After our hearty commendations.—Whereas, upon some controversy

between the towns of Yarmouth and Lowestoft, concerning the trade of

buying herrings, we have referred the consideration thereof to our

very loving friends Sir John Fortescue, Knt., Justice Clench, and

Justice Gawdy, who have accordingly returned certificates of their

opinions of the matter, which herewith we send unto you; we have now,

by the consent of both parties, made choice of you, as fit persons to

execute the determination of the said certificates and do therefore

pray and request you, or any five or four of you, with all convenient

expedition to undertake the pains of measuring the seven miles from

the town of Yarmouth sideway {79} according to the intention of the

privilege claimed by the town of Yarmouth, by their charters; and at

the end of the said seven miles so measured, to fix and set down

apparent marks; and also upon good examination and inquiry to set

down and define certainly where Kirkley road is which the charter of

Yarmouth mentioneth; where it beginneth, and how far it doth extend.

And of these two material points, and to certify your opinion and

proceedings there upon such further orders shall be given therein as

we shall think requisite. And so we bid you heartily farewell.

From your loving friends, etc.

But the burgesses of Yarmouth being conscious that they were prosecuting

a claim for which they had neither a legal nor equitable pretension; and

being also apprehensive, that if the affair was carried before the said

commissioners, and submitted to a strict and impartial investigation, it

would terminate greatly to their disadvantage; therefore they resolved as

there was but little prospect of being successful in the enquiry, they

would exert every effort in their power to retard and embarrass it; and

that the most effectual mode for accomplishing their designs would be to

counteract the commission; and accordingly, in a subsequent application

to the Privy Council for redress of grievances, they transmitted such a

partial representation of the case, as to obtain from their Lordships an

order for a new commission. In this second commission we find, that an

alteration was made in the appointment of commissioners; for in the place

of Anthony Wingfield, Esq., one of the commissioners nominated in the

first commission on the part of Lowestoft, William Rowse, Esq., was

appointed in this second commission, a person partially attached to the

interest of Yarmouth. And whereas, by the first commission, any four or

five of the commissioners had a power of deciding any point relative to

the dispute; but by the second commission it was ordered, that they

should be unanimous; and also it was further directed by the first

commission, that the inquiry should determine the two principal points in

dispute, viz., the admeasurement of the seven miles and the true

situation of Kirkley road; whereas the burgesses of Yarmouth, by this

second commission so ordered the business, that when the parties appeared

before the commissioners, they confined the inquiry solely to the

situation of Kirkley road, and withheld from them every information that

related to the admeasurement of the seven miles; and also had given

previous directions for Mr. Rowse to be absent from the meeting, which

consequently rendered every resolution of the Commissioners void, as by

the commission they were directed to be unanimous.

To Sir Arthur Heneningham and Sir Henry Woodhouse, Knts., and Henry

Gawdy, Esq., and to Sir Robert Jermyn, and Sir John Higham, Knts.,

and William Rowse, Esq.

Whereas, we gave orders and directions unto you, for the appeasing of

the controversy between the town of Yarmouth and Lowestoft,

concerning their liberties, to measure the seven miles claimed by

them of Yarmouth for their jurisdiction, from the key of Yarmouth;

whereby they pretend the same will be very prejudicial to their

charter, antient liberties, and other rights. And they also alledge,

that by a statute of the 31st of Edward III, the said seven miles

ought to be accounted from the uttermost bounds of the haven (_i.e._

from the mouth), which hath been extended, in memory of man, a mile

further towards the south than it is now. These, therefore, shall be

to require you, that according to your former directions you will

cause seven miles to be measured from the key at Yarmouth, and

likewise seven miles to be measured from the uppermost bounds of

their haven; and to be unanimous in your opinion, and to certify unto

us how far each admeasurement doth extend; and in the mean season to

forbear setting up any marks or bounds until we shall consider of the

same, and give such further orders therein as shall be agreeable to

reason and equity, and satisfaction of both parties.

LORD KEEPER, LORD TREASURER, LORD COBBHAM, LORD BUCKHURST, MR.

SECRETARY, MR. CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER.

Concordat cum Registro Exor.

JOHN WOOLEY.

Keeper of the Records of the Councell Chamber. 8th July, 1596.

On the 4th day of August, 1596, all the Commissioners nominated in the

first commission, together with the bailiffs and principal inhabitants of

Yarmouth assembled at Lowestoft; and the Commissioners, as directed by

their commission, intended to have made the admeasurement of the seven

miles the first object of their inquiry; but the Yarmouth men objected

against this mode of proceeding, and insisted upon inverting the order of

the enquiry, and that the ascertaining of the true situation of Kirkley

road ought to be the first business that engaged their attention. The

Commissioners so far acquiesced in this unreasonable demand, as to employ

about four hours in investigating the exact situation of Kirkley road,

and limiting its boundaries; but when the Yarmouth men began to discover

that the result of the inquiry would be prejudicial to their interests,

as well as contrary to their expectations, they then produced the new

commission, which effectually answered all the purposes they had been

aiming at; and notwithstanding the Commissioners made a proposal of

sending for Mr. Rowse, the absent Commissioner, and also of suspending

any further proceedings till he should arrive and concur with them in

their deliberations, yet all these offers proved wholly unavailable, and

nothing would satisfy the desires of the Yarmouth men but an acquiescence

on the part of Lowestoft in such a decision respecting the situation of

Kirkley road and the extent of its boundaries, as the bailiffs themselves

thought proper.

In consequence of these illegal and unreasonable proceedings on the part

of Yarmouth, the commission was dissolved. Nevertheless the

Commissioners on the part of Lowestoft were so perfectly convinced of the

oppressive designs of the Yarmouth men, as well as apprehensions of the

inevitable ruin that would ensue to the inhabitants of Lowestoft, that

before they broke up, they unanimously resolved to present a certificate

of their proceedings to the Lords of the Privy Council, both for

remonstrating against the unjust and unlawful proceedings of the Yarmouth

men, as also to represent to their lordships, the apparent poverty and

distress which threatened the town of Lowestoft.

THE CERTIFICATE OF SIR ROBERT JERMYN AND SIR JOHN HIGHAM, KNTS., AND

ANTHONY WINGFIELD, ESQ., ON THE PART OF LOWESTOFT; SHEWING THE

UNNECESSARY SHIFTS, DELAYS, AND HARD DEALINGS OF THE YARMOUTH MEN AND

THE NECESSITY OF ENDING THE CONTROVERSY:

Our humble duties to your honours remembered.—May it please the same

to be advertised, That by authority of your lordships’ letters to us

and others directed, concerning the deciding of the controversies

arisen between the township of Yarmouth, and the inhabitants of

Lowestoft, proceeding from the certificate of the Honourable Sir John

Fortescue, knt., Justice Clench and Justice Gawdy, we met together at

the town of Lowestoft, whither the Commissioners named for Yarmouth,

together with the bailiffs and chief inhabitants of Yarmouth, did

also make their repair; and upon our meeting we desired that we might

employ ourselves about the measuring of seven miles from Yarmouth to

Lowestoft; but that would not be allowed of, but only to search and

try out where, and how far Kirkley road did extend, upon which two

points the whole of your honours’ commandment did consist, in which,

after hearing the learned councell on both sides, we had spent at the

least four hours about the extent of Kirkley road only, and had heard

the effect of sundry affidavits taken and returned upon several writs

of ad quad dampnum, mentioning the said Kirkley road: at length the

bailiffs of Yarmouth delivered to us and the other Commissioners, a

letter of your honours, which they had kept in their hands at the

least five days, and had suffered some of us not only to travel

almost fifty miles, but also to spend so many hours as we have before

expressed, about a question, which upon the receipt of this your

honours’ second letter, we had no authority to deal in; namely, the

second point, or to describe the situation of Kirkley road. Also, in

the proceeding of that letter, they omitted the name of Anthony

Wingfield, Esq., who was then absent and had caused the name of

William Rouse, Esq., to be put in; and also had gotten the letter so

indited, as that the whole number of the said six commissioners must

need agree to the measure of the said seven miles, and which could

not be done by reason Mr. Rowse was absent; and although an offer was

made to send for Mr. Rowse, and so to proceed to the admeasurement,

yet in the end they would not proceed to it, except the Lowestoft men

would confess that Kirkley road extended as far as the Yarmouth men

would have it. All which proceedings we are bold to signify to your

honours to prove the unnecessary delays, and hard and unjust

proceedings of the Yarmouth men, and the desire they have to enjoy

their private gain in the herring fishing shortly approaching, to the

utter impoverishing and undoing of the poor inhabitants of Lowestoft,

if by your honours’ favours they be not relieved; and whose

lamentable estate, arising from the hard measure and unjust delays of

the said Yarmouth men, do move us, in consideration of them, to be

bold to offer to your lordships’ view, the hard dealings in this

cause; and in their behalfs humbly to entreat your most honourable

and speedy relief in this their grievous distress. And thus very

humbly we take our leaves of your good lordships.

ROBERT JERMYN,

JOHN HIGHAM

ANTH. WINGFIELD.

From Somerleyton, the 4th August, 1596.

The Lowestoft men were so far from being dispirited by these illegal

proceedings of the burgesses of Yarmouth, that, on the contrary, from the

favourable representation of their case, made to the Privy Council by the

Commissioners, they received so much encouragement as to renew their

application to their Lordships for relief; and petitioned that they might

be indulged with re-hearing of their cause. {81}

In consequence of their application, their lordships immediately sent

letters to the several Commissioners nominated in the first Commission,

informing them that as the differences subsisting between Yarmouth and

Lowestoft were become a matter of great difficulty, and that some certain

points of law were so connected therewith as to require explanation, they

were under the necessity of referring it to the judges for their opinion

thereon; and in the mean time requesting that the herring fishery and

fair at Yarmouth might be conducted as usual and without any

interruption, until the said judges had certified their opinion.

To SIR ROBERT JERMYN, SIR JOHN HIGHAM, SIR ARTHUR HENENINGHAM and SIR

HENRY WOODHOUSE, Knts., and ANTHONY WINGFIELD, and HENRY GAWDY, Esqs.

After our hearty commendations.—We have received the letters

severally sent unto us from you that were appointed to be the

Commissioners on both sides for certain controversies between the

towns of Yarmouth and Lowestoft. And because we find by your several

reports, that it will be a matter of great difficulty for you to set

in order those differences, some proceedings depending upon matter of

law, and are to be decided by certificate from the judges, we have

thought good to respite the same until next term; and in the mean

season to request you, that those of Yarmouth may not be interrupted

in their fair and herring fishing this season, but that they may use

the same in such sort as the same has usually been, until there shall

be a final end made in those matters now depending between them. So

praying you to take thorough hearing accordingly we bid you farewell.

JOHN CANTERBURY, LORD KEEPER, LORD BUCKHURST, LORD TREASURER, LORD

CHAMBERLAIN, LORD BUCKHURST, MR. SECRETARY, MR. CHANCELLOR OF THE

EXCHQUER.

From the Court at Greenwich, the 17th August, 1596.

Thus was this long-contested affair brought the third time before the

judges, who, after duly weighing every circumstance respecting the same

delivered their opinion, “That as the matter in dispute was become so

exceedingly intricate and perplexed, and entangled with such numerous

difficulties as to make them despair of accommodating the differences to

the mutual satisfaction of both parties, they therefore have thought it

more advisable to refer the decision thereof to the determination of

parliament.”

Whereas it hath pleased the right honourable the lords of her

majesty’s most honourable privy council, upon the humble petition of

the inhabitants of Lowestoft, in the county of Suffolk, to remit to

us now this third time the controversy now depending before their

lordships, between the bailiffs, burgesses, and community of the town

of Great Yarmouth, in the county of Norfolk, of the one party, and

the said town of Lowestoft of the other party, touching the trade of

hanging and making of red herrings, and also the procuring of white

herrings, for victuals of store, to be merchandised: we see no

decisive course therein can be taken by us, to compound their

controversies and adjust their differences, whereby to bind both

parties, as is most necessary and convenient (their differences being

of such great difficulty); and therefore we think it fit that the

cause be respited, and referred unto the next parliament; at which

time, upon supplication and complaint of those that shall find

themselves aggrieved, the cause may receive hearing and due remedy.

J. CLENCH, FRANCIS GAWDY.

Given this 29th day of April, 1597.

But notwithstanding the judges declined passing a final decision upon

this long-contested affair, but referred it to parliament, yet the

Yarmouth men still continued to pursue the inhabitants of Lowestoft with

the utmost rancour, and came shortly after into Lowestoft roads with two

armed vessels, and under a pretence of being within the liberties granted

by their charter, demanded anchorage; in consequence whereof a battle

ensued, and much blood was shed on both sides; and though a complaint was

lodged by the Yarmouth men in the star Chamber, against Lowestoft, yet

their accusations appeared so frivolous and ill-grounded, that their

cause was dismissed, and instead of recovering any damages, were fined

twenty marks.

In consequence of this reference, an Act of parliament was passed in the

year 1597, directing that an actual admeasurement of the said seven miles

(eight furlongs to every mile) should immediately take place, and begin

to be measured from the crane key in Yarmouth, and to proceed the

directest way towards the roading place, near the sea shore, where the

fishermen usually anchor for the sale of their herrings; and at the end

of the said seven miles, a post or some other apparent mark, should be

erected near the sea shore, to signify to all persons whom it may concern

the termination of the said seven miles, prescribing the boundary of the

liberties of Yarmouth. {82}

In this defence of their rights and liberties, the town of Lowestoft

expended £120 which was collected from a voluntary subscription of the

inhabitants; some subscribing £10, some £6, some £4, and others lesser

sums, according as their abilities enabled them. But exclusive of the

above expenditure, the inhabitants were under the necessity of

contracting a debt of upwards of £50 which, by reason of their distressed

situation they were utterly unable to discharge any other way than by

appropriating a part of the rents and profits of the town lands; for it

had always been an established maxim of the town to support and maintain

the free trade of buying and selling herrings in Lowestoft roads;

therefore, at a general meeting of the inhabitants, it was resolved that

as a large sum had already been expended in support of this right, that

out of 200 persons who reaped advantages from this fishery, many were

unable to contribute towards the above expense; and that if the fishery

was not supported, the town would be inevitably ruined. Therefore, the

state of the town being thus considered, and the affair regarded as a

case of necessity and charity, and of the utmost utility to the

inhabitants; they agreed, That, it was a very justifiable application of

the rents of the town lands, in the present emergency, in discharging the

said debt.

An Act of the 39th of Elizabeth, for the measuring of seven miles from

the town and haven of Great Yarmouth, in the county of Norfolk, mentioned

in the statute made in the 31st year of King Edward III, and certain

letters patent, granted by the same king unto the bailiff and burgesses

of the said town of Yarmouth.

Whereas, King Edward the Third, at the parliament holden at

Westminister the Monday after the week of Easter, in the 31st year of

his reign, amongst other things, ordained, that none hang herrings in

no place about the haven of Yarmouth, by seven miles, except in the

three towns of Yarmouth, that is to say, Easton, Weston and Southton,

unless it be the herrings of their own fishing. And whereas, the

said King, by his letters patent, in the 46th year of his reign,

among other things did grant unto the bailiffs, burgesses, and good

men of Great Yarmouth, in the county of Norfolk, in the time of

herring fishing, no fair should be kept, nor buying nor selling by

way of merchandise, should be had anywhere within the space of seven

miles about the said town, of herrings or other merchandise. The

which letters patent and grant were afterwards revived and confirmed

by act of parliament in the 10th of Richard II. And by colour and

pretence of the aforesaid statute and letters patent the aforesaid

bailiffs and burgesses of the said town of Yarmouth, have of late

years, practised, in the principal time of herring fishing viz., from

the feast of St. Michael the Archangel, forty days then next

following, to restrain buying and selling of herrings, and making of

white and red herrings, in other towns and places on the sea cost of

Suffolk and Norfolk, above seven miles from the said town, and the

place where the fair of herrings is yearly kept, contrary to the true

meaning of the statute and letters patent above mentioned; by means

whereof great debates and controversies have been moved, the trade of

taking herrings greatly decayed in the coast of Suffolk and Norfolk,

and likewise the trade of making of red herrings, which was more

proper to that part of the realm than to any part of the world else,

is now transferred into the parts beyond the seas, to the great hurt

and undoing of the inhabitants of divers coast towns in the said

counties, and to the general hurt of all fishermen using the trade of

herring fishing; for that by means of this restraint there is nothing

so many herrings taken as otherwise might be; and of these that be

taken, the fishermen, to avoid this restraint, endeavour themselves

to utter some greater quantities of herrings unto Hollanders,

Zealanders, and Frenchmen, than they were wont to do, whereby the

price of herring, red and white, is more than double increased, to

the hurt of all the commonalty of the realm of England. Now,

therefore, for the avoiding of the above mentioned and other

inconvenience that in time to come may ensue, if remedy be not herein

provided, be it enacted by the queen’s most excellent majesty, the

lords spiritual and temporal, and the commons in this present

parliament assembled and by authority of the same, that the aforesaid

seven miles, mentioned in the aforesaid statute, shall be measured

from that part of the said town of Yarmouth whereabout the fair of

herrings is kept, which is the crane key, within the said town; from

thence the usual ways southwards and northwards by the sea shore; and

at the end of either of the said seven miles, apparant marks shall be

fixed, such as may be seen as well upon the sea as upon the land, as

a manifest declaration how far the liberties claimed by bailiffs and

burgesses of Yarmouth shall extend upon the sea coast of Suffolk and

Norfolk, either by sea or by land, concerning the buying, selling and

hanging of herrings; and that either of the said seven miles shall be

accounted to contain eight furlongs, and every furlong to contain in

length, forty poles or perches, and every pole or perch to contain

sixteen feet and a half; and that the high sheriffs of the counties

of Norfolk and Suffolk, or their deputies, shall before the feast of

St. Batholomew the apostle, now next coming, measure seven miles, in

manner and form aforesaid from the said crane key, over the haven,

thence southwards, and at the end of the said seven miles six

apparent marks as aforesaid; and so before the said feast of St.

Batholomew, measure seven miles in manner and form aforesaid, from

the said crane key and at the end of the said seven miles six

apparent marks as aforesaid; and that either of the said sheriffs of

the said counties of Suffolk and Norfolk, for the time being, shall

take such orders from time to time in their several counties, that

the said marks shall be continued for ever. And the aforesaid

bailiffs, burgesses, and community of the said town of Yarmouth, or

the barons of the five ports, or any of them, shall not, at any time

hereafter by colour of any manner of liberties, jurisdictions or

privilege, claimed to belong to them or any of them, by reason of the

aforesaid statute or letters patent, or any other statute, charter,

usage, or rescription, restrain or inhibite any person whatsoever,

buying, selling, changing, or discharging of herrings, in any place

or places whatsoever, being without the compass of the said seven

miles.

Thus was this litigious and long-disputed difference, which had subsisted

between Yarmouth and Lowestoft for a great many years, and had been

prosecuted with the utmost vehemence, at length happily concluded.

Nevertheless it afterwards appeared, that during these dissensions the

seeds of animosity had been so profusely scattered and became so deeply

rooted in the breasts of the contending parties, that it was impossible

to eradicate them even by the most lenient and conciliating measures;

and, consequently, the apparent reconciliation proved, in reality, little

better than a truce, in order that the parties might be enabled to renew

their differences with greater vigour.

In the year 1659 we find, that the former disputes between Yarmouth and

Lowestoft respecting Kirkley road and the admeasurement of the seven

miles, the boundary of the liberties of Yarmouth, were again revived.

During the further prosecution of this affair, the burgesses of Yarmouth

traversed the same ground as they had done before; and insisted that

Kirkley road, which was united to their haven by the statute of the 46th

of Edward III. was opposite to the town of Kirkley, and consequently to

the south of Lowestoft; and that the seven miles which circumscribed

their liberties were not to be measured from the Crane quay, but from the

haven’s mouth; and the better to obviate every objection that might be

alleged against them, and that their new pretensions might carry the

greater appearance of justice, they had provided, that in the recital of

the statute of the 46th of Edward III, in the renewal of their charter in

the reign of James I. to have the situation of Kirkley road described as

opposite to the town of Kirkley, notwithstanding it is represented in the

original statute as being contiguous to the haven’s mouth; and having

thus removed the greatest obstacle to a successful renewal of their

pretensions, they only waited for a favourable opportunity of carrying

their designs into execution. In the year 1659, this desirable and

much-wished-for opportunity presented itself. A time when the

inhabitants of Lowestoft were overwhelmed with the greatest misfortunes;

when their unshaken loyalty, during the late rebellion, had exposed them

to all the distresses which soldiers living in free quarters could

involve them in; when their principal inhabitants (whom they wanted to

defend their rights) were employed as commanders of the royal navy, and

their sailors were absent in manning the fleet; when they were reduced to

the greatest poverty and distress by a terrible fire, which consumed in

the town, houses and merchandise to the amount of £10,000; whilst they

were thus struggling under the accumulated miseries of war, fire, and

oppression, and sinking under the insupportable burden of those grievous

calamities, then it was that the Yarmouth men, imagining that the happy

period had arrived when they might renew their pretensions without

opposition, and pursue them with success, contrary to all legal

authority, renewed their unjust and unreasonable claims, and attacked the

almost-ruined and defenceless town of Lowestoft with an armed vessel,

which was termed a man-of-war.

In this unhappy situation, when almost every avenue to redress was shut

against them, and nothing but the ghastly spectres of poverty and ruin

were continually presenting themselves to their alarmed imaginations, no

other remedy was left but to implore the assistance of the legislative

powers of their country, and to lay before them a true representation of

their unfortunate state, which was done in the following complaint,

shortly after presented to the lords of the privy council.

A COMPLAINT OF THE TOWN OF LOWESTOFT IN THE COUNTY OF SUFFOLK, TO THE

LORDS OF THE PRIVY COUNCIL.

Whereas the Yarmouth men under pretence of a privilege granted them

in their charter, that no fishers should deliver any herrings within

seven miles of their town during the time of their free fair, which

beginneth at Michaelmas, and continues till Martinmas, have, on one

day of the year, come rowing in small boats into the roads before

Lowestoft, and there have exacted anchorage, although eight or nine

miles distant from Yarmouth; and if they refuse to pay it they

violently take their goods, cruelly beat the fishermen and their

assistants, confiscate their vessels and set grievous fines on them,

on purpose to prevent their delivering any herrings at Lowestoft to

the great damage of the poor fishers and injury of the said town;

who, if compelled to deliver all their herrings at Yarmouth, must

lose at least one third part of their time; and when they do proceed

to Yarmouth, by an ordinance of that town, the first freeman that

comes on board must be his host, and will set the price of the

fisher’s herrings without their knowledge or consent, which commonly

is 20s. to 50s. a last cheaper than they give to their own townsmen,

which the fishers are ready to make appear by certificates, or other

ways; whilst at this town they are free to sell to whom they please,

and are furnished with such necessaries as they want; and if they

like not this market, they are free to sell their fish to any other,

and return to sea again at their own pleasures.

* * * * *

OBSERVATIONS ON THE ADMEASUREMENT OF THE SEVEN MILES AND THE PLACE CALLED

KIRKLEY ROAD.

The Yarmouth men alleged that Lowestoft south road was within the

compass of seven miles from the town and herring fair of Yarmouth,

although upon an admeasurement it was found, that only Corton road

and part of Lowestoft north road were within the limits of the said

seven miles and that the greatest part of even Lowestoft north road

is beyond the said seven miles, the boundary of the liberties of

Yarmouth, yearly proclaimed. Yet, notwithstanding, the Yarmouth men

have made a practice of coming one day in the year, in the time of

their fair, only into Corton and Lowestoft north road, but also into

Lowestoft south road and have there unjustly extorted anchorage under

the colour of a grant of Kirkley road being united unto their town

and haven, and was situated off the town of Kirkley, which place so

granted was found (before the granting), by two inquisitions of

record, to be at the mouth of the haven of Yarmouth, and nothing

distant; which inquisitions agreed with no other place but that now

called Yarmouth road; and there they have enjoyed all those things

mentioned in the said inquisitions, and grant of the 10th of Richard

II. until the first of Queen Elizabeth, and then they obtained a new

grant of Yarmouth road which until that time they held by the name of

Kirkley road, and by no other name or grant; and though they have

come wrongfully into the roads of Lowestoft one day in the year,

exacting anchorage, they leave all other profits, jurisdictions, and

government, all other parts of the year, unto the Vice-Admiral of

Suffolk; for admiralty causes, and concerning wreck of the sea,

things found in the roads, flotsom and jotsom, and all other

casualties in the said roads and shores of the same, all that they

leave to the lord of the manor of Lothingland, Lowestoft, and Mutford

all along the shores as far as Kessingland, which is three miles

southward of Lowestoft; but they never had any part of the same in

use or possession but as before mentioned. It appears by copies of

letters patent in the 9th of Richard II. and by an edict of the

extent of the manor of Lowestoft, taken the 10th of Richard II. and

returned into the Exchequer in the term of St. Michael, that the

lords of the manor of Lowestoft have had and enjoyed from time to

time in the roads before Lowestoft, and all shores of the same; and

also had, and still have, all petty customs of all goods there

landed, (which was much in those days), and all casualties happening

in the said roads, and upon the shores thereof; and the trade of

merchandising herrings and other merchandise have continued ever

since; as the great number of herring houses, warehouses, and other

buildings do now remain, as monuments, to prove the use of the said

trades at Lowestoft. And likewise there have been of antient time,

and still continue, officers for the collecting such customs as

should be due to the lord, etc., and a deputy searcher for the king’s

customs; and although the aforesaid trade of merchandising, loading,

and unloading of ships and boats continued there, and never any of

the customs claimed by the town of Yarmouth were either taken or

demanded for such loading or unloading; and although the statute of

the 31st of Edward III. concerning the prohibition of discharging any

more herrings in the road of Kirkley, but for the charge of the

pickers, was never in use etc., yet, under the pretence of the grant

(46th Edward III.) of a place in the sea, then called Kirkley road,

which no ways agreeth to be Lowestoft roads, they have of late used

to come into the said roads before Lowestoft, which is above seven

miles from the town of Yarmouth, and fair of herrings kept in the

said town; and have compelled the fishers to sail to Yarmouth and

sell their herrings, etc.; and likewise have exacted anchorage,

tending greatly to the breach of the peace, and without any material

profit to Yarmouth, and which tends only to the disturbing and

diminishing of the trade of merchandising herrings at Lowestoft.

But now the Yarmouth men, as if all their former injuries were not

sufficient, have sent a vessel, a man-of-war ship as they term it,

with a flag on the main-top-mast head, having 25 men aboard, armed

with swords, half-pikes, muskets, and great store of stones, which

sail into the roads of Corton, Lowestoft and Kirkley, to ride there

at anchor, and to act as above by virtue of a commission under the

hands of the bailiffs and three justices of the Peace, and the seal

of the said town, so that the fishers may not deliver any herrings at

all, which before they never practised.

* * * * *

THE AFFIDAVIT or JAMES MUNDS, OF LOWESTOFT.

James Munds, of Lowestoft, Suffolk, fisherman, aged sixty years and

upwards, maketh oath, that he has used the trade of fishing

forty-five years and upwards, last past, upon the coasts of Norfolk

and Suffolk; and that the western fishermen and strangers have

constantly, during the time of the free fair kept at Yarmouth,

delivered herrings in the roads of Lowestoft aforesaid, to several

merchants inhabiting in the said town, without any disturbance or

molestation, till this last year the men of Yarmouth sent out a

vessel, which they called a man-of-war, furnished with five and

twenty men, and several weapons of war, which anchored in the roads

of Lowestoft the chiefest part of the season, daily chasing the

fishermen, so that none durst deliver any herrings, to their great

damage, and, if not timely prevented, to their utter ruin and

undoing.

JAMES MUNDS.

Prob. 30th die Januarii, A.D. 1660, Corum me in Cancell. Magistro,

THOMAS ESCOWTR.

* * * * *

THE AFFIDAVIT OF ROGER HOOPER, OF RAMSGATE.

Roger Hooper, of Ramsgate, Kent, aged forty-six, or thereabouts,

maketh oath that he hath used the trade of herring fishing four and

thirty years, last past, upon the coasts of Norfolk and Suffolk; and

that the western fishermen, his neighbours, and others, and also

strangers, have constantly, during the time of the free fair kept at

Yarmouth, delivered herrings in the road of Lowestoft aforesaid, to

several merchants, inhabitants there, without any molestation, until

this last year, when the Yarmouth men sent out a vessel, which they

called a ‘man-of-war,’ to ride in the roads of Lowestoft the chiefest

part of the season; which man-of-war threatened him, that if he

delivered any herrings at Lowestoft, they would seize him. So that

none dare deliver any herrings, to their great damage, and, if not

timely prevented, to the utter undoing of their voyage.

ROGER HOOPER.

Prob. Febru. 1660. Corum me in Cancell. Magistro.

BYRED.

Having been grievous sufferers for our constant fidelity to his

sacred Majesty; several times plundered, grievously burthened with

taxes above the neighbouring towns, soldiers living at free quarters,

great losses by sea, depopulated of our principal inhabitants by

their being engaged in his majesty’s service, as Captains Allen,

Utber, Canham and Whiting, besides a great number of our common

seamen, and many who have lost their lives in contending with these

oppressors, and also a most lamentable fire in this town, which

consumed 140 houses, together with tackling and goods to the amount

of ten thousand pounds and upwards, for which we never had any

favour. And now having made large provisions for the fishery of all

sorts, as also for the receiving, salting, and drying such herrings

as they should bring in being able to hang in this town about 700

lasts, which time out of mind, have been the sole subsistance of this

town, are now bespoiled at once, and like to perish, if speedy remedy

be not obtained, being no ways able to wage war with them, for

reasons above.

We therefore humbly pray, etc.

* * * * *

THE SECOND ORDER OF THE TOWN OF GREAT YARMOUTH TO THOMAS ALLEN TO

ENTER CORTON ROAD, LOWESTOFT ROAD, AND KIRKLEY ROAD, TO PROTECT THE

LIBERTIES OF THE SAID TOWN OF GREAT YARMOUTH.

Whereas Thomas Allen was late ordered by us, the bailiffs and

justices of the burgh and town of Great Yarmouth, in the county of

Norfolk, her under named, to go into Corton road, Lowestoft road, and

Kirkley road, Suffolk, with a vessel and a convenient company, to

take notice of such persons, strangers and others, as shall there

deliver any herrings or other merchandise, during the time of the

free fair here at Great Yarmouth, contrary to our liberties and

charters; and to seize such vessels and merchandise, as forfeited to

the king’s majesty, and to bring the same into the haven of this

town. And we did also order the said Thomas Allen, with his company,

to demand and take in the said several roads such duties as were or

should be due to this town of Great Yarmouth for anchorage of ships

and vessels in these roads, or for any other cause, which said orders

by us so given unto the said Thomas Allen, were done by virtue of an

act or ordinance of common councel of the said town of Great

Yarmouth. And whereas the said Thomas Allen, by virtue of our said

order unto him given, did go into the said road of Lowestoft, with a

convenient vessel and competent number of men, to execute the orders

by us given unto him; and was there opposed by the chief men of the

said town of Lowestoft, who came upon the said Thomas Allen and his

company in the road of that town, violently and riotously in boats,

and with force of arms, etc., drave him and them out of that road,

threatening them otherwise to fire their vessel; whereby the said

Thomas Allen, with his vessel and company, was enforced to come away

without doing anything. Now, therefore, we the said bailiffs and

justices, do again order, authorise, and appoint the said Thomas

Allen to go with a competent vessel and company of men, and with

convenient weapons for their defence into the said roads of Corton,

Lowestoft, and Kirkley, from time to time, during the time of the

free fair here at Great Yarmouth, and there to do and execute all

things, specified in our former order given unto him. In witness

whereof we the said bailiffs and justices have hereunto set our hands

and seals this fifth day of October, in the year of our Lord, one

thousand, six hundred and sixty.

NICHO. CUTTINGE, JAMES SYMONDS,

(_Bailiffs_.)

JOHN CARTER, GEORGE ENGLAND.

JO. WODROFFE.

The adjoining towns of Pakefield and Kirkley also lodged complaints

before the Privy Council, against the Yarmouth men, similar to those from

Lowestoft, so did likewise Hastings, Dover, Rye, and other towns of the

western coast; and afterwards some private adventurers in those parts of

England did not scruple, on this important occasion, to petition the

throne to protect them from the despotic designs of the Yarmouth men.

TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE THE LORDS OF HIS MAJESTY’S MOST HONOURABLE

PRIVY COUNCIL.

THE CERTIFICATE OF THE SEA COAST TOWNS OF PAKEFIELD AND KIRKLEY, IN

THE COUNTY OF SUFFOLK.

Humbly certifying,

That the said towns are joining upon the sea, and divided by one

street, subsisting chiefly by the fishing trade. And that we never

knew, or heard our forefathers speak of any roads lying against or

near the said town, called by the name of Kirkley road, but Pakefield

bay or hithe, and Lowestoft roads; nor was there ever any road near

our said town so called, but by the men of Yarmouth, on purpose to

engross the whole of the fishery; and monopolise the whole trade to

themselves; whilst, in truth, our town of Kirkley is near three miles

southwards of the pole set up to the northward of Lowestoft, always

accounted the boundary of the seven miles granted to the town of

Yarmouth, measured from their crane key, and to be the uttermost

extent of their privileges. Nevertheless, in the year 1657, two or

three days after Michaelmas, as Thomas Fowler the elder, and Thomas

Fowler the younger, of our said towns, were, for delivering of

herrings betwixt our town of Kirkley and Lowestoft, at their next

going to Yarmouth, had before the bailiff, who set a fine upon each

of them, of £40 a-piece, which they were commanded to pay, or else

their boats and tackling would be confiscated. But after alleging

their poor condition, they mitigated it to £30, and at last to £20 a

man, which they were compelled to lay down upon the table; and large

writings were produced for them to sign and seal, to indemnify the

said bailiff, which if they would do, they would take but £5 a man;

but one of the Fowlers desiring to understand the contents of the

writings, and beginning to read, Mr. Bailiff England interrupted him,

and said that if he would not seal it, he should pay the whole £20;

so that they were obliged to seal they knew not what, and were

dismissed by each of them paying £5. Such is the great bondage of

the poor fishermen. In testimony of the truth, we the inhabitants of

the said towns have hereunto subscribed our names this 14th day of

January, 1660; and are ready to aver the same upon oath when we shall

be thereunto required.

ROBERT BRONSBY, WILLIAM RICHMAN, WILLIAM GOGOE,

THOMAS COLBY, WILLIAM THURKITTLE, THOMAS FOWLER,

MICHAEL FOWLER, WILLIAM WOODS, THOMAS ERTIS,

JOHN COLBY, JOHN SWATT, JOHN SETTAVAYE,

FRANCIS DURRAND, WILLIAM ERTIS, WILLIAM ROUSE,

ABELL HOULSWORTE, THOMAS MASON, JOHN MASON

HENRY CROSS, WILLIAM BROWN.

* * * * *

TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE THE LORDS OF HIS MAJESTY’S MOST HONOURABLE

PRIVY COUNCIL.

THE CERTIFICATE OF THE FISHERMEN OF THE TOWNS OF BRIGHTHELMSTONE,

HASTINGS, RYE, DOVER, RAMSGATE, AND THE REST OF THE WESTERN FISHERY.

Upon perusal of a petition presented unto the king’s most excellent

majesty by the town of Lowestoft, in Suffolk, representing the

injurious proceedings of the town of Yarmouth to them, and also the

whole Western Fishery; and his majesty’s gracious reference thereupon

unto the right honourable the Lords and others of his Majesty’s most

honourable Privy Council for satisfaction and relief therein,

We do humbly certify unto your Lordships,

That the Western Fishery, has time out of mind, sold and delivered

herrings in the roads of Lowestoft, until this last year, when the

Yarmouth men sent forth a man-of-war (as they term her) not only to

affrighten them and others from delivering herrings in the said

roads, but also to prevent any that should offer to deliver herrings

there. And in case they should presume to deliver any, to seize upon

them, and bring them into their haven, to be dealt with accordingly

(as by the commission granted to the commander or captain of the said

man-of-war may appear); which they have done, not only to the great

loss of some particular men, imposing great fines upon them, which

they were forced to pay, but also the great discouragement, (and if

not in time prevented) the ruin of the whole Western fishery. For if

we be forced to deliver our herrings only at Yarmouth, we shall lose

at least one-third part of our time, the winds falling so as that

sometimes we lye through three or four days before we can get to sea

again. Besides, having that advantage, they will give only what they

please, which will amount to the loss of near half our time and

profit, and will be much to the disadvantage of his Majesty’s

subjects in trading, both at home and abroad. Whereas at Lowestoft

we have the privilege to make the best of our market, and can go to

sea when we please, furnished with all necessaries as plentifully as

we can at Yarmouth. The truth of all which we do attest under our

hands, humbly praying relief therein.

Signed at Bradstow, Foulstone, Hastings, Ramsgate, Hyde, Dover, Rye,

Brighthelmstone, by 469 Western fishers, and others.

* * * * *

Lowestoft answereth, That the said statute of 31 Edward III. is

repealed by the statute of 2 Richard II., cap. i.: which grants a

free trade for all persons to buy and sell at any place within the

realm, notwithstanding any statute, grant or usage to the contrary;

and by 46, Edward III., which united Kirkley road to Yarmouth Haven.

Yarmouth alleges, That the anchoring place opposite the town of

Kirkley, and the road before the town of Lowestoft, is that Kirkley

road mentioned in the grant of 46 Edward III., which united Kirkley

road to Yarmouth haven.

Lowestoft answers, That the town of Lowestoft is situated eight or

nine miles to the south of Yarmouth; and that a mile further to the

south is a village called Kirkley, joining to the head town called

Pakefield; before which towns the anchoring places have always been

called Pakefield bay or hithe, as by a certificate under the hands of

the principal inhabitants of both those said towns doth appear.

Yarmouth says, That the seven miles, which bound their liberties,

begin at the haven’s mouth.

Lowestoft answereth, That by the charter of 46 Edward III. the seven

miles were confined to the town of Yarmouth.

Yarmouth declareth, That Kirkley road lies at a considerable distance

from the haven’s mouth.

Lowestoft answereth, That the situation of it was contiguous to the

mouth of the haven at the time when the haven discharged itself into

the sea to the south of Corton, 46, Edward III., when the charter was

granted for uniting Kirkley road to Yarmouth haven.

Yarmouth affirms, That the power and authority derived to them by

extending their liberties to the distance of seven miles, were not

detrimental to the nation in general, nor to Lowestoft in particular.

Lowestoft answereth, That it is prejudicial to both of them; and

grounded their reasons on the two inquisitions held during 5 Richard

II.

Yarmouth denieth. That the statute 31 Edward III. was repealed by

the general statute 2 Richard II., and also insists, that by the

charter 46 Edward III, for uniting Kirkley road to Yarmouth haven,

their liberties were to extend seven miles from the said haven.

Lowestoft answereth, That the said charter 46 Edward III was repealed

by an act 50 Edward III (though the judges declared that the statute

31 Edward III was not repealed) and that the statute 2 Richard II was

prejudicial to the kingdom in general: and therefore a complaint was

made thereof, in the parliament holden 4 Richard II, and an

inquisition was taken by three judges of the realm, who surveyed the

premises, and declared, that to extend the liberties of Yarmouth

seven miles from the haven’s mouth, was against common right, and

that the said statute 2 Richard II was hurtful to the commonwealth;

and, consequently, by the statute 5 Richard III, the statute 2

Richard II was repealed.

Yarmouth declareth, that by the statute 10 Richard II all their

privileges were confirmed to them, and again by statute 1 queen

Elizabeth.

Lowestoft alloweth, that the liberties granted to Yarmouth, 46 Edward

III were confirmed by statute 10 Richard II; but concerning the

statute 1 Queen Elizabeth that did not relate to the herring fishery,

except confining their liberties to seven miles from the town, but to

the establishing a court of admiralty at Yarmouth; and, therefore,

though the town of Yarmouth, under a pretence of being authorised by

that grant, made considerable encroachments on the privileges of

Lowestoft, and insisted that their privilege of seven miles was to be

measured from the haven’s mouth, and not from the key of Yarmouth,

thereby attempting to exclude the town of Lowestoft from the fishery;

yet, on complaint thereof being made to her majesty’s privy council,

who referred it to the judges, Sir John Fortescue, Justice Clench,

and Justice Gawdy, they certified, that it was their opinion, that

the seven miles should be measured from the crane key in Yarmouth,

towards Lowestoft, and at the termination thereof a post, or some

other mark should be erected to denote the same. Whereupon the Lords

of the Council, on the 16th May, 1596, after referring the case again

to the judges, laid it before the Parliament, who issued an order, in

1597, to Sir Arthur Heneningham, Sir Henry Woodhouse, and Henry

Gawdy, Esq., on the part of Yarmouth, and to Sir Robert Jermyn, Sir

John Higham, and Anthony Wingfield, Esq., on the part of Lowestoft,

to undertake the admeasurement of the said seven miles; accordingly

the said admeasurement was actually made, and a great post, denoting

the boundary of the liberties of Yarmouth, was erected, which

remained unto that day.

Yarmouth insisteth, That a Charter of confirmation, granted to them

in the reign of James I., Kirkley road is expressly described as

opposite to the town of Kirkley; and that their jurisdiction shall

extend from Winterton Ness in Norfolk, to Easton Ness in Suffolk,

which is twenty-four miles, and includes the town of Lowestoft, which

is only eight or nine miles from Yarmouth; and that by virtue of this

jurisdiction, they justify their interruption of the herring fishery

at Lowestoft, and all other trades within the extent of their said

liberties.

Lowestoft answereth, That such a charter as the Yarmouth men pretend

to have obtained, would be a monopoly, and contrary to the common

rights of the Kingdom in general. That such a charter, if it was

really granted, was obtained privately; that no writs of ad quod

dampnum were issued, so that it is evident that they had imposed upon

his majesty. That it would be prejudicial to the commonwealth, and

the utter ruin of the western fishery, as is testified by above 3000

fishermen, who have subscribed a petition which certifies the truth

of this assertion, and prays for relief. That it relates chiefly to

the jurisdiction belonging to their court of admiralty, as is evident

by their coming with a boat into Lowestoft roads, and demanding

sixpence for anchorage. And lastly, That the artifice of having

Kirkley road represented in this charter as situated opposite to the

town of Kirkley, merely with a design of furnishing themselves with a

plausible pretence for extending their liberties beyond the town of

Lowestoft, towards the south, and thereby to exclude them from the

herring-fishery, was a fraudulent imposition, and a manifest

perversion of the Charter 46 Edward III, which represents it as

situate near the entrance of Yarmouth haven.

Previous to the report of the attorney-general, a certificate was

presented to him from James Wild and Samuel Pacy, two eminent

merchants at Lowestoft {90} asserting the reasons why the seven

miles, the boundary of the liberties of Yarmouth, ought to be

measured from the crane key belonging to the said town of Yarmouth,

where the herring fair is usually held, and not from the haven’s

mouth.

* * * * *

To the Honourable Mr. ATTORNEY GENERAL

The humble CERTIFICATE of the INHABITANTS of the town of LOWESTOFT,

in SUFFOLK, shewing the reasons why the seven miles, the extent of

the liberties of Yarmouth, in Norfolk, ought to be measured from the

crane Key, and not from the haven’s mouth.

1st.—That their fore-fathers being obstructed in their fishing by the

Yarmouth men (which time out of mind they had enjoyed), had appealed

to her late majesty, queen Elizabeth, to her parliament, and privy

council, and obtained an order for setting bounds to the seven miles

granted to Yarmouth.

2nd.—In consequence whereof an order was also obtained from the lords

of the council, directed to several men of authority in both

counties, to make due enquiry concerning the controversy, and survey

the premises, in order to ascertain the place from whence the

admeasurement ought to begin, which was certified to be from the

crane Key in Yarmouth, where the herring fair was usually held. And

though the Yarmouth men, thinking themselves aggrieved obtained a

second survey to be made, yet was it certified by the inquiries a

second time, that they found no reason to depart from their former

opinion. The reasons which they assigned, were that it was

beneficial to her majesty’s good subjects in general, and the

encouragement of the herring fishery in particular.

3rd.—That the order from the council, for the admeasurement of the

seven miles, was never revoked, as the Yarmouth men falsely

suggested, but only suspended, as by the copy of their letters

appears, and though by indirect means they occasioned a delay, and

endeavoured to weary the commissioner appointed to settle the

controversy with frivolous evasions, yet it was agreed, that the

seven miles should be measured from the crane Key, in Yarmouth,

directly towards Lowestoft, and a great post should be set up at the

end thereof, to denote the same, which remaineth to this day.

4th.—That ever since that time (which was in the year 1595 and 1596)

the fishers have freely delivered their herrings in Lowestoft roads,

in the time of the free fair at Yarmouth, without any molestation,

until this last year, 1660, when they were interrupted by a vessel,

called a man-of-war, employed by the Yarmouth men for that purpose.

May it therefore please your honour,

That as this controversy has been for so long standing, and it

plainly appearing that no remedy can be obtained but by another

admeasurement; that your honour will give credit to the orders and

certificates lately pleaded before his majesty in council, as also to

the certificates of several thousand fishermen belonging to the

western fishery, then produced, shewing the inevitable ruin and

destruction both to them and their families, that would immediately

ensue, if prevented from delivering their herrings at Lowestoft, as

from time immemorial they have been accustomed to do, which

certificates have been since confirmed by a petition from Captain

Tattersell, to his sacred majesty; and that your honour would be

graciously pleased to report your sense of this difference concerning

the admeasurement as soon as possible; for that the Yarmouth men will

continue to claim the same privileges, or greater, than they did in

the year 1595; and exercise the same ruin to our poor town, as in the

last year (1660), with their armed vessel called a man-of-war.

Neither do the Yarmouth men desire that the controversy should be

brought before the parliament, but to weary us out with delays and

expense, well knowing how unable we are to wage law with them, and

that unless they persist in opposing us, it will end in an

admeasurement. We therefore humbly pray your honour, that you will

be pleased to consider the equity of our case; the great expense,

travail and loss of time we have been at; and with due regard to our

poor condition, speedily to report the state of the whole matter to

his majesty in council, that so we may be no longer delayed, but

repair home to follow our lawful callings; and we shall, as in duty

bound, for ever pray, and remain, your honours most humble and

grateful servants,

JAMES WILD,

SAMUEL PACY.

The attorney-general, in pursuance of the order of council, paid due

attention to the allegations of both parties; and after hearing what each

of them had to advance in support of their several pretensions, together

with the opinion of their learned council, delivered a report to his

majesty; wherein, after reciting the many charters which had been granted

to the town of Yarmouth, and afterwards repealed; and the various

ordinances and inquisitions issued and taken by the King’s commission in

preceding reigns, and revoked by the same authority; declared that he had

considered the statute 31 Edward III, the different opinions of the

several judges thereupon, and the orders of her late majesty queen

Elizabeth and her privy council, in consequence thereof, which were, that

seven miles should be measured from the Key of Yarmouth, and also from

the utmost bounds of their haven, and that a certificate should be

presented, declaring how far each of the said admeasurements extended;

and that during the interval, they should forbear to erect any marks or

bounds, pointing out the termination of the said admeasurements, until

further orders were issued; but that it did not appear to him that the

said seven miles were actually measured by any order for that purpose.

It is evident that the attorney-general had not perfectly informed

himself of all the circumstances of this dispute, or else they were

misrepresented to him; for in 1596 an order in Council was given for

seven miles to be measured from the key of Yarmouth towards Lowestoft,

and at the end thereof to set up some apparent mark; and in that

remarkable commission, which had all the appearance of being fraudently

obtained, is contained directions for the two admeasurements, and the

suspension of the order for erecting a mark pointing out the extent of

the liberties of Yarmouth. Nevertheless the inhabitants of Lowestoft did

affirm, and it was certified by great numbers of the Western fishermen,

that the said Western fishery had ever since the recited order (as they

did before), sold and delivered herrings in the roads of Lowestoft till

this last summer, without any disturbance or molestation from the town of

Yarmouth.

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL’S FIRST REPORT.

May it please your most excellent Majesty.

In obedience to your Majesty’s order in council, of the 25th January

last, I have heard the inhabitants of the town of Lowestoft, in the

county of Suffolk, and also the inhabitants of Great Yarmouth, in the

county of Norfolk, and their learned counsel on both sides; and do

find, that the contention between the said towns concerning the

herring fishery, hath depended for a very long time. And that divers

statutes have been made in this case by parliaments, and again

afterwards repealed. And also divers ordinances and inquisitions

have anciently been made and taken, by the king’s commission directed

to men of great quality, and afterwards altered and revoked again by

the like authority. But there was one statute made in the 31st

Edward III, whereby amongst other things it is provided, that none

shall sell herrings in any place about the haven of Yarmouth, by

seven miles, but in the three towns of Yarmouth, except the said

herrings be of ‘their own fishing.’ And I have likewise seen the

opinions of several learned judges, some of them conceiving, that the

said statute, 31 Edward III is repealed; and others, that the said

statute, and also one other Act made in the tenth year of Richard II,

for reviving divers former repealed charters, made to Yarmouth, stand

still in force bylaw, and are not repealed. And those judges who

were of opinion that the same were not repealed, did think it good

and convenient to have the seven miles measured, and to begin at the

crane key in Yarmouth, where the said fair of herrings is kept (to

which place the fishers who sell their fish at Yarmouth must first

come, and their cable draw to land, before they deliver their

herrings), and so go towards Lowestoft, and where the seven miles do

end, to set up some apparent mark to make it known; and did certify

the same accordingly to the lords of Queen Elizabeth’s privy council.

But the inhabitants of Yarmouth being discontented with the first

certificate of the said judges, did procure a rehearing of their

cause before them, who having accordingly heard them and their

learned counsel, did certify that they did find no cause to alter

their former certificate; yet the admeasurement was suspended by

reason of the Yarmouth men alledging, that the admeasurement of the

seven miles from the key of Yarmouth would be prejudicial to their

charters and liberties; and that by the said statute, 31 Edward III,

the seven miles ought to be accounted from the utmost bounds of the

haven, which they affirmed to have been extended, in the memory of

man, a mile beyond where it was then; so that it was directed by the

lords of her said late majesty’s most honourable privy council, that

there should be seven miles measured from the key at Yarmouth and

from the utmost bounds of their haven, where the five ports begin

their jurisdiction, and that it should be certified unto them how far

each admeasurement did extend; and that in the mean time they should

forbear to set up any marks or bounds, until such further orders

should be issued therein as might be just and reasonable, and to the

mutual satisfaction of both parties. But there is nothing appears to

me, that the said seven miles were measured as the said last-recited

order did direct. Yet, notwithstanding, the inhabitants of Lowestoft

do affirm, and it is certified by great numbers of fishermen, that

the western fishery has been ever since the said recited order (as

they did before) sold and delivered herrings in the roads of

Lowestoft, till this last summer without the disturbance of the

Yarmouth men.

All which I humbly submit to your Majesty’s great wisdom.

It also appears that the Attorney-General, upon further consideration of

this contested difference, presented an additional report to his majesty,

wherein he represented, that since his former report he had seen the

certificate of the two learned judges, dated April 29, 1597, subsequent

to the certificates mentioned in his first report, in which they declared

that they could not see how any method could be taken for compromising

the differences between the two towns, but by referring them to

Parliament.

THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL’S SECOND REPORT.

May it please your most excellent Majesty.

In obedience to your Majesty’s order of council of the 25th of

January last, concerning the matter of difference between the

inhabitants of the town of Lowestoft, and the inhabitants of the town

of Great Yarmouth, I lately made certificate to your majesty

according to the truth of what was then produced before me. But

since that time there hath been produced to me a certificate under

the hands of the learned judges, dated the 29th of April, 1597,

subsequent to those mentioned in my former certificate, wherein they

did declare, that they did see no other course could be taken by

them, in order to compound their controversies and decide the

differences between the said towns, and whereby they could bind both

parties in such a manner as was most fit and convenient (their

differences being of such great difficulty), and therefore they

thought it fit, that the cause should be respited, and referred to

the next parliament. At which time, upon supplication and complaint

of those that should find themselves aggrieved, the cause might

receive hearing and due remedy.

And I humbly crave liberty to certify to your Majesty, that by the

word “crane” key, in my former certificate, I did intend the key of

Yarmouth, that is known by that name, without any the least prejudice

to either party thereby, in relation to the admeasurement mentioned

in the same certificate, further or otherwise than the truth of the

cause would bear.

All which I humbly submit to your Majesty’s great wisdom.

At a council held at Whitehall the 10th of April, 1661, at which were

present his Majesty, and the Duke of York, and many of the first

nobility, these reports of the attorney-general were presented and read;

and it was accordingly ordered by the council, that by reason of his

Majesty’s approaching coronation, they were unable to pay such proper

attention to the complaints of the respective parties, as their cases

required; therefore the affair must necessarily be suspended a short time

longer; and that both parties do attend the Board on Friday three weeks,

the third of May next ensuing, at three in the afternoon, for the further

hearing and determining of this matter.

Upon the issuing of the order for deferring the hearing of the cause to a

subsequent council, the Lowestoft men presented another petition to His

Majesty, beseeching him that as it was the opinion of the judges, and

also of the Attorney-general, that the only method which could be taken

for compromising the differences so long subsisting between these two

towns, would be to consider seven miles to be measured from the key of

Yarmouth, towards Lowestoft, in order to ascertain the boundary of the

liberties of the former place, and secure the privilege of a free fishery

to the latter, and at the end thereof to have some apparent mark erected,

to denote the same; that his Majesty would be pleased to order the said

admeasurement to be immediately carried into execution; or otherwise, by

reason of their many misfortunes and losses, they must be involved in

inevitable ruin.

TO THE KING’S MOST EXCELLENT MAJESTY, THE HUMBLE PETITION OF THE

INHABITANTS OF THE TOWN OF LOWESTOFT, IN THE COUNTY OF SUFFOLK,

Sheweth,

That your majesty having been graciously pleased, at the humble suit

and prayer of your petitioners, to hear the complaint of your poor

petitioners, against the rich inhabitants of the town of Great

Yarmouth, in the county of Norfolk, before the right honourable the

lords of Your majesty’s privy council, touching the free trade of

herring fishery, which hath of long time been in controversy between

them; and upon a full hearing, did order both parties to attend your

majesty’s attorney-general, that he, upon due consideration and

hearing of all parties, should report to your majesty the true state

of the whole matter of fact accordingly: whereby it appears, that the

opinion of all the reverend judges, and such other worthy gentlemen

of quality to whom the matter hath been formerly referred, is, ‘That

there is no other visible way to end their controversies, and to

procure unity between the said towns, but by an admeasurement of

seven miles from the crane key of Yarmouth towards the town of

Lowestoft.’ And whereas your petitioners are exceedingly

impoverished by reason of their said controversy, and their

sufferings during the late troubles, their affections to your

majesty’s late royal father, of ever blessed memory, having been

plundered by Oliver Cromwell and the said inhabitants of Yarmouth,

who were instrumental with, and assisting him in the same; and since

that time have been almost ruined by a sad and lamentable fire which

happened in their said town, whereupon inevitable destruction will

follow, except a speedy and effectual end be put to their

differences, and that they may have free liberty to use their trade

of herring fishery.

Your petitioners therefore humbly pray, That your majesty would be

graciously pleased, upon the report of Mr. Attorney-General, as also

the reports and certificates of former learned judges and justices of

the peace of both counties, by your royal command to declare and

publish, that seven miles may be measured from the crane key of

Yarmouth aforesaid, towards the town of Lowestoft, and not from their

pretended utmost bounds of their haven, which is uncertain, and by

which means they would destroy your petitioners said fishing trade.

And that a post, or some other apparent mark, may be set up at the

end thereof, so that the trade of herring fishing may be used during

the time of their free fair at any place without the said post or

mark, without the molestation of the said inhabitants of Yarmouth,

whereby your petitioners, and many thousands of your majesty’s poor

western fishermen, may live and subsist by their said trade of

herring fishing, as time out of mind they have done; which otherwise

will be their utter ruin and undoing, as appears by their humble

certificate and remonstrance to your sacred majesty.

And your petitioners as in all duty bound, shall ever pray, etc.

Petitions were also at the same time presented by the Lowestoft men to

Lord Chancellor Hyde and the Duke of Albemarle, entreating their interest

and authority at the privy council intended shortly to be held for the

further discussion of this litigious contest; also that an order might be

obtained for the admeasurement of the said seven miles from the crane key

at Yarmouth, and that the same admeasurement should not be made from the

haven’s mouth, as thereby the town of Lowestoft would be excluded from

their indisputable claim to the privileges belonging to the herring

fishery.

A petition was also presented to his majesty, praying that his majesty

would graciously please to be present in his royal person at the council

appointed to be held on Friday the third of May next ensuing, for

deciding this long-controverted difference.

In consequence of this appointment a privy council was held at Whitehall

on the third of May, 1661, at which were present his majesty, the duke of

York, many of the great officers of state, and others of the nobility;

when, after hearing the learned counsel on both sides, and after full

debate on the several complaints and allegations advanced by the

respective parties, it was ordered by his majesty in council, that as the

determination of the differences between the said towns of Yarmouth and

Lowestoft depended upon the validity of several charters, acts of

parliament, and orders of council, that the inhabitants of the town of

Lowestoft should make application to the right honourable the House of

Lords, shortly to be assembled in Parliament, who would consider their

complaints and afford them such redress as their lordships, upon due

examination of the whole matter, should think just and reasonable.

The Lowestoft people having conceived the highest expectations of an

amicable adjustment of their differences with Yarmouth at the late

hearing of their cause before the privy council, were extremely chagrined

and disappointed at its being referred to the House of Lords; especially

as their inability (from their late misfortunes) to continue the contest,

and the continual interruptions and depredations of the Yarmouth men, had

rendered a final decision of the affair absolutely necessary. In this

critical situation of their affairs, they thought it necessary, as

preparatory to the introduction of their cause before the House of Lords,

to present a petition to their lordships informing them, that whereas,

from time immemorial, they had enjoyed the free trade of buying herrings

of the western fishers in the roads of Lowestoft; but that the Yarmouth

men, taking advantage of their late misfortunes by fire and civil wars,

had greatly interrupted and annoyed them, and threatened them with the

total destruction of their fishery, and, consequently, with the utter

ruin of their town. That they had laid their case before his majesty and

the privy council; that it had been referred by them to the

attorney-general, that the opinion of the attorney-general had been laid

before his majesty and the privy council; who, after due examination of

the premises, were pleased to refer a further investigation thereof to

their lordships, recommending such redress of the grievances complained

of as they should think just and equitable. Therefore the said

petitioners humbly besought their lordships, that they would be pleased

to take the matter into consideration, and afford them such immediate

relief as would prevent the annihilation of the fishery, the ruin of the

town, and the great loss and inconvenience of the nation in general.

On reading of the above petition before the house of lords, their

lordships ordered, that the cause so long depending between the said

towns should be heard at the bar of that house by such counsel as should

be retained on each side, on the seventh of June, 1661; and that the said

petitioners should give timely notice thereof to the inhabitants of

Yarmouth, and that both parties do attend the same hearing.

DIE SABBATHI, 25º MAIJ, 1661.

On reading the petition of the inhabitants, of the town of Lowestoft,

in the county of Suffolk, this day in the house, concerning a free

trade of fishing, which the petitioners complain they are molested in

by the inhabitants of Great Yarmouth, it is ordered, by the lords in

parliament assembled, that the cause shall be heard at this bar, by

counsel on both sides, on the seventh day of June next. And that the

petitioners, or some of them, shall give the said inhabitants of the

town of Yarmouth, timely notice thereof, and that both the said

parties do attend the said hearing accordingly.

JOHN BROWNE, Cleric. Parliamenti.

The state of the town of Lowestoft, and the herring fishery, on which it

solely depended, were now become truly alarming; the towns of Ipswich,

Orford, Alborough, and Dunwich apprehended also their being involved in a

share of the calamity; and the company of fishmongers in London, as well

as the numerous body of fishermen on the coasts of Sussex and Kent,

evidently foresaw the distress and inconveniences which must inevitably

ensue should the town of Yarmouth be permitted to monopolise the whole

trade of the herring fishery to themselves. Alarmed with these

apprehensions, and stimulated with the desire of independence, they

united their utmost efforts in one common interest, in guarding

themselves against the oppressions of the Yarmouth men, which, it was too

evident, they were most industriously endeavouring to burden them withal.

The first who offered their assistance to the Lowestoft men in this

difficult but necessary undertaking, were the fishmongers of London.

They presented a certificate to the house of Lords; wherein after

premising that several petitions had been presented to his majesty and

the privy council, from the town of Lowestoft, representing the injurious

proceedings of the town of Yarmouth; and also his majesty’s reference of

the case to their lordships they further certified, to the house of

Lords; wherein, that Lowestoft was a very antient town; had always

subsisted chiefly by the herring fishery; that they had, from time

immemorial, enjoyed the privilege of having herrings delivered in the

roads off that town until the last year, when they where interrupted by

the Yarmouth men, under a pretence, that by virtue of a charter they had

granted to them, no fishers were authorised to deliver any herrings

during the continuance of their herring fair, or from Michaelmas to

Martinmas, within the distance of seven miles from the mouth of their

haven; that were the Yarmouth men permitted to persevere in these

injurious proceedings, it would be attended not only with great prejudice

to the town of Lowestoft, but the utter ruin of the western fishery, and

would also be extremely detrimental to the nation in general, exclusive

of many other inconveniences.—Seventy-eight of the London fishmongers

attested the truth of the premises under their own hands and prayed for

relief.

A petition was also presented at the same time from the towns of Ipswich,

Orford, Alborough, and Dunwich, similar in general to the above petition

from the fishmongers of London; entreating their lordships, that the town

of Lowestoft may not only enjoy their ancient freedom of buying and

selling herrings on every occasion, but also be protected for the future

against the interruptions of the town of Yarmouth; and that each town

might enjoy the common right of the nation without any restraint or

limitation from each other, as the most effectual means of preventing a

monopoly, and rendering the herring fishery of more general utility.

TO THE HONOURABLE THE PEERS OF ENGLAND ASSEMBLED IN PARLIAMENT.

THE HUMBLE PETITION OF THE BURGESSES ETC., FOR THE TOWNS OF IPSWICH,

AND DUNWICH IN THE COUNTY OF SUFFOLK,

Humbly shewing,

That your petitioners being informed, that his majesty, together with

his council have recommended the case between the towns of Lowestoft

and Yarmouth, concerning the free trade of herring fishing, to your

lordships’ care and determination; your petitioners do think fit to

recommend some particulars to your lordships’ consideration.

1st. That the town of Lowestoft is more antient than the town of

Yarmouth.

2nd. That Lowestoft is in the county of Suffolk, and Yarmouth in the

county of Norfolk.

3rd. So that it seems unreasonable to us, that the town of Yarmouth

should infringe upon the town of Lowestoft, which is a more antient

town than Yarmouth, and in a distinct county, and full nine miles

distant, and thereby not only bring a prejudice to Lowestoft, but to

the whole coast of Suffolk, and consequently to the whole trade of

herring-fishing, by their destroying the common right which the

western fishermen and the city of London have enjoyed by trading with

our coast rather than Yarmouth, to the great advantage of the whole

nation; whereas such a monopoly as the town of Yarmouth pretends to,

would be destructive both to us and the town of Lowestoft.

Your petitioners therefore humbly pray, That the town of Lowestoft

may not only enjoy their antient freedom of buying and selling

herrings at all times, but that there may not be any encroachments by

the town of Yarmouth upon the town of Lowestoft, but that each town

may enjoy the common right of this nation without circumscription to

each other; whereby monopolies will be prevented, and the trade of

herring fishing become more advantageous to the nation.

And your petitioners, as in duty bound, shall ever pray, etc.

JOHN ROUS, RICHARD COOKE, FOR DULWICH. JOHN HOLLAND, {97} ROBERT

BROOKS, FOR ALBOROUGH. WALTER DEVERRIX.

Another petition was also presented by Captain Tettersall, a commander in

the British navy, a person firmly attached to the interests of the

western fishermen. This petition was addressed to the Knights and

burgesses of the counties of Sussex and Kent: wherein, after

recapitulating the oppressions of the Yarmouth men, and that this

long-contested difference had been referred by his majesty to the

decision of the house of lords, he informed them that many hundreds of

his friends, neighbours, and acquaintance, western fishermen of the said

counties, and who were greatly interested in the prosperity of the

herring fishery, had concurred with the town of Lowestoft in presenting a

certificate and petition to the lords of the privy council, respecting

the illegal proceedings of the Yarmouth men, and had requested their said

petitioner to appear in behalf of the said towns before the council, and

deliver the same, which office he had undertaken and executed. And also

further informed them, that an order had been issued by the House of

Lords, summoning both parties, with their counsel, to appear at the bar

of that house on the seventh of June next ensuing, being the day

appointed for hearing and determining their cause; and that their

petitioner being unable to attend the said hearing (he being a commander

in the navy), the decision whereof being pregnant with the most important

consequents both to the town of Lowestoft and the whole western fishery:

therefore, he humbly petitioned the knights and burgesses of the counties

of Sussex and Kent to unite their interests with those of the county of

Suffolk, in procuring a redress of those grievances which the town of

Lowestoft, and the said western fishermen were then labouring under; such

as the exigency of their situation required, and the wisdom of their

lordships should think just and reasonable.

TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE THE KNIGHT AND BURGESSES OF THE COUNTIES OF

ESSEX AND KENT.

THE HUMBLE PETITION OF CAPTAIN NICHOLAS TETTERSALL,

Sheweth,

That the town of Lowestoft, in the county of Suffolk, having been

interrupted this last year in their free trade of herring fishing, by

the inhabitants of Great Yarmouth in the county of Norfolk, tending

not only to the ruin of the said town of Lowestoft, but of the whole

western fishery; and seeking for remedy by their humble petition to

the king’s most excellent majesty, who referring it to the right

honourable the lords and others of his privy council, for

satisfaction and relief, many hundreds of his neighbours, friends,

and acquaintance, the western fishermen of both your said counties,

whom it so highly concern, did join with the said town of Lowestoft,

by their humble certificate and petition subscribed by them, and

requested your petitioner to appear on their behalfs before the said

lords, to affirm the said petition, which accordingly he hath done;

and several hearings have been before his majesty in council, held on

the third of this instant May, it was ordered, in regard that the

determination of the difference depended upon the validity of several

charters, acts of parliament, and orders of council, that the

complainants should apply themselves to the right honourable the

house of lords, speedily to be assembled in parliament, to consider

their complaint, and afford them such relief as their lordships

shall, on examination and consideration of the whole matter, find to

be just and fit. Whereupon, on the twenty-fifth of this instant May,

1661, the said complainants, on their humble petition to the right

honourable the lords assembled in parliament, obtained an order,

summoning both parties to appear at the bar of that house on the

seventh day of June next ensuing, together with their learned

counsel, in order for the hearing of their cause. And your

petitioner being in no capacity of serving his countrymen any longer

therein, by reason of his command in his majesty’s service at sea;

and because that apparent ruin must necessarily attend the said

fishermen, which of his own knowledge he doth affirm; and as by the

copy of their remonstrance and petition, hereunto annexed, and read

twice before his majesty and the privy council, doth plainly appear.

Your petitioner doth therefore, in their behalf, most humbly pray

your honours to join with the knights and burgesses for the county of

Suffolk, and as true patrons for your country’s good, be instrumental

that the poor complainants be no longer interrupted and distressed by

the rich inhabitants of Great Yarmouth; but that they may be heard at

the time appointed, in order to the adjusting of their differences,

and settling them by an act of Parliament, as the right honourable

the lords and commons in their grave wisdoms shall think to be just

and right.

And your petitioner, as in duty bound, shall ever pray, etc.

N. TETTERSALL.

In pursuance of the appointment of the House of Lords, for the hearing of

the cause depending between the towns of Lowestoft and Yarmouth, at the

bar of that house, on the seventh of June next following, notice thereof

was delivered to the bailiffs of Yarmouth, on the 30th May preceding,

requiring their attendance; but the inhabitants of Yarmouth pleading the

want of sufficient time to collect the necessary evidence upon such short

notice, petitioned the house, that the hearing of the case might be

deferred a short time longer; and accordingly their lordships gave

orders, that the said hearing should be postponed to the 20th of June

next ensuing; at which time all the parties concerned were to attend with

their counsel and witnesses, and to be otherwise duly prepared.

Die Mercurii, 5th Junij, 1661.

Upon the petition of the bailiffs of the town of Great Yarmouth, read

this day in the House, shewing that they were served with an order of

this Court, on the 30th of May last, for a hearing at this Bar on the

7th of this instant June, concerning a free trade of fishing between

the inhabitants of the town of Lowestoft, in Suffolk, and the town of

Yarmouth; it is ordered by the Lords in Parliament assembled, That

the said cause is hereby put off unto the 20th of this instant June,

peremptorily. And that then all parties concerned are to attend,

with their counsel and witnesses, and come fully prepared for a

hearing at this bar accordingly.

JNO. BROWNE, Cleric Parliamenti.

Accordingly, on the 20th June, the House of Lords being assembled, the

council for the respective towns was heard at the bar of that house; and

all the claims and privileges of the contending parties were carefully

scrutinised and debated, in order to terminate the dispute, and to

establish harmony and friendship between the said towns on a permanent

and lasting foundation; but at the conclusion of the hearing it appeared,

that as the principal point on which the whole controversy seemed to

turn, was whether the statute 31 Edward III, upon which the Yarmouth men

grounded their claim, was repealed by the statute 2 Richard II, as the

Lowestoft men affirmed, and being a point of law, their lordships were

unable to decide upon, therefore they referred it to the judges; and

ordered that the counsel belonging to both parties should attend the

judges at such time as they should appoint, who were to deliver their

opinion concerning this point as soon as conveniently they could; and

also ordered that the witnesses should be sworn and examined at the bar

of the house, on Thursday next, the 27th. of this instant June, 1661,

respecting such matters of fact as related to the present dispute; and

also it was further ordered on the 22nd instant, that John Humphrey,

Richard Gillam, Sidrich Seager, William Fox, and such other necessary

witnesses as the inhabitants of Lowestoft should have occasion to produce

in the cause now depending between them and the bailiffs of Yarmouth, and

to be heard in that house on Thursday the 26th June, 1661, do appear at

the bar of that house; and that the witnesses not therein named, have

their names delivered in writing to the clerk of the parliament before

the commencement of the said hearing.