MRP: C10/55/132 f. 2 - Revision history

Francescagreenstreet at 09:57, February 7, 2012

2012-02-07T09:57:27Z

ColinGreenstreet at 14:17, November 21, 2011

2011-11-21T14:17:38Z

ColinGreenstreet at 14:16, November 21, 2011

2011-11-21T14:16:41Z

ColinGreenstreet at 14:16, November 21, 2011

2011-11-21T14:16:13Z

ColinGreenstreet at 12:25, November 21, 2011

2011-11-21T12:25:45Z

ColinGreenstreet at 23:36, November 20, 2011

2011-11-20T23:36:03Z

New page

==C10/55/132 f. 2==

'''Editorial history'''

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

----
===Abstract===

----
===Transcription===

----
===Commentary===

See also [[MRP: C10/55/132 f. 1|C10/55/132 f. 1]]

----

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-==C10/55/132 f. 2==
+'''C10/55/132 f. 2'''
 '''Editorial history'''
@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
 /11/11, CSG:  Images made of manuscript
 /11/11, CSG:  Started transcription
 ----
-===Abstract and context===
+__TOC__
-The mariner Willliam White the younger replied in March 1657/58 to a bill of complaint ([[MRP: C10/55/132 f. 1|C10/55/132 f. 1]]) of four London merchants, Martin Noell, George Underwood, Simon Delboe and John Taylor.  Separately, Noell and Delboe were subscribers to the ''Smirna Venture'' joint stock in which George and Christopher Oxenden were involved.  William White the younger had sailed on the ''Mayflower'' with William White the elder, the commander of the ship.  Both were mariners; White the younger was presumably the elder's son or nephew, though this is not stated in the suit.  William White the elder appears to have died during the voyage, or shortly after his return, and William White the younger answered on his as well as his own behalf.  The ship probably departed from London in late December 1655 and was back in Plymouth by August 1657, before sailing on to its final destination of London.
+The mariner Willliam White the younger replied in March 1657/58 to a bill of complaint ([[MRP: C10/55/132 f. 1|C10/55/132 f. 1]]) of four London merchants, Martin Noell, George Underwood, Simon Delboe and John Taylor.  Separately, Noell and Delboe were subscribers to the ''Smirna Venture'' joint stock in which George and Christopher Oxenden were involved.
 The suit concerned alleged missing trading assets of the deceased Henry Watkins, who had died from drowning off the east coast of continental India. Reference is made to Watkins in both the Court Book of the English East India Company and in XXXX.  Watkins had been sent as the official factor on the ''Mayflower'', a ship of about 240 tons, which had been chartered by the English East India Company in late 1655.  However, according to the bill of complaint, Watkins was also employed by the complainants as their factor for private trade with a stock of £1500, which had been entrusted to Watkins.
@@ Line 17: / Line 22: @@
 Prior to the ''Mayflower'' being chartered by the English East India Company it had been chartered by the Navy, under the command of Captain White, and had been involved in the English war with the Dutch.
 ----
-===Transcription===
+==To do==
 //Sworne the 18:th of//
@@ Line 104: / Line 119: @@
 ----
-===Commentary===
+==Possible primary records==
-−
-See also [[MRP: C10/55/132 f. 1|C10/55/132 f. 1]]
-−
-----
-===Possible primary records===
 PROB 4/23449 Haley, Thomas at sea, batchelor (marriner in the East India ship Mayflower') 28 Feb 1661/2 (28 Feb 1661/2)
 SP 46/97/fo 18 Petition to the Council of State by Major Robert Russell and Robert Barrett requesting that they be treated similarly to the other members of the East Indies Company sailing on the ship Mayflower in respect of payment for provisions. [1655 Dec. 20]

@@ Line 13: / Line 13: @@
 The suit concerned alleged missing trading assets of the deceased Henry Watkins, who had died from drowning off the east coast of continental India. Reference is made to Watkins in both the Court Book of the English East India Company and in XXXX.  Watkins had been sent as the official factor on the ''Mayflower'', a ship of about 240 tons, which had been chartered by the English East India Company in late 1655.  However, according to the bill of complaint, Watkins was also employed by the complainants as their factor for private trade with a stock of £1500, which had been entrusted to Watkins.
-Martin Noell, the principal complainant in the bill of complaint, had stood security for Watkins on a bond of £500 taken out with the English East India Company.  It is not clear whether Noell or any of the three other merchant complainants were also part owners of the ''Mayflower''.  They are not named as such in their bill of complaint, but it is possible that one or more of them were indeed so.   A separate dispute between the English East India Company and the owners followed the ship's return, and appears to have related to suspected private trade off loaded at Plamouth and the using up of scarce freight capacity in the ship by such unpaid for activities.
+Martin Noell, the principal complainant in the bill of complaint, had stood security for Watkins on a bond of £500 taken out with the English East India Company.  It is not clear whether Noell or any of the three other merchant complainants were also part owners of the ''Mayflower''.  They are not named as such in their bill of complaint, but it is possible that one or more of them were indeed so.   A separate dispute between the English East India Company and the owners followed the ship's return, and appears to have related to suspected private trade off loaded at Plymouth and the using up of scarce freight capacity in the ship by such unpaid for activities.
-−
 Prior to the ''Mayflower'' being chartered by the English East India Company it had been chartered by the Navy, under the command of Captain White, and had been involved in the English war with the Dutch.

@@ Line 9: / Line 9: @@
 ===Abstract and context===
-The mariner Willliam White the younger replied in March 1657/58 to a bill of complaint ([[MRP: C10/55/132 f. 1|C10/55/132 f. 1]]) of four London merchants, Martin Noell, George Underwood, Simon Delboe and John Taylor.  Separately, Noell and Delboe were to the ''Smirna Venture'' joint stock in which George and Christopher Oxenden were involved.  William White the younger had sailed on the ''Mayflower'' with William White the elder, the commander of the ship.  Both were mariners; White the younger was presumably the elder's son or nephew, though this is not stated in the suit.  William White the elder appears to have died during the voyage, or shortly after his return, and William White the younger answered on his as well as his own behalf.  The ship probably departed from London in late December 1655 and was back in Plymouth by August 1657, before sailing on to its final destination of London.
+The mariner Willliam White the younger replied in March 1657/58 to a bill of complaint ([[MRP: C10/55/132 f. 1|C10/55/132 f. 1]]) of four London merchants, Martin Noell, George Underwood, Simon Delboe and John Taylor.  Separately, Noell and Delboe were subscribers to the ''Smirna Venture'' joint stock in which George and Christopher Oxenden were involved.  William White the younger had sailed on the ''Mayflower'' with William White the elder, the commander of the ship.  Both were mariners; White the younger was presumably the elder's son or nephew, though this is not stated in the suit.  William White the elder appears to have died during the voyage, or shortly after his return, and William White the younger answered on his as well as his own behalf.  The ship probably departed from London in late December 1655 and was back in Plymouth by August 1657, before sailing on to its final destination of London.
 The suit concerned alleged missing trading assets of the deceased Henry Watkins, who had died from drowning off the east coast of continental India. Reference is made to Watkins in both the Court Book of the English East India Company and in XXXX.  Watkins had been sent as the official factor on the ''Mayflower'', a ship of about 240 tons, which had been chartered by the English East India Company in late 1655.  However, according to the bill of complaint, Watkins was also employed by the complainants as their factor for private trade with a stock of £1500, which had been entrusted to Watkins.

@@ Line 7: / Line 7: @@
 ----
-===Abstract===
+===Abstract and context===
@@ Line 22: / Line 30: @@
 //The sayd Def:t saving to himselfe now and at all tymes hereafter all advantages and benefit of Excepcionn to the incertaintyes insufficiencyes and ?Impfeccons of the sayd Bill of Complaint  for Answer unto soe XXXX thereof or any wayes materially//
-//XXX XXXX him this Def:t
+//XXX XXXX him this Def:t to make Answer unto saith That hee doth not know that the Comp:lts or any of them about the moneth of December in the yeare of our Lord one thousand six hundred ffifty and ffive or att any other tyme did ioyntly//
-//?or severally adventure severall or any pcells of goods money Comodities
+//?or severally adventure severall or any pcells of goods money Comodities or Merchandizes of the value of ffive hundred pounds sterling or any value whatsoever in ??certeyne or any places in the//
-//East Indyes in the Shipp called the ''Mayfflower'' of which Captaine
+//East Indyes in the Shipp called the ''Mayfflower'' of which Captaine William White was then Commander And therefore doth not know that such goods Merchandizes and Commodityes were by the Comp:lts//
-//or any of them
+//or any of them or any other for them committed to the Care or  Managem:t of Henry Watkins in the said Bill of Complaint  named as ffactor for the Comp:lts to negotiate Barter or Merchandize//
 //with the same upon the Comp:lts behalfe or for their Accomp and benefit or otherwise or that the Comp:lts or any of them allowed him Sallary as their or any of their servant or ffactor  Neither doth this Def:t//
@@ Line 44: / Line 52: @@
 //other ship or that any such goods money of Comodities were committed or delivered to the sayd William White the elder or or this Def:t or that the same were by the sayd William White this Def:t received//
-//
+//to the use of Comp:lts or to any of their use or uses But this defend:t doth confesse it to be true that after the death of the said Henry Watkins the sayd William White the elder did take into his possession certaine//
 ----

@@ Line 14: / Line 14: @@
 ===Transcription===
 ----
@@ Line 22: / Line 52: @@
 ----