The Welcome Kindness of Strangers

In this blog post we hear from Dr Jo Stanley, one of our lovely researchers, who has kindly agreed to tell us about her research and experience of using Hull History Centre. She's been working with our Mission to Seafarers collection and has made some fascinating discoveries...

Dr Jo Stanley

I’m used to using archives looking for the oddest things. And sometimes I find even odder surprises. They’re a joy. They put the colour and quirkiness into social history. Such successes make me wish every archive had a stash of champagne to help us researchers celebrate the weird needles in haystacks we find - thanks to archivists.

Interested in maritime mental wellbeing, in Spring 2024 I was questing for information relating to strangers’ kindness. Specifically I sought historic evidence about tender-heartedness in relation to an unusual gender situation. I was hoping that in the Missions to Seafarers’ records stored in the belly of Hull’s beautifully whale-like History Centre I’d find out about an un-named woman.

Who was she? A domestic, not spiritual, worker in London’s Queen Victoria Dock Road Mission in the 1950s. 

And why did she matter? Because her kindness in a supportive letter to a trans ex-customer had heartened him in the depths of his despair the other side of the world. This Buddhist ship’s surgeon, Dr Michael Dillon, is thought to have been the first UK person to transition to male, in the 1940s.

All I knew about her was a line in Michael’s memoir. I’d read it when looking for seafarers who’d been brave enough to seek surgical help in becoming what they truly felt themselves to be, long before the NHS made it possible. 

In Out of the Ordinary Dr Michael refers to the trauma of being outed by the Sunday Express, while he was working aboard Ellerman's City of Bath in Baltimore, May 1958. Then the relief: 

Letters started coming now from my oldest friends, offering their sympathy and saying what they thought of the press. Sir Harold Gillies [his pioneering surgeon] also wrote, and the Lady Warden from the Mission to Seamen, and of course [his guru] Lobzang Rampa … One and all they all wrote encouragement. (p.217)

Surely it was going to be impossible to find out, 66 years later, who this broad-minded loyal woman was. But I could try. How?

By fluke I happened to know that the mission had made its records publicly available. They were in Hull, a city I love to visit. I wrote to the Hull History Centre. The diligent archivist, who’d been sorting the Missions to Seafarers’ documents for four years and thereby become an expert, replied welcomingly. She told me where I might start looking: in the Queen Victoria Dock Road Mission folders.

I went. And it turned out that the archivist was right about the trove that would be most fruitful. I had flipped through only a hundred or so flimsy and yellowed sheets before I found the Lady Warden in spring 1958. She was Mrs CE Harvey. Elizabeth. Bingo.

An earlier document showing the Lady Warden to be Mrs Elizabeth Harvey, Dec 1956

And in the ensuing pages I found that Mrs Harvey was a force to be reckoned with: ultra confident, competent, and working in the mission between 1951 and 1960 at least. All for £350 pa.

A report submitted by Harvey to headquarters documenting activities at the institute under her wardenship, Jul-Aug 1960

There was no carbon of her letter to Michael, of course. She must have written hundreds to her ex-residents. And it wasn’t that she was some sort of early trans ally. But there she was, looking after all the seafarers and benefactors who came through the doors. I even found where she’d lived on the premises: flat F, phone extension 99. Unfortunately there was no photo. (Nor could I later track her down using family history websites).

Extract from a fire regulations showing Mrs Harvey's address at the institute, 1960

What has this find given me? Fascinating gender-aware cultural knowledge about context. A mission could be so much more than beds and bibles. And I really see that a hospitality worker could be more than a sort of house-mistress: a true companion in adversity whose kindness could help stop someone from suiciding. 

I’m going on to write articles and give conference papers, thanks to this important gift the archive has accidentally bestowed upon me.

If you are a newcomer who imagines archival exploring to be daunting, please rethink. You can ask your intended archivists for guidance. Their leads are always invaluable – and as kind to strangers as Elizabeth Harvey’s letter was to Michael.

Dr Jo Stanley

To read more about Michael Dillon's story see Jo's blogs:

• Transitioning, the sea and surgery: Dr Michael Dillon
• The first ship’s doctor to transition

Tolls, taxes and monopolies: how Hull’s authorities manipulated the market during early modern subsistence crises

 Hull evidently accepted its role in the national market network and with that came the obligation to monitor the legalities around illegal offences. Within the archival material presented we can perceive that the administration and surveillance of markets was occasionally a detrimental concern to the overall wellbeing of the town. However, there is also the indication that those who were placed in roles of power had the ability to manipulate the regulations of dearth for the benefit of the city throughout these 1580s and 1590s subsistence crises.  

Obviously, as a port town at the mouth of the Humber, the city gained a lot of wealth through taxing goods, victuals and shipments which passed through or anchored in the haven. Merchants from places such as York, Gainsborough or Beverley would have had to pay some kind of tariff to be able to use Hull’s port - for example, in 1533 we see an agreement between Hull and Beverley burgesses, which required the “inhabytantes of Beverley” to “pay ye burgesses of Hull ffor every quarter of wheate a penny & every quarter of other grayne a halfe penny.” (C BRG/2/180b). Hull would have seen a significant number of goods passing through and as the town, the town walls and port were in a state of decay and this second form of income through the grain market was much needed.  

The Borough of Kingston upon Hull had several methods of producing an income from the grain market, primarily through the shipping trade and then through the local licensed markets. The charters allowing Hull to hold markets and fairs were important grants. They allowed for trade and guaranteed that all known exchange within the borough of Hull was legal, above board and most importantly monitored and taxed. The upholding of market restraints, legislation and collection of tolls provided local authorities with the opportunity to visually assess the grain market, benefit from collecting tolls and instrumenting the transactions, whilst also monitoring who visited and what was brought to market. Any person presenting their wares to sell were to “willingly render and paie all such tolls, duties & dues as shall lawfully in that behalf to be demanded of them, concerning the same, without complication or constraint anie waies will be extended towared anie” and once again the audible sanction of the market bell is included as “no person doe hereafter make showe or sale of anie corne or other grain brought to this market before the market bell be ronge upon the forfaiture thereof.” (C BRG/2/316) 

Entry into Bench Book IV details of markets and Fairs, and where corn tolls, taxes and legal requirements are stated, Oct 1598 ]CBRG/2/215b &216]

The Bench Book’s entries on the fairs are biased towards the liberty of the market. They identify a market not only substantially stipulated but varied in its wealth of goods. On the 20th October 1598, the Bench Book details the amended practices of the town’s market and fairs. It repeats the legislative obligations set out by her majesty’s orders. It states that:  

These are therefore to give notice therof with all her majestie loving subjects that the said fair is here to be kept accordingly, and to begin the xjith day of September next, and to be continued for xv daies from thence next following. And so after that yearly during the daies aforesaid, if God permit to the intent that all manner of person that are disposed to buy or sell at the said fair anie wears, merchandises, horse, cattell, or other things may at that time repair and come hither at their pleasures without impeachment or hinderance of any in that respect. [C BRG/2/315b-316]

The entry presents a fair whose merchandise and sellers are all accounted for. The city has opened its gates for a market without prosecution with fair and open exchanges. It appears to be a diverse and also regionally significant marketplace, stretching across the boundary of Hull’s liberties. But with this event comes the opportunity for the city to make money or grow its grain stores and also allowed for the monetisation and monitorisation of grain goods. In Hull’s fair “all manner of toll, of all sort of victuals or other things belonging to anie such fair or market, shall from tyme to tyme be recyved with the use of this towne, by the officers for such purpose to be appointed”(C BRG/2/316b). These undertakings of tolls allowed country and state officials to identify how much grain was being moved within counties. This provided the authorities with the ability to see what was being brought into the town and who was selling what and at what prices.  

The jurisdiction of Hull’s market was overseen by the body of burgesses, aldermen and the mayor himself. This corporation was able to pass bylaws as they “shall and may have full power and authority to form, constitute and ordain, and make, from time to time, such reasonable laws, statutes and ordinances whatsoever, as, according to their wise discretions, shall be seen by them to be good, profitable, useful, honest and necessary” with the intent to “further the public utility and rule of that town or borough” (Boyle, 107). This was one of the first steps of Hull becoming a self-regulating market, being controlled by a small group of merchants which have been described as an oligarchy (Taylor, 2017). It was this body who was responsible for collecting charges for grain transport, exchange of goods and gathering provisions for the poorer sorts. It was a common practice for the town to hold a piepowder, which was a sort of tribunal in front of the Mayor and Sheriff, where: 

all manner of tolls and dues of all, and all manner of merchandise, victuals, and other things whatsoever, from time to time sold and brought within the aforesaid markets and fair, or either of them, with the customs, usages, profits, commodities and emoluments whatsoever, belonging, appertaining, occurring, happening, or arising at such markets, marts, fairs and courts of piepowder  (Boyle, 116) 

These occasions allowed for the collection of tolls, sometimes these were a portion of grain taken from the sellers total amount or sometimes it could be a monetary payment which was given to this governing body. Its uses depended on what the county thought was best, either a distribution of the collected grain amongst the poor or payment for the upkeeping of the county of Kingston-Upon-Hull. During times of scarcity this collection of taxes and tolls was heavily criticized as being unjust or coercive, especially when more people were becoming dependent on the market for their source of food (Taylor, 2023). As prices of corn nearly doubled between 1570s and 1630s and changes amongst labourers’ occupation leading them to depend more on the market than the field, these acts impacted on the socio-economic relations between residents and their aldermen who may manipulate the market and tolls for their own benefit. The movement of commodities through the town enabled the monopolizing of such a market and permitted the mercantile authorities of the town to precure a higher income. 

The money collected through taxes partly funded local infrastructure and charity. In October 1598, the aldermen of Hull ordered and agreed that a "toll of all manner of corne and graine brought to the markette here shall now be taken” meaning that a fraction of the goods were to be taken instead of money, and that it should be “given the same to the town, and by such measure by dishes for such purpse, as that been and now is hauled and taken by the citie of Yorke at & within the said cittie acccordinge with the azziase of which measure and dishes there accustomed to be used the said maior and aldermen have caused the like to be made, agreable in all respects in tynes and proporcion”(C BRG/2/ 316B). In Hull this toll could also be paid in money as it states that the mayor “shall have, like and receive the said toll of corne and grain so to be taken to his own [proper] use and [before] yielding and paying to the use of the townes chamber for the same, xx.s.” (C BRG/2/ 316B) Here we see the source of revenue becoming an important supplement to the town’s organising body - whether that caused any social disturbances due to the sensitivities around who collected, how much they collected or where this money did actually end up it is difficult to determine.  

Entry in Bench Book IV of an order detailing how the collected tolls and taxes were to be distributed amongst the inhabitants of the town [CBRG/2/216b]

The obligations of Hull’s local authorities were to interact at local levels with the everyday ongoings of the town. The duty to provide alms and dispense whatever manner of aid available could become tarnished by the aldermen acting in their own narrow interests; there were opportunities for personal gain in governing one of the most influential ports in England whilst regulating an international and internal market network.  

Episodes of dearth continued into James Ist reign, and we can see the aldermen once again circulate grain to those who need it most. In 1609, an agreement between William Gee - a previous mayor who later went on to be sectary of the Council of the North - and the Bench is recorded. Gee’s Father’s legacy gives,  

one hundred and threescore pounds in monie which he willed should by therein maior and his brethren their good advice or other honest psons be yerely at the beginning of the yere imployed to buy corne for the use of the poore of the saide towne that they might have the said corne for monie so that the saide towne loose not by it […] [C BRG/3/4] 

Here we witness a charitable act of an alderman giving alms to the poor of the city. The act of giving alms in the wills of wealthy members of society was not unusual, it was of course part of the Christian culture. Yet, here Gee is wanting this act of almsgiving to take place every year, indicating the problem of food supply was a consistent anxiety. Poverty and hunger are closely connected, and the need to distribute food goes beyond the means of avoiding hunger but preventing disorder and instability in the wellbeing of the town. Five years later we see this pocket of money being delved into, as “it is agreed and ordered by the Maior and his bretheren […]shall for a yere have the usage and ordering of the monie being Master Gees Legacie for the provecion of corne for the poore and for making upp the same corne to have also the collection” (C BRG/3/39). The supply of grain for the ‘poorer sort’ is funded by those who appropriated the resource and is given in order to maintain a legacy. It is a complicated socio-economic cycle, which manipulates a much-needed resource and has further consequences throughout society.  

Entry into Bench Book V, revealing how the Corporation spent Master Gee’s father’s legacy [CBRG/3/39]

Felicity Wood (University of Hull)

How Hull’s monitoring of the assize of bread and ale bear witness to social behaviour during the 1580s & 1590s subsistence crises

It is difficult to assess the extent to which dearth and famine truly affected the citizens of Hull during the 1580s and 1590s. Through the limited glimpses given to us through archival documents, the interaction between the mercantile occupation and the everyday consumption of grain victuals can be detected. The consumption of bread and ale, a considerable portion of the everyday diet, was regulated with the intent to moderate the consumption of grain goods. The assize of bread and ale is a legal custom which dates back to the thirteenth century. It ensured that all local manufacturers of bread and ale were producing and selling goods in line with government sanctions. The price of bread and ale depended on the economy of the grain market, if the price of grain goods rose, so did the price of processed goods. These moderations led to the banning of excessive consumption and the condemnation of drunkenness and the restraining of bakers profits. Reflections of market conditions and an idea of social wellbeing can be detected in Hull’s engagement in moderating market conditions and limiting the depletion of grain stores. 

Hull’s Assize of Bread 

The manipulation of weights, scales and pricing was a familiar problem during periods of dearth. It became a common criminal practice to sell an incomplete amount of wheat or a smaller size of bread or ale at a full or inflated price. There were regulations already in place; the assize of bread and ale were directed at brewers and bakers; these were locally regulatory systems which licensed certain businesses to produce and sell their goods within legal standards. The assizes of bread and ale regulated the price of the goods, matched the quality and quantity and if sellers were caught or rumoured to be deceiving their customers, they could be placed in front of a court, fined or punished by the aldermen of the said town.  

In 1589, the corporation repeat the assize measurements and prices set out by the government, stating that: “The size of bread, the wheate being xxxiis. the quarter” and subsequently that “wheat bread should weigh 13 ounces, Wheaten or Bowled bred should weigh 19 ounce, and Brown bread 25 ounce.” (C BRG/2/254). Bakers were to adhere to these regulations, and that no bakers “shall hereafter bake and sell any two pennye bread, but i.d. or loaves upon paine every such ii.d. lofes or greater then that quantity hereby lymmited” (C BRG/2/254). These restrictions altered according to the price of grain, as the order continues to state that, “That the said bakers shall once within one fornihht or as corn shall ryse and fall of pryce [meet with the mayor] for the tyme being. And of him to receive the weight that they shall observe in making of their bread accordygne [to] the pryce that the corne shall then be at.” (C BRG/2 /254). There was careful consideration within these restrictions, firstly for the bakers ensuring their product was sold within the legal parameters allowing for their business to be least affected and secondly, through maintaining that their customers received the correct weight for their money, it protected both citizens and the sellers. The lower quality bread  - usually the darker the colour the cheaper the bread – and the inexpensive loaves were to remain fairly accessible during times of inflation. During times of scarcity these assizes would change, whether through market manipulation or the general inflation of corn prices. It was down to local authorities to regulate and dispense principled restrictions amongst their markets. 

Entry in Bench Book IV detailing the city’s bread assizes and the legalities around the prescribed legislation, 1586  [C BRG/2/254]

This regulation of bread had direct effects on the local market and were guided by local grain prices and accessibility. The statutory limits were presented by the privy council but the daily supervision was overseen by local authorities. In these districts’ attempts at supervision of the market, the everyday appetite for grain goods and products can be witnessed. The customs of the grain trade can often be presented as being competitive and unfeeling, but sometimes the charitable concerns of the community override the political restraints. In 1595, a year of dearth, an entry into Bench Book IV shows how local needs are resolved at borough level, it states that: 

Whereas there is some present scarcitie of corne whereby the poore people of this towne are driven in some extremitie of neede, the market daily increasing in prices, whereby they are not able to provide themselves of bread and their necesarie susteynance, ffor some remedie and seccour the said maior alderman and divers of the burgesses […] thought good and agreed it a certaine some of monie should be levied & collected among the sayd maior aldermen & burgesses and buy some quantity of corne, and the poore of the towne will have it, by peck, at such price as the graine shall bought. [C BRG/2/296] 

Here we see the intervention of local burgesses providing the means for the poorer members of Hull’s society. The distresses of bread and grain prices required that the town authorities step in, finding the money to buy the goods and distribute an allotted amount of corn at a reasonable price. There is little mention of assizes again, but here we can see the mediation between sellers and customers with the attempt to maintain the flow of the market, aiding the community of Hull and alleviating the possible hunger present in the town. 

Entry into Bench Book IV revealing the scarcity of corn and the request of the Corporation to provide food for the poor, 1595 [C BRG/2/296]

Beer and Problem Drinkers 

Breweries were also affected by the shortages and inflation during times of dearth. As a port town, Hull certainly enjoyed its ale. Restrictions in times of scarcity can be traced and like corn sellers, alehouse owners and brewers had restricted market and selling times in periods of dearth. Ale housekeepers were to avoid selling drink during church services and that no “ale brewer within this towne bye any corne or graine in ye markitt [before one] of the clocke” (C BRG/2/68). The two markets are naturally connected, both require the need of grain goods. However, an investigation of the ale market reveals a real insight into Hull’s early drinking culture.  

In 1596, a year of dearth, it is mentioned that drink has caused “misrule by daie and night, carde, dice & other unlawfull games there practiced, drunkenness and often times worse [proved] unthriftie expences caused”(C BRG/2/304). The use of the adjective ‘unthriftie’ alters the tone of the statement which now goes beyond a sense of moral disapproval into the territory of money and greed. People were consuming scarce produce, when really they should be conserving such goods. The entry continues that “the witness of povertie within this towne, and ill spending of good time, the wastfull consuming of victuals and corne chiefly, by meanes whereof the same are in it growne & held up with excessive prices, with the great detriment of the corne wealth, private damage of manie and no small impediment to the performance of good lawes” (C BRG/2/304). Hull’s society was in a state of insufficiency and, the drink culture admonished here masks the deprivations and hunger of the citizens. The entry ends with the statement that “no pson or psons of what estate or condition should he or they being burgesses or  inhabitante within this towne, or the libertites thereof shall hereafter, during the time of darth at the least, go or resort into anie alehouse or other drinking house, and there to drinke either beere or ale” (C BRG/2/304). If you were caught doing so you were to be penalised and fined, and if you were caught again, you would be imprisoned. These orders may seem somewhat severe, but they cover two main problems: keeping civil equilibrium in a moment of crises which could be easily disrupted by the consumption of excessive ale, and also, they reiterate the need to retain some of the grain stores allowing for distribution at a later date. 

Entry into Bench Book IV regarding the drunkenness and unthrifty behaviour of the inhabitants of the town during times of scarcity [C BRG/2/304]

The condition of the town’s wellbeing can be seen in accounts of implementing grain and ale assizes, not just at a local level but also how national standards were imposed. Here in Hull, we see the inter-play between consumption, social civility and impartiality, and how the ancient customs are restructured to suit the economic and social climate.

Felicity Wood (University of Hull)

Market Integration and how dearth impacted Hull’s early modern grain Market

In the previous blog post Hull’s mercantile enterprises were shown as being instrumental to Hull’s ability to survive the subsistence crises of the 1580s and the 1590s. Hull’s authorities performed preventative measures, taking advantage of the port’s maritime trade which brought grain into the city itself. Therefore, it is a reasonable progression to investigate Hull’s own internal market; considering how the market was made accessible and fair to all buyers, whilst also questioning how the city’s authorities moderated, monetised and maintained the flow of grain goods within the market. 

During the subsistence crises of 1580s and 1590s Hull had the ability to provide grain for itself, whether through internal or external trade. The city was comfortably integrated within the larger national market network. As fluctuations in domestic food prices and availability became a nationwide concern, Elizabeth’s Privy Council ordered that “that no transportation of Corne or Victual be, but from porte to porte within this Realme, and that but in cases needfull, as for the prouisions of London, shipping, or such like” (A New Charge, 1595). There is an emphasis given to the internal circuit of grain movement – English grain is to remain limited to this country and no external trade should be conducted. Through the legalities and licensing around the transportation of grain the state retained authority over the grain market, ensuring ‘sufficient sureties’ of grain would flow throughout the country. 

In 1596/7 Hull’s city authorities were ordered to find 20,000 quarters of grain (barley, malt, wheat, peas/beans) from neighbouring counties, which was then to be distributed within the national market. Much of this grain was to be delivered to London. This rural to urban flow of goods is to be expected; larger towns and cities provided better market opportunities, as they allowed goods and grain to be bought and sold to a much larger clientele. Hull acted, like any urban centre, as a hub of interchange and communication, and outlying rural farmers, manufacturers and trades people would come into the city to trade their goods. A large proportion of Hull’s commercial operations was centred around the dock and although there was obviously a need for local businesses such as cloth workers, brewers and bakers, port-related commerce was dominant throughout the city.  

The movement of agricultural goods into Hull was not always an easy task. In 1577,  the Bench Book IV, describes how the market was suffering as the roads to the city were impassable:  

Fforasmuch as the highe waies to this towne are of laite greatly decased on every side the saime, and growen to be so fowel and especially on Holderness side that hardly any loden horses can gitt to this towne. By meanes whereof it is greatly to be doubted that corne will in this markitt growne is be very deare […] it is thought a good idea that some corne & especially wheate & rye be bought & provided to save ye markitt as nede shall require & thende darthe may be avoided & the scarcitie provided for as much as reasonably may be.” [C BRG/2/178]

Here we see that the maintenance of the road networks was essential to the existence of the city market. The entry reveals that as the goods could not get to the city and that corn prices had inflated, the stores were possibly running low and that there needed to be an intervention before dearth occurs. This entry reveals how fragile this market network is; if the town is not provisioned via local internal routes, then the townspeople would fear dearth and famine.

Entry into Bench Book IV detailing the deteriorating roads into hull, slowing or altogether stopping the wares of peripheral sellers entering the Town, 1577 [C BRG/2/178]

In Tudor England, the role of the market was central to the wellbeing of the town. It was the principal hub of exchange, communication and culture. It was the main source of revenue for both town and peripheral sellers, and as much of the commercial exchanges were based upon a currency of credit (whether that be to pay later, pay in instalments or in exchange for work), Tudor towns were arenas of bargaining and bartering. Hull’s core market was held on both sides of Marketgate, which later became known as Butchery, Market Place and Lowgate. By 1469, this was limited to the southern boundary of Whitefriargate (below Silver Street and Scale Lane). In the map below (1610) we can see the faint outline of the market cross behind Trinity Church and the breadth of the streets which would allow for expanse of the market. At this moment in Hull’s history, the market accommodated all kinds of produce from livestock, dairy, fish, grains, to textiles, and metal work.   

Speed’s plan of Hull 1610, available in the Searchroom at HHC

The market was a sensual overload: the smell of fish, animals, cheese, processed goods, the sounds of bartering, livestock, and the ongoings of city life. It was a perfect scene for both legal and illegal activities, the unremitting motions of market business provided hiding places to avoid the watchful eyes of burgesses, officers and the market clerk. The market required order, both from a monetary stance allowing for regular and accurate collection of tolls, but also to maintain a civilised and organised structure to the chaos that was the Elizabethan market. 

Organising the Market

Hull’s market was carefully organised, from which stalls sit next to which and from what time the market began and ended. These appear as simple arrangements, yet when reading the archival material, it is evident that there was a conscious desire to maintain order, allowing for a more accessible and fairer market experience. In 1608, the Bench Book details the market orders which outline the order of the stalls and the market’s opening hours. Basic instructions ordered that “all sellers of salt fishe by retaile and stande to the southward of the bull ring on the west syde” or that “over against towarde the Gate House to begyn to sett stall, or place people to stand, and so the northward: And first of that ranke townes people of Hull to be placed, and next theme pedlers & petie chapmen with small wares” (C BRG/2/376). The list of requirements goes on in a similar manner, detailing the manner of stalls from fruit, rope, nails, dishes, glass and woodware, and where these stalls should locate themselves. In these instructions we see the aldermen take a keen interest in the organisation of the marketplace, but underneath these designs there is a strong sense of control and regulation. 

Entry into Bench Book IV of Market orders, containing the organisation of market stalls and importance of the market bell [C BRG/2/376]

It was a varied market which needed discipline, among these regulations we see the audible boundaries set in place. The mechanisms of the marketplace were conducted by the toll of the market bell. Although, somewhat symbolic in nature the market bell played an important role as it signified the beginning of fair and open exchange – “The market bell is to have a tyme sett downe when to be ronge. And the Toll to be gathered before.” (C BRG/2/376). The perceptible command of the bell signalled that all wares should be in order, tolls collected and that the market is to commence. In 1566, the city’s ordinances make it clear that “no man [should] sell any corne in the markitt or open any seeke before tenne of the clocke, that ye markitt bell be ronge and yt be solde before two of the clocke at afternone, And yt none bye ay corne before teime of the clocke upon peine is forfete of the same corne”(C BRG/2/68). To sell corn before 10 am or after 2pm becomes a punishable act, and those penalties were set down by the mayor and his associates. The upholding of this order maintained a free market, ensuring that the distribution and accessibility of grain goods was equal and fair.   

Manipulation of the Market 

There was opportunity for those with access, owning and trading in grain to manipulate and control the grain market. Money could be made in these periods of subsistence crises, the more the grain was needed the higher the sellers could inflate their prices, manipulate the weights of bushels and conceal their stores. Grain resources were serially monopolised throughout early modern England and concerns of the criminality within England’s food supply endures throughout this period of history. The criminal offences of Forestalling (buying victuals before they make their way to market, therefore adverting the flow of supply chain), Engrossing (the act of buying up all or large quantities of corn to sell later) and Regrating (buying grain to sell again later either in the same market or local area) are present concerns in dearth legislation. The 1595 reissuing of dearth orders, as “stay of dearth” continues throughout England, were directed towards county officials. It required that there should be a smaller company of men to monitor, observe and maintain the trade of goods. It covers hoarding, pre-arranged bargains, household stores and the distribution of stores among the community, it allows for these officers to search and obtain excessive quantities of grain. It attempts to keep a fair flow of grain towards the market:  

Neither shall you from the beginning of the Market, to the full ende thereof, keepe or cause to be kept any of your said Corne out of the open sight of the Market: neither shall you carry away from the Market Towne any kind of Graine that was brought thither which you haue not there sold, but shall leaue the same there in the Market Towne in some place knowen, so as it may be brought into the open Market the next Market day at the first opening of the Market, there to be sold as afore was limitted. And yet neuerthelesse, you shall bring to the Market such other quantitie of Graine as shall bee limitted, and so continue at euery Market day the bringing into the open Market, the quantitie of Corne that shall be limitted. (A New Charge Given, 1595)  

Official grain trade was limited to take place in the market where it could be watched. In an  attempt to keep engrossing to a minimum, grain was to be sold once and in one place so equilibrium and equality was maintained.

The prices and origins of goods became constant concerns in the early modern market. The manipulation of the market saw the poor unfairly treated in times of need, at the same time those with access gained greater control of the market. In 1569, a letter from Lord Huntingdon, with the instructions prohibiting Hull to export grain without the Council of the North’s knowledge, sets the atmosphere for how grain exchange is acknowledged within the written accounts. It has accusatory tone throughout and identifies an episode of engrossing stating that “the said maior and aldermen being informed that [several] psons did engrose and gitt into their custody great quantitie of corne and butter where for the worth [that] they bought in ye markkit by means wherof bothe corne and butter dothe growe […] very deare”, “have appointed Antony Bownsall and John Bell to see yt no man upon one markitt  day doe buy above two mettes of corne in the markitt and they present all such as by any great quantitie of butter in the markitt” and that any pruchases within the market by a sole individual should only be  “sufficient for their own provision is be spent in their howses” (C BRG/2 /111b). The authorities are therefore required to monitor the market, making sure no one buys beyond their means. Here we see how the reality of buying up of victuals, which adverts the flow of supply to the market with the means to sell on at an inflated price, had direct consequences within Hull’s market. This early accusation was most likely accurate, as later accounts of the Mayor’s household grain stores come into question. It shows there was an operation which saw prices of grain goods inflate, subjecting the townspeople to an inaccessible market and provoking this reprimanding response demanding Hull authorities enforce market laws.  

Entry into Bench Book IV of a copy of a letter revived from Lord Huntingdon prohibiting Hull’s export of grain without the Council of the North’s knowledge [C BRG/2/111B]

Felicity Wood (University of Hull)