The medieval fairs and markets of York jq085k09z

Citation preview

THE MEDIEVAL FAIRS AND MARKETS OF YORK

by

H. RICHARDSON

Oyen ST. ANTHONY’S PRESS, YORK

FIRST PUBLISHED 1961

© 1961 by St. Anthony’s Press, York

PRINTED IN GREAT BRITAIN BY H. MORLEY AND SONS LTD. PETERGATE, YORK

INTRODUCTION The origin of fairs is lost in antiquity. Like so many more aspects of our civilisation they would appear to have come out of the east. Certainly

they were commonplace in the Roman Empire, and may have been introduced to this country by the Romans during their occupation. It would be strange if they were not, when the excellent road system would lend itself ideally to this kind of trade. Unfortunately we have no proof of this, nor have we any definite evidence of fairs during the Saxon or Danish occupations, though some system of inter-settlement trading must have existed. So far as the north is concerned, whatever the state of the fair system at the time of the Norman Conquest, it is certain that the reprisals of William in 1069 would stop, for some years, almost all trade between towns and villages and leave no incentive for

traders from other counties to travel north. A few pre-conquest fairs may have survived, or have been re-constituted towards the end of the

eleventh century, but in general we must accept that the medieval system of fairs and markets in Yorkshire is of post-conquest origin. The ecclesiastical nature of fairs was brought about by two complementary reasons. Firstly, traders naturally tended to congregate where they found the greatest number of people, and with the crowds gathering at the abbeys and churches on Saints’ Days, especially that of the patronal saint, this need was supplied. Secondly, the churches encouraged the fairs as tending to bring even more people to their congregations, their open-air pulpits and their shrines, by reason of the trading going on within the precincts of the church. The abbeys of Yorkshire, throughgut their existence, played an important part in the wool trade attracting

merchants from other counties as well as from abroad. It is therefore natural that fairs received their greatest impetus with the rise of the monastic houses. The same circumstances governed many of the local markets, which were often held in the church-yard if no other suitable space were available near at hand. That fairs played an important part in the lives of the people is proved both by the great number held each year, and by the number of towns and villages in which they were held. No less than 157 charters were granted for fairs to be held in Yorkshire between 1227 and 1514.! To this figure must be added those fairs for which charters were granted before 1227 and others which, although they had no charter, had been held from time immemorial. Both of these classes would have had to have their charters or rights confirmed by the Quo Warranto inquisition

of Edward 1. “ Owens’ Book of Fairs’ for 1770 lists 97 Yorkshire towns and villages holding fairs during that year. As many of these places had more than one fair and some even four or five, during the course of a year, three hundred fairs annually in Yorkshire may be a conservative estimate of the total number held. It should also be borne 1 See Calendar of Charter Rolls. 3

in mind that few fairs lasted for only one day, most were for at least two days, whilst some were for as many as eight days, and one, (Kingstonupon-Hull) lasted for thirty days. The lordship of a fair was a valuable possession. Fairs were profitmaking institutions and were meant to be so; it was from such sources that the lord obtained the money to maintain the abbey, church, manor, village, or any other of his responsibilities. Tolls were charged on all goods coming into the fair or market to be sold, the scale being laid down

either in the charter granting the fair,? or by the lord of the fair after the granting of the charter. There were occasions when tolls were also chatged on goods going out of the fair after being bought. The Archbishop of York was one fair owner who charged the same amount of toll on goods coming into the fair to be sold as on goods being taken out after being bought. There was also a charge, known as “ stallage ”, made for setting up a stall in the fair or market, or for using one already set up. Twopence for a seven foot stall appears to have been the general charge. Exemption from tolls, stallage and all other charges in the fair could be, and often was, granted by the king, either to all the inhabitants of a town of manor, or to individuals and their servants or other representatives. As one example of this exemption, the citizens of York were

granted quittance of tolls and stallage etc. throughout the realm by Henry III, this privilege being confirmed by Edward II in 1312.8 In return for the tolls of the fair the owner was responsible for the safety of those attending it, for equitable dealing within its bounds and for the administration of justice within the fair. The grant of a fair contained, either expressed or implied, the grant of a fair court and at York the archbishop held a Court of Pie Powder during his Lammas Fair. In the case ot the City fairs, there was no need for special courts as the existing courts and law officers were quite adequate for the purpose. The origins of the Courts of Pie Powder are very obscure. Such courts

were held in the fairs of the Romans as Curia Pedis Pulverizati, in old French they were termed Pied Puldreaux, and in Norman

French Pied Poudre, each of which designations means literally ‘ dusty

footed ’, and implies a court of pedlars, or the dusty-footed followers of the fair. There was a necessity for such courts which could deal quickly with the itinerant vendors who frequented fairs, which lasted only a day or two in most cases, the users being off and away once business was finished. The constitution of these courts should be

kept firmly in mind. They could sit only during fair time and could deal only with matters arising out of the fair. They could deal only with

a thief if his crime was committed within the bounds of the fair, and then only if he were apprehended within the fair. They could deal with a slander of goods but not with a slander of the person, which was considered a civil matter and had to go to the ordinary courts. The juries 2 This was the case in the Charter of 32 Elizabeth I granted to the City of York. 3 Calendar of Charter Rolls (13800-1326), p.185.

4

for the Courts of Pie Powder were in general empanelled from the traders using the fair. It is noteworthy that the jury for the court held by the Archbishop of York for his Lammas Fair was, for some reason which has so fat not been discovered, empanelled from the residents of Wistow, a village near Selby, and within the Liberty of the Archbishop.

The Clerk of the Market was appointed by the King. He had charge of the collection of tolls, stallage etc. and was responsible for ensuring fair and just weights and measures in the fair. He was also responsible for the Assize of Bread and Beer. He was not solely concerned with buying and selling in the fairs and markets, his authority extended over all matters of purchases, just as the assay of weights and measures applied

to all shops and stalls. Occasionally the charter of grant, or a supplementary charter, would give the owner of a fair the right to appoint his own Clerk, but the slightest deviation from strict justice in any weights of measutes would cause the privilege to be withdrawn and the oversight placed again in the hands of the King’s Clerk. Even when a local clerk was appointed the local authority had no right of making its own stand-

ards but had to adhere strictly to those laid down by the government. The charter of 10 Edward I, signed at York on 24th June 1316, grants this privilege to the City and, by its wording, appears to be confirming an earlier grant.4

Many of the earlier fairs were in ecclesiastical hands, others in the hands of local landowners. The original grants of many of them had been lost, if ever they existed in fact, and Edward I (1272-1307), by the

institution of the Quo Warranto inquiries tegularised the position by requiring the production of the original grant, or by proof that it had in fact existed, or by proof that the privilege of a fair had been held from

time immemorial. The Commission for the Quo Warranto Inquisition was signed at Woodstock on 12th March 1279° and after appointing the commissioners for all the counties, (those for County Ebor being Geoffrey Aquillon, John de Steingrave and Ralph le Botiler) goes on to set out in great detail the terms of reference for the inquiry. The object

was to inquire into the sources of revenue and the rights thereto in the country and included, among many other sources, fairs and markets. The Archbishop of York claimed before this Inquisition the right to a fair to be held in York from Vespers on the Vigil of St. Peter-ad-Vincula to the same hour on the Morrow of the Feast and also the right of jurisdiction over the whole City during the same time. As he had no charter for this fair he claimed the right as having been held by the archbishops from time out of the mind of man, and after due inquiry his claim was allowed.®

4 York Corporation Records, E.60A. The numbering is that given in ‘‘ The Catalogue of the Charters, House Books etc.’’ compiled by Wm. Giles (1908). § Calendar of Patent Rolls (1272-1281), p.342-343. 6 Placita de Quo Warranto, p.222-3. j

It was always possible for the owner of the grant of a fair to object to the granting of a new fair on the grounds of its being too near, either in time or distance, to his own. In 1318 the grant of a fair and weekly market in Bootham to the abbot of St. Mary’s Abbey was withdrawn because of the objection of the citizens that the proposed new fair was too neat in point of distance to the City and would interfere with their trade.? When one fair per year was granted to the City in 1449 it was carefully arranged so as not to be too near in point of time to the Lammas Fair of the Archbishop. There was no standard laid down for the time which must elapse between neighbouring fairs, each case being taken on its merits, but in the case of distance a standard of seven miles was generally accepted. The seven mile standard was made as that distance was considered to be one third of a day’s journey, it being arranged to allow people to make one third of a day’s journey to the fair, spend one

third of a day making their purchases or selling their goods and the rest of the day getting home. The right to hold a fair or market could very easily be forfeited. Changing the date, without the King’s authority, to one thought to be more advantageous would cause the loss of the privilege, as would the extension of the period of the fair in times of good business. In times of bad weather or slack trade it must have been a great temptation to close down the fair or market before time and so save the expenses involved, but this was a dangerous thing to do as the total loss of the grant would probably result. Failure to hold a fair at the appointed time and place would almost certainly bring the forfeiture of the privilege in its train. The fairs were also useful for purposes other than trading. Fair-time, when the normally scattered population was gathered together, was used by the authorities for making proclamations or other official announcements, in the full knowledge that the people present would carry the news back to their villages or hamlets, thus enabling the greatest number of people to be reached. It is recorded that Queen Elizabeth used the fairs to find out where the horses were going and how many

were changing hands. Her object was to make sure that none of the great lords was building up a sufficient stock to make an uprising possible.

No uprising could succeed without more than the normal stock of horses, which were the only means of transport, and increasing stables meant, at any rate in the minds of Elizabeth and her Council, a suspicion of rebellion. By the end of the eighteenth century the great fairs, except those for

cattle and other animals, began to decline. This was due to several factors. The growth of towns tended towards a shop economy, and the

improvement in roads and transport, especially near towns, made it advantageous for country people to come into the towns rather than wait for the fair to come to them. The beginning of the nineteenth 7 Calendar of Charter Rolls (1300-1326), p.407. 6

century, with the coming of the railways and the Industrial Revolution being in full swing, saw the end of a great many fairs, although some few have survived. The great cattle fairs of York still exist to-day, the chief change being that in 1827 they were transferred to a new site outside the City Walls and are now kept together instead of being spread through many streets. THE BOOTHAM FAIR OF THE ABBOT OF ST. MARY’S ABBEY

A gteat deal has been written about the fair held in Bootham by the Abbot and Convent of St. Mary and about the quarrels between the

abbot and the citizens on account of the fair. Drake® ascribes the name of Bootham to the booths erected in the street by the abbot for his fair

and states that the tolls collected by the abbot were the cause of the disputes with the City. Knight? follows the lead given by Drake and reiterates the statement that the tolls of the Bootham fair and market wete the cause of the disputes, bending the facts of the quarrels to fit the theory of the fair. McCutcheon! tells us the Bootham fair was held on the feast of the Nativity of the Virgin and, later, that the fair apparently originated with the various privileges granted to the Abbey by William II, stating that it rapidly grew in size until it came to threaten the trade of the City. An examination of the evidence still in existence shows only one item which would go toward proving the fair to have been held, but a considerable number of items, admittedly of a rather negative character, together form a strong body of circumstantial evidence againstwhich its existence. The only evidence which is advanced for the existence of this fair is one teference in “ The Chronicle of St. Mary’s Abbey ”’ which teads, 11° Fiodem anno impetrata fuit Carta libertatis sancte Marie Eboracensis et confirmata a Rege E quinto, Anno coronacionis sue primo, ut Nundinum et forum esset in Botham: et fuit proclamatum per totam Communitatem Eboracensem, et irrotulatur in magnis Rotulis Regis per Dominum J. de Langton Cancellarium domint Regis”. ( In the same year (1308) there was obtained a Charter of the liberties of St. Mary’s of York, and it was confirmed by

King E(dward) the Fifth in the first year of his coronation, that there should be a fair and market in Bootham and it was proclaimed through all the city of York, and enrolled in the great Rolls of the King by Master J. de Langton, Chancellor of the Lord King.’’) Taking the above statement, that the fair “ was confirmed by King

Edward the Fifth”, we find that throughout the “‘ Chronicle” the

8 Drake, F., Ebovacum (1736), p.256. 9 Knight, C. B. History of York (1944) p.181. 10 McCutcheon, K. L., Yorkshive Fairs and Markets (1940), pp.18, 35.36. 11 MS.Bodley 39, fol.176V. published by the Surtees Society, Vol.CXLVIII, p.43. The indices of the Close Rolls, Patent Rolls and Charter Rolls have been searched and not the slightest hint of this fair is to be found in them. 7

author reckons the Kings named Edward as follows :- Edward I he calls

Edward IV and Edward I he calls Edward V.!2 It may be thought

that the chronicler, who wrote after the event but not later than about 1350, is really referring to the charter of 131813 which does grant a fair and market to the Abbey (later to be cancelled) but this cannot be so as John de Langton was Chancellor in 130814 but had relinquished the office by 1318. The charter granted to the Abbey in 1308 by Edward II contains no specific reference to a fair to be held in Bootham. It confirms all previous privileges and liberties and then goes on to grant all the same

privileges and liberties as are enjoyed by the churches of St. Peter at York and St. John at Beverley.!5 Confirmations of the abbey’s privileges by inspeximus were made by Edward III, Richard II, Henry IV, Henry V,

Henry VI, Henry VII and Henry VIII, in none of which is mention made of Bootham or a fair to be held there. It might be thought that the Bootham fair may be included among the liberties confirmed in bulk, and not particularised, by the first part of the charter of 1308 but if this is so one would expect to find mention of the fair in the claims brought before the Ovo Warranto Inquisition in 1279. Although there is a long list of claims, here again there is no mention of Bootham or a fair to be held there.!6 Although the Corporation “ House Books ”’ contain a great many references to St. Mary’s Abbey and to the disputes between the Abbey and the City there is no mention of a fair or

market being held in Bootham. One would have expected that, had a fair been held in Bootham at the

time of the Dissolution, the City, especially as at this time their own trade was declining, would have made strenuous efforts to have had the

grant transferred to them, but again the “ House Books” make no mention of any such suggestion.

THE DISPUTES IN BOOTHAM _. Disputes regarding the jurisdiction of the Abbot of St. Mary’s Abbey in the street and “ town ” of Bootham were regular occurrences through-

out the middle ages, right up to the dissolution of the monastery by Henry VIII. As already stated, consultation of the many histories

of the city gives the impression that a fair, held each year in Bootham by the Abbot and Convent of St. Mary, was the cause of the quarrels, as depriving the city of part of its revenue. In 1203 the citizens had agreed with the king to pay a Fee Farm rent of {160 per annum in 12 There are numerous examples of this mode of numbering English monarchs ;

for example the Chronicles of the veigns of Edward I and Edward II.

ed. W. Stubbs, in the Rolls Series vols.76 a-b, 1882-3. 13 Calendar of Charter Rolls (1300-1326), p. 407. 14 Calendar of Charter Rolls.” 15 Calendar of Charter Rolls (1300-1326), p.110. 16 Placita de Quo Warranio, p. 201 3

consideration of which they were to be allowed to keep to their own use

all the rents, taxes, fines, tolls etc. which otherwise would go to the king. The only piece of evidence in our possession, of a fair having been held in Bootham goes to show that the grant, if it had been made at all, had been made to the abbey before this composition was made with the

king, so that the tolls of the St. Mary fair would not be going to the king at the time and would, therefore, be no deprivation of income to the city. Had it been the fair which caused the disputes, surely it would be right to expect that similar disputes would have arisen between the Archbishop and the City over the tolls of St. Peter’s fair ? During his fair the Archbishop took over the whole city for two days, using all the entrances of the city as toll gates, and applying the income so derived to his own purposes, without any suggestion of quarrel or dispute with the city authorities.

The disputes over Bootham were purely local politics. The Abbot claimed to hold the “ vil and toun of Boutham ” in free burgage, and to be able to do as he liked there. On the other hand the citizens claimed that Bootham was within the suburbs of the city and that the jurisdiction was theirs entirely. Had the Abbot been able to maintain his claim he would have been able to take all the rents and taxes of the district, to hold trial in his own courts of crimes or misdemeanours committed within Bootham and to take all other income deriving from his liberty there. This was what

the City disputed and in 1218 a case was brought before the Justices of Assize between Robert Longchamp, the Abbot of St. Mary’s, and the Mayor and Citizens of York, wherein it was decided that the street was within the subrubs of the City and that the Abbot had no jurisdiction or liberty there.!”

This appears to have settled the dispute for some time, but by 1262 the arguments between the two protagonists had flared up fiercer than before, for in that year it is recorded that the citizens attacked the Abbey servants killing several of them, and burned a number of houses which had been erected by the Abbey in Bootham.!8 The outcome of this affray

was that Abbot Simon de Warwick paid the large sum of one hundted pounds to the City by way of compensation and absented himself from the Abbey for over a year. It was as a result of this fight that the Abbey sought, and obtained, the king’s permission to build and fortify the wall enclosing the buildings and grounds of their house. By 1352 the dispute had again arisen. This time the King instructed Archbishop William de Thoresby who at the time was Lord Chancellor of England to hold an inquiry and make settlement between the parties. As a result of the Archbishop’s efforts an indenture of Agreement was drawn up and signed on 16th January 1353, the City’s copy of which is 17 Widdrington, Sir T. Analecia Eboracensia (1897), p.122.

18 Widdrington, op.cit., p.243. . 2

still among its archives.!9 This agreement stated that Bootham, with the

exception of Marygate, should be within the jurisdiction of the City, while Marygate, along with /’ Anmonerie-garth, which never had been part

of Bootham, was to be within the jurisdiction of the Abbey. The Abbey was given free passage in the street of Bootham and was allowed to use the street for the purpose of cleansing its ditch and repairing its wall. The City was to leave the ditch clear and not interfere with it in any way, but should the abbey build in or over the ditch such buildings were to be considered to be in the suburbs of the city and within the city’s jurisdiction. Finally the men of the abbey were to be free of attest in Bootham except for felony, trespass or by the express command of the king.

This agreement was intended to settle the matter of the jurisdiction of Bootham, and it appears to have done so for almost a century and a half. But the Mayor and the Abbot seemed to miss their arguments for in 1377 we find them again in dispute, this time about Marygate. In this year the Mayor, on behalf of the City, claimed a right of way through Marygate from the Ouse to Bootham.?° A ship loaded with timber for the city was lying in the Ouse at the landing at the foot of Marygate, but the Bursar of the Abbey caused a ditch to be dug across

the road and so made it impossible to unload it. To make matters

worse, as if he really was trying to provoke a dispute, the Bursar removed the rudder from the ship, thus making it impossible to unload the cargo ot to take it to another landing where unloading was possible. Naturally,

the Mayor sent a vigorous protest to the abbey. The answer of the Bursar did nothing to mitigate the offence, the Mayor being told that if anyone cared to ask for a licence to use the road it would be granted without delay. The Mayor, not being disposed to ask for a privilege whete he claimed a legal right, not unnaturally refused any such compro-

mise and so the dispute dragged on for some time. The Bursar was eventually forced to send servants to fill up the ditch and restore the road

to its former state.

The next, and apparently the final, dispute between the Abbey and the City started on 24th March 1500 with a report to the City Council, by the

Mayor that Thomas Kendall, a smith, had started to build a house in Bootham without the City’s permission.?! On being approached, Kendall said that he had permission from my Lord of Carlisle, the Abbot of St.

Mary’s. The City at once complained to the Abbot and suggested that the building should be taken down. To this the Abbot replied that the land was his, that he could allow what building he liked and that if the City was not satisfied they should apply to the King. He followed this letter with another, 2 month later, saying that when the Abbey built their gate (Queen Margaret’s Arch) in 1497, no objection was raised by the City, as it would have been had the land not belonged to the Abbey. He 19 York Corporation Records, G.2. 20 Sellers, M., York Memorandum Book, Part I., Introduction, p.lviil. 21 York Corporation Records, House Books, Vol.8, fol.73. 10

also said that he would report the matter to the Archbishop. The argument dragged on, with much letter writing on both sides, including a warning to the citizens by the Mayor, to keep the peace and not interfere with the Abbot or his servants, until on 15th December 1500, in the absence of the Abbot, the Prior of St. Mary’s made further enclosures in Bootham. On his return the Abbot backed the actions of his Prior and so aggravated the dispute still further. On 9th April 1502 the case came before Humphrey Conesby, Justice of Assize, who ruled that whilst the Abbot should be allowed to keep the land he had enclosed, it should remain within the jusridiction of the City and that the Abbot should pay

rent to the City for it.

It will be seen that throughout the whole of these disputes there is not one single mention of the fair, which is said to have been held in Bootham by the Abbot and Convent of St. Mary. There is one further piece of evidence bearing on this fair which may be thought to be vital. On 18th April 1318, Edward II made a grant to the Abbot and Convent of St. Mary, York, of a weekly market on Wednesday and a yearly fair

on the vigil, the feast and the morrow of the Nativity of the Virgin. As soon as this grant was proclaimed the City protested to the King, in the correct way, giving their reasons and arguments against the granting of the charter. The result of this protest was that the charter “ was restored and cancelled by order of the king because it was granted to the injury of the City of York.” This cancellation was made only ten years

after the date given by the “ Chronicle of St. Mary’s Abbey ” for the confirmation of a previous fair. It is inconceivable that the citizens should allow one fair to continue without protesting to the King whilst

immediately asking for the withdrawal of the second fair. At this date

the City had no fair of their own and had to rely on the Lammas Fair of the Archbishop, so that the circumstances of the two fairs would have been identical. If they could prevent the 1318 fair being held by a protest to the King what possible reason is there for supposing that they could not prevent the 1308 fair in the same legal manner ?

Taking an overall view of every scrap of evidence available to us, and

giving due weight to the implications of the facts before us, we are brought to the inevitable conclusion that the Bootham Fair of the Abbot and Convent of St. Mary is one of the myths which have grown from the misinterpreting of a single statement by a long dead monk, unsupported by corroboration of any kind.

THE LAMMAS FAIR OF THE ARCHBISHOP OF YORK The St. Peter’s, or Lammas, Fair held annually by the Archbishop of York is a very different case to that of the Abbot of St. Mary’s. The 22 Calendar of Charter Rolls (1300-1326), p.407.

II

: earliest mention of St. Peter’s Fair proves it to have been well established no later than 1140 and is as follows :—

“143. Grant by Thurston, archbishop of York, to the canons of St. Peter’s of 2 marks yearly from his fair at York at St. Peter’s Chains for their community. 1114—1140.

Reg. Mag. Album, pt. iti, f. 17d. T(urtstinus) Dei gratia Eboracensis archepiscopus omnibus successoribus suis et universis sancte matris ecclesie filliis salutem. Sciatis me dedisse et presenti carta confirmasse ecclesie Sancti Petri Eboracensis in elemosinam

duas marcus argenti de feria mea quam habco Eboraci?3 ad Vincula Sancti Petri per singulos annos ad communam ipsius jure perpetuo.”24 Edward I instituted the Quo Warranto Inquisition in 1279 and among the many claims brought before this commission by the Archbishop was

the following for his fair at York. “ (John, Archbishop of York) also claims the fair at York beginning in and on the vigil of St. Peter in Chains (31st July) at the hour when vespers are rung at the church of St. Michael’s York and lasting until the morrow of St. Peter’s, ending at the same hour. And when the fair has begun, the bailiffs of the Archbishop will keep the

peace in the city and collect tolls and take all the other profits both on water and on land just as, in other times, the city bailiffs do. And for the time of the fair he holds infangenth (infangthief) in his enclosure of York and in his granges in the suburb of that city and a gallows next the suburb, but at other times he does not claim liberty of this kind.”25

From this quotation we can obtain a clear picture of the fair which was held without interruption for almost seven and a half centuries, the fair to open at 3 o’clock on 31st July and to close at the same time on 2nd August, the handing over of the rods of office and the Archbishop’s jurisdiction in the City during the time of the fair. Although the above

claim does not use the term Court of Pie Powder, the statement that

“for the time of the fair he holds infangthief ”’ is sufficient, and in practice amounts to the same thing. The following transcription, taken from a little manuscript book in the keeping of the Borthwick Institute of Historical Research, gives some interesting details concerning the Court of Pie Powder held during the Lammas Fair. The book is titled “ Lammas Fair and Pye Powder Court Book”, dated 1755 and numbered 67684. The first few pages read thus :— “‘ Directions concerning Lammas Fair as the same has been held formerly and how the same is held now. Formerly the Archbishop’s Steward or his Deputy with two or more Gentlemen, the Bedal of Wistow

and thirteen men summoned as Jurymen out of Wistow, used to attend at Ouse Bridge Court the day before Lammas Day exactly at 3 o’clock when Spurriergate Church bell always rings. The Steward in open court 23 ‘‘in elemosinum ............ Eboraci’’, in the margin of the M.S. 24 Early Yorkshire Charters, Vol.1., p.126. 25 Placita de Quo Waranto, p.222-3. 12

presents the Archbishop’s patent for this fair to the Sheriffs of the City of York and the prothonotary or Clerk in Court reads over the same, then the City Sheriffs deliver their Rods to two of the gentlemen there present who are appointed by the Archbishop or his Steward to receive the same and who are called Sheriffs for that Fair and stand instead of such. It is always customary for the Steward or his Deputy upon receiving

the Rods as before to invite the two Sheriffs, the Prothonotary or Clerk into Ouse Bridge Gaol (in order to have the door opened to him and that is looked upon to be delivering up the keys or turning over the Gaol as is said at the time the Bishop has the Gaol turned over to him though

no charge taken of the same by the Archbishop, his Steward or his Deputy) and to treat them with two or more Bottles of Wine &c. (about thirty years ago the then Bishop’s Steward used to order a cold entertainment at that time) at the Steward’s pleasure, after which the Steward, the two new Sheriffs &c. used to proceed to the Bowling Green behind the Minster in this order. The Bedal of Wistow first with his white Rod, next two men with halberds, called Halberdiets, next seven of the Jury-

men, next the Steward, next the new Sheriffs and other gentlemen (if any) and last the other six Jurymen. At the high end of the Bowling Green against the Bishop’s Prison was made their proclamation, to this effect.

‘ All manner of persons who shall resort to this fair, commonly called Lammas Fair, and have anything to do at the Court of Pie Powder now

held for His Grace the Lord Archbishop of York, Lord of the said Fair let them attend at the house of Mr. Mills known by the Sign of the George in Coney Street in the City of York where the Jury summoned and Sworn upon this occasion will sit during this Fair, and such persons shall and will be heard. God save the King and the Lord Archbishop of York.’

Then proceed to where the Court is to be kept and the new Sheriffs leave their Rods there till the Fair Day in the morning about 9 o’clock. The Bedal of Wistow a fortnight before this time Summons the Jury and for which and his own attendance has the tolls in Thursday Market and the Pavement called the pickage, stallage and standage, of late years the Jury has only attended on Lammas Day in the morning about 8 or 9 o’clock when they are called over, impannelled and sworn. They used to be impannelled and sworn at the Bowling Green that day the Steward or his agents received the Rods as aforesaid and in this manner, the Foreman by himself and the rest by fours. ‘ You shall diligently inquire and true presentment make of all such matters and things as shall be brought before you, or given you in charge during this Fair. You shall present no man for malice or hatred nor spare none for favour or affection but in all things to the best of your knowledge shall present the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God.’ When this is done the Steward, two Sheriffs, Gentlemen, Bedal, Jury and Halberdiers proceed in the like order as before, to ride the Fair, their round is as follows (Viz) from the Court House to the Pavement, first proclamation is read by the Bedal of Wistow, second proclamation T3

is read in Thursday Market, third in the Horsefair and then return to the Court House. And then from thence to the Court House for Dinner and to attend least any seizures come in or complaints be made by, or against, the Tollmen. The Jury used to stay till the day after the Fair at 3 o'clock in the afternoon but of late years they have been dismissed on the Fair Day in the evening, first going to the Bowling Green with the Steward or his Deputy, when the Court is dismissed by proclamation.” From the same source we find that when the Court was held for the full time of the fair, that is for two days, the jury were given three meals a day, with ale, (a special note says no wine or punch) and half a crown for their trouble. There is a little account of the cost given as :—

Twelve Half Crowns I 10 oO Two breakfasts, two dinners and two I 4 oO suppers for each man

And suppose the same for ale I 4 0 3 18 Oo There is also a footnote which says “‘ They do not spend so much now.”

When the jury were only required for one day we are told they were given “ cold meat for breakfast and a pint of ale each man, their dinner and ale and a little wine or punch afterwards but no money.” Where the early Courts of Pie Powder were held is not apparent but from 1755 to 1779 they were held at the George Inn in Coney Street and from 1780 to 1812 at the York Tavern in St. Helen’s Square. It would also appear from the Jury Lists, of which about fifty are still in existence, that the last court was held in 1812.26 The tolls charged at the Lammas Fair were heavier than the average, and in addition to this, were charged both on goods coming into the fair

to be sold and on goods going out of the fair having been bought. In the sixteenth century the Archbishop’s tolls were as follows :—27

Every beast to be sold I penny Every led horse, mare to be sold 2 pence Fivery twenty sheep 4 pence Every pack horse of wares 4 pence

Every load of hay 4 pence Every other thing to be sold, in

wallet, basket, cloth, bag or port-mantua, to the value of

twelve pence I penny

There is a printed bill preserved which, although undated, appears by the type and the paper to be of mid, to late eighteenth century period, 26 Borthwick Institute. 27 McCutcheon, of.cit., p.106. 14

which sets out the tolls of the Lammas Fair in the same terms as stated above.?8

The City Bars and Posterns were used for the collecting of the tolls and the same manuscript which gave us some details of the Pie Powder

Court, and quoted previously, gives us the manner in which the tolls wete farmed out in 1753, as follows :— To Thomas Emmetson, Walmgate Bar, Fishergate, Castlegate, Skeldergate and North Street Posterns and Micklegate Bar and the Staith or £4 §© per year.

To ............ Kipling, a weaver, Bootham Bar, Burton Stone, Forest Gate and Waterworks end of Manor Shore for {1 6 o per Year. To Robert Heptonstall, Monk Bar, Suthern ( ? Layerthorpe) Postern, and Easley (Yearsley) Bridge for £1 1 0 per year. It will be seen from the above figures that the Archbishop’s tolls were only worth £6 12 0 to him in 1753 and with the Steward taking the tolls of Thursday Market and the Pavement as his payment for looking after the Pie Powder Court, as stated earlier, the fair seems to have become hardly worth the trouble of running. As will be shown later, the City had acquired several fairs by this time and as they were much cheaper in tolls it is small wonder that the Archbishop’s income from this quarter was shrinking. In May 1806 the City authorities started to pull down Skeldergate Postern in order to widen the road for the increasing traffic. The Archbishop at once applied for an injunction to stop the demolition, on the grounds that it affected his collection of the tolls of his fair.29 The action

was tried at Durham Assizes in July 1807, the verdict going in favour of the Archbishop and the injunction being granted. Five years later, in 1812, the taking of tolls was discontinued, newer methods of trading depriving the Archbishop of his medieval privileges.30 The Lammas Fair of the Archbishop of York seems to have been finally extinguished after 1823. The last Patent for the Fair was dated 18233! and the “ York-

shire Gazette ” of 16th August printed a notice of the fair held on the 12th August. (Old Lammas Day). After that date nothing further is heard of the fair.

THE CITY FAIRS Although markets appear to have been held from time immemorial it was not until 1449 that the City of York was granted a fair. It was granted by a charter of 27 Henry VI., dated at Westminster, roth July 28 Borthwick Institute. 29 York Corporation Records, K.21. 30 Cooper, T. P., The History of the Castle of York (1911), p.338.

31 Borthwick Institute.

5

1449, which gave permission for the Mayor and Citizens to have a fair in the City and Suburbs on Whit Monday and the five days following.

The earliest House Book now in the possession of the City Council starts in 1476 and we are therefore denied the full details. This is not the case with the two fairs granted by the charter of 17 Henry VII.,32 dated at Westminster, 25th January 1502, of which full details are recorded in the House Books, although the charter itself is no longer in the possession

of the Corporation. This fair is such a good example of the way they were otganised in the City throughout the middle ages, and of the method of setting out the stands so as to avoid more congestion than was necessaty, that it is proposed to give as much detail as possible.

On 27th April 1501 it was agreed that “a Bill of Peticon shal be putt unto the Kyngs highnes for two fayres to be had within this Citie for at ij tymes in the yere that is to witt :— the first fayre to begin on the Monday

next after the Ascencon day and to endure viij dayes next ensuyng. And the ij to begyn on Saynt Luces day Evangelist and to endure other viij dayes next after ensuyng the sayd fest.”33 The last sentence of this peti-

tion is noteworthy as showing the anxiety now beginning to be felt regarding the diminishing trade of the City. For some years the port of Hull had been growing rapidly, and much sea-borne trade which formerly

came up the Ouse to York was now going no further than Hull. These two fairs were being petitioned for with the sole purpose of bringing trade into the City, for the last sentence reads :— “‘ And every person comyng to

the sayd fayres to come and go frely without payng of toll or murage and thes fayres to be gettyn toward the upholding of this Cittie whiche is in gtet Ruyn and decaye.” News of the granting of the charter for the two fairs having reached York towards the end of 1501, though for only six days, not eight as asked, the Council at a meeting held on 4th January 1502 decided “ that Maister Recorder for his gret and diligent labor by him mayde at London for the purchessaying of the Charter of the Fayres and other suyts ther

concernyng of the well of this Citie, of the comon cost of the same at Candlemas next comyng shall have a Scarlet gowne so that he bring or send home the sayd Charter under the Kyngs Gret Seale.”’34 The wording of the last phrase of this resolution seems to make it somewhat doubtful

whether the gift of a scarlet gown was to be a reward for “ Maister Recordet’s ” good work in London or as a bribe to ensure his bringing the charter home with him. That he did in fact bring the charter to York is evidenced by the record that on 7th February 1502 the Lord Mayor exhibited the King’s Letters Patent for the two fairs. It is also recorded on the same date that the Lord Mayor said that the sealing of the same would cost “‘ Mycle more money than thei know before.” It was therefore agreed that the whole Council should be summoned to assemble and 32 York Corporation Records, E.60. 33 York Corporation Records, House Books, Vol.8. fol.110b.

34 York Corporation Records, House Books, Vol.8. fol.112b. 16

that the Lord Mayor should “ move them what every Craft or Occupation wold giff more than thei have giffen toward the sayd cost.’’35 The money for the cost of sealing the charter must have been very quickly forthcoming for on the 25th February 1502 it was determined to advertise the two fairs in Malton, Scarborough, Beverley, Hull, Doncaster, Rotherham, Wakefield, Halifax, Leeds, Richmond, Northallerton, Helmsley and such other places as the Lord Mayor thought suitable.36 It was decided that the first two days of each fair should be given over to the sale of horses, cattle and sheep only and that the remaining four

days should be occupied by the rest of the goods brought in for sale. It was also laid down that the fair commencing on the Monday after Ascension Day should be confined to the east side of the river and that commencing on the Feast of St. Luke should be held on the west side. The full details of the setting out of the fairs is given as follows :37 ““ that the sayd fayres shall be kept and ordered in manner and forme ensuyng that is to say — the first fayre to begyn on the Monday next after the Ascencon Day and that day and the morn or Tuesday next after, the

Nawte and Horse fayre to be kept that is to say All manner Nawte as fatte nawte, drapes or yong sters to be brought into Fyscgergate (the present Paragon Street and George Street) and ther to be put to sale ; and all ryder horses and Stagges to be brought into the street without Walmgate Barre and ther to be put to sale. Shep to be brought into Heworth More and ther put to sale within the sayd two days. And after the said two dayes the Clothe fayres and all manner goods

wate and merchandices to be brought and putt to sale in the stretes and places ensuyng — First all manner of fyn Sotheran Cuttyng Clothe in the Common Hall. Clothe from Ledes, Halifaxe, Wakefield, Bradford and thos parts in the Strete from the Comon Hall up towards Stayngate.

Clothe from Kendall, Ripon, Knaresborough and thos parts in the strete from Comon Hall towards Conynstrete.

All Goldsmyths, Juelers, Vestmentmakers, Sylkwomen, Mercets, grocers and Hardwaremen in Petergate and ther from the Deanegate downward the same strete. All pewters, Founders, Potters and Metalers in Colliergate. All Yronmongers and all other Yronware in Fossegate. All Hatmakers, Sadylers, Glovers, Cowpers, Turnors, Sewers, Ropers, Baysters, Hemp Sellers and Cartwights in Walmgate. All Coukes, Pulters and sellers of Ale and Beer in Davygate and Swyne-

gate. No Pulter to keep ther stuff in Houses or Ostryes (Hostelries) upon payne of forfeiture of ther stuff. 35 York Corporation Records, House Books, Vol.8. fol.126b. 36 York Corporation Records, House Books, Vol.8. fol. 127. 37 York Corporation Records, House Books, Vol. 8. fol.131, 131b, 132. 17

All those bringyng any Lynen Clothe, Hardyn Clothe or such stuff in Patrick Pole and Jubergate, and not to hawke in the Stretes upon payne of forfeiture. All those brynyng Wolle, Bred, Flesche, salt or other Vitals to Thursday

| Market.

Flechers, Glovers, Tapitors, Bedsellers, Mattressmakers and upholdsters in Gotheramgate. Tanners ot Barkers in Peaseholme. Shoemakers in Saviourgate.

The Second Fayre on the Fest of St. Luce to be kept and ordered as follows —- That on St. Luce Day and on the morn next after the Horse and Nawtes fayre to be kept and endure for two days as ensuyth :— All ryder Horses and Fat Nawtes to be brought in to the strete without

Mekillith barre and ther put to sale. All Stagges Drapes Nawtes and yong sters in the Strete beyond Saynt James Kirke and all Shep in Knaysmite.

And then also the said two days the Clothe fayre and all manner other

goods wers and merchandises to be brought and put to sale on the stretes and places ensuyng — All Goldsmiths, juelers, Vestmentmakers,

Sylkwomen, Mercers and Grocers from the ends of Skeldergate and North Strete on both sides the Strete up Mekilgate unto Saynt Martyn Kirk Stele. And from Saynt Martyn Kirk Stele unto Gregory Lane all Fyn Sotheran

Cuttyng Clothe and frome Gregory Lane on the north side towards Mekillith Barre all manner clothe from Kendall, Ripon, Knaresborough ot those parts and from Gregory Lane on the south side towards Mikillith all clothe from Ledes, Wakefield, Halifaxe, Bradford and those parts.

All Yronmongers, Pewters, founders, Potters and Metelers in North

Tofft Grene. : Strete.

All Tanners or Barkers, Flechers, Bowers, Coupers and Turners on

All Hardwermen, Glovers, Tapitors, Bedsellers, Mattressmakers,

Hatmakers and Sadilers in Skeldergate.

All Schomakers in the strete that goeth from the east end of Saynt

Nicholas Kirk Yerd towards Felt Lane.

All Lynen Clothe and Hardyn Clothe sellers, Sewers, Ropers, Baxters,

Hemp Sellers and Cartwrights in the strete that goeth from Felt Lane towards Bischophill.

And all manner of people comyng or resorting unto the sayd Citie duryng the sayd Fayre tyme to be welcome and to have fre comyng and passage without payng of any Tolles or duties and without being 18

sued, arrested or troubled for any action except for treason, felony or other comon Indictment.”’

Queen Elizabeth I. gave the City a Charter dated 20th June 159038 authorising the citizens to hold a great horse and cattle fair on the Thursday before Palm Sunday and thereafter every alternate Thursday until Christmas. These fairs were held in the streets of Walmgate, Fossgate, Colliergate and Petergate, which in those days was the main street running through the city from north-west to south-east. The tolls authorised by this charter wete :—

Every Horse, Gelding, Mare or Mare and Foal id.

Ox, Cow or Cow and Calf dd.

ten Sheep $d. five Sheep with Lambs 4d. ten Lambs 3d.

two Heifers less than 2 years 4d.

In the year 1632 another charter was granted to the City by Charles I. for a fair to be held “‘ upon Thursday next before the Feast of the Purification of the Blessed Virgin Mary to be continued and remain for that whole day and the Day following.”%9 This charter mentions the free customs of Tolls, Stallage etc. but makes no mention of what the tolls should be, presumably leaving the matter in the hands of the Mayor and Council.

THE MODERNISATION OF THE CATTLE FAIRS In the early nineteenth century an agitation grew in the City to have the cattle fairs removed from the streets of Walmgate, Fossgate and Petergate to some more convenient site. The City Council, after much discussion, appointed a sub-committee to look into the complaints and report. Petitions were received from farmers, graziers and dealers, some from as far away as Sheffield and Rotherham, making suggestions as to the most

suitable arrangements. One set of petitions suggested a new site on “a field next to Holgate Lane ”, whilst a very long roll contains some 1500 signatures asking for the new market to be erected in Lord Mayot’s Walk and an eight acre field near Monk Bridge. However, the Council eventually decided on the present site, and sent a memorial to the King asking

permission to purchase six acres of land outside Walmgate Bar from Alderman Hearon for use as a cattle market. Letters Patent, dated 11th October, 7 George IV (1826), granting permission to purchase this land were received and the agreement drawn up and signed. The agreement

38 York Corporation Records, E.60. | 39 York Corporation Records, E.60. 19

is between William Hutchinson Hearon and Ann Isabella his wife and the Mayor and Commonalty of the City of York and the purchase price £3,150.4 The new Cattle Market was opened for business on 4th October 1827, and with two reconstructions, in 1855 and 1904, is still in almost daily

use to-day. The following table gives the number of animals passing through the market in the present century.4!

1913 1922 1927 1937 1947 1957

Cattle 65,212 78,260 84,266 125,965 41,114 70,073 Sheep 123,034 94,752 143,088 113,022 30,323 39,584

Pigs 12,405 13,801 30,247 40,046 11,175 57,484 200,651 186,813 257,601 279,033 82,612 167,146 A comparison of prices of animals passing through the York markets

at vatious dates is illuminating. . 1393 1735 1958 A carcase of choice beef Io 4 910 0 #70 0 0 A carcase of the next sort Ig 0 7 00 66 0 0 A carcase of Scotch beef, Sovereign IZ 0 3 10 0 JO 0 0 For a Scotch Cow Io oO 215 Oo 45 0 O A catcase of mutton, the best 1 8 1200 6 18 o For a worser sort I 4 If oO 6 2 0 A carcase of veal, the best 2 6 I I Oo 10 0 0

For a worser sort81 8 6 If oO 6 3 63Oo For a lamb oO 0 For a hog or Pork, the best 3 4 +.'IIg oO 9 12 0

For another sort 3 0 I I Oo 8 13 0

The opening of the new Cattle Market effectively removed the cattle from the streets, but still left the goods and general merchandise sections

of the fairs spread throughout the City. It was not until the opening of the Parliament Street market place, some ten years later, that all trading could be brought together, as will appear later.

THE PLEASURE FAIRS At the present time there are three Pleasure Fairs held annually in the City ; at Whitsuntide, August Bank Holiday and Martinmas. The first of these is a survival of the Whitsun Cattle Fair granted to the City in 1449 which continued to be held in Peaseholme Green when the Cattle Fair was transferred to the new Cattle Market in 1827. 40 York Corporation Records, K.126. 41 By courtesy of York Markets Superintendent. 20

ies 2k :—!~853X _— as“> on Ea“OA ee AE A fiyhealt, - : t Stwa S sncabth ' ty

= a : Aube a on . ie

pncamet e2) hy “yp oe aaa wo hele {ity Sigh aon

XQve) a) ; we i ‘s. “Aie a ‘3a_,4~at roei ee .¢daa) “a « aie a| as ee mee foe eter) ‘ahaa a@) imaf dy44at a .ah ™ oye: : :“‘;:>: ‘ ia ‘a sty ‘ve : aae .+= “A, ¥ ffi aey : #3 i ».i& von “ Hi “dl nh rae ct- it iBh me = aa iat oe7 *pe an

99 Ee“ Ey aa eee iybi7mae A ot S £5| mal . |aloa coy . eg“Lan i‘hha: vate ot AGN Fe a ipe* my os ae 3S:ae oo ” fee ees

5o |Bahbi' .3yp: ye ja :"bo ‘these th‘fo oe“Yat ~ “ee oe vtifan Uh*=a ’2‘ ae rheoy :, .:77. a*t; & ct 5 a at : | : eee a ee tia ae s 7 wh bate ~ Qu 7 i Hi) BY aaP < 2 \ Lie ae a oa ca cas | | oo PR a rasae \ a it |oe vecsA.. :on.pa¥atoo ::#wid = 7 | ; a [: 7in. .|| F 4 r{etwh — a4:aeABS . : toeva . Zsdk : i... ° i ce ute c a a'|~~ :_EE iy mr reHyge 48teK aha Bia me a5 ieBu btaoa caapinctl 5 ee _.AEE Boees a aly ate athryt fiIh i Ne) ef“Ne ‘SES ae aS . Ps We - ae;7wie ois Q — 3a dosoo Ae fee =) itPe Ah Meee .prape sS “as oe ame te :ot.ie* ‘ a

=n i} te aoe i ce “ ge -ae “4 = 2] aa ie .|Ly Dee 5sy iash _=aa cee te ea eyo7a“Ae my au am He zIna ~~ bh _ ae Ms AkeZe i noah Fis. 2.5—- “|}: _'ili |pee “imil ie stoS ==Soni aeysee aeataM yoexos cae-ef Le a le\ i.i yo | oem4a se eypos ce wo 4— " ae as) gi a:1 ogi iy! ae fo oe ”* ,oy= .oe 8 “aom

om . \ | eo a eset en: ate SanBee xr AS 2a yp pgaae eek m so =f Ate - aN ‘ . 1‘| .; ae W Cot f -) vs I ath sn ‘.tial Ne as eeeum y a He 7s ae. i aoeeoog = ae ~ ae

C ;aan | ry): "| i i AaiabiHy by"j=aes iy aa aYip = YY; og, eZ = eesya;| aWl Sot 4aaes Be awee 22 ae ifaoe aHs Ih 2 ZB; 8O zop iN i R aor oa ae cot a < cae — ; Bo . it t ' = a | — 3 a ™g . es an ps = ge. oe 4. | iAy ireémS ee or2o.te a ‘ioe a; > ofae 7 byt Hy | IiBS Ls 4aapy 7 a 8Jdeos :caRS IZ ZL, ge ae ie “4ns ay 724Zz “3 OH= ore aN rotNa Meg NS rel aoSS ia SoS 8 od Yj ZGY Lig ‘4J ce iy ae *A4 a~A.. ay on Bie {i i Boe | oe yy = y ‘ i a a B- hveel itt all ii" i {. Befat“ag qi ‘a oeaae< a7 Bs Pe Lies, ’ i we a 5. j. aM} mS * oc Se age) = NZ mSaZA ei vei bil me eZ a - 2y he os :

= i | i”iiat}!x. |Se) og Sh Mh BAe ie :feAS 4j 3 @ay *ey.COMMON HALL ig > th SB yy, : A SSS € Ang ¢ < Oo ONG oe San EE Ba ssesexOe a | Re Pee se oes aes ee, Rasen eee ¢ eed PrEseia ee Se o33 pee nee .8EEiBe me Bice me ieSa ues ee aePY eeiekeBeBees ames PE ny Le ae a etol 5:oat sitet ae Satie es Se es Shes shecoed AgLe SeyEe | Bobi BOO ER Reynt ne ate SG: UL PRRRRERE paredhig rg ee GEae iay pee: Meee eeGea “a at0 te E “Legh fi Oise weotes SB.Rcha paneseeYE! Betas ue ee eae 2 feoeeeeed paiee eeieSN Aoe -os oe oe. : ae : 4 oes ne 8 Brome iia a eS REE siesta Pee ttc anon ey oa Be Ce coe ae. cs Ree oe wee RE ne ae Senos So se oxen, ORE RETRY See RETE Ee se A 1 aipegeee. eee IORI ais BERRIEN ae ee facet cinsiteiigiiic: het hen SUSE ee se8ae Pick. es ' Bi: i.NER Re ee: aSapeeeeer. we eae oo aida |e tae ekBa2: Pierce — 2ReesBea aeshie!sis elds aeOER % age es,veen8 het fae ae EeWL Te Se | PORE Haid ateialaahaetaeca aMaden geReseReaDee bes .beo heagia seein aa COE: Wtey :aeeee oRFee ents we oe RE,1 oeae aEN: Beeps ehh Obs cs 7pe pea rseiageae Teh $5 ensoe See pier anus Gees eee3BE as Soe Bi ateBoats: esere See tnt Po Bw Bemead ME ace ‘Bienes te agmCEE Seas aeaa Ses iBerg RE NS ents ERS tt eaey ysocak baie i enciek HStBits 2 ee cestitre Sie ee ee Bie, se hatincate ein Oe wate ae thediitdag ‘Soke. Us ite tl pee Coanephe eee oot 5Seren a ea 5 ee Ree fae at sme wnat one eae anonpee Sara in ORES D3 titersSens 3g Leth‘Beers ggegees cmccranenn fae PE OSS aaa MS Secs es niits hLT, rn,Othe aea eaets gs2 ba aneants SOE Bae Eee : Phas RO :. ee aauae a a - Bee Bt eeeee es oe ot BSE Ah wetas* Saeeae SEpot RRSeer REO: 5.78a eee se See SRR: & fos 3roby Te HEE ccoeos Pent a PEL PLERTS Baeecat:eePay Bia ee

4ee ER eae Aga eee es eseeglee gas is,SEE eeSRRRRIRE Bie Bigioen 2)eseee ereeeT PIEOeEEF Ssgesaich: gett! Rae 2 aeat| 2eS ait boy AS Ste iste cris SEEre, oS “ SAE Pacts TES Res phsteer Bee PNR REM Fens REET peiPrad SS Be oe SORTS Se ee

Ree | Pot. UB AS see ea Be Bt | anes Sb ae os ae Re se pre Pep is eg noone 2 ee Ct

og : SO aakgen“Seay ae eran Bape t I tes ce Seeeoneen Sch TRE Be a: WERE RRR. heeeane Brees a SESE RE ations oo fe: e_.ogea anaes oa Ee fr Lon Soe og Se i a Sian. eS RRS gieyric Pep : BERRrteiy Se ae ae SRL h:Beer Ree. pe CEE eS. pet oe ao Bets a 2a om Bees ESSE peacea aaphere) he Ce aeeen ae.aLOPES id eee ghi, AES Ryaetna : %3:. 62Pe a Fie cee aa aeSeBecket BYBee Weit aks nfeeecs esas te!dye TEEneeenee ca soe Bio pease ee aaa fouBae as ies a BP ¢ RR eae 3 BSS as a ay PSL BREE! vy fe SeEPS Bisovalt! BR EER jab one Oaa

ae ah ine ,yee es a‘eee a | aa7BP Seats Teeee RPE Be Sse Ses EET: cast~ aa aaaSaBe s ees ee —. a e PI ee gE Be RRS ee 5 yng ‘ a:RES Ek abeh be pty ie st : eee oe:ESTEE oe . ERLE, ® Hees, ia aeeecee ue Pear a:— hob. nah. «bast aCe han SE oe ce ade ae Lage EE Be nk ieee: HEE TG ae. oe eebercnine henna: 2 ee ee PRB py ue ae ate ee mon oR BEES EEEE! DE Wl oS aca SSPE ey Sas

.ee-_ve NeSeagae1 cogs Be ge, “abesels gs ve OEee28eee : aemoe = SE EBEe Seeaeeees a sedepage ‘ aesoea es Ehaie el aaeieee ear Begin scretenasate an ikins a “Ss epee uh ree peae retEugenes ABM Evatt, eee:oeCe EURO, Isistierontig Naa ognape, a ONSee, peg Tt Feats Bis rls RS PRR oe ret EE PY Borges an BEES 2: PES, Temre gE oh a yepies. E EElets ed BiasShei PE amet oa ;ae_ ci ee ro 7 ueBeg ge ae a Lge age aeeehase “heAEB oe aMbt EOE Li BetefrBe uie Ssh BES BSEat ae er ek Soph ee Eee ag? a es 7 ee aoe a pres : Hats i aa itn aebga Bee fights amen oe: Gad “hehe! ae Be SF Sete gh a— BES a ee ey aes Pa Pe bee d Sea BE Eo: RS PPLE oa siiccuisstand © EP hed Be ns Liseale ee BEES we a eg ay le : | ~~ | :wit oeTE aeSsceWAPI me —8)Lmeg 2 . -SO u Penal are presences a PRE EEE x BTL runs hibit? bet gs: ibeResa Anais Sa Been he ett tttPS we Reae ree: Staton CORR. Spine ton Sa Eee ea Mgt Baas Pi Se oot PUAN DnhtBaap Loh yatahend URE A_aw. Be ese ete a ree a4 whe Rt Pad . EE a Bee ar a ele pet Seared 8 BRUM Et EERE et reeseBD fessES peeae et pn Reg oat figs arb EC foe hae See eyoe Boe Tei eyrac ee ee a See weSee nN capa ae OR Ser er> ers ss: Da Soran F: Pe ane Rasrsnnpasnvss miata a oqype me phdaty onFe eal hehe i ae SN tu, REPRE Ree ts 7See EPrk Lethe :ees “Peat 4aeNea at ssGh Es REgk PUES Re Bist ete een ea a ees im oes eeeees eee eae 7 oe eee : rar Pet Soe. TOONS es at Thane fT bast OR “4popeienanes Bae aescee oeoF BUH: peter Biss LAT. a aa area rercSaat assDaa PRE mae aesaeeg

TREES” 7wags See A igs ens : ee ae Be hcateScant oesorts ByeWET peaesoe ath Red pie aoa -: we ain se PEPER PELEae ite BARR Pg Be a: awes ecco, beghift CBE Pr CURD, SUE Gspte mane Apoe fob! eB vee ee = -eee 7 oe oo eeePere gettcee ee Bibi OFghaeREBT ae Seneereree eetpee AES PES Biitibeesseggeete Td erie See

i

S ae escipoe aeYwi ealesLiaiatghts wate REY Riese Re PEE aBe ed OS ee ESSER Cea eereeteed pooLisa nia Sa B me _ rekip dabonset fbi nil wy Spee AEB or ae Le Shen eituens LMbe aan RS vetsLass ms DBrdaganss sehen, wee arn sr egies te aes ae: ELS

oorane co cain” eet: rete SteeBhgaytydt aeseeeee we wae: areas SpE Fe ret coef TE oe oe nay eeteagagt 1 Fete wig 2 Saat rer Se: ea hind Litera PELE TES Sibir, BB WAR Does neeee Seca BOUL weeOne. eefete us ang as ere S woaes : < Pe a i ‘ Ey _geri. ae neE ae 2PRES cae ee a enya Ue are RCtasaPRR SOOT 2 ereyaBE ggstsanteds agiesss oad TL gto coca Wisp ty Mire aSSSEE re ale

ss ee aeapEDnentTee nian Guage On EEN eeer eatee mes eee 4 .pis oo PEPE ee se ME: ta carer ais ee Bei sips: as eae ont nella ait ene Lee pon SOI SSE re re ot CBee ee asearn ‘0 fee ne rewean wi oea: Seer pee : 7ESRe es UseEes a Te fis eee aaa eek epteay cao TE tesshe a agony . en sit a Fos oe feetk PePb BRATS tEER ; hie Sen Ooo Regaae | Pee hae ee eae i i erate ioe ae ee sn oh Giga a sy REE. agit, OUct ty Bae eve Nace eneiene scenesoc eeeSole pie AEP co “3edt — Ca ne ene : aris pyre oe fern ree wae GO nA z ORI ee, tS GRRE Se ER pe ee ae wi ate, oe for dat . aii ee Sita me OOD nO ae Nappe “at! ET ae RE Se scctieeee Se ee ce SOKee Cee | feta? Dantes feeble ney oo . so aetre ERS erinntmanceinten Birans ‘, 2g Oe PO rien AN mae sine Madea ee “ hae an ae piteny atenit fe cnntntitet cae SORE AR KS cn ca he Rccaais ta sae etc pees ae

ear ad geigdhihyl 7 ee fs oe ee BE A Bi Bern oman cc aaaere ete ee ee isa. eek OPed sige we,cainant eeortne oe PN, ie so Pe 1 OSve ae ppeeesneon tesi 2. ssc OO ae “Thee + reer TN Benger rears nod oeey Petra rege Fni RST a— Serena ekeoe ser 8Sh'aasaa HE aeenOO soieee %SB ‘Sa iiss, “ekaeeTeaser many aeSeg Nyei orca aes ete Pears patti eas heBoalt eRe ti“pan, PrdSeine SoS A RR Royse dete Ok, Oe See ae. PeSpee ite eeee see Ceousee Be te "ey Sues a ieoe oepase cS ae oosantas ee. ce ae soit ee ee ae hi ee seg ee le aie ccna i |8

EE a.eae le eeBO gt:eeTOR eae ee BO anaeSEN ate ERIE oeAR ae ae 8 es eget Fees Tea Aene ie eee Oe oo . _SOs . _Seis : a” — oeieaoe iLe, aoF “scientist .get iescsi re FE NAS PRN Resear raSiis aan oo i—— aaa oo ysuscs Ee aes Be aesete cee eee Beas esA ee Emam Wren, brane ee eeao eee aeope Ge ee aeeae Sr SSsSee 2=—esese Es eM a ee a aire a etsy Re poe ey I at es Hs eran he ES . CS eae aie ene on amicus: ee “a aie Bsssomstisenoats Eas SC ae ee era ~ Se gE RE i eee ee ee se ROR ee SEE es PG cat SRE Sap ORI U C Regen RE gee SSS imondtrinaons aout gest Seeteastnins peo Ce Ds SO e . . Feeppesie, 6 ssi So ania sie Se ie ’ te t) i BES i aN aes a Sasa pO dria ae, pete! tae ane TE Bo uae eee Ss ere ee nee Wr teint coninmsnscenseiies React: Precaansmrate Pan TCO Sea eNt ey 4 ee PUES eee eee seER Raa ene eeSS". Bee Po iaag eS see a SN naa ais RE rao See LLRH St Crtaits re unos SE a ee RES satan, are aA aes atEE SES eee FOS Ec ron CI acebiacronctniatt se i SRE St NUN sennaiSST ae oe nasaa ep ER nhago aaa ster ierBERS “ieee sis SRR NRE rh EN ogneigh, sop a ars eRe iets AOR aOR RG sentient eee EC RST neo SCR SM rane aN SR sates aaa ten aaee eRenCo aio etSESE Tsoie igsiitnpints te wen. Saree prtatnaennrana OD: SoNS aBRB atisn aSaRN —

--—« oy @323= here tIldine situa an — = Se aie lid} tan _ es RE RR Oa . U S — = eee | } O fa a i i#323=3= =D EERO: UW . ee , e )