A HISTORY OF DURHAM 



William Walton, the borough of Durham and 

 Framwellgate, including the tolbooth and its 

 appendages, with fees, courts, markets, fairs, 

 etc. The grant was for twenty-one years and 

 the yearly payment ;^20. Accordingly these 

 three citizens, of whom Mann became mayor 

 in 1630, farmed the city until the grip of the 

 Scots was laid upon Durham in the troublous 

 days that followed. ** 



In the recent dispute a variety of small 

 rights and dues connected with the fairs and 

 markets had come into question. The new 

 farmers of the city had considerable difficulty 

 with one of these which figures largely in the 

 controversy. Scavage, otherwise Schevage, 

 Schewage, or Skewage, but often locally spoken 

 of as Scavell, was a very ancient toU taken 

 from merchants and others for wares exposed 

 for sale within the liberty. In Durham the 

 toU was of ancient right and had been exer- 

 cised, it is probable, for hundreds of years.*' 

 The local custom was to exact it in the name of 

 the bailiff or other officer at the ringing of what 

 was called the corn bell. The seller of corn, 

 or other grain, of oatmeal, and of salt, had to 

 pay a measure from every bushel of twelve 

 gallons. The measure was a reputed pint. 

 In point of fact, however, the pint had come to 

 be rather more, and was frequently heaped up 

 by the officer. It was said that at Darlington 

 and Auckland the measure was smaller, and 

 this was urged as a grievance. Sometimes the 

 due was farmed out for a fee paid. The farmers 

 under the lease of 1627 worked the due them- 

 selves at a considerable profit, using the larger 

 measure and heaping up the grain. Persons 

 who lived at a distance had been put to con- 

 siderable inconvenience by the delay occasioned 

 in taking the tax, so that the afternoon of fair 

 or market day was often reached before they 

 were able to open sale, and sometimes they 

 were constrained to pass the night in Durham, 

 riding home on Sunday. Against these griev- 

 ances one Margaret Forster made petition to 

 the bishop, and a Durham chancery suit was 

 the result. It was ordered that the old arrange- 

 ment be continued, but with certain modifica- 

 tions. Henceforth the scavage measure was to 

 be a uniform pint, and ' shall not be upheaped 

 but by hand-stroke, and even stricken by the 

 taker.' The corn-bell was henceforth to be 

 rung at noon, and, if it was not rung, the sellers 

 should be at liberty to begin the sale. The whole 

 question had been further complicated by the 

 claim of certain people, e.g., the tenants of 

 Newton Hall, to be quit of the due, and also by 



** Given in Mickleton MS. i, fol. 410J. 



*' A statute of Parliament under Henry VII had 

 forbidden scavage, but the Act did not, apparently, 

 affect Durham. 



the uncertainty as to whether corn sold privately 

 on other than fair and market days should be 

 liable to toll. Freemen of the city naturally 

 claimed to be toll free, but the farmers had 

 been exacting the due even from them, though 

 of ancient right, goods and cattle belonging to 

 freemen had paid no due.*'' 



Some evidence of the interest taken by the 

 Corporation in their position and prestige is to 

 be seen in a compilation of 1626 in which George 

 Walton, mayor for that year, drew up an inven- 

 tory ' of such things as doth belong to the said 

 city,' for which the mayor was answerable. 

 Several of the items had been dispersed, but 

 were collected by Walton and handed over to 

 his successor. These possessions consisted 

 partly of old grants, including the charter of 

 Pudsey, partly of newer grants like Matthew's 

 charter, and partly of recent rentals, decrees, 

 and commissions. More interesting than these 

 were the Corporation plate, consisting of a 

 silver-gilt bowl, a drinking cup, the seal referred 

 to above,*"' a mace. All these articles have been 

 lost, and the book,*'" later known as the Cor- 

 poration book, disappeared within living memory. 

 The existing Corporation plate, other than the 

 seal, is of later date.*''' The evidence also refers 

 to one or two benefactions of then recent date. 



The Arminian movement was now beginning 

 to attract attention, and for some years to come 

 the ' innovations ' in progress drew on Durham 

 the eyes of England. All this has been recorded 

 in a previous volume.** The dispute figures 

 largely in State documents of the time.** The 

 outstanding event of the story from the point 

 of view of the city was the visit of the King 

 in 1633. Again great preparations were made, 

 and the roads were repaired for the regal pro- 

 gress. Another visit was made in 1639*" in 

 which the city took special interest, holding a 

 meeting ' to set down a convenient and fit 

 taxation and sessment to be raised and levied 

 out of the several trades and occupations within 



*'* The account given above is made up from the 

 various depositions and orders. See for the final 

 order Hutchinson, op. cit. ii, 40-2 or 31 ; and for the 

 depositions Dur. Rec. cl. 7, no. 35, 43. 



*"• See above, p. 34. 



*'° A summary is given in Surtees, op. cit. iv, 159. 

 A copy of the lost book exists in the Rawlinson MSS. 

 at the Bodleian Library. *'" See below, p. 4I. 



«* V.C.H. Dur. ii, 43. 



** For a general account see S. P. Dom. Chas. I, 

 clirrii, no. 61, and for the bishop's defence ibid, 

 clxxivi, no. 107-8. 



^ An interesting diary survives with some account 

 of Durham in the turmoil of the King's stay, B.M. 

 Add. MS. 28566. Edited by Mr. J. C. Hodgson in 

 North Country Diaries: Surtees Society, no. 118. A 

 description of the city in 1617 has already been 

 mentioned (above, p. 36). 



38 



