INDUSTRIES 



whom the said William had 'overreached in a 

 contract for wool for 10 years, lest he should 

 become obnoxious to the penalty for usury or 

 other correction.' The abbot, it would appear, 

 could not supply wool, as agreed, ' on account of 

 a murrain amongst his sheep (occasione marine 

 ovium suarum).' About this date (1299) 60 

 acres at Wellodal in the field of Cuckney were 

 given by Thomas son of Richard de Cuckney 

 to make a sheep-walk and pasture for 700 

 sheep. 4 



The county of Nottingham played no incon- 

 siderable part in the furnishing of that wool 

 revenue which was the chief support of Edward's 

 armies in the field. 6 The price of Nottingham 

 wool as assessed in 1337, when a subsidy 

 of 2O*. on every sack of wool exported was 

 granted to the king for the defence of the 

 realm, was taken, says Professor Cunningham, as 

 the basis of the royal trading transactions at that 

 date. 6 In 1 340 the price of Nottinghamshire wool 

 was i\ marks per sack. 7 In 1341 the price was 

 again ordained at Nottingham, 8 but two years 

 later, the price having advanced to io marks, 

 the merchants declared that it was impossible to 

 keep to the same. 9 



Judging from the records of the time, the 

 1 4th century was the golden age of the wool 

 trade of Nottinghamshire. Not only did the 

 wool of the county command the favourable 

 attention of Parliament, as before-mentioned, 

 whilst great families of local merchants, such as 

 the Stuffyns, Keysers, Revilles, and Durants of 

 Newark, were building up their fortunes on the 

 sales of this precious commodity ; but we hear 

 at the same time of merchants of Brabant, of 

 ' Almain,' and of Revel actively engaging in the 

 traffic. Beyond the confines of the county we 

 find Hardolf de Barton of Kingston on Hull, 

 and Thomas Tyrwhitt of Beverley, proving 

 themselves, on more than one occasion, good 

 customers of the king, as purveyors of the wool 

 of Nottinghamshire. 10 Thus, in 1340, they 

 were purchasers of 1,000 sacks at ^4 135. $d. 

 per sack, 11 whilst in the following year orders 

 were issued to the receivers of wool in the 

 county to deliver 326 sacks, I quarter, 12 stones, 



4 Harl. MS. 3640, fol. 68, 74. 



5 Cunningham, Engl. Industry and Commerce (ed. 

 iv), 299. 



6 Cal. Close, 1337-9, P- '95 5 &<" P" 1 "/- '' ' ' 



7 Rot. Parl. ii, 1206. 



8 Cal. Close, 1341-3, p. 230. 



9 Rot. Parl. ii, 13 83. It was John Bowes, mem- 

 ber for Nottinghamshire, and Speaker of the Parlia- 

 ment of 1345, who was largely responsible, says 

 Professor Rogers, for the several financial operations 

 whereby the wool trade of the country was turned to 

 account for the augmentation of the royal revenue ; 

 Rogers, dgric. and Prices, iv, 1 64. 



10 Cal. Close, 1339-41, p. 615; Rot. Parl. ii, 

 nob. 



" Rot. Parl. ii, 120,*. 



3^ Ib. of wool to Barton, the same having been 

 sold to him for 17 marks per sack. 12 



The importance of this commodity accounts 

 for the frequent records of thefts of wool in early 

 times. Thus, in 1325, Richard Poye of Land- 

 ford stole twenty-seven fleeces from a cart belong- 

 ing to Henry Warde at Newark, 13 whilst in 1361 

 Thomas Pakker and Beatrice, formerly the wife of 

 Thomas de Leppyngton, broke into the house of 

 Richard Prentiz, in Newark, and secretly seized 

 and carried away 20 stones of wool worth iooj. 14 



It will be of interest to pass briefly in review 

 the fragmentary histories of these merchant- 

 princes of Nottinghamshire which have come 

 down to us. We first hear of Robert Stuffyn in 

 1305 as a brother of ' the Fraternity of the Holy 

 Trinity and St. Peter the Apostle ' of Newark. 

 In 1328 his goods were valued at 12*. 9^., and 

 himself described as a ' marchaund.' Ten years 

 later we find him exporting wool in considerable 

 quantities from the port of Boston to Dordrecht, 

 and in the same year from Hull. 15 In 1337 he 

 was appointed taker and buyer of wool in Not- 

 tinghamshire for 1,200 sacks, William de 

 Amyas, Roger de Bothale, and Robert de Beghton 

 being associated with him in that office. 16 Stuffyn, 

 it would appear, owed his appointment to the 

 misconduct of his predecessor in office, Henry de 

 Chestrefield, who had 'conducted himself badly ' 

 in its execution. 17 Stuffyn and Roger de Bothale 

 were appointed ' to take wool according to the 

 fifteenth in the county of Nottingham ' in 

 I338. 18 The names of numerous Nottingham- 

 shire merchants appear among those who lent 

 ' divers sums of money to the king for his affairs' 

 in 1338, and to whom 'allowance' was ordered 

 to be made in that year 19 : John le Colier for 

 82 I2s. lid. in the port of Kingston on Hull, 

 also for a further sum of ^69 6s. 2d. ; Matilda 

 Sausmer of Newark for 120 in the port of 

 Boston ; William de Amyas of Nottingham for 

 ,1,075 8*. id. in the same port ; Robert de 

 Stuffyn for 200 in the two ports of Boston and 

 Kingston on Hull ; William Durant for ^60 in 

 the latter port ; Robert de Beghton of Notting- 

 ham for 195 12s. 2d. in the same ; Roger de 

 Bothale of Nottingham for ^385 os. \d. in the 

 same. 20 We read of John de Ferriby, the king's 

 clerk, being paid 2s. a day in 1339 for wages 

 when sent to Nottingham to control the sum of 



" Cal. Close, 1341-3, p. 184. 



" Brown, Hist. Newark, 184. " Ibid. 



" Brown, Hist. Newark, i, 184. The amount sent 

 from Boston was 23,268 Ib., and from Hull, 

 20,888 Ib. 



16 Cal. Close, 1337-9, p. 269 



17 Chan. Misc. R. bdle. 19, no. 20. 



18 Cal. Close, 1337-9, p. 602. 



19 These sums were advanced to the king on 

 condition that they should be deducted from the 

 customs dues. 



" Cal. Close, 1337-9. PP- 4*5-7, 43. 434. 435- 



341 



