230 Mineral Trades 



but the distribution was well proportioned among the ports. New- 

 castle owned fewer than one would expect. The ships of the various 

 ports differed much in their respective tonnage: those of London, 

 Yarmouth, Whitby and Newcastle being about one size but less than 

 half the size of those of Ipswich. The ships of Sunderland were used 

 in the Newcastle trade in winter when the weather was bad. It is 

 noticeable that ships of the south and west coasts were employed in 

 this coal trade. ^ 



While the Hostmen, as merchants, controlled the trade and held 

 the magistracy of the town Newcastle, the owners of the coUieries 

 had to sell to the magistrates of the town, and the magistrates sold 

 to the masters of the ships.^ When the Hostmen, as fitters, controlled 

 the trade, they were the privileged agents who effected sales between 

 the coal-owners and ship-masters. The Hostmen and coal-owners 

 do not appear at any time to have striven for ownership of the ships, 

 except occasionally to own a fractional share of a ship with the pur- 

 pose, not of getting profits as ship-owners, but of encouraging that 

 ship to carry their coals in preference to others'.^ This want of inte- 

 gration in the trade is remarkable: the Newcastle dealers remained 

 comparatively passive so far as the real "adventures" of sea-traffic 

 were concerned and allowed the ship-owners and -masters of Ipswich 

 and Yarmouth to run the risks: the most Kkely explanation lies in 

 the small amount of capital the Hostmen controlled, not sufficient 

 to perform both the large mining operations and the shipping. 



The ship-master might or might not be the ship-owner in whole or 

 part. It was generally desirable that he own a small share at least 

 so as to fix a greater sense of responsibility, but too large a share might 

 shift the interests of the master against the owner. It was cus- 

 tomary for the ship-builder to make out the "grand bill of sale" to 

 the ship-master in his own name, for the whole ship, however small 

 the part the master owned; and this bill gave the master the sole 

 management of the vessel, to use it at his discretion. It was always 

 difficult for the ship-owner to control the master \vith the grand bill 

 of sale in the latter's hands.'* To correct abuses of this nature an 



1 In the firsl half of the seventeenth centur}-. at least, the ships of France and of 

 the North Sea countries were much engaged in carrying coal abroad from New- 

 castle. Galloway, vS4, quoting a writer of that period. 



- Anderson, Origin, II, 431. 



•■' See testimony in Rep. from Com. H. C, X, 551-2. 



"• These various relations of owner and master are presented in "A Letter on the 

 Coal Trade," 3.i-5. 



