further ordered that Thomas Writckee be likewise banished and transported in the same manner as William Clifton. In the meantime, however, he was to be kept in close confinement. This additional severity was imposed because he had previously been involved in a rebellion and mutiny, for which he had been tried alongside others, though his punishment had been deferred due to injury. After his recovery, he had been restored to service upon his petition and promise of good behaviour, but his involvement in this second offence was treated as a renewed breach of trust. The court therefore considered that he had forfeited any prior leniency and deserved stricter treatment than those guilty only once. He was to remain in close prison until he could be sent away, and both he and the other soldiers were to be maintained at Company expense until they were placed aboard a ship bound for India. A subsequent Court Martial was held at Fort James on Thursday 31 January 1682, with the same principal officers present. At this session, Thomas Fuesdale, a soldier, was accused of using abusive language toward Robert Hadden, the Deputy Governor, including threatening to beat him, and of behaviour tending to provoke disorder. Fuesdale admitted that he had spoken the words, stating that they arose in the heat of passion during a dispute, and that he had no ill intent. Interpretations None. Speculations Perhaps the harsher treatment of Writckee reflects a principle within military discipline that repeated offences, especially following prior leniency, were viewed as aggravated breaches of trust? It was likely that prior involvement in mutiny made Writckee particularly suspect, so that even a speech-related offence was treated as part of a pattern of insubordination? Perhaps the insistence on close imprisonment before transport indicates concern that he might otherwise attempt escape or further disorder? It was probably the case that Fuesdale’s admission, combined with his claim of acting in passion, positioned his case differently from those involving calculated or repeated disloyalty, potentially affecting the severity of his sentence? |
274 | 253 | him Selfe and Capt Hadden Which he Mistaking Did Say John Finnis[...][...] being Some [p][...] Saith that he was by when Andrew [Wa][l]ker Gent: Mate; saith that he heard the Differ- Upon the hearing of the whole matter the said Fuesdale It is ordered That the said Fuesdale be for Ever Banished this Island, and | Thomas Fuesdale explained that he had spoken the threatening words toward Captain Hadden through mistake and inconsideration, arising from a sudden dispute. John Finnis testified that he was present when the disagreement occurred, which concerned a matter of money owed by Fuesdale to Captain Hadden. He stated that the exchange was heated but slight in nature, and that when Hadden remarked that he knew how to deal with him, Fuesdale suddenly replied with words to the effect of threatening to thrash him. Finnis noted that he heard these words both within the room and later outside in the street at Fort James. Andrew Walker also testified that he heard Fuesdale threaten to thrash Captain Hadden as they came down the stairs, though he did not know the cause of the dispute. Upon consideration of the case, Fuesdale was found guilty, without dissent, under the second and sixteenth articles of martial law relating to disloyal speech and conduct toward authority. While one of these articles allowed for discretionary punishment, the other carried the penalty of death. However, taking into account the relatively minor nature of the offence and the circumstances in which it was committed, the court mitigated the sentence. It was ordered that Fuesdale be permanently banished from the island and transported on the next outward-bound ship to India, where he was to serve the Company for three or four years as directed by its senior officers. Interpretations “Arbitrary punishment” indicates a penalty determined at the court’s discretion rather than fixed by statute. Speculations Perhaps the court distinguished between deliberate insubordination and impulsive speech in anger, leading to mitigation despite the technical applicability of a capital offence? It was likely that the financial dispute provided context that reduced the perceived gravity of the threat, framing it as a personal quarrel rather than a challenge to authority? Perhaps the use of multiple articles of martial law reflects an effort to formally justify jurisdiction over both speech and conduct within a military framework? It was probably the case that banishment to India again served both punitive and practical purposes, removing a disruptive individual while retaining his labour for Company service? |
275 | 254 | Beside the fore mentioned Crimes of the said Fuesdale, J. Blackmore | In addition to the offences already described, it was noted that Thomas Fuesdale was widely regarded as of a turbulent and seditious disposition, frequently using scandalous language and having been involved in several prior incidents for which he had been called to account. He was also said to have been deeply involved in a recent rebellion on the island, from which he had escaped full punishment. Since that time, he had continued to use seditious language, including words considered defamatory toward the King, which had previously led to his arrest and confinement. These behaviours were said to have caused unease among others on the island, particularly at a time when authority and order were of heightened concern. Taking all these factors into account, the court concluded that Fuesdale justly deserved the sentence of death under martial law. However, he was permitted to escape that penalty and instead be banished, this being treated as a form of mitigation. Interpretations None. Speculations Perhaps this passage functioned as a retrospective justification of the sentence, strengthening the court’s decision by framing Fuesdale as a habitual offender rather than judging him solely on the immediate incident? It was likely that prior involvement in rebellion weighed heavily in the court’s reasoning, effectively transforming a moment of heated speech into evidence of a broader pattern of disloyalty? Perhaps the emphasis on the disturbance caused to “this Society” reflects concern about maintaining collective stability in a small and vulnerable settlement? It was probably the case that formally acknowledging that he deserved death, while sparing him, allowed the court to assert authority and deterrence while still exercising controlled leniency? |
276 | 255 | Island St Helena Att a Publique Session held on Monday the 16 th Day of Before John Blackmore Gov r and Judge The Tryall of John the Son of John Oliver Deceased Proclamation was made for all persons warned or Concerned Then the Judge Comand John Oliver Prison r to be brought The said John Oliver being Come into the Court Judge - Sett John Oliver to the Barr, which was Done. Clerk of Thou standest here Indicted by the Name of John Oliver | At a public session held on Monday 16 May 1696 at the Sessions House near Fort James on the Island of St Helena, John Blackmore, Governor and Judge, presided, with Joshua Johnson, Deputy Governor, and Richard Keelinge, Attorney General. Proclamation was made for all persons concerned to draw near and give their attendance. The judge ordered that John Oliver, son of the late John Oliver, be brought before the court. He declared that the matter to be tried was one of great seriousness, namely that Oliver had committed buggery upon a calf, an offence described as heinous and contrary to both divine and human law. Oliver was then set to the bar and required to hold up his hand. The indictment was read, stating that John Oliver, an Englishman of the island, stood accused that, on or about 22 or 23 May, near the house of Mary Matthews, widow, he had wickedly, inhumanly, and feloniously committed buggery upon a calf belonging to her. The charge was said to be contrary to the law of God, the law of King William and Queen Mary, and the laws and constitutions of the East India Company governing the island. Interpretations None. Speculations Perhaps the judge’s opening emphasis on the offence as “contrary to the law of God and man” reflects the moral as well as legal framing of such crimes, indicating that the case was treated not only as criminal but as deeply transgressive in a religious sense? It was likely that the detailed invocation of multiple legal authorities-the Crown, divine law, and Company regulations-was intended to reinforce the gravity and universality of the prohibition? Perhaps the identification of the animal’s owner and location in the indictment reflects the need to establish both property and jurisdictional elements alongside the act itself? It was probably the case that such offences were rare in the records, which may explain the formal and emphatic language used at the outset of proceedings? |
277 | 256 | What sayst thou John Oliver art thou Guilty of the [offe]nc[e] Prison: Cl[erk] P. C. P. C. P. John Oliver thou art here Indicted by the Name of Then the Jury were Called and [B]ony [Coles] appointed fore- You shall well and truely try and true Deliverance make The Rest of the Jury was Sworne in these following words The Oath which you foreman hath taken you and | John Oliver was asked how he pleaded to the indictment, whether guilty or not guilty. He answered that he was not guilty. He was then asked how he wished to be tried, to which he replied, “By God and the country.” The court responded with the customary formula, wishing him a good deliverance. The indictment was then restated in full, and Oliver was informed that he had put himself upon trial by a jury. He was told that if he had any objection to any of the jurors, he might raise it before they were sworn. The jury was then called, and Bony Coles was appointed foreman and sworn. He was charged to try the case faithfully between the Crown, the East India Company, and the prisoner, according to the evidence and without fear, favour, or affection. The remaining jurors were then sworn in similar terms, each undertaking to give their verdict according to the evidence and their knowledge. Interpretations None. Speculations Perhaps the explicit inclusion of both the Crown and the East India Company in the oath reflects the dual authority under which justice was administered on the island? It was likely that the formal restatement of the indictment served to reinforce the gravity of the charge immediately before the jury was empanelled? Perhaps the emphasis on “without fear, favour, or affection” was particularly important in a small community, where personal relationships might otherwise influence judgment? It was probably the case that the opportunity to challenge jurors, though formal, may have been limited in practice given the small pool of available individuals? |
278 | 257 | C. P. Henry Coales - - - 1 A. G. You Gent: of the Jury John Oliver the Prisoner Now at the | The jurors were then called and named as follows: Henry Coales All were described as “good men and true.” No objection was made by the prisoner to any member of the jury. The jury were then addressed and reminded that John Oliver stood indicted for committing buggery upon a calf belonging to the widow Matthews, contrary to divine law, the laws of the Crown, and the regulations of the East India Company. They were instructed that it was their duty to determine, upon the evidence, whether he was guilty or not guilty of the offence as charged. They were further directed that, if they found him guilty, they were to declare it accordingly; if not guilty, they were to say so and no more. Interpretations None. Speculations Perhaps the absence of any challenge to the jury reflects either acceptance of the panel or the limited scope for objection within a small colonial community? It was likely that the formal reiteration of the charge served to ensure that the jury clearly understood both the nature of the offence and the legal authorities under which it was prosecuted? Perhaps the instruction that the jury should “say no more” if not guilty reflects a procedural emphasis on limiting verdicts strictly to the question of guilt, without elaboration or justification? It was probably the case that the phrase “good men and true” functioned both as a conventional formula and as an affirmation of the jurors’ expected integrity in a tightly knit settlement? |
279 | 258 | Judge - Make a Proclamation Oyes God Save King William A. G. Saturday Feb ry 22 t h 168[9] Tho: Monke sold r Informeth that He hath [underst]o[o]d | Proclamation was made calling upon all persons who could give evidence on behalf of the Crown against John Oliver to come forward and be heard, as he stood upon his trial. An information was then read in court, taken before the Governor. Thomas Monke, a soldier, reported that about a month earlier, at the house of the widow Matthews, he had heard that one morning before Christmas a soldier named Jones, who had long lodged at the house, spoke to John Oliver, the widow’s apprentice, accusing him of committing the act upon the calf. Monke stated that Jones claimed to have seen Oliver in a compromising position with the animal. Oliver denied the accusation. Monke further stated that he had heard the widow Matthews herself say that she had seen Oliver commit the act upon the calf in the pound near her house. Interpretations None. Speculations Perhaps the reliance on reported speech within this information reflects the difficulty of obtaining direct testimony in cases of this nature? It was likely that the widow Matthews’ alleged observation carried particular weight, given her position as owner of the animal and employer of the accused? Perhaps the inclusion of both accusation and denial within the same account indicates an attempt to present the initial dispute rather than a settled fact? It was probably the case that such allegations depended heavily on reputation and witness credibility, especially where physical evidence would have been limited or absent? |
280 | 259 | Hereupon the said Depon t did [about] the said Jack Judge - Judge - Tho Dixon | The information continued that, after the accusation, John Oliver took a rope from the house under the pretext of fetching wood, though this was not customary. The widow Matthews expressed concern that he might attempt to hang himself. Thomas Dixon and the informant then followed Oliver and found him hanging from a tree about a mile from the house, though not yet dead. They cut him down, and after some time he recovered and stated that he had attempted to hang himself out of shame for what he had done, but they instructed him to conceal the matter. The judge informed the jury that this statement had been formally given before him, signed by the informant, and previously sworn to, though the witness had been absent at an earlier stage of the trial. Thomas Dixon was then called and sworn. He stated that he had never seen Oliver commit the act in question. Interpretations None. Speculations Perhaps the account of Oliver’s attempted suicide was introduced as circumstantial evidence of guilt, suggesting consciousness of wrongdoing rather than direct proof of the act? It was likely that such behaviour, particularly the expression of shame, would have carried strong weight in a moral and legal framework where confession and reputation were significant? Perhaps the inclusion of Dixon’s testimony denying direct observation reflects the court’s attempt to balance second-hand accusations with firsthand evidence? It was probably the case that the credibility of the informant was central, given that much of the narrative depended on reported statements and subsequent conduct rather than eyewitness testimony of the act itself? |
281 | 260 | Judge Tho: Di: John Oliver if you have any thing to aske the witness Prison: Judge - Jury Judge M: Matt Elizabeth John [Lea][ve] Planter who being Sworne Saith that ab t | The judge questioned Thomas Dixon further, asking whether he had ever seen Oliver commit the act or make any motion toward it. Dixon replied that he had never seen him do any such thing, though he had seen him handling the calf. Oliver declined to question the witness, and the jury also had no questions. Mary Matthews was then called and sworn. She testified that she had seen Oliver commit the act upon the calf. Elizabeth, the wife of Samuel […], was then called and sworn. She stated that, in conversation with Mary Matthews after the alleged incident, Matthews had been asked whether she knew anything of the accusation, and suggested that Dixon had spoken of Oliver in connection with the act. John Lea, a planter, was then called and sworn. He stated that around Christmas he had heard that Oliver had attempted to hang himself and had been cut down, but he did not hear Oliver confess to the act. Interpretations None. Speculations Perhaps Mary Matthews’ direct testimony was the most decisive evidence, as it provided the only clear claim of eyewitness observation of the act? It was likely that Dixon’s denial of having seen the act weakened the prosecution’s case in part, creating a contrast between direct and indirect evidence? Perhaps the testimony of Elizabeth suggests uncertainty or inconsistency in earlier accounts, raising questions about how firmly the accusation was initially asserted? It was probably the case that the reported suicide attempt continued to function as circumstantial evidence, but without an explicit confession it remained open to interpretation? |
282 | 261 | And [monke] leade him the said Oliver Downe the [h][i]ll Elizabeth Boddes being sworne saith [The Depon t] the [Elenor] the wife of Rich d Lee being sworne E L | Further testimony was given that Monke led Oliver down a hill near Perranns’s house, and that Perranns heard Monke tell Oliver that he deserved severe punishment for what he had done. Elizabeth Boddes, sworn as a witness, stated that her husband had told her that Mary Matthews had declared she had seen Oliver commit the act, and that Dixon had also been present. According to this account, Oliver was reproved, then went to fetch wood, and afterwards attempted to hang himself, whereupon Dixon and Monke cut him down. Eleanor, the wife of Richard Lee, testified that Mary Matthews came to her house in distress, stating that she had seen Oliver commit the act and feared the consequences of having spoken of it. She further stated that Matthews later expressed anxiety that her statement might lead to her being drawn into proceedings or punishment, suggesting concern about the implications of her testimony. Interpretations None. Speculations Perhaps the accumulation of second-hand testimony reflects the circulation of the accusation within the community, indicating how such allegations spread beyond direct witnesses? It was likely that Matthews’ reported distress and hesitation suggest uncertainty about the consequences of giving evidence, especially in a case carrying severe penalties? Perhaps the repeated references to Oliver’s attempted suicide continued to be treated as indirect confirmation of guilt, even in the absence of a clear confession? It was probably the case that the mixture of direct and reported testimony created tension in the evidentiary weight, requiring the jury to assess credibility carefully rather than rely on a single clear narrative? |
283 | 262 | Judge - ask the sd Matthews what she Could say to what Judge - John Oliver what hast thou to Say for thy Selfe, you Prison: Judge - Prison: Judge.--- Then the Jury withdrew and stayed ab t two hou[rs] C P C P Jury C P Jury C P Judge - Not Guilty, | The judge questioned Mary Matthews regarding earlier testimony, and she stated that some parts were true and some were not. John Oliver was then asked what he had to say in his defence. He replied that he had never committed the offence nor attempted any such act. When asked if he had anything further to add before the jury withdrew, he stated that he was wrongfully accused by Monke and left his case to God and the verdict of the jury. The judge then addressed the jury, noting the inconsistencies in the evidence. He observed that Matthews and Dixon denied knowledge of the act, while Monke’s earlier information suggested that they had seen it. He also pointed out that another witness had sworn that Matthews had previously claimed to have seen Oliver commit the act and that Oliver had attempted to hang himself. The jury were instructed to consider all these circumstances carefully and to return a true verdict. The jury withdrew for about two hours and, upon returning, confirmed that they had agreed upon a verdict. The foreman spoke on their behalf. Oliver was set to the bar, and the jury were asked whether he was guilty of the felonious crime charged or not guilty. They returned a verdict of not guilty. Interpretations None. Speculations Perhaps the contradictions in Matthews’ statements were decisive, as they undermined the only direct claim of eyewitness evidence? It was likely that the conflict between Monke’s account and the testimony of Matthews and Dixon created sufficient doubt to prevent a conviction? Perhaps the jury placed greater weight on in-court testimony than on reported statements made earlier, especially where those reports were inconsistent? It was probably the case that, despite the seriousness of the charge, the evidentiary standard required clearer and more consistent proof than was available in this case? |
284 | 263 | Judge Record the verdict which was Done C P You Gentlemen of the Jury hearken to the verdict as the Then the Record was Read C P You say that John Oliver is not Guilty of the felonious C P So saith the foreman and So Say you all Jury yea yea y e s C P Downe on yo r knees, which the Prison r did God Save King William & J Blackmore Gov r Island | The judge ordered that the verdict be recorded, which was done. The clerk then read the recorded verdict aloud, confirming that the jury found John Oliver not guilty of the felonious act of buggery. The jury unanimously affirmed the verdict. Oliver was then ordered to kneel, and he declared: “God save King William and Queen Mary, and bless the Honourable Company and the Bench.” The proceedings concluded under the authority of Governor John Blackmore and Deputy Governor Joshua Johnson. Interpretations None. Speculations Perhaps the formal affirmation of loyalty following acquittal functioned as a ritual reinforcement of authority, even when the accused was cleared? It was likely that the unanimity of the jury was emphasised to underline the legitimacy of the verdict in a case marked by conflicting testimony? Perhaps the structured conclusion of the proceedings reflects the importance of maintaining order and ceremonial propriety, regardless of the outcome? It was probably the case that such declarations helped reaffirm the relationship between local governance, Company authority, and the Crown within the colonial setting? |
285 | 264 | Island St Helena Att a Court of Justice Continued on Tewsday the 6 th Day Present John Blackmore Gov r & Judge The Tryall of John Oliver Englishman of the sd Island Proclamation was made for all persons warned or Then the Judge Comanded John Oliver Prison r to be brought C P Sett John Oliver to the Bar Clo: C P Thou standest here Indicted by the Name of John Oliver | At a continued Court of Justice held on Tuesday 6 May 1690 at the Sessions House near Fort James on the Island of St Helena, John Blackmore, Governor and Judge, presided, with Joshua Johnson, Deputy Governor, and Richard Keelinge, Attorney General. Proclamation was made for all persons concerned to attend. The judge ordered that John Oliver be brought before the court and stated that the matter to be tried was a charge of rape, alleged to have been committed or attempted by Oliver upon Sarah, the daughter of Simon Tucker, a planter, aged about nine years. Oliver was then set to the bar and required to hold up his hand. The indictment was read, stating that John Oliver stood accused that, on 10 February, in the house of Mary Matthews, widow, he had wickedly, violently, and feloniously committed rape upon the body of Sarah Tucker, contrary to the laws of the Crown and the governing rules of the East India Company. Interpretations None. Speculations Perhaps the inclusion of both “committed or attempted” at the outset reflects some uncertainty in the evidence, prompting the court to frame the charge broadly before the formal indictment? It was likely that the explicit mention of the child’s age emphasised the gravity of the offence, both legally and morally? Perhaps the reference to the location-the house of Mary Matthews-indicates that the court was careful to establish the setting as part of the evidentiary framework? It was probably the case that invoking both royal and Company law reinforced the seriousness of the charge and the authority under which it was prosecuted? |
286 | 265 | How Sayst thou John Oliver art thou Guilty of the [Cr]ime Prison C B B C B John Oliver thou hast bin Indicted by the Name of John Then the Jury was Called and Henry Coles appointed foreman You shall well and Truely try and True Deliverance make The rest of the Jury was Sworne in these words The oath which yo[u] foreman hath taken you and Every | John Oliver was asked how he pleaded to the charge of rape, and he answered that he was not guilty. He was then asked how he wished to be tried, to which he replied, “By God and my country,” and the court gave the customary response. The indictment was restated, and Oliver was informed that he had put himself upon trial by a jury and might object to any juror before they were sworn. The jury was then called, and Henry Coles was appointed foreman and sworn. He was charged to try the case faithfully between the Crown and the prisoner according to the evidence. The remaining jurors were sworn in similar terms, each undertaking to give their verdict according to their knowledge and the evidence. Interpretations None. Speculations Perhaps the repetition of the indictment, including the age of the alleged victim, was intended to underscore the seriousness of the charge before the jury was sworn? It was likely that the formal opportunity to challenge jurors served more as a procedural safeguard than a frequently exercised right in a small community? Perhaps the consistent phrasing of the oaths reflects an effort to maintain uniformity and legitimacy in judicial proceedings under Company authority? It was probably the case that the invocation of both Crown and Company law reinforced the gravity and jurisdiction of the court in such cases? |
287 | 266 | C P Henry Coales - - - 1 A: G: you Gentlemen of the Jury John Oliver the Prisoner To which Indictm t he hath pleaded Not Guilty and | The jury members were called over by name, including Henry Coales as foreman along with eleven others, each described as “good men and true.” The indictment against John Oliver was then read again to the jury, stating that he was charged with committing rape upon Sarah, the young daughter of Simon Tucker. The jurors were instructed that Oliver had pleaded not guilty and had placed himself upon trial by them, and that it was their duty to determine, based on the evidence, whether he was guilty or not guilty of the crime. They were further directed that if they found him guilty they should say so, and if not, they should likewise declare it, without adding anything further. Interpretations The repeated formal listing of jurors as “good men and true” reflects a standard legal formula intended to affirm their credibility and moral standing rather than provide any specific evaluation of their character. The restatement of the indictment directly to the jury suggests an emphasis on ensuring that lay jurors clearly understood the charge they were to judge, particularly in cases involving serious offences. Speculations Perhaps the explicit instruction to “say and no more” indicates concern about juries offering explanations or qualifications to their verdicts, which the court sought to avoid? It was likely that the repetition of the charge in simplified form functioned as a practical means of guiding jurors who may not have been familiar with legal terminology? Perhaps the composition of the jury, drawn from local settlers and soldiers, reflects the limited pool of eligible participants in a small colonial setting? It is possible that the structured phrasing of the directions aimed to minimise ambiguity in verdict delivery, thereby reinforcing procedural clarity in the court’s records? |
288 | 267 | Judge Make a Proclamation oyes oyes God Save King William A:G Saturday Febru ry the 22 th 168[9] Tho: Monke sold r informeth that he hath understood | A proclamation was made calling for any persons to come forward and give evidence on behalf of the Crown against John Oliver, who was described as standing “upon his deliverance.” The authority of both the Crown and the East India Company was invoked, and the court formally invited any information relevant to the case. A written information by Thomas Monke, a soldier, was then read aloud. It had previously been taken and signed before the governor. Monke’s statement described an occasion when he and Widow Matthews were returning to her house and heard a young girl crying out loudly. He reported that the widow identified the voice as that of Sarah Tucker, and that he went quickly toward the house. According to his account, he entered and saw the girl lying on her back crying, with John Oliver upon her. Interpretations The formal proclamation demonstrates the court’s openness to additional testimony, suggesting that proceedings allowed for community participation even after the trial had begun. The use of a pre-recorded and signed information indicates that written depositions could be integrated into oral proceedings, rather than relying solely on live testimony. Monke’s account is presented as direct observation, which would likely carry particular weight compared to second-hand reports heard elsewhere in the trial. Speculations Perhaps the reliance on a previously recorded statement reflects practical constraints, such as witness availability or the need to preserve testimony given earlier? It was likely that the dramatic description of the girl’s cries was intended to strengthen the emotional and evidentiary impact of the testimony before the jury? Perhaps the inclusion of both Monke and the widow in the narrative suggests an attempt to corroborate the circumstances leading up to the alleged act? It is possible that the formal reading of such statements in court served to standardise evidence presentation in a setting where literacy and record-keeping were uneven? |
289 | 268 | This informant he asked Jack what he was doing Judge - You Gentlemen of the Jury to take Notice that this informan- Mary Matthews was Called and Sworne Judge - Mary Matthews what have you to alledge or Say on the M: M: | The written statement continued, describing that the informant questioned John Oliver about what he was doing, and that Oliver replied in a manner recorded as “nothing but [B]ugging.” The informant indicated that he warned Oliver that the widow was coming and that he would report what he had seen. When the widow arrived, she asked what had happened, and the informant told her that he had found Oliver behaving improperly with the girl. The girl was then asked what Oliver had attempted, and she answered that he would have “been foul” with her, but that she would not allow it. The judge informed the jury that this statement had been previously given and signed before him, and that the informant had affirmed it as true, although he had not been sworn at that earlier time and was now absent from the island. Mary Matthews was then called and sworn as a witness. She stated that she did not know of any rape, despite what Monke had told her. She confirmed that she and Monke had heard the girl crying while approaching the house, and that Monke had gone ahead to see what was happening. When she arrived, she asked Monke why the girl had cried out, and he told her that Oliver would have “been foul” with her. Interpretations The contrast between Monke’s written statement and Matthews’s sworn testimony introduces a discrepancy, particularly regarding whether the act was witnessed directly or inferred. The judge’s clarification about the informant’s absence highlights the procedural issue of relying on unsworn or unavailable witnesses while still presenting their statements to the jury. The phrase “would have been foul” appears to frame the act as attempted rather than completed, which may affect how the charge is interpreted. Speculations Perhaps the admission that the informant was not sworn at the time of the original statement raises questions about the evidentiary weight the jury might assign to it? It was likely that Matthews’s distancing herself from Monke’s accusation reflects either uncertainty, reluctance, or concern about the implications of her testimony? Perhaps the girl’s reported words, as mediated through others, illustrate how testimony could pass through multiple voices before reaching the court? It is possible that the court’s decision to include the written information despite the witness’s absence reflects pragmatic legal practice in a remote colonial setting? |
290 | 269 | the Said Girle what was the cau[se] [...] the [S]aid [...] the Girle Said because the Said Oliver would [have] her [fetch] two payles of Water and Shee would fetch hir and ther[...] the Said Oli: thr[ew] her the Said Girle ag: the table his [...] this Des[on]: Sattisfaction Shee tooke the Said Girle into [s] Inner Roome, and Searched her but did Not finde that the Said Oliver had Done any harme to the Said Girles §H Sam: Hasselbury Corp being Sworne Saith that he[m] [/] the [...] M[...] and the Said Monke [...], were Coming [...] the [...] towards the Said Matthews house and they heard one Cry out Whereupon the Said Matthews Desired the [...] Monke to Runn and See what was the mattr which he Did And the Depon: with the Said Matthews followed after, - Then the [...] Matthews Said to Monky what was therefor[e] that the Girle Did Cry out, the [...] Monke Answered that the Said Oliver would have his fowle with her, then the Said Matthews Did Take the [...] Girle into her Chamber, and Searched her and Came forth [...] [...] there was No harm [...] Sutton Isaac the father of the Said Girle, being Sworne Saith that he Never knew that the [...] Oliver Did offer to - Committ a Rape on the body of Leah his Daughter gi[...] the Said Monky was Runn away of [...] the Said Island[...] Saith Saith that when he heard that the Said Oliver Did offer to Doe any Such thing, he the Said Isaac Did Send for his Said Daughter from the Said Matthews hous[e] and the Said Isaacs wife Did Search the Said Girles, who told him that there was no harme Done to the Girle. §¶ 111 Walter m[as...]den [...] being Sworne Saith that upon one Lords day at Night [...] he the [...] m[as...]den Came from [...] going his past to Lodge at the[...] Matthews and the Said Hasselbury and Monke told h[im] the Said m[as...]den that the Said Oliver would hav[e] his [...] the Said Girle, and that the [...] [...] [...] [...] [...] the Said Girle, [...] [...] [...] [...] [...] [...] [...] [...] | The girl was asked the cause of her crying, and she said it was because Oliver had told her to fetch two pails of water, and when she refused or delayed, he threw her against the table. The widow took the girl into an inner room and examined her, stating that she found no sign that Oliver had done her harm. Samuel Hasselbury, a corporal, testified that he was present with Matthews and Monke when they heard the girl cry out. He confirmed that Monke went ahead to the house, and that when Matthews arrived and asked what had happened, Monke said that Oliver would have been “foul” with the girl. Hasselbury also stated that Matthews examined the girl and reported that no harm had been done. Isaac Sutton, the girl’s father, testified that he had not known Oliver to have attempted rape. He said that after hearing reports, he sent for his daughter from Matthews’s house, and that his wife examined the girl and found no harm. Walter Masden testified that he had been told by Monke and Hasselbury that Oliver would have been “foul” with the girl. Interpretations The repeated emphasis on physical examination of the girl, and the consistent claim that no harm was found, introduces evidence that contrasts with the earlier accusation. Hasselbury’s testimony supports parts of Monke’s account (the crying and immediate suspicion) but does not confirm direct observation of any act. Sutton’s testimony shifts the evidentiary weight further toward absence of physical injury, while also indicating that knowledge of the event circulated through report rather than direct witnessing. Masden’s evidence appears to be second-hand, relying on what others told him rather than personal observation. Speculations Perhaps the reliance on physical inspection reflects contemporary expectations that proof of such a crime required visible injury? It was likely that the divergence between accusation and examination created uncertainty for the jury regarding whether an offence had been completed or merely alleged? Perhaps the repeated reporting of what Monke said, rather than what others saw, indicates that his absent testimony remained central despite its indirect transmission? It is possible that the father’s testimony was intended to reinforce doubt, particularly by emphasising his own household’s verification of the girl’s condition? |
291 | 270 | John [Sot][...][...] Planter being Sworne Rich d Boddes being Sworne saith that the Monke Judge P Judge - P: Judge -- | John Sot[...] stated under oath that Isaac (the girl’s father) had told him the girl said Oliver tried to put his hand under her clothes, but she refused. Richard Boddes testified that Monke had said Oliver had done no harm to the girl when he came down the hill, though harm might have occurred if he had not been prevented. John Oliver was then asked to speak in his own defence. He denied that he had offered or attempted to commit rape upon the girl or anyone else. He added that he was wrongfully accused by Monke’s statements and left his case to God and the jury. The judge then addressed the jury, summarising the evidence. He noted that one account suggested an attempt to put a hand under the girl’s clothes, while Monke’s information stated that Oliver would have been “foul” with her. He also referred to testimony indicating that harm might have occurred but was prevented. The jury was instructed to consider all these circumstances carefully and to return a true verdict. Interpretations The judge’s summary highlights a shift in the case from an alleged completed act to varying accounts of attempted misconduct. The convergence of testimony around prevention-rather than completion-suggests that the central issue for the jury was whether intent and attempt sufficed for conviction. Oliver’s defence rests entirely on denial and the discrediting of Monke’s account, indicating the importance of that single absent witness. Speculations Perhaps the repeated framing of the act as something that “would have” happened reflects uncertainty or hesitation among witnesses to assert a completed offence? It was likely that the distinction between attempt and completion carried legal significance, influencing whether the charge of rape could be sustained? Perhaps the reliance on reported speech (what the girl told others) indicates limitations in directly examining child witnesses in court? It is possible that the judge’s structured recap was intended to guide the jury toward weighing inconsistencies rather than focusing on any single testimony? |
292 | 271 | Then the Jury withdrew and stayed ab t two hou[rs] when C P C P Jury C P Jury C P C P Jury Judge - C B C B C B C B Jury C P God Save King William & Queen | The jury withdrew for about two hours before returning with their verdict. They were called over by name and confirmed that they were all agreed. The foreman was appointed to speak on behalf of the jury. John Oliver was set to the bar, and the jury was asked whether he was guilty or not guilty of the offence charged. The jury answered that he was not guilty. The verdict was recorded and then read aloud in court, confirming that Oliver was acquitted. The prisoner was then instructed to kneel, and a formal proclamation followed. Interpretations The unanimity of the jury suggests that, despite conflicting testimony, the evidence did not meet the threshold required for conviction in their judgement. The formal repetition and recording of the verdict reflects the procedural importance placed on clarity and finality in court decisions. The act of kneeling following acquittal indicates a ritualised conclusion to the trial, linking legal outcome with expressions of loyalty and order. Speculations Perhaps the length of the jury’s deliberation reflects the need to reconcile inconsistent accounts, particularly between allegation and physical examination? It was likely that the absence of definitive evidence of harm contributed significantly to the not guilty verdict? Perhaps the reliance on second-hand testimony and the absence of the key informant weakened the prosecution’s case in the eyes of the jury? It is possible that the court’s structured closing ritual reinforced authority and legitimacy, even in cases ending in acquittal? |
293 | 272 | Then the Jury were Dismissed w th thanks for theire Attendance It was Judged that he Deserved Some Corporall Punishment to Deter him and other That the said oliver shall be Tyed to the Gaolpost, and J Blackmore Gov r | The jury was dismissed with thanks for their attendance. The court then considered particular points raised in Monke’s declaration and in several witness depositions, especially that Oliver had attempted to put his hand under the girl’s clothes and had engaged in other behaviour described as lascivious. Although he had been acquitted of rape, the court judged that he deserved corporal punishment. It was therefore ordered that Oliver be tied to the gaol post and receive twenty-one lashes on his naked body in public. This punishment was carried out, after which he was returned to his master, Widow Matthews. Interpretations The court’s decision to punish Oliver despite acquittal indicates a distinction between the specific charge of rape and other forms of misconduct considered punishable. The reference to “lascivious” behaviour suggests that lesser moral or sexual offences could still be sanctioned even when the principal felony was not proven. The public nature of the punishment implies an intention to reinforce social discipline beyond the individual case. Speculations Perhaps this outcome reflects a legal framework in which courts retained discretionary authority to impose punishment outside the strict bounds of the indictment? It was likely that the court sought to balance the jury’s acquittal with its own perception of improper conduct, avoiding complete exoneration? Perhaps the emphasis on deterrence indicates concern about maintaining moral order in a small and closely governed community? It is possible that returning Oliver to his master after punishment reflects assumptions about ongoing supervision and control within household or labour relations? |
294 | 273 | Island St Helena. Att a Court Martiall of Military officers Held att Present Col t John Blackmore Cap t and Gov r Information was Given that Tho s Easton sold r had neg- The said Easton acknowledgeth the Information to be true Then the Court Martiall were [...] and [...] the All which was [...] Read unto the sd Easton | A court martial was convened, listing its members, including the governor, deputy governor, and other officers. Information was presented that Thomas Easton, a soldier, had neglected his duty by failing to respond to an alarm on the 28th of June, when a vessel approached the island and was feared to be an enemy. Easton acknowledged that the charge was true and explained that he had been in a state of distraction for several days due to excessive drinking. He requested the mercy of the court. The court martial then considered the seriousness of the offence, particularly neglect of duty during an alarm. Relevant articles of military law were read to the prisoner, including provisions that drunkenness on duty and failure to attend a rendezvous could be punished severely, even by death. Easton was then asked what he had to say in his defence. Interpretations The reading of specific articles of military law indicates a structured legal framework governing discipline, particularly in matters affecting security. Easton’s admission of guilt shifts the focus of the proceedings from establishing facts to determining appropriate punishment. The emphasis on response to an alarm highlights the perceived vulnerability of the island and the importance of readiness among soldiers. Speculations Perhaps the explicit mention of potential enemy ships reflects broader anxieties about external threats in a remote colonial setting? It was likely that intoxication was treated as an aggravating factor because it directly impaired military readiness? Perhaps the formal recitation of penalties, including death, was intended to underscore the gravity of the offence before sentencing? It is possible that Easton’s appeal to mercy suggests an expectation that mitigating circumstances, such as his stated condition, might influence the court’s decision? |
295 | 274 | The said Easton acknowledged his [...] [...] true Then it was put to the Question wheather the said [...] But the Court Did not thinke fitt to inflict the Sentence And Every one of the Court beginning from the Inferiour John Calemoth [...] was accused for [...] [...] The said Calemoth Confesseth the accusation and [...] Then the Law Martiall was perused And the [...] in Duty That a Centinell or [...] Guard a Ship or Division or for- And the 12 th article in Duty saith Noe man that is enrolled Shall Depart from the Army or Both which were Read in Court in the hearing | Easton admitted the truth of the charges and promised not to offend again. The court considered whether his actions fell under the relevant articles of military law, and the majority agreed that they did. Despite this, the court chose not to impose the death penalty prescribed by the articles, instead reserving punishment at its discretion. Each member gave an opinion, and the majority concluded that Easton should be imprisoned until the next “receipt day.” He was also ordered, on the first occasion, to have a musket tied to him and to walk around the fort for one hour, after which he would be returned to prison. This punishment was to be repeated and increased on subsequent occasions. John Calemoth was then accused of leaving his post while on sentry duty and fleeing from the guard, remaining away until he was apprehended and brought back to the fort. He confessed the accusation and, kneeling, asked for mercy. The court then reviewed the articles of martial law relating to sentinels and desertion. These articles stated that leaving a post before dismissal, or departing from the garrison without leave, was punishable by death. These provisions were read aloud to Calemoth, and he was asked what he had to say in his defence. Interpretations The court’s decision in Easton’s case demonstrates a discretionary approach, applying the law’s framework but moderating its most severe penalty. The structured escalation of punishment suggests a system designed to discipline through repeated exposure rather than immediate extreme sanction. Calemoth’s case introduces a more serious category of offence-abandoning a post-which is explicitly linked to capital punishment under the articles. Speculations Perhaps the court’s reluctance to impose death in Easton’s case reflects a pragmatic approach to maintaining manpower in a small garrison? It was likely that public and repetitive punishment was intended to reinforce discipline visibly among other soldiers? Perhaps the formal reading of capital statutes to Calemoth served to heighten the gravity of his situation before judgement was passed? It is possible that Calemoth’s immediate confession and plea for mercy indicates an expectation that the court might temper strict legal penalties with discretion, as in Easton’s case? |
296 | 275 | The said Calemorth replied he had Nothing to say Then it was put to the Question wheather the sd Calemorth The whole Court agreed in the affirmative Then the Court took [...] order and Information above And the Sentence of Death mentioned in the sd Articles But it was unanimously agreed that the sd Calemorth [...] Blackmore Gov r Memorandums that this Court [...] John Brisco St Helena | Calemorth replied that he had nothing to say in his defence and instead begged for mercy. The court then considered whether his actions fell within the relevant articles of military law, and all members agreed that they did. It was acknowledged that the offence, as defined and admitted, was punishable by death under those articles. However, the court chose to suspend the sentence of death. Instead, it was unanimously agreed that Calemorth should remain in prison and be kept in irons until further order. Interpretations The unanimous agreement that the offence met the criteria for capital punishment underscores the seriousness with which abandonment of post was regarded. The suspension of the death sentence reflects a pattern of judicial discretion, even where the law prescribed the most severe penalty. The imposition of irons suggests an additional layer of restraint and control, marking the offence as particularly grave despite the reprieve. Speculations Perhaps the repeated suspension of death sentences indicates a reluctance to enforce capital punishment except in the most extreme or unavoidable cases? It was likely that imprisonment in irons functioned both as punishment and as a visible warning to others within the garrison? Perhaps the court balanced strict legal provisions with practical concerns, such as maintaining manpower or avoiding excessive severity? It is possible that the formal acknowledgement of the capital offence, followed by mitigation, served to preserve the authority of the law while allowing flexibility in its application? |
297 | 276 | I have Received yours with abundance of Satisfaction for learning meaning of [...] came a third quarter above referred to see Book [...] No 11 p 23 | The writer expresses satisfaction at receiving the recipient’s letter and conveys good wishes for their health and welfare. Reference is made to a journey and to individuals including Mr Griffin and others, though the relationships and details are partly unclear. The letter then turns to a dispute over property connected to Robert Goodwin. It states that Mrs Goodwin (now remarried and referred to as “Madam”) is in possession of Robert Goodwin’s effects and is unwilling to release them, claiming that the recipient has no right to them. The writer indicates that, in his view and in the view of others, the recipient does have a rightful claim, apparently through a prior marriage, but that those holding the property intend to retain it as long as possible unless compelled otherwise. He explains that he has hesitated to take action without clear instruction, noting that local opinion may not be favourable and that proceedings might be handled partially. There is mention of James (name unclear) as a witness or participant in the matter, and of efforts to pursue the claim through available channels. The writer refers to land-possibly around twenty acres-and other assets, suggesting that these could be of use or value to the recipient. There are also references to goods, including quantities of cloth or similar materials, and to transactions or accounts connected with them. The letter suggests that some parties are unwilling to settle accounts or disclose the full state of the estate without further direction from the recipient. The writer concludes by indicating that more details or instructions should be sent at the first opportunity. Interpretations The letter was probably written by Mr Bazett. The document reflects an ongoing dispute over inheritance or property rights, with competing claims and reluctance among those in possession to relinquish control. The writer positions himself as an intermediary, cautious about acting without explicit authority due to concerns about bias or local conditions. The references to land and goods suggest that the estate in question includes both real property and movable assets. Speculations Perhaps the resistance of Mrs Goodwin and others indicates a contested interpretation of inheritance rights, particularly involving remarriage and step-relations? It was likely that the writer’s hesitation to proceed reflects awareness of limited legal enforcement or partiality within the local system? Perhaps the mention of land grants and goods points to the broader economic context of the island, where property and trade items were closely intertwined? It is possible that the recipient’s absence created practical difficulties in asserting claims, allowing others to delay or control the outcome? |
298 | 277 | As I have imposed upon My self as a duty to mys[el]f no opportunity | Mr Bazett writes that he has taken it as a duty to communicate whenever possible and has therefore sent this letter. He begins by congratulating the recipient on their safe arrival in England and on their marriage, wishing them happiness in that state. He then reports that, after a long period of conflict and “persecution” involving the governor, there is now a temporary pause in hostilities, though he expresses doubt about how long it will last. He states his belief that the governor had attempted to have him dismissed from the East India Company’s service, but had not succeeded. Mr Bazett refers to a letter the recipient had written to Mr Griffith’s son, suggesting that the recipient had supported him by representing his situation to the Company. He expresses gratitude for this support and suggests that it helped prevent actions that would have harmed his position. He reflects on his past difficulties, describing a period of hardship before benefiting from the recipient’s favour. He criticises the governor, portraying him as motivated by self-interest and inconsistent in his treatment of others. The letter then turns to conditions in the store, describing confusion in accounts and management, with uncertainty among those involved about the state of affairs. Mr Bazett indicates that he has taken on the role of storekeeper for the time being, until the Company appoints or confirms someone else. He suggests that others are dissatisfied or uncertain about how the store has been managed. Interpretations Mr Bazett presents himself as both a victim of mistreatment and a loyal servant of the Company, emphasising endurance and eventual partial vindication. The reference to the recipient’s intervention suggests the importance of patronage networks in influencing Company decisions. The description of disorder in the store points to administrative weaknesses and possible tensions over accountability. Speculations Perhaps Mr Bazett’s account of persecution reflects broader factional conflict within the island’s administration rather than solely personal grievance? It was likely that appeals to contacts in England were a key strategy for defending one’s position within the Company hierarchy? Perhaps the confusion in the store accounts indicates either mismanagement or contested control over resources? It is possible that Mr Bazett’s emphasis on his own role in restoring order serves to strengthen his claim for formal appointment or continued employment? |
299 | 278 | Since their arrivall and that now with the acclamations of both [...] M. Pack died 3. April 1713. M. Bazett succeeded | Mr Bazett continues by describing the reaction of others following recent arrivals, noting that there were visible signs of approval and satisfaction among them. He contrasts present conditions in the stores with earlier practice, suggesting that matters are now handled differently and perhaps less effectively than before. He remarks that, had the recipient been able to observe the situation directly, they would have recognised the disorder and likely shared his concern. He also indicates frustration at being unable to access certain documents or writings, implying that others withheld them and were supported in doing so. The passage then shifts into later annotations or archival notes, recording that Mr Pack died on 3 April 1713 and that Mr Bazett succeeded him in a role connected with the stores. It also refers to additional records, including a “Book of Leave” and court complaints, noting that Bazett had been prevented from assisting in the stores and was described in one examination as a “worthy assistant.” Interpretations The contrast between past and present management of the stores suggests that Mr Bazett is arguing for a decline in standards or proper procedure. The complaint about restricted access to documents indicates internal conflict and possible attempts to control information. The appended notes appear to be later archival additions, providing context about Bazett’s career and disputes over his role. Speculations Perhaps Mr Bazett’s emphasis on mismanagement and exclusion reflects an effort to justify his own authority or to strengthen his case for formal recognition? It was likely that control over records and accounts was a source of power, making access to them a point of contention? Perhaps the later annotations were added by a clerk or historian to link this letter with subsequent events in Bazett’s career? It is possible that the description of Bazett as a “worthy assistant” reflects retrospective support for his position in earlier disputes? |
300 | 279 | Blank page | |
301 | 280 | Blank page | |
302 | 281 | Blank page | |
303 | 282 | Our Gov r & Councill London y e 16 th [...] Aprill 1700 Generall &c We have before us your severall letters from ye 24 th June 1699
3 We observe in your Letter of 24 th June after [...] of severall ordinary Demands
5 We take Notice of your reason for allowing Mr Vanakel her [...] as your Generall
| The letter is addressed to the governor and council of St Helena and dated in London, April 1700, with later receipt noted in July 1701. The writers acknowledge receipt of several letters from the island and refer to earlier correspondence, including instructions sent via ships to the Cape and onward to St Helena. They state that supplies are to be sent from India and instruct the island authorities to communicate their needs so that future provisions can be arranged accordingly. Attention is drawn to financial matters, particularly the need to account for revenue and expenditure, with concern expressed about losses, spending, and drafts made upon the Company. The writers require that detailed accounts be sent regularly, including statements of stock and financial condition, so that the Company can understand the state of affairs on the island. They comment on governance and discipline, approving certain measures while also advising moderation in enforcing work, particularly regarding labour expectations and allowances. The letter also addresses specific administrative decisions, including allowances granted to individuals, and calls for justification where such decisions have been made. There is discussion of maritime matters, including the handling of ships arriving at the island, with instructions to avoid unnecessary interference in naval or merchant affairs unless required. Reference is made to an individual, Mr Humphreys, whose claims or case are viewed with scepticism due to conflicting reports, and the writers indicate caution in accepting or acting upon his representations. Overall, the letter combines administrative oversight, financial instruction, and commentary on governance practices. Interpretations The document reflects close metropolitan supervision of the island’s administration, with emphasis on accountability and regular reporting. The repeated demand for accounts suggests concern about financial management and possible irregularities. The mixture of approval and correction indicates an attempt to guide rather than fully censure the island authorities. Speculations Perhaps the insistence on detailed accounting reflects broader concerns within the Company about mismanagement in distant settlements? It was likely that communication delays required such letters to combine multiple issues, resulting in a wide-ranging and directive tone? Perhaps the caution regarding interference with ships reflects tensions between Company authority and independent maritime actors? It is possible that the case of Mr Humphreys illustrates difficulties in verifying claims across long distances and reliance on conflicting testimony? |
304 | 283 | 10 We will not find fault with your supplying of French men of war with [...] in 11 We have perused and more Letters to find out that small matter of prejudice 12 We observe you propose as to Returning Ships Victualling them to stay in India 13 As to ye Quality of your [...], we intend you are in mind to examine more 14 Mr [...] has made application to us on acct 19 th December [...] of your 15 We understand by his Letters that he has a mind to reside as a Free Merchant in 16 We are sorry there should be factions among our Councills, which seems to 17 &c | The letter continues with further instructions and observations from the Company to the governor and council of St Helena. The writers state that they do not object to supplying French men-of-war in time of peace, nor to assisting ships even when connected with enemies under certain circumstances, provided this does not disadvantage Company interests. They discuss interactions with other European powers, including the Dutch, suggesting reciprocal expectations in treatment and provisioning. The Company notes that it has reviewed additional letters and expresses a general intention to maintain order and proper conduct, including regulating who may engage in trade and ensuring that only qualified persons are involved. They emphasise that duties and responsibilities must be enforced and not evaded, particularly in relation to ships supplying one another or avoiding obligations. Attention is given to the provisioning of ships, with instructions that Company vessels must be adequately supplied, and that others arriving should also be assisted where appropriate, especially in cases of need. They warn that ships should not be allowed to depart without sufficient provisions and outline expectations for payment or compensation for supplies. The letter also refers to agricultural production and local resources, indicating that the island’s produce should first serve Company needs, with surplus managed accordingly. There is mention of individuals applying for roles or permissions, with the Company indicating that it will send skilled servants where necessary. One individual is permitted to reside as a free merchant in India, with instructions that his activities be monitored and reported. The writers express concern about factions within the council, describing such divisions as harmful to good service and discipline. They refer to dissatisfaction with a governor’s conduct and note that a new appointment has been made, with instructions that cooperation be maintained for the Company’s benefit. Interpretations The letter reflects detailed administrative oversight, extending beyond finance into trade regulation, diplomacy, and internal governance. The concern about factions indicates internal instability within the island’s leadership, which the Company sought to correct through oversight and appointments. The instructions on provisioning and trade suggest the island’s strategic role as a supply point within wider maritime networks. Speculations Perhaps the tolerance for supplying foreign ships reflects pragmatic diplomacy in a remote location where strict enforcement might be impractical? It was likely that regulating who could trade was an attempt to maintain Company monopoly while accommodating local realities? Perhaps the repeated emphasis on discipline and unity indicates that factional disputes had already disrupted administration? It is possible that the appointment of new officials was intended to restore order and reinforce central authority over the island’s governance? |
305 | 284 | 17 We have [...] made to us that our [...] has laid out some [...] in a [...] w ch all assisting to [...] of the Councill, we have also had an [...] of the [...] a [...] to do it otherwise [...] [...] [...] [...] [...] [...] from [...] by [...] we wrote to you [...] to have one of it [...] on that [...] why he did not advise us thereof to all what [...] the Councill made ag t it, that haveing to write before all we might our Judgment upon it. 18 Our [...] is also complained ag t as being too [...] we hoped since the [...] of our [...] [...] to him and his family w ch Engage his utmost [...] to promote our Service in all things equall to your [...] we have of him, But he must consider that we have a Councill and have to [...] and [...] may be [...] [...] Councill, and there be some [...] continue differences [...] between them [...] [...] difference of opinion you ought to [...] [...] 19 Haveing given you [...] we are now to give you our Reasons for [...] the Island of St Helena [...] The King of Spain declares some months ago and by [...] of January soon to Spain succeeding him, his grandson [...] [...] which he is [...] Holland, Notwithstanding [...] and [...] the second son [...] King, who is [...] to [...] whole Empire in Germany and [...] Nation, oppose [...] of Spain [...] which [...] with Holland [...] his [...] [...] being severe [...] and Spain [...] resolve to [...] to [...] Kings [...] and Emperor [...] are now making War and [...] [...] his titles, Thereby we may hope there will be no further [...] England and Holland are also engaged on the same side to [...] [...] [...] ships [...] the being [...] to provide for you and our European Ships, what [...] you [...] you will be no means your care supply [...] Island [...] [...] [...] whereby we shall not only receive an advantage in the [...] [...] upon what [...] be expected and [...] and [...] could not have arrived [...] by the Course [...] [...] then done about the [...] Ships might do as good service [...] convenient for your defence and protection 20 We have for this which French Ships that severall French Gentlemen [...] on pretence of trading, have been seized upon and complaint in our Govern r to us which we think it was not good policy and so much unnecessary and cannot be long continued, and we therefore order you not to do any other persons or wrongfull way search or molest such, but use all Civility 21 We send you Directions for Returning Ships how to proceed with course commanded but in regard these advices are not like to reach you before the season of shipping are over longer [...] we are therefore sending you Duplicate Ships after this letter shall stay in Port if advised so and command you that no English Ships nor other Nations shall come without giving notice [...] we shall have them to meet together for mutual Security that they may exchange Intelligence, and give each other [...] and that for your [...] if any of them shall have sufficient [...] then you shall order them to [...] ships [...] to be supplied [...] We desire you observe this carefully and [...] We beg an answer to all the above Your Loving Friends [...] [...] [...] [...] [...] [...] [...] [...] [...] [...] [...] [...] | The letter continues with further administrative concerns and instructions. The writers refer to complaints that certain actions had been taken without full consultation of the council, indicating dissatisfaction with decision-making processes and suggesting that such matters should have been reported earlier for their judgement. They also address complaints about an individual (likely an officer), suggesting that he may have acted in an overbearing or improper manner. While they express some confidence in him, they emphasise that he must work in conjunction with the council and not act independently in ways that create division. The issue of factionalism is again raised, with the Company stressing that differences of opinion should not lead to ongoing conflict within the council. The letter then turns to broader geopolitical developments, noting changes in the Spanish monarchy and the resulting tensions in Europe. It refers to emerging conflict involving Spain, France, the Emperor, England, and the Dutch, indicating the onset of wider war. In light of this, the Company highlights the strategic importance of St Helena, particularly as a provisioning point for ships. The island is expected to support English and allied vessels, ensuring they are supplied and able to operate effectively. The writers instruct that the island should prioritise supplying Company ships and contribute to broader maritime operations, including defence and coordination. They also address complaints from French individuals whose ships or goods had been seized under the pretext of trading. The Company disapproves of this practice and orders that such persons should not be wrongfully searched or molested, but treated with civility. Further instructions are given regarding the handling of ships, including coordination between vessels for mutual security, exchange of intelligence, and ensuring adequate supplies. The governor and council are urged to follow these directions carefully and to provide a full response addressing all points raised in the letter. The letter concludes with a formal closing, describing the writers as “your loving friends.” Interpretations The repeated concern about consultation and factionalism suggests ongoing governance problems, with authority not being exercised in a unified or transparent manner. The reference to European conflict places the island within a wider imperial and military context, highlighting its strategic importance. The instructions regarding foreign ships indicate an attempt to balance security with diplomatic restraint. Speculations Perhaps the emphasis on council cooperation reflects persistent tensions that had already disrupted administration on the island? It was likely that the outbreak of wider European conflict increased the Company’s concern for secure supply lines and naval coordination? Perhaps the directive to treat foreign ships civilly reflects awareness that overly aggressive actions could provoke diplomatic or commercial repercussions? It is possible that the Company’s detailed instructions reflect both the distance from London and a lack of confidence in local decision-making? |
306 | 285 | Blank page | |
307 | 286 | Blank page | |
308 | 287 | Blank page | |
309 | 288 | Blank page | |
310 | 289 | Blank page | |
311 | 290 | Copies & Extracts from Charters & orders & miscellaneous matter | |
312 | 291 | Blank page | |
313 | 292 | Blank page | |
314 | 293 | Blank page | |
315 | 294 | Book cover | |
316 | 295 | EAP 1364 St Helena Document Name and Date: Dimensions (l × h × depth) (cm): No. written pages: No. blank pages: Spine and cover: Inside pages: Additional comments: Time taken to photograph (hours): |