A HISTORY OF SURREY 



Robert Cordwcll ordered to receive one-third 

 of all the saltpetre bought of the East India 

 Company by another powder maker, William 

 Pannoyer, who was to keep the other two- 

 thirds, the whole quantity to be converted 

 into gunpowder for the service of the State. 

 Henceforward there are frequent warrants for 

 payments to be made to Cordwell and other 

 makers for gunpowder supplied by them until 

 the year 1651, when Cordwell's name ceases 

 to appear amongst those of the powder makers. 

 He probably died in that year, for on 10 

 November 1652 there is a petition of Hester 

 Cordwell, widow, for relief, which was referred 

 by the Council of State to the Admiralty 

 Committee.' The Chilworth mills con- 

 tinued to be worked, for we hear on 25 

 March 1653 that four wagons had been 

 sent there to fetch what powder was ready .^ 

 Cordwell's widow seems to have attempted 

 to carry on the business herself, but finding 

 the work beyond her powers, to have sold 

 her stock to some merchants who for a year 

 became the tenants of Vincent Randyll the 

 owner. On the expiry of their lease Randyll 

 on 2 March 1653-4 petitioned the Admiralty 

 Committee to be allowed to serve the State 

 himself with the same quantity of powder 

 which the mills had before served, on his 

 giving security to make it as good and cheap.* 

 In January of the following year we find him 

 mentioned in conjunction with George Dun- 

 combe and John Woodroff as one of the 

 masters of the Chilworth powder works." 



In April 1656 however we find that these 

 works were held by Josias Dewy, who claimed 

 for them that having a certainty of water they 

 could work in a drought when other mills 

 were stopped." Dewy may have been pre- 

 viously employed at these mills, for he states 

 that he had supplied 150 barrels weekly during 

 the Dutch War (1652-4) and had sent 1,800 

 barrels to Portsmouth. All that he had made 

 had been Tower proof, and some of it had 

 gone to sea three times and still proved good. 

 At this date he had not sent any to the Tower 

 for two years, and unless employment were 

 given him he feared that the mills must be 

 demolished to the great loss of the State. 



It was at this time that some scandals which 

 had come to light in the performance of the 

 various contracts for powder, entered into by 

 them, seem to have been exercising the minds 



' S. P. Dom. Interr. I. 63, pp. 98-100. 



- Ibid. I. 35, pp. 54-9. 



3 Ibid. xlix. 83. 



• Ibid. Ixvii. 7. 



s Ibid. xciv. 50. 



• Ibid, cxxvi. 58. 



322 



of the Admiralty Commissioners. The nu- 

 merous makers employed by them on being 

 approached in regard to these scandals joined 

 one and all in pointing to some Hamburg 

 powder, which had been sent to them for re- 

 pair, as the cause of all the trouble. Some of 

 them asserted that they had all along protested 

 against this powder, knowing that it was made 

 of bad materials and could not be made good.^ 

 Certainly more than a year before the agent 

 of Randyll and his partners at Chilworth 

 seems to refer to some Hamburg powder 

 which had been delivered and repaired at the 

 mills and yet proved defective, when he ex- 

 cused himself on the ground that if there were 

 any defect, it was his employers' concern and 

 none of his.® Dewy in his petition, already 

 mentioned, of April 1656 had doubtless this 

 powder in view when he said that if the old 

 powder repaired by him did not hold good, he 

 could not keep it. The Admiralty authorities 

 were prepared to consider the suggestion that 

 the faults in the gunpowder were to be traced 

 to the foreign powder they had imported, and 

 wrote to Richard Bradshaw their agent in 

 Hamburg evidently desiring him to inquire 

 into the frauds. For on 21 October 1656 he 

 wrote back to express his wonder at the bad- 

 ness of the powder, and to exonerate the mer- 

 chant who had supplied him from any ill 

 intentions or wilful deceit.* In turn he sug- 

 gested that the fault might be in the powder 

 already in store at home, as he had heard that 

 the Hamburg powder was mixed with this. 

 At any rate one-fourth of what he had bought 

 had been sold at current price three years later 

 and no fault found with it. 



Whether or not the complaints against the 

 gunpowder contractors arose chiefly from their 

 inability to make anything out of the foreign 

 powder supplied to them for repair, it is cer- 

 tain that amongst them were some to whom 

 just exception on other grounds might be 

 taken. The inquiries of the Admiralty re- 

 sulted in the drawing up of a report upon the 

 doings of six of the different makers or firms 

 of makers. As out of these six three at least 

 can be connected with the industry in Surrey, 

 the following tabular analysis of the report to 

 be found amongst the State Papers may here 

 be given.'" If on the one hand the very worst 

 of the makers was a Surrey man, on the other 

 hand the two who were most favourably re- 

 ported can also be associated with the history 

 of the industry in that county : — 



' Ibid. 60. 



' Ibid. xciv. 50. 



» Ibid. cxn. 66. 



'» Ibid, cxxvi. 64. i. 



