The Case stated specially between Mr. Redhead + Mr. Blofield.

By the Day bookes of the late Mint at Norwich + the Cashbookes of Mr. Redhead + his Clerk + by another book composed + sign'd by the warden of that Mint we find that Mr. Redhead upon the breaking up of that Mint was indebted 2497l: 16s: 03d to Mr. Blofield for hammer'd mony at 5s. per Ounce.

In Discharge of this Debt Mr. Redhead produces three Receipts for 2500l: paid to Mr. Blofields order out of that Mint, the one dated augt. 26th. 1697 for 500l the other two dated augt. the 30th. + Sepr. 1st. 1697 for 1000l each to which Mr. Blofield + his friends answered that whatsoever summs were payd to him or his order out of that mint upon such private Receipts were paid in Course for silver Imported + intended upon the next accounting to be brought to account + set off upon the printed Mint Ticquetts then payable in Course + accordingly were all of them faithfully brought to account as he is ready to make oath but the Receipts were not alwais taken up + Cancell'd as they should have been The endorsment on the printed Mint ticquetts implying (as they Conceived) according to the order + Course of the Mint that all summs paid untill the day of the Endorsment were then accounted for + sett off upon the printed Ticketts + thereby all private Receipts of such summes untill that day discharg'd + made voyd, which made him + his agents less carefull to take them up. They say also that about three weeks after the date of the said three Receipts vizt. on 22th. sepr. 1697 Mr. Blofield accounted with Mr. Redhead and endorsed 14922l. on two Mint ticketts including all summs paid to him untill that time + that in so short a time as three weeks so great a summ as 2500l could not be forgott + that in Decr. following he accounted again + endorsed 6443l: 13s: 09d on two other Mint ticketts including all further summs untill that day, By which accountings + Endorsements the said three Receipts (if they be true ones) being looked upon as Discharg'd, they were not mentioned any further by Mr. Redhead while that Mint stood nor for a long time after but lay neglected till he thought fitt to produce them, as he did also some other Receipts of the same kind which the Importers neglected to take up + cancell + which are now allow'd to be voyd.

In examining this matter we find therefore that Mr. Redhead did pay severall summs of mony to Mr. Blofield + some other Importers upon private Receipts without endorseing the summs upon the printed Mint ticketts untill they came to a Generall Reckoning upon the tickett or ticketts next payable in course, + that the Importers did sometimes upon such a Reckoning neglect to take up their Receipts That Mr. Blofield did endorse 14922l: on two ticketts 22th. sepr. 1697 + 6443: 13: 09 more on two others in Decr. following as he alledged + we humbly Conceive these Endorsements by the Course of the Mint to be in full of all monys paid upon those ticketts so as to voyd the said three Receipts unless Mr. Redhead can positively prove the payment of more mony by 2500l upon the two first of those tickets then {was}{were} <36> Endorsed upon them which proof is wanting + would infer the Crime of undue Preference, the Officers of that Mint for preventing Misreckonings took an account every two or three dayes + sometimes dayly of all the mony's new Coyned + paid away + of what remained in the treasury whereby a Misreckoning of 2500l might soon have been discovered, whereas those three Receipts lay neglected till about Michaelmas 1699 which was two yeares after the Endorsment Mr. Redhead representing that he then found also & produced a Receipt of 1858l. left in that Mint by Mr. Dashwood another Importer of publick Hammere'd mony, but by an affidavitt of Mr. Allen Clerk to the Warden of that Mint made before my Lord Chief Baron Ward the 3d. of Iuly 1701 + by other Circumstances it appeares to us, That mr. Dashwood did account for that mony + neglected to take up + Cancell the Receipt + this is now acknowledged also by Mr. Redhead and about the same time the said Mr. Redhead produced also two other Receipts of the aforesaid Mr. Blofield besides the three above mentioned both dated in the said Month of augt. 1697 the one for 500l the other for 1000l but by the aforesaid affidavit of Mr. Allen these summs were accounted for upon the same 22th. sepr. 1697 + Mr. Redhead insists no further upon them seeing therefore that Mr. Blofield upon accounting on the said 22th. Sepr. 1697 did neglect to take up + Cancell his Receipts then accounted for or some of them it may be suspected that the three now produced were of that Number, For the said Mr. allen in the affidavitt above mentioned affirmes further that he hath heard + believes that Mr. Redhead hath another Note of Mr. Blofield for 1000l + believes that Mr. Blofield forgott to take up that Note when he accounted for the mony + sign'd the printed Receipt or Tickett which Note wee take to be one of the three Receipts now produced by Mr. Redhead, and Mr. Redhead affirmes nothing further of the said three Receipts then that he found them amongst his papers sometime after that Mint broke up + believes them truely to be sign'd by Mr. Crowne who now imploy'd by Mr Demee the agent of Mr. Blofield.


Is: Newton

[1] Ianry 15 1702

© 2020 The Newton Project

Professor Rob Iliffe
Director, AHRC Newton Papers Project

Scott Mandelbrote,
Fellow & Perne librarian, Peterhouse, Cambridge

Faculty of History, George Street, Oxford, OX1 2RL - newtonproject@history.ox.ac.uk

Privacy Statement

  • University of Oxford
  • Arts and Humanities Research Council
  • JISC