English Public Finance and the National State in the Sixteenth Century

Dietz, Frederick C.

doi:10.4159/harvard.9780674368897.c8

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…He forced the patentees for the transportation of tin to take a new lease at a higher price and squeezed so hard they surrendered it. 68 At the same time that he was pressuring the colonial tobacco producers, he was pressing the currant importers to surrender their patented privileges, insisting that 'the farmers of the currants do by instrument under their seal relinquish to the King all their claim thereto by any general word of their patent'. 69 Many merchants were prepared to oblige the king in return for a share of monopoly profits.…”

Section: The Context Of the Cancellationmentioning

confidence: 99%

The End of the Gamble: The Termination of the Virginia Lotteries in March 1621*

Rose

2008

Parliamentary History

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The sudden cancellation of the Virginia lotteries during the first sitting of the parliament of 1621 was not part of a general parliamentary attack on monopolies but a calculated political act intended to pressure the Virginia Company of London to pay more taxes than required by its charter of 1612. The appropriate context for considering the cancellation is the financial difficulties of James I and the search for funds by Sir Lionel Cranfield. The cancellation coincided with a rejection of a new charter for the company, possibly incited by Count Gondomar, the Spanish ambassador in England. The cancellation of the lotteries was the most important turning point in the history of Jamestown and started the company on its downward spiral.

show abstract

Section: The Context Of the Cancellationmentioning

confidence: 99%

The End of the Gamble: The Termination of the Virginia Lotteries in March 1621*

Rose

2008

Parliamentary History

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…But they were. 106 For his services, Cranfield was knighted, but virtue was not his only reward. The cogency of Cranfield's argument could not be denied but Cranfield's statistics did not take into account the patronage relationships which determined the distribution of rewards at court.…”

Section: 7mentioning

confidence: 99%