Sir Clement Clerke and the Adoption of Coal in Metallurgy

Notes And References

• This point was originally made by J.R. Harris, but (in a short article) he was only able to identify the people and not precisely how they were linked: 'The introduction of coal into iron smelting', Edgar Allen News, vol. 37 (1958), pp. 204–05.
   Google Scholar
• J. Woodward, 'Observations relating to the natural history of minerals', British Library, Add. MS. 25095, ff. 98–100. I have spelt the name 'Clerke' because that is what I have found in deeds and other documents (cited below) emanating from sources close to him, including some signed by Sir Clement. Despite Woodward's spelling of 'Clark', there can be no doubt that the same person is meant. It is not unlikely that Woodward had only heard the name not seen it written.
   Google Scholar
• Ibid., f.98. Except in quotations, I have preferred the modern spelling cupola to cupoloe and cupilo, which I have found in contemporary documents.
   Google Scholar
• As to metallurgical processes generally see R.F. Tylecote, A History of Metallurgy, 2nd edn (Institute of Materials, London, 1992); J. Day & R.F. Tylecote (eds), The Industrial Revolution in Metals (The Institute of Metals, London, 1991).
   Google Scholar
• R.F. Tylecote, History, pp. 83-84; J. Day, 'Introduction', in J. Day & R.F. Tylecote (eds), Industrial Revolution, pp. 13–16.
   Google Scholar
• P.W. King, 'The cupola at Bristol', Somerset Archaeology and Natural History, vol. 140 (1999 for 1997), pp. 37–38; from Skippe's diary, 6 May, 21 Jun., 30 Jun., and 5 Sept. 1676.
   Google Scholar
• P.W. King, 'Cupola', pp. 38–9 from inter alia P.R.O., Chancery proceedings, C 5/85/26.
   Google Scholar
• Leics. R.O., Launde Abbey deeds, 6D52/4-5; P.R.O., C 5/461/21.
   Google Scholar
• Rudge was mortgaged for £1000 in 1666 and another £1000 in 1671; Whistons Farm in Boningale (nearby) was mortgaged for £650 in 1668. Clerke sold a half share in Notgrove to George Skippe in 1668 for £3000. They mortgaged it together in 1670 for £3000 of which Clerke initially had £2000 and the rest in 1671. Launde Abbey was mortgaged for £2000 in 1673. £1500 more was obtained from Notgrove in 1675 and £3000 more from Rudge in 1677, so that the latter was charged for more than its full value: Shrops. R.O., 6000/14265-82; 6000/14799; Skippe's diary, 16 Dec. 1668 to 27 Apr. 1675, passim; Leics. R.O., 6D52/6.
   Google Scholar
• Skippe's diary, 12 Jan. 1671; 19 Jul. 1671; 1 Sep. 1675; 1 Dec. 1675; Herefs. R.O., B38/131. It is conceivable that some of the money was required in connection with the purchase of Launde Abbey, as there was litigation as to whether this had been fully paid for in 1668: P.R.O., C 5/461/ 21.
   Google Scholar
• P.R.O., Exchequer bills, E 112/538/94. Dudley Furnace and the other matters dealt with in this section are described in more detail in P.W. King, 'Dud Dudley's contribution to metallurgy', Historical Metallurgy, vol. 36, no. 1 (2002), pp. 43–53.
   Google Scholar
• Herefs. R.O., Foley collection, E12/VI/NC/passim; Victoria County History, Worcs. iii, (1913), p. 104 The name is preserved in Furnace Place.
   Google Scholar
• P.R.O., Exchequer bills, E 112/ 538/94.
   Google Scholar
• P.R.O., E 112/502/70; Stourton: Herefs. R.O., E12NI/KE/28; cf. Staffs. R.O., Aqualate Collec-tion, Stour Navigation documents, D(VV) 1788/P61/B7(b), 17 Apr. 1670; an agreement with Finch for making a lock adjoining Cookley Forge is mentioned in a letter in 1678: Staffs. R.O., D(VV) 1788/P61/B7(b), 26 Apr. 1678.
   Google Scholar
• P.R.O., E 112/502/70; `Sudley' or `Shudley' Furnace is mentioned in letters of Andrew Yarranton: Staffs. R.O., D(W) 1788/P61/B5, 21 Oct. 1673, 12 Nov. 1673; Herefs. R.O., E12/IV/ 31, undated letter endorsed 'Capt. Yarranton about John Finch' [Oct. 1673(?)]. A furnace at Winchcombe is referred to in Skippe's diary, 6 Sept. 1674.
   Google Scholar
• Herefs. R.O., E12NI/KE/31-33 50; E12/IV/31, undated letter endorsed 'Capt. Yarranton about John Finch' [Oct. 1673(?)]; Staffs. R.O., D(W) 1788/P61/B5, 21 Oct. 1673. At the same time Wolverley and Stourton Forges were exchanged. R.G. Schafer (Genesis and structure of the Foley "Ironworks In Partnership" of 1692', Business History, vol. 13, no. 1(1971), p. 30) inter-preted the agreements with Finch as concerned with genuine sales. In view of the low prices, such as £12 per ton for bar iron then worth about £15 or £16, I am convinced it was intended that neither party should act so as to be obliged to sell anything under the agreement. For the price of bar iron see R.G. Schafer (ed.), A selection from the records of Philip Foley's Stour valley iron works 1668–74, part i (Worcestershire Historical Society, n.s., vol. 9, 1978), passim, e.g., pp. 8–9.
   Google Scholar
• Calendar of Treasury Books iv 1672–75, pp. 228–31, 489 496–7; P.R.O., E 112/502/70; Herefs. R.O., E12/11/83 (Herefs. misc.), Linton; R.G. Schafer, 'Genesis and structure', pp. 19–38; Herefs. R.O., E12NI/KD/2-21. Payment of such a premium for goodwill is another unusual feature of this transaction.
   Google Scholar
• P.R.O., E 112/502/70; George Skippe was probably the link between the various parties: he and Robert Foorth were partners in the Somerset excise (Skippe's diary, 22 Apr. 14 Jul. and 27 Nov. 1671), while he and Clerke owned Notgrove in Gloucestershire together (Herefs. R.O., B38/ 130–33. Skippe's diary 16 Dec. 1668, 16 Feb. 1669–70, 19 Jul. 1671 etc.)
   Google Scholar
• P.R.O., E 112/502/70; Skippe's diary, 29 Aug. 1675; 10& 11 Jul. 1676; Herefs. R.O., B38/130-31; Staffs. R.O., D(W) 1788/P61/B3, 10 Sep. 1675; D(W) 1788/P59/B3, 3 Apr. 1676; D(VV) 1788/P61/ B7, 26 Aug. 1676, 10 Sep. 1676; D(VV) 1788/P37/B8, 20 Dec. 1676.
   Google Scholar
• R.G. Schafer, 'Structure and Genesis', pp. 29–32; Herefs. R.O., E12NI/KD and KH passim.
   Google Scholar
• P.R.O., E 112/502/70; E 112/538/94; D. Dudley, Metallum Martis (1854 edn), p. 12; P.W. King, 'Dud Dudley and pit-coal iron', The Blackcountryman, vol. 29, no. 3 (1996), pp. 23–24.
   Google Scholar
• T.W.M. Johnson suggested it was copper, which would certainly fit with the prices quoted, but in a recent article I argued that it was lead, because that was the metal first smelted: T.W.M. Johnson, 'The diary of George Skyppe', Trans. Woolhope Naturalists Field Club, vol. 34 (1952–54), pp. 54–62; P.W. King, 'Cupola', p. 38.
   Google Scholar
• L.J.U. Way, 'An account of Leigh Wood in the parish of Long Ashton in the County of Somer-set', Trans. Bristol Glouces. Archaeol. Soc., vol. 36 (1913), pp. 72–75; Coster: P.R.O., E 112/502/ 70.
   Google Scholar
• P.W. King, 'Cupola', pp. 38–9.
   Google Scholar
• P.R.O., C 6/191/40. This affair is mentioned in Metallum Martis and by Samuel Smiles (Industrial Biography (1959 edn), p. 56), but Smiles, who may have read the Chancery proceedings, wrongly described it as an ironworks. As to bell founding see note 5. See also P.W. King 'Dud Dudley,' pp. 46–7; L.J.U. Way, 'An account,' pp.72–3.
   Google Scholar
• P.R.O., State Papers, domestic entry books, SP 44/61, p. 4.
   Google Scholar
• Foreclosed is used in its technical legal sense. Shrops. R.O., 6000/14265-82; P.R.O., C 10/219/27, plea of George Viscount Grandison and others.
   Google Scholar
• J. Woodward, 'Observations', f.98v.
   Google Scholar
• The location of this works is not certain. In my 'Cupola' I argued that it was the cupola 'above thebridge at Rownam', which the Company for Smelting Down Lead with Pitcoal took over in 1693. However Dr John Woodward (Observations', f.98) reported that the Rownam cupola was Sir Clement's and one 'at --- upon Mendip [was] built also by direction of Sir Clem' Clark'. In the litigation Talbot Clerke accused Grandison and the Howards of building a rival cupola. This was named in a Master's Report (in Chancery) as at `Mendiffe' (P.R.O., C 38/235, V, 15 Apr. 1690), presumably Mendip.
   Google Scholar
• I have described these events outlined in this section at much greater length in P.W. King, 'Cupola', where full references are given. The principal manuscript sources are various Chancery proceedings, particularly P.R.O., C 5/85/26; C 9/101/21; C 10/219/27; C 10/269/18; C 10/269/22; C 10/223/17; Chancery orders, C 33/263-276, passim; Chancery Masters' Reports, C 38/229, 7 Jul. 1687 and 13 Jan. 1687/8; C 38/235, 15 Apr. 1690; C 38/238, 8 Jul. 1690; also P.R.O., Privy Council registers, PC 2/65, f.506; PC 2/71, f.263-4 276 293, and 310–12; P.R.O., SP 44/51, f.55; SP 44/61, p. 4.
   Google Scholar
• Staffs. R.O., D(W) 1788/P59/B3, 18 Jun. 1684 and undated.
   Google Scholar
• B. Woodcroft, Titles of Patents of invention chronologically arranged, no. 253 (1854).
   Google Scholar
• Rhys Jenkins, 'The copper works at Redbrooke and at Bristol', Trans. Bristol Glouces. ArchaeoL Soc., vol. 63 (1942), pp. 146–7, 157–8; J. Woodward, 'Observations', f.98v-99; D. Grant, 'Sixth Duke of Somerset, Thomas Robinson and the Newlands mines', Trans. Cumberland Westmoreland Antiq. ArchaeoL Soc., n.s. 85 (1985), p. 153. Rhys Jenkins' suggestion that smelting began at Redbrooke cannot be right as his summary from port books indicates that ore shipped in 1688 went to London: R. Jenkins, 'Copper works', p. 147. Nor can it have been at Stockley Slade near Bristol, as that was still in Grandison's hands.
   Google Scholar
• C. Macleod, Inventing the Industrial Revolution: the English patent system 1660–1800 (Cambridge University Press, 1988), p. 21.
   Google Scholar
• Ibid., p. 21; C. Macleod, 'The 1690s patents boom: invention or stockjobbing?' Economic History Review, ser. II, vol. 39 (1988), pp. 549–71, esp. 564–5.
   Google Scholar
• P.R.O., C 9/471/37; C.T. Carr, Select charters of trading companies (Selden Society, 1913), pp. 216–8.
   Google Scholar
• These suggestions are by analogy with the Lead Company (see below).
   Google Scholar
• R. Jenkins, 'Copper works', pp. 157–9; Joan Day, 'The Costers: copper-smelters and manufacturers', Trans. Newcomen Soc., vol. 47 (1975), p. 48.
   Google Scholar
• K.R. Fairclough, 'Temple Mills as an industrial site in the 17th century', Essex Archaeology and History, vol. 22 (1991), pp. 118–19 from P.R.O., C 6/394/17. The source refers to other Chancery proceedings, probably more acrimonious ones and perhaps referring to Clerke's affairs more generally. Unfortunately these have not been traced and their nature therefore remains uncertain. Henry Corbett was from 1696 the anchorsmith (and contractor for smiths' work generally) to Portsmouth dockyard and also from 1696 had premises in Maid Lane, Southwark: P.R.O., ADM 49/120, 72–74. A. Bartlet, 'The ironworks at Sowley in the manor of Beaulieu c.1600-1820' (Ts. in Hants. R.O. and at Beaulieu Palace Archives), pp. 6–7 and document 5 (Beaulieu Palace Archives, EII s27, S70). I am grateful to Jeremy Greenwood for his assistance concerning Corbett.
   Google Scholar
• J. Morton, 'The Cornish Copper Company 1693-7', J. Trevethick Society, vol. 7 (1979–80), pp. 57–75.
   Google Scholar
• A. Raistrick, 'London Lead Co. 1692-1705', Trans. Newcomen Soc., vol. 24 (1943–44), pp. 119–25; P.R.O., C 9/437/108; P.W. King, 'Cupola', p. 44; L.J.U. Way, 'An account ...', pp. 77–78.
   Google Scholar
• R. R. Angerstein's illustrated travel diary: Industry in England and Wales from a Swedish perspective, trans. Torsten and Peter Berg (Science Museum, London, 2001), pp. 133–34. This has illustrations of the works.
   Google Scholar
• P.R.O., C 10/268/18; D. Grant, 'The Sixth Duke', p. 145; P.W. King, 'Cupola', pp. 41, 44. According to John Woodward this was also built 'at Writon' by Sir Clement's direction, but the attitude of the Clerkes in the litigation contradicts this, though it was evidently based on his design.
   Google Scholar
• For John Lethicullier see S.R. Woodhead, The Rulers of London (1965), p. 107; L.B. Ellis, 'The Lethicullier family', Proc. Huguenot Soc. London, vol. 19, no. 2 (1954), pp. 60–64.
   Google Scholar
• P.R.O., C 8/574/166; LR 2/183, f.119; A. Raistrick, 'London Lead Company 1692-1905', pp. 120–32; J.N. Rhodes, 'The London Lead Company in North Wales, 1692-1792' (Ph.D. Thesis, Leicester University, 1970), pp. 30–50, p. 172; B. Tyson, 'Attempts to smelt metals with coal near Whitehaven before 1700', Cumbrian Industrialist, vol. 2 (1999), pp. 10–22; J.V. Beckett, Coal and tobacco: the Lowthers and the economic development of west Cumberland 1660–1760 (Cambridge University Press, 1981), p. 132.
   Google Scholar
• J.N. Rhodes, 'London Lead Co.', pp. 28–29.
   Google Scholar
• C.T. Carr, Select charters, pp. 241–43; W.R. Scott, Joint Stock Companies, ii, p. 436.
   Google Scholar
• J. Woodward, 'Observations', f.98–99
   Google Scholar
• Ibid.
   Google Scholar
• C.T. Carr, Select charters, pp. 228–30; W.R. Scott, Joint Stock Companies, ii, pp. 466–47; B. Woodcroft, Titles of patents, no. 291.
   Google Scholar
• R. Jenkins, 'The Vauxhall Ordnance Factory of King Charles I', Collected Papers of Rhys Jenkins(Cambridge University Press for Newcomen Society, 1936), pp. 28–33; W.H. Thorpe, 'The Marquis of Worcester and Vauxhall', Trans. Newcomen Soc. vol. 13 (1931–32), pp. 75–88; C. Ffoulkes, The gun-founders of England (Cambridge University Press, 1937), pp. 51–54; H.W. Dickinson, Sir Samuel Morland: diplomat and inventor 1625–95 (Newcomen Society, extra publication 6,1970), p. 53,91.
   Google Scholar
• B. Tyson, 'Attempts', pp. 3–10; J.V. Beckett, Coal and tobacco, p. 125.
   Google Scholar
• Carlisle R.O., Leconfield collection, D/Lec/240/mines.
   Google Scholar
• P.R.O., Ordnance Board bill books, WO 51/48, f.3; WO 51/49, ff. 5671. Ruth Brown has kindly confirmed that the cupola at 'Fox Hall' was at Lambeth and that this is also indicated by WO 51/49, if. 121,123.
   Google Scholar
• P.R.O., Ordnance Board minutes, WO 47/18, p. 23.
   Google Scholar
• P.R.O., WO 47/18, pp. 35 75 77.
   Google Scholar
• N. Cox, 'Imagination and innovation of an industrial pioneer: The first Abraham Darby', Indust.Archaeol. Rev., vol. 12, no. 2 (1990), pp. 127–44; A. Raistrick, Dynasty of ironfounders: The Darbys of Coalbrookdale, 2 edn (Sessions Book Trust, 1985), Ch. 3; R.A. Mott, 'Abraham Darby I & II and the coal-iron industry' Trans. Newcomen Soc. 31 (1957–59), pp. 49–93, esp. 66–67; R.A. Mott, 'The earliest use of coke in iron-making', The Gas World, vol. 145, (5 Jan. 1957), coking section, supplement, 7; R.A. Mott, `Coalbrookdale in the early years', Trans. Shrop. Archaeol. Soc., vol. 56(1957–60), pp. 82–93. The subject was much discussed around 1959, which was perceived as the tercentenary of the introduction of coke smelting, but was actually only that of the arrival of Abraham Darby at Coalbrookdale.
   Google Scholar
• J. Woodward, 'Observations', f.99.
   Google Scholar
• P.R.O., E 112/829/344; E 112/833/957; P.R.O., Exchequer depositions, E 134/4&5 Anne/Hil./19. The plaintiff's fear that 'Thomas Fox would do some violent act in the prison having brought thither [bombs, grenades etc.] which threatened to damage the prison' was no doubt miscon-ceived, since the bombs in question were no doubt empty of explosives. The dispute related to the escape from the prison of Francis Hind and the expense of his retaking in Antwerp and to an annuity granted to Fox when he gave up the wardenship. Wombridge Furnace had probably been the `Reking' Furnace, which belonged to Richard Foley in 1636 and later (as Wombridge) to his grandson Philip until 1672, after which it disappears from the landlord's rentals: the events described therefore probably concern a brief revival of the furnace. The annuity and arrears of it were mortgaged to Isaac Hawkins to secure debts relating to Wombridge Furnace. For the earlier references to Wombridge Furnace see P.R.O., State Papers, Charles I, SP 18321, no. 42; R.G. Schafer, 'Genesis and Structure'; Philip Foley's accounts, passim; for its closure see Shrops. R.O., 625/15, rentals.
   Google Scholar
• N. Cox, 'Imagination', p. 131; A. Raistrick, Dynasty, pp. 31–33. The latest possible date of the explosion of Coalbrookdale is indicated by an outright sale of it in 1703 free from a mortgage on it, but for less than the sum due on that mortgage: P.R.O., C 11/1379/19. The explosion is likely to have taken place a little earlier.
   Google Scholar
• O.F.G. Hogg, The Royal Arsenal: its background origin and subsequent history (Oxford University Press, 1963), p. 238, from P.R.O., WO 47/24, p.151.
   Google Scholar
• P.R.O., WO 47/23, 320 403; WO 47/24, 97 101 151.
   Google Scholar
• M.W. Flinn, 'William Wood and the coke smelting process', Trans. Newcomen Soc., vol. 34 (1961–62), p. 56, an article which has largely been superseded by a fuller account of that fraudu-lent affair in J.M. Treadwell, 'William Wood and the Company of Ironmasters of Great Britain', Business History, vol. 16, no. 2 (1974), pp. 93–112.
   Google Scholar
• J. Woodward, 'Observations', f.99. It may also be the ironwork at Southwark of which Mr Baden was master: Ibid. f.100.
   Google Scholar
• Hants. R.O., 11M59/E2/154801-7 & 154808E; Survey of London, vol. 22, pp. 58, 65, 118; cf. P.R.O., WO 47/53-120, passim; plaque on the present building.
   Google Scholar
• N. Cox, 'Imagination'; A. Raistrick, Dynasty of ironfounders: The Darbys of Coalbrookdale, 2nd edn (Sessions book trust, 1985), Ch. 3.
   Google Scholar
• B. Trinder, The industrial revolution in Shropshire, 1st edn (Phillimore, Chichester, 1973), pp. 81–82, and 3rd edn (Phillimore, Chichester 2000), pp. 29–35; L. Ince, The Knight Family and the British iron industry (Merton Priory Press, Cardiff, 1991), pp. 117–20.
   Google Scholar
• Space is not available to develop this point fully but see: 'Local partnership deeds from ms. in collection of Richard Welford', Proc. Soc. Antiq. Newcastle upon Tyne 3rd ser., vol. 3 (1907–08), pp. 169–171; P.W. King, 'The Vale Royal Company and its rivals', Trans. Histor. Soc. Lancashire & Cheshire, vol. 142 (1993), pp. 8–12; L. Ince, Neath Abbey and the Industrial Revolution (Tempus Publishing, Stroud 2001), pp. 25–28 from Bristol R.O., 4658(6)a—b; 09458(21); A. Raistrick, Dynasty, Ch. 3–5 passim.
   Google Scholar
• H. Lloyd, The Quaker Lloyds in the industrial revolution (Hutchinson, London, 1975), pp. 54–55.
   Google Scholar
• G.R. Morton & N. Mutton, 'The transition to Cort's puddling process', J. Iron & Steel Institute, vol. 205, no. 7 (1967), pp. 722–28; R.A. Mott (ed. P. Singer), Henry Cort: The great finer: creator of puddled iron (The Metals Society, London, 1983); R.F. Tylecote, 'Iron in the Industrial Revolution', in J. Day and R.F. Tylecote, Industrial Revolution, pp. 233–39.
   Google Scholar
• See also P. W. King, 'Dud Dudley'.
   Google Scholar
• Cf. B. Earl, 'Tin preparation and smelting', in J. Day & R.F. Tylecote (eds), Industrial Revolution, p. 69. Robert Lydall's patent was actually dated 4 Sep. 1697. He obtained further patents in 1702 and 1705, both concerned with tin smelting: B. Woodcroft, Titles of Patents, nos. 351, 368, and 374
   Google Scholar
• I am grateful to David Cranstone for pointing out the significance of this.
   Google Scholar
• M. Gill, Swaledale: its mines and smelt mills (Landmark Publishing, Ashbourne, 2000), pp. 146–47.
   Google Scholar
• See note 62. Richard Jones' deliveries of shot made of old iron continued until May 1710 (P.R.O.,WO 51/79, 95–96), but it is not clear how long he continued using the Woolwich foundry, rather than just his own at Southwark.
   Google Scholar
• N. Cox, 'Imagination', p. 131; A. Raistrick, Dynasty, pp. 31–33; and see note 60.
   Google Scholar
• Cheese Lane: N. Cox, 'Imagination', pp. 127–29; A. Raistrick, Dynasty, pp. 20–21; Back Lane: Bristol R.O., 4658(6) a-b; 09458(21); P/St.J/ChW/1(c)-(d); PR/St. P. & J.; 21782/xiv/159/B.
   Google Scholar
• Herefs. R.O., E12NI/DEf/13, `Blakeney Furnace'; E12NI/DFf/5, `Blakeney Furnace'.
   Google Scholar
• See note 72.
   Google Scholar
• G.E.C., Complete Peerage, iv (1916), p. 225. His honours and estates were forfeited for leading the Jacobite Army in 1715.
   Google Scholar
• There is a pencil note (presumably contemporary) following the heading, 'drawn up for the use of Mr Burdet'. The significance of this is not clear.
   Google Scholar