Scandinavian Economic History Review

ISSN: 0358-5522 (Print) 1750-2837 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/sehr20

Freight costs in the English East India trade

1601–1657

Niels Steensgaard

To cite this article: Niels Steensgaard (1965) Freight costs in the English East India
trade 1601–1657, Scandinavian Economic History Review, 13:2, 143-162, DOI:
10.1080/03585522.1965.10414367

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/03585522.1965.10414367

Published online: 20 Dec 2011.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 206

Citing articles: 3 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=sehr20
 Freight Costs in the English East India
Trade 1601-1657*
By NIELS STEENSGAARD, COPENHAGEN

Uncertainty about the actual costs of the East India trade in the early seven-
teenth century has often led to exaggerated ideas of the risks and profits associated
with the trade. This lack of knowledge makes it impossible to analyse satisfactor-
ily the conditions during the first half of the seventeenth century which enabled
the north-west European countries to prevail in the competition for the East
India trade. With few exceptions invoices and ledgers from the early seventeenth
century have disappeared. The following paper, based on other miscellaneous
material, is an attempt to estimate the English East India Company's freight
costs on the Cape route up to the time of the Company's reconstruction in 1657.

The Freight Costs in the First Decades.

The agreement concluded in 1619 between the English and Dutch East India
Companies 1 contained a proviso that all goods seized during the preceding
hostilities should be returned. But since meanwhile the Dutch had conveyed part
of the goods seized-720,000 lbs. of pepper-to Europe, the question arose as to
how much the Dutch would be entitled to deduct as payment for carrying them
to Europe. 2 While both sides were immediately able to agree on 10 per cent as a
reasC'nable insurance premium, the Dutch demand for £130 per last in freight
was countered by an English offer of £25-28 per last. The outcome of the
negotiations was partly influenced by matters unconnected with freight costs, and
in this paper we shall concern ourselves only with one of the English contri-

* This article is a slightly extended translation of 'Fragtomkostningerne i den engelske ost-

indienshandel 1601-57', printed in Festskrift til Astrid Friis, (K0benhavn, 1963).
1 Printed in Corps Uniuersel Diplomatique, ed. J. du Mont, (Amsterdam, 1728), Vol. v: 2,
pp.333-37.
2 Papers concerning these negotiations, which were conducted during the opening months

of 1622, in the Public Record Office, London. C. O. 77, Vol. 2.

144 NIELS STEENSGAARD

butions to the argument, in the course of which the English negotiators quoted
examples of various freight costs in support of their offer. 3 Such a source must
of course be open to the suspicion that the English, out of regard for their own
interests, would try to put freight costs at the lowest possible level. But compari-
son with figures given by Trinity House and a number of London ship-owners
which will be referred to later, as well as with other sources, does show that the
budgets given, though perhaps cut fine, were nonetheless realistic.
For the quantity in question the English stated that a vessel of 240 lasts Dutch
measure, or 480 tons English measure, would be required; such a ship would call
for a crew of 120, and the following rough estimate of costs was drawn up :

Example 1
Wages, 120 men @ 25s. per month £150
Victuals, 120 men @ 20s. per month £120
'Weare and teare and loane of the ship' £300

Total monthly expenditure £570

(Estimated) costs, 1 ton per 24 months: £28.1Os.

The argument was then supported by a practical example, and a summary

of the accounts of the Lesser James, which had carried home a similar quantity
of pepper, was given:
Example 2
The ship new built cost set to sea with all furniture and victuals £11,000
The wages at return £3,300
The assurance of the ship and victuals, 10 per cent £1,000 (sic)
The assurance homewards £1,000
The interest of £11,000 for 2 years, 10 per cent p.a. £2,200

Total £18,500
The ship at 24 months' end was worth £4,000

£14,500
(Estimated) monthly expenditure: £604.3s.4d.
(Estimated) costs, 1 ton for 24 months: £30.4s.2d.

At first sight there are considerable differences between the two estimates, even
though the gap between the final results is not very great. The differences are,
however, merely a matter of posting. In Example 1 insurance and interest are
included in the item 'weare and teare and loane of the ship', while in Example

3 Public Record Office. C. 0.77, Vol. 2, No. 11.

 FREIGHT COSTS IN THE ENGLISH EAST INDIA TRADE 145

2 victuals are included in the cost of fitting out the ship. If we make the as-
sumption, reasonable in the circumstances, that the crew of the James was
calculated at 120 men, it will be seen that the amount given in Example 2 for
wages, £3,300, would cover only 22 months. Doubtless, therefore, 2 months'
wages, or 'imprest money' was included in the costs of fitting out in Example 2.
This method of accounting was logical in view of the fact that the loss of two
years' interest had to be allowed for on the advance, whereas the rest of the wages
was paid in arrears. 4
The English supplemented these estimates by two 'expert declarations' in
support of the English freight calculations:

Example 3
A declaration was submitted from seven London ship-owners among whom, incidentally,
were such prominent figures as Raphe Freeman, Henry Garway and William Cockayne. 5
Each of the seven ship-owners declared himself ready and willing on his own account to
send a ship to the East and back again for £35 per ton including four months' free load-
ing time. They reckoned on being able to carry 15 cwt. of pepper per ton, though two of
the ship-owners made the express proviso that it would have to be 'loose pepper', i.e.
stowed in bulk. The ship-owners' offer was for a full voyage with four months' loading
time. This was estimated by the Company as being equivalent to £28 per last for 10 months,
i.e. the ship-owners reckoned on the duration of the whole voyage being 25 months.

Example 4
Finally the English statement included a declaration from Trinity House. This institu-
tion was also of the opinion that the quantity in dispute could be transported in a ship
of 480 tons nett with a crew of 120 men, and it considered that a reasonable freight for
such a vessel would be £640 per month or, for the whole voyage including four months'
loading time, £32 per ton.

The four examples thus give the following rates per ton for a full voyage:
Ex. 1 : £ 28.1 Os., Ex. 2: £30.4s.2d., Ex.3: £35., Ex. 4: £32. There is no doubt
that Ex. 1 is too closely pared, while Ex. 3, which is based on an additional month
away, and, because it presumably contained a certain amount of profit for the
ship-owner, must be assumed to exceed the actual costs involved.

4 The same distinction was made in the example below of the third separate voyage, and
was also used by the Dutch East India Company. (Kristof Glamann, Dutch-Asiatic Trade 1620-
1740, (Kl'lbenhavn-Haag, 1958), p. 43).
5 Raphe Freeman was the largest Muscovy merchant in 1620-22; see Astrid Friis, Alderman

Cockayne's Project and the Cloth Trade. The Commercial Policy of England in its Main As-
pects 1603-25, (Kl'lbenhavn, 1927), pp. 56-57, n. 5. Like the rest of the Garway family, Henry
Garway was particularly interested in the Levant and Italian trade (ibid., p. 177). The William
Cockayne mentioned here is presumably William Cockayne jun., since the name is given with-
out any title.

10 Scand. Econ. Hist. Rev.

146 NIELS STEENSGAARD

A check on the calculations given and a basis of comparison are provided by

reference to a survey of expenses connected with the third separate voyage which
left England in the spring of 1606. 6 Account must of course be taken of the
changes in prices and wages during the intervening sixteen years, but the list
of goods and services involved in the building and fitting out of a ship is too long
and complicated to allow of generalisations on this point. 7
In the calculation of 1606 the length of the voyage was assumed to be 24
months and the size of the crews to be 150, 100 and 30 men respectively, the
following items being specified:

Dragon Hector Consent

Ship £2,400.16s. £1,416

Fitting Out £4,770 £3,000
Victuals £2,895 £1,726
Imprest to men £784 £322
Charges outwards £10,849,16s. £6,464 £2,600

In addition, for all three ships, men's wages on return: £10,000.

Before the calculation is compared with the estimate given above not only
must men's wages on return be added but also 20 per cent of the sum for fitting
out for loss of interest and 20 per cent for insurance. On the analogy of Ex. 2
this last figure is somewhat understated.

Dragon Hector Consent

Charges outwards £10,849.16s. £6,464 £2,600

Wages on return £5,357. 5s. £3,571.10s. £1,071. 5s.
Interest (estimated) £2,170 £1,292 £520
Insurance (estimated) £2,000 £1,000 £500

Total freight costs £20,377. Is. £12,327.10s. £4,691. 5s.

As often happens, the tonnage of the three ships is difficult to determine

SO

accurately on account of the varying information. The above estimate gives the
tonnages as 600, 500 and 120 tons respectively. In another estimate of about the
same time, worked out in connection with the same voyages, the tonnage of the

6 Printed in The Register of Letters etc. of the Governour and Company of Merchants of
London Trading into the East Indies, ed. Sir George Birdwood, (London, 1893), pp. 95-102.
7 Thomas Mun stated in 1621 that the prices of ship's provisions had not risen during the

preceding 15 years. Thomas Mun, A Discourse of Trade from England into the East Indies,
(1621) in Early English Tracts on Commerce, ed. J. R. McCulloch, (Cambridge, 1954), p. 25.
 FREIGHT COSTS IN THE ENGLISH EAST INDIA TRADE 147

three ships was quoted as 700, 500 and 105 tons. 8 In the Company's commission
for the same voyages, 700, 500 and 115 tons were cited. 9 What concerns us in
the present connection is the quantity of goods the three ships were capable of
carrying home. The estimate in The Register of Letters etc. gives certain infor-
mation on this, the cargo which the three ships were to bring home from the
East being calculated as follows: Dragon: 10,500 sacks of pepper and 460 bakars
of cloves; Hector: pepper, nutmeg, cloves and mace to a value of 40,000 rials
of eight; Consent: the same goods as the Hector to a value of 12,000 rials of eight.
On this basis we can calculate the Dragon's burden as 708 tons.,10 We can
also see that the Hector was expected to carry 371 times the Consent's cargo
which, on arrival home from this voyage, is known to have been 112,000 lbs.
of cloves. 11 If, then, we put the Consent's burden at 112 tons, the corresponding
figure for the Hector would be 373 tons. The costs per ton for a 24-month voyage
can accordingly be stated as follaws:
Dragon: £28.15s.7d.; Hector. £33.1s.; Consent: £41.17s.8d. The weighted
average for the entire fleet was thus worked out at £31.6s.11 d. per ton.
Broadly speaking, the estimate of 1606 may be said to confirm the examples
given in 1622. Divergences are not large enough and the material is insufficient

8 Commonwealth Relations Office, London. Marine Records Misc., Vol. 4. f. 11 ff.

9 The Register of Letters etc., p. 114.
10 1 sack of pepper = 65 Engl. lbs., 1 bahar= 550 Eng. lbs.; d. J. C. Van Leur, Indo-
nesian Trade and Society. (Haag-Bandung, 1955), p.369. In this paper 1,000 lbs. cloves and
1,500 lbs. pepper are reckoned to equal 1 ton of shipping; d. Bal Krishna, Commercial Rela-
tions between India and England, 1601 to 1757, (London, 1924), pp.248-49.
11 Calendar of State Papers, Colonial Series, East Indies, ed. W. Noel Sainsbury, 1513-1616,
p. 181. Regarding the ship's ton see Bal Krishna, op. cit., pp. 241-43; W. H. Moreland, India
at the Death of Akbar, (London, 1920), pp. 310-12; Ralph Davis, The Rise of the English
Shipping Industry, (London, 1962), p.7, n. 1.; and Frederick C. Lane, 'Tonnages Medieval
and Modern', Economic History Review, 2nd ser., xvii (1964-65). The ship's ton has often
given rise to considerable confusion. For the period treated here it must be emphasised that
the ton, at any rate so far as the Levant and the East India trade were concerned, was de-
fined, both as regards the ship-owner and the merchant, in relation to the quantity of goods,
not to the ship's tonnage measurements. This meant that agreement in the charter party or a
Company resolution determined what quantity of each type of goods corresponded to a ton.
An example of the former is to be found in the copy of a charter party for the Exchange and
the Susan to Alexandretta 1597 (British Museum Lansdowne Ms. 241, f. 319a) ; a company
resolution subsequently became customary in both the Levant Company and the East India
Company (Bal Krishna, op. cit., pp. 247-50, d. Ralph Davis, op. cit., p. 180, n. 3). In contrast
to a ship's official gross tonnage, which was arrived at by conventional measurements, or
measurements laid down by law, and was therefore an unchangeable size, the nett tonnage
depended on the size of the armament, the quantity of water and provisions carried, the num-
ber of passengers and merchants with their own cabins, the skill and energy of the crew in
stowing, etc.

10*
148 NIELS STEENSGAARD

for it to be possible to draw any conclusion regarding changes in the level of

freight costs or their composition in the intervening period. 12
From the foregoing, therefore, £30-32 per ton might be regarded as the normal
cost of an English East India voyage of 24 months in the early decades of the
seventeenth century.

The Freight Costs of the Dutch East India Company.

The only information so far produced on the Dutch East India Company's
freight costs during this period is an estimate for a flute or flyboat to Batavia in
1636. 13 But a direct comparison with the English estimate cannot in this case be
made, for according to the information given the estimate is cut extremely fine.
The crew, 40 men for 170-180 lasts, or 1 man per ca. 8.75 tons, is also well
below the customary level of manning both in the English and Dutch East
India trade. 14
On one single point, however, a comparison can be made, i.e. on the question

12 On the other hand it is significant that expenses fell as the size of the ship increased.
This is in accordance with the ratio between tonnage and crew which, for the Dragon, was
708/150 or 1 man per 4.72 tons, for the Hector 373/100 or 1 man per 3.73 tons, and for the
Consent 112/30, or the same ratio as for the Hector, 1 man per 3.73 tons. In this 'economy of
the big ships' doubtless lies the explanation of the increase, so catastrophic for safety, in the
size of the Portuguese carracks towards the end of the sixteenth century. (See The Tragic
History of the Sea, ed. C. R. Boxer, Hakluyt Society, 2nd series, Vol. CXII, (Cambridge, 1959),
pp. 2-4; James Duffy, Shipwreck and Empire (Cambridge, Mass., 1955), chap. III and pas-
sim). In 1622 the building of carracks in Portugal for the Asia trade was forbidden, and in
the years that followed the Portuguese went over to the use of the smaller but safer galleons.
(C. R. Boxer, 'Admiral Joao Corte-Real and the Construction of Portuguese East-Indiamen in
the Early 17th Century', Mariners Mirror, (1940).)
The East India Company soon learned by experience that manoeuvrability and seaworthiness
were in inverse ratio to the size of the ship. The most famous example of this is the Trade's
Increase, which, with its approximately 1,000 tons, was the largest merchantman so far built
in England. Launched with pride in 1609, it failed to return from its maiden voyage. Its tragic
history can be found in Cal. S. P., East Indies, 1513-1616 and in Letters Received by the East
India Company from its Servants in the East, ed. W. Foster, (London, 1896), Vol. I. In the
1620s a number of ships in the 7-800 tons class were in use, but when broken up they were
not replaced, and subsequently, apart from a short period in the 1680s, 350-500 tons was the
normal size for the English East India traders right down to ca. 1775. (C. N. Parkinson, Trade
in the Eastern Seas, 1793-1813, (Cambridge, 1937), pp. 165-67; and K. N. Chaudhuri, 'The
East India Company and the Organisation of its Shipping in the Early Seventeenth Century',
Mariner's Mirror, (1963).)
13 Brought to light by K. Glamann, op. cit., p.48, n. 122.
14 Cf. above, n. 12. For standard Dutch manning see Pieter van Dam, Beschryvinge van de
Oostindische Compagnie, ed. F. W. Stapel. Rijks geschiedkundige Publicatien, Vol. 63, (Haag,
1927), I: 1, p.505.
 FREIGHT COSTS IN THE ENGLISH EAST INDIA TRADE 149

of wages and victuals, which in the Dutch estimate are calculated for 40 men
for 20 months as follows:

Wages 13,020 fl. per man/month: 16.275 fl. (30s.1d.)

Victuals 9,600 fl. per man/month: 12.0 fl. (22s.3d.)15

This is closely in line with Bewindhebbers, Amsterdam, who in 1631 put monthly
wages and victuals per man at 29 £1. 16 or, in English money, £2.13s.8d. at the
same rate of conversion as above.
It is safe to assume that Dutch wages and victualling costs were somewhat
higher than the corresponding English ones in view of the fact that Dutch wages
and prices were higher than the English. Furthermore, the crews of Dutch ships
seem to have been larger than the corresponding English crews, partly because
the Dutch were accustomed to have soldiers on board. 17 Since the cost of the
crew accounted for nearly half the entire running costs, and since it was only on
exceptional occasions in the East India trade that the Dutch could reap the full
benefit of the more economic types of ships which were their strength in the
European trade, the Dutch, so far as running costs were concerned, were no more
competitive on the Cape route than the English. 18
But it is interesting to see how the Dutch company tried, by greater economy
on board, to counteract the disadvantage of the higher food prices in the Nether-
lands. A Dutch food list of 1629 19 is based on a man's rations of % lb. meat or
pork 3 times a week, ~ lb. fish 4 times a week, and 4 lb. bread a week. An English
ration list of 1606 20 is based on larger rations: 4/ 5-1 11 / 2 lb. fish, meat or pork,
with only 5 fish days for every 16 meat days. Bread is calculated at 24 lb. per
man/month. Even bearing in mind that the Dutch pound was ca. 10 per cent
larger than the English, English seamen lived somewhat better than their Dutch
colleagues. An estimate given in connection with a private English voyage ca.
1600 21 is based on even more generous rations, i.e. 12/14 lb. meat 8 times a

15 Converted at 36 sch. FI. per £; d. N. W. Posthumus, Nederlandsche Prijsgeschiedenis,

(Leiden, 1943), i. pp.590-91.
16 Bronnen tot de Geschiedenis der Oostindische Compagnie in Perzie, ed. H. Dunlop. Rijks

geschiedkundige Publicatien, (Haag, 1930), Vol. 72, p. 363.

17 Pieter van Dam, loco cit.
18 Cf. Violet Barbour, 'Dutch and English Merchant Shipping in the Seventeenth Century',
Economic History Review, ii (1929-30), pp. 265 and 273-75.
19 Public Record Office, C.O. 77, Vol. 7, No.1; d. Pieter van Dam, op. cit., pp.517-18.
20 The Register of Letters etc., p. 112.
21 Commonwealth Relations Office, Marine Misc., Vol. 4, f. 5.
150 NIELS STEENSGAARD

month, 9/ 14 lb. pork 8 times a month, 6/ 14 lb. bacon 8 times a month and 2/ 3 lb.
fish daily.

The Changeover to the Use of Chartered Ships.

While there is no reason to suppose that alterations of any consequence in the
East India Company's freight costs took place during the first forty years of the
Company's history, they fell considerably after 1640 at the same time as-though,
as will be shown, not on account of-the changeover to the use of chartered ships.
The first time discussions took place over the chartering of a private ship to
Asia was in 1607. 22 Tenders were invited by the court of the Company at £30 per
ton, but without success, apparently because the freight offered was too low. The
gap between the estimates of the Company and those of the ship-owners is
illustrated by an offer received by the Company in 1614.23 The ship in question
was the Great Defence, later known as the Defence, of 300 tons. It was offered
to the Company, equipped with 33 cannon, 40 barrels of gunpowder, a crew of
70 men including the captain and ship's boys, and provision of all kinds, for 20
months. In addition the owners guaranteed both on behalf of themselves and of
the crew not to indulge in private trade and undertook to replace any damaged
goods. 60 lay-days would be allowed without demurrage, and the freight de-
manded was £37.10s. per ton, with 15 cwt. of pepper per ton and all other
goods as in the Levant trade. The owners, Mr. Freeman and Mr. Moore, were,
however, prepared to reduce the rate to £35 per ton against an interest-free
advance of £2,000. The offer was given serious consideration by the Court. They
came to the conclusion that such a voyage could be completed in 17-18 months
at most, and so £30 per ton would be a reasonable freight. When the owners
turned down this counter-offer the Company bought the Defence with all its
equipment for £2,000. 24
In 1628 the Governor was able to inform the Court of Committees that Trinity
House had started negotiations for the transport of pepper from Bantam at a
freight of 6d. per lb., which he considered dear, though worth considering. 25 At
1500 lbs. per ton this offer, or rather this point of departure for negotiations,
corresponds to £37.1 Os. per ton. The negotiations did not lead to any result, but
in the following year the Court again seriously considered the possibility of ob-

22 K. N. Chaudhuri, op. cit., p. 29.

23 Commonwealth Relations Office, Court Minutes, Vol. 3, f. 301.
24 Commonwealth Relations Office, Court Minutes, Vol. 3, f.335.
25 Calendar S. P., East Indies, 1625/29, p. 502.
 FREIGHT COSTS IN THE ENGLISH EAST INDIA TRADE 151

taining a vessel on charter. It was stated on this occasion that, as a rule, the
Company's ships cost them £36-37 per ton, and in order to encourage any inter-
ested parties it was resolved to offer £40 per ton. But even this offer was insuf-
ficient to attract owners. 26
In 1636 the situation was reversed. The Court was offered a ship of 300 tons
with 70 men for 18 or 24 months at £400 per month; for a 24-months' voyage
this is equivalent to £32 per ton, and for an 18- months' voyage to £24 per ton
-in other words the lowest offer yet received and below what the Court had
been ready to pay in 1629. However, the Court declined the offer, which they
considered 'neither seasonable nor suitable' .27
The demand for a changeover to chartering was, however, put forward from
time to time by the private shareholders, who thought that it would provide an
opportunity of reducing the Company's high fixed costs. 28 The first charter, for
the Caesar, which was despatched in 1640, must be considered against the back-
ground of the Company's difficult economic situation at the time. A month
before the negotiations for the charter began the Court had made drastic
reductions in the Company's staff in England. 29 The Court of Committees was
far from enthusiastic over the idea of chartering, which it regarded as an emer-
gency measure, and the arguments against chartering were strenuously advanced
at the General Court on the 23 September 1640. It was then argued that char-
tered ships would lead to an increase in private trading, that the ships would be
insufficiently manned, victualled, etc., and would thus be unable to aid each
other in an emergency, and finally that demurrage was an uncertain factor which,
it was feared, would add considerably to the cost of the trade. 3D
So it was with some hesitation and unwillingness that the Court agreed to
employ chartered ships; that this took place at all was due principally to the
difficult economic situation of the Company, which made the shareholders and
the Court less ready to risk long-teIm economic investment.
In the eighteenth century 'the shipping interest'-the circle of ship-owners who,
by custom and monopoly, chartered ships to the East India Company-became
a troublesome and expensive parasite on the East India trade and was surrounded

26 Ibid., p. 663.
27 A Calendar of the Court Minutes etc. of the East India Company, 1635/39, ed. E. B. Sains-
bury, p. 307.
28 E.g. in 1636 (Cal. Court Minutes, 1635/39, p. 154), and in 1640 (Cal. Court Minutes,
1640/43, p. 93).
29 Cal. Court Minutes, 1635/39, p. 307.

30 Cal. Court Minutes, 1640/43, p. 93.

 152 NIELS STEENSGAARD

by many uneconomic and entrenched customs which, not surprisingly, have

appalled the Company's historians. 31 The fact that nevertheless the charter system
became established is undoubtedly due to the decline in freight costs which
accompanied its introduction, as appears from Table 1.

Table 1
Number of Chartered Ships and the Freights Agreed Prior to 1657
(£ per ton for a full voyage)

Bantam Surat Coast

Ships Freight Ships Freight Ships Freight

1640 25
1641
1642 21 20-30
1643
1644
1645
1646 2 20
1647
1648 2 20 2 20-25 1 25
1649 3 17-20
1650 3 17-18 2 18-22
1651 1 17 1 18-22 1 18-22
1652 2 17 1 17-21 1 19-23
1653
1654 17 1 ? 1 20-23*
1655 ?
1656 1601 1 18-20 1 1601-1801
Source: Compiled on the basis of information in Cal. Court Minutes.
* Subject to peace being concluded with Holland before the departure of the ship.

Only a single copy of a charter-party appears to have been preserved,32 but

from the Court minutes copious information is available on the conditions under
which the contract between the ship-owner and the Company was concluded.
In addition to information regarding the ship's name, size, armament, manning
and command, the agreements also laid down such things as time-limits for the
voyage. One way of determining the latter was to agree on a time-limit for the
ship's departure from England which the ship-owners were obliged to observe,

31 See e.g. C. N. Parkinson, op. cit., p. 170-71. It is perhaps not pure chance that the ori-
ginator of the sociological study of bureaucracy started as a historian of the East India Com-
pany.
32 For the Aleppo Merchant to Surat in 1642, see Commonwealth Relations Office, Factory
Rec. Misc., Vol. 12, f. 8 ff.
 FREIGHT COSTS IN THE ENGLISH EAST INDIA TRADE 153

and a date for the completion of loading in the eastern port, which the Company
was obliged to honour. The Aleppo Merchant, for example, was to be ready to
leave the Downs by the end of February 1648 and to sail to Surat where, for its
part, the Company was to provide a cargo before the end of January 1649. 33
What seems to have been more usual, however, was for it to be agreed in advance
how long the ship was to stay in the eastern port, which was either the port of
arrival or elsewhere as the factors of the Company in Asia required, without
extra payment. The free waiting time was 2-4 months, e. g. 60 days for the
Ulysses to Bantam in 1642/4 the same for the Endymion to Bantam in 1645,35
4 months for the Advice to Bantam in 1648,36 and the same for the Endymion
to Bantam in 1649. 37 If the Company's factor was unable to obtain a cargo for
the ship before time ran out the Company bound itself to pay demurrage, which
was calculated per day at rates which varied from £8 to £15 according to the
size of the ship.
As regards freight rates for Surat and the Coast and, in certain cases, for
Bantam, the agreements always differentiated between fine and coarse goods, or
between goods in bulk and in parcels. For bulk goods, such as pepper and saltpetre,
which could be stowed more efficiently in the hold, a lower rate of freight was
charged. Similar differentiation could be seen in the Levant trade. 38 In this
connection it is interesting to note that the charter party of the Aleppo Merchant
to Surat in 1642 39 obliged the Company to load part of the ship's tonnage-70
out of 400 tons- with pepper. At first sight this clause seems illogical, since the
freight on pepper was only £20 per ton as against £30 per ton for other goods.
The explanation is undoubtedly that the hold could only be efficiently stowed if
part of the cargo was taken on board in bulk and possibly stowed loose between
bales and barrels.
The charter party also contained clauses concerning responsibility and risks.
The Company bore the risk of the cargo unless, as the charter party of 1640 put
it, this was due to 'ill or bad stowedge or other defaulte or negligence'.
Finally there were clauses setting out the extent of legal private trade which,
it should be noted, might benefit the ship-owners as well as the captain and crew,

33 Cal. Court Minutes, 1644/49, p. 229.

34 Op. cit., 1640/43, p. 235.
35 op. cit., 1644/49, p. 112.
36 Op. cit., 1644/49, p. 242.
37 op. cit., 1644/49, p. 292.
38 M. Epstein, The English Levant Company, (London, 1908), chap. IX.
39 Commonwealth Relations Office, Factory Rec. Misc., Vol. 12, f. 8 ff.
154 NIELS STEENSGAARD

and could therefore be an important consideration in fixing the freight. It is

unfortunate, therefore, that we do not in all cases have information about the
extent of the approved private trade. In the case of the Aleppo Merchant in 1642
it was 5 tons outwards and 10 tons homewards, with a stipulation that it should
not include any goods of consequence in which the Company itself traded. 40 In
1650 private trade was fixed at 5 tons each way for each 100 tons chartered by
the Company.41 A less strict attitude to private trade in the uncertain period of
the 1650s could therefore have contributed to a reduction in freights.

The Reasons for the Decline in Freight Costs.

In the opening decades of the century it appears that the Company had to
reckon with freight costs of £30-32 per ton for a voyage of 24 months. Table 1
shows that after the changeover to chartering these costs were considerably re-
duced. Our next step, therefore, will be to determine how this reduction in cost
was brought about.
Table 2
Returned Ships and Average Time of Absence, 1601-57

Bantam Surat Coast

No. of No. of No. of
Months Months Months
Ships Ships Ships

1601-10 10 28
1611-20 19 33 6 24
1621-30 19 41 22 32
1631-40 18 35 16 35
1641-50 23 19 15 17 2 19
1651-57 7 17 8 21 6 19

Source: See Appendix p. 161.

The chief factor was undoubtedly the reduction in the time that ships were
away. As mentioned above, they were normally victualled for 24 months, and
the estimated costs of transport are based on an absence of this length of time.
But looking at the actual time of absence we find that up to 1640 it was consider-
ably longer for nearly all ships, while after 1640 it was appreciably shorter-not
only for chartered ships but for the Company's own ships as well.
From the figures for individual years the turning-point appears to have occurred

40 Commonwealth Relations Office, Factory Rec. Misc., Vol. 12, f. 9.

41 Cal. Court Minutes, 1650/54, p. 182, d. p. 171.
 FREIGHT COSTS IN THE ENGLISH EAST INDIA TRADE 155

in 1640 when, of four ships returning, three were despatched during the preceding
year.
Time of absence is not to be confused with the duration of voyages, in which
no change of consequence took place during the period under review. The normal
length of time at sea for all three presidencies was 6-8 months outwards and 7-9
months home. The Dutch company considered 7 months from Holland to Ban-
tam good and 9 months acceptable, but possibly the Dutch ships took longer over
the voyage than the English, partly because of their bigger cargo, partly because
they often took the route round the north of Scotland. 42
Two, or perhaps three, circumstances affected the period of absence. The most
important of these were political considerations. In 1617-19 competition with
the Dutch for the trade in the fine spices, cloves and nutmeg of the Moluccas
led to open warfare east of Cape Comorin; in 1621-23 the English had to make
ships available for the common defence fleet which was set up under the treaty of
1619; in 1622 the Portuguese fortress at Hormuz was conquered, which tied
down a whole fleet for a year, and finally, until 1635 sailings to Surat and Persia
had to be made in convoy as a safeguard against the Portuguese. All these factors
tied down a considerable tonnage which consisted to a large extent of ships which
should have returned to Europe.
During their sojourn in Asian waters, however, the return ships were employed
not only in protective duties. Before being sent home most of them also took part
in the port-to-port trade in Asia, although only in exceptional cases did this trade
provide them with enough cargo to fill all their space.
Such inefficient use of tonnage was partly a matter of security and prestige,
but in addition to political considerations and participation in local Asiatic trades
a third factor helped to prolong the ship's sojourn in the East-the absence of a
clear view of the situation on the part of the court of directors, and a consequent
lack of balance between return tonnage and purchasing capital. In the 1620s we
frequently find in the minutes of meetings references to discussions on the ratio
between tonnage and capital, but the discussions always leave the impression that
the Company had very little sure knowledge of the situation at a given moment.
A discussion between two members of the Court, Thomas Bownest and the cele-
brated Thomas Mun, which continued over several Court meetings between 16
and 30 November 1630, is symptomatic. Both had tried to work out from the
Company's books the relationship between capital and tonnage in the East, but

42 Pieter van Dam, op. cit., I: 1, pp.662-63.

156 NIELS STEENSGAARD

the conclusion they reached differed by no less than 1200 tons. Thomas Mun
thought that 400 tons more cargo space had been sent out than the capital
remitted would be able to fill, whereas Bownest was of the opinion that the
capital remitted would call for another 800 tons of cargo space. The Board took
account of both reports, but abandoned their efforts to clear up the matter. They
concluded, however, that it was better to have sent out too much tonnage than
too littIe. 43
The provision of defence fleets ceased after what became known as the
Amboyna Massacre in 1623; relations with the Portuguese were regulated by
the armistice concluded in Goa in January 1635. By the middle of the 1620s at
the latest the period of experimentation in the country trade was over. All the
more important trading routes had been tried out and, although there were regular
sailings on a number of them, the trade on some was so limited that it was more
advantageous to use smaller vessels and sometimes even Asian ones. The extra
expense involved in setting up this permanent Asian trading fleet must have been
slight compared with the saving achieved by employing the big return ships solely
for the purpose for which they were intended.
The first ship to be chartered by the Company, the Caesar, made a record
round trip to Bantam and back in only 11 months. 44 This was exceptional: the
normal period of absence to all ports for ships which returned without incurring
demurrage was 16-19 months. Of the 31 chartered ships which returned prior
to 1657, 21 were back within 16-19 months, 6 in less, 4 in more, but of these
4 two were away so long that their owners must have been paid demurrage.
Though there was always the chance of a particularly favourable voyage like the
Caesar's, the owners must normally have reckoned on an absence of 18 months, or
three-quarters of the time normally reckoned with during the first decades of the
Company's existence. Other things being equal this would mean that the freight
did not fall below £22~-24 per ton, leaving aside the matter of profit to the
owner. But, as Table 1 shows, during the 1640s freights fell even lower.
Whatever was done to bring costs down, safety was not affected. The Company
kept strict control of the condition and equipment of the ships it chartered, and
of the 32 chartered before 1657 only one failed to return. This was the Roebuck,
which in February 1653 was seized between Surat and Gombroon by the Dutch. 45
At first the standard crew, as already shown, was one man for roughly four to five

43 Calendar S. P., East Indies, 1630/34, pp.311-20.

44 Cal. Court Minutes, 1640/43, p. 140.
45 Cal. Court Minutes, 1650/54, p. XVII.
 FREIGHT COSTS IN THE ENGLISH EAST INDIA TRADE 157
tons, and this ratio does not appear to have been altered materially after the
changeover to chartering. The following crew numbers can be taken as examples:
Endymion, 300 tons, 1648: 68 men 46 (1 :4.44); Dolphin, 300 tons, 1648: 76
men 47 (1 : 3.95) ; Aleppo Merchant, 360 tons, 1648: 80 men 48 (1 : 4.50) ; Love,
400 tons, 1650: 90 men 49 (1: 4.44).
If any reduction was made in the rations on board, there is no evidence of it
in the source material. The only resolution passed concerned wine. It was felt
that supplies had been too generous and so in 1640 this was reduced to 6-8
months' consumption. 50 But this was a return to former practice rather than a
reduction. 51 The risk of mutiny and regard for the crew's health naturally set
limits to the amount that could be saved on this account; on the other hand,
comparison with the normal Dutch rations indicates that certain possibilities for
saving did exist. It must also be assumed that the scale of operations at the Com-
pany's works at Blackwall, which were used to a large extent by the private ship-
owners whose ships the Company chartered, 52 reduced to some extent the cost of
repairing and fitting out the ships.
In 1622 10 per cent each way had been considered a reasonable premium for
insurance by both the English and Dutch companies. In 1628 we find the in-
surance premium on a return cargo estimated at a maximum of 12 per cent. 53
Weare not able to follow movements in the immediately succeeding years, but
after 1644 there are the following examples: 1644, outwards, 5 per cent ;54 1646,
homewards, 5 per cent ;55 1648, homewards, 5 per cent ;56 1650, homewards, 6
per cent ;57 1651, homewards, 6 per cent ;58 1652, homewards, 5 per cent. 59 In
1653 it was decided that the participants could each insure their own shares.

46 Cal. Court Minutes, 1644/49, p. 112.

47 Cal. Court Minutes, 1644/49, p. 234; d. p.225.
48 Cal. Court Minutes, 1650/54, p. 312; d. 1644/49, p. 229.
49 Cal. Court Minutes, 1650/54, p. 312 ; d. 1644/49, p. 387.

50 Cal. Court Minutes, 1640/43, p. 97.

51 Cf. the survey mentioned for the third single voyage (The Register of Letters etc., p. 102),
in which quantities for beverages are given as follows: Ship's ale, 1 pottle per man/day for
3 months; Strong ale: 1 pottle per man/day for 1 month; Cider: 1 quarter per man/day for
12 months; wine: 1 pint per man/day for 8 months.
52 See e.g. Cal. Court Minutes, 1644/49, p. 239 and Cal. Court Minutes, 1650/54, p. 101.

53 Calendar S. P., East Indies, 1625/29, p. 559.

54 Cal. Court Minutes, 1644/49, p. 28.
55 Ibid., p. 143.
56 Ibid., p. 260.

57 Cal. Court Minutes, 1650/54, p. 41.

58 Ibid., p. 103.
59 Ibid., p. 174.
158 NIELS STEENSGAARD

This method was apparently followed in the succeeding years. 60 The scanty infor-
mation available on insurance premiums shows beyond doubt that in the 1640s
the risk was considered to have declined, and this is in line with the incidence
of shipwreck. Although we do not know what arrangements the private ship-
owners made for the insurance of their ships, it is quite clear that, whether they
took out insurance cover or preferred to bear the risk themselves, this item weighed
less in their budget than in the calculations for the Company's own shipping given
above.
Interest costs on chartered vessels were borne almost exclusively by the ship-
owners, since the advance made as 'imprest money' amounted at the most to ca.
10 per cent of the total freight. The English rate of interest remained high
throughout the period under review, a handicap of which both the English them-
selves and their competitors were aware ;61 but the Company's rate of interest on
loans, and so presumably the rate on the private market for well secured loans,
fell from 10 per cent at the beginning of the century to 7-8 per cent during the
course of the 1620s. 62 Of course the interest payable by individual owners must
have depended on the security they were able to offer, but in this matter the
ship-owners would probably be able to reckon on some saving as compared with
the Company's original freight costs.

Reconstructed Voyage Estimates, 1620 and 1650.

Using the above information it is now possible to reconstruct two sets of voyage
estimates along the lines indicated by Ralph Davis,63 one for 1620 and one for

00 Ibid., p. 225. The right to effect insurance was especially reserved to Company's own

members. (See e.g. Cal. Court Minutes, 1650/54, p. 41.). The partners could not therefore con-
sole themselves, as the Portuguese in Goa did in 1641 when they lost a loaded carrack to the
Dutch, 'which they seem not to resent because they pretend and avouch that both ship and
goods were insured by Dutch merchants then come to inhabit Lisboa'. (Commonwealth Rela-
tions Office, Orig. Correspondence, No. 1787.)
61 'Te Londen betalen zij 10 % interest op geleend geld ... Wij daarentegen kunnen in de
steden, waar de Kamers der O. I. C. gevestigd zijn, het geld a 5 % krijgen.' The Governor-
General, Batavia, to Overschie, Gombroon, 15 August 1634. (Dunlop, op. cit., p.500.)
62 Cal. S. P., East Indies, and Cal. Court Minutes, passim. As far as I am aware there has

been no systematic investigation of interest rates in England in the seventeenth century, but
the view generally held is that the rates were not much below the legal maximum. In 1625
this was 10 per cent, in 1625-51 8 per cent, and after 1651 6 per cent. (Robert Ashton, The
Crown and the Money Market 1603-1640, (Oxford, 1960), p. 69; and H. J. Habakkuk, 'The
Long-term Rate of Interest and the Price of Land iIi the 17th Century', Economic History
Review, 2nd ser., v (1952-53), pp.33-34.)
63 Ralph Davis, op. cit., chap. XVII.
 FREIGHT COSTS IN THE ENGLISH EAST INDIA TRADE 159

1650. As these estimates are hypothetical, it will be necessary to explain in some

detail how the figures have been calculated.
The ship in example 2 has been used as standard, i. e. a ship of 480 tons burden
with a crew of 120 men at both dates. The cost of wages and victuals per man
are assumed to be unchanged. The time of absence) on the other hand, has been
reduced from 24 to 18 months. Repairs is necessarily one of the most tricky points
in a voyage estimate-to us no less than it was to the ship-owner. Here it has been
estimated at a third of total running or operating costs,64 or rather half the known
costs of wages and victuals. This might seem pessimistic, but considering the
length of the voyage and the special conditions in which the East India ships had
to operate, it is hardly unrealistic. It should be kept in mind, however, that the
expenditure on repairs might be reduced by good management or by technical
innovations.
Table 3
Estimated Costs for a Ship of 480 Tons in the East India Trade

1620 1650
Size of crew 120 120
Time of voyage 24 months 18 months
---
Running costs
Wages £3.600 £2.700
Victuals 2.880 2.160
Repairs 3.240 2.430
Total 9.720 7.290
Capital costs
Ship £2.500 £2.500
Fitting out 8.500 6.375

Total 11.000 8.875

Capital charges
Depreciation (15 per cent on ship only) £ 375 £ 375
Insurance 2.200 887
Interest 2.200 1.064
Total 4.775 2.326
Costs per voyage
Running costs £9.720 £7.290
Capital charges 4.775 2.326
Total 14.495 9.616

Costs per ton £30.3s. £20.1s.

64 Ibid., pp. 368-69.
160 NIELS STEENSGAARD

The price of the ship before fitting out has been put at £2,500 or roughly
£5.4s. per ton. 65 The cost of fitting out has been estimated at £11,000-£2,500
in 1620 (d. Example 2) and at one fourth less in 1650 in accordance with the
reduced time of absence. Very few East India ships made more than four voyages.
Depreciation has been roughly estimated at 15 per cent assuming that the ship
would have some value after four voyages, even if it was not able to undertake the
East India voyage again.
Insurance can be taken to have been reduced from ca. 20 per cent to ca. 10
per cent on the whole voyage. The annual rate of interest is assumed to have been
10 per cent in 1620 and 8 per cent in 1650; the reduction in the time of absence
meant a further saving on this account. It might be added that the fall in the
rate of interest to 6 per cent p. a. which occurred a few years later, would save
another £266 or a little more than 10s per ton.
We may conclude that the chief factor in the reduction of the English East
India Company's freight costs about 1640 was the reduction in the period of time
ships were away, consequent upon the division of duties between ships which
returned home and those which remained in Asian waters. While running costs
presumably were reduced in proportion to the reduction in the time of absence,
capital charges, as shown in Table 3, were reduced by as much as one-half
consequent upon the reduction in risk and the lower rate of interest. The esti-
mate for 1650 apparently leaves a very small margin, if any, for the ship-owners.
We must assume that it was by savings on the vague item 'repairs' that the ship-
owner achieved or hoped to achieve his profit. Finally it would be well to note
the wide fluctuations in the English freight market during the two decades in
which the charter system came to be adopted. 66 With a competitive reserve of its
own ships the Company was in a strong negotiating position vis-a.-vis the owners
during this period. In a bad year the ship-owners, for their part, preferred a
none-too-generous or speculative charter party to the alternative of laying up
a ship.

65 Ibid., pp. 372-74; K. N. Chaudhuri, op. cit., p.31.

66 'The fortunes of the industry during these two decades [1640-60] fluctuated all the way
between excellent and very bad'. Ralph Davis, op. cit., p. 11.
 FREIGHT COSTS IN THE ENGLISH EAST INDIA TRADE 161

Appendix
From letters and other documents, the progress of all the ships can be followed from
the time of their departure to their return home. Data for Table 2 has been obtained
from the following works: Cal. Court Minutes, Calendar S. P. East Indies, Letters
Received by the East India Company and The English Factories in India, ed. W. Fos-
ter, (London, 1906).
Table 2 differs to some extent from the most recent attempt to establish the volume
of the East India Company shipping in K. N. Chaudhuri, The East India Company,
(1965 ), table p. 91 and Appendix pp. 230 ff. (list of returned ships). Part of the
disagreement is explained by the fact that for the present purpose I include ships
foundered on English shores when returning from the East. As no shipping lists are
given in support of the tables in the present paper, it is necessary, however, to discuss
the discrepancy between Dr. Chaudhuri's figures and mine in some detail.

1621-30
Dr. Chaudhuri's table (p. 91) gives the figure as 38, while his own list of returned
ships (p. 230 ff.) contains the names of 39 safe arrivals and 2 losses. The actual
figure for ships returning to English waters from the East is 41, of which 40 were
safe arrivals.
From Dr. Chaudhuri's 39 safe arrivals should be deducted:
The Jonas. Left Swally Hole 12 April 1630 and sighted Scilly 4 April 1631. (Engl.
Fact. 1630/33 pp.41-43). 9 April 1631 she was in the Downs with the Charles.
(Cal. S. P. East Indies 1630/34 p. 144).
This leaves 38 safe arrivals on which we agree. To these should be added:
The Blessing. Left Swally Hole 15 February 1624/25. (Engl. Fact. 1624/29 p. 88).
Arrived in England September 1625. (Cal. S. P. East Indies 1625/29 p. 94). There
is no evidence that the Blessing was cast away as stated by Dr. Chaudhuri. She left
England again in April 1626 (Engl. Fact. 1624/29 p. 140).
The Hop'ewell. Left Swally Hole 15 April 1629 and reached the Downs 10 Janu-
ary 1629/30. (Engl. Fact. 1624/29 pp.331-32).
For the present purpose I have finally included the Moon, which was cast away
near Dover Castle on returning home in September 1625 (Cal. S. P. East Indies
1625/29 p.92). On the other hand I have excluded the Morris, which did not
reach English waters, but was stranded on the coast of Holland when returning
home in 1628.

1631-40
Dr. Chaudhuri's table (p. 91) gives the number of returned ships as 31, while his
own list of returned ships contains the names of 29 safe arrivals and one loss, 30 in
all. The actual number of ships returning to English waters from the East in this
decade is 34, 33 of which were safe arrivals.

11 Scand. Econ. Rist. Rev.

162 NIELS STEENSGAARD

To Dr. Chaudhuri's 29 safe arrivals should be added:

The Jonas. Arrived in 1631. Cf. Above.
The Charles. Left Swally Hole 12 April 1630 and sighted Scilly 4 April 1631.
(Engl. Fact. 1630/33 pp. 41-43).9 April she was in the Downs with the Jonas. (Cal.
S. P. East Indies 1630/34 p. 144).
The Crispiana. Left Swally Hole for England 4 December 1637. (Engl. Fact.
1637/41 p. 88). Congratulations upon her safe arrival in England together with
the H op'ewell are offered in a letter from Masulipatam to the Company dated 25
October 1639. (Engl. Fact. 1637/41 p. 178). 13 November 1639 the Court ordered
the shipwright to hasten her repair. (Cal. C. M. 1635/39 p. 344). She departed from
England for the East in March 1639/40 (Cal. C. M. 1640/43 p. 28).
The Hopewell. Left Swally Hole for England 1 January 1637/38. (Engl. Fact.
1637/41 p. 88). Mentioned with the Crispiana as having arrived safely in the Masu-
lipatam letter cited above. Left England for the East in late September or early
October 1639. (Cal. C. M. 1635/39 pp. 325-27).
For the present purpose I have finally included the Palsgrave, which was wrecked
on the coast of England when she returned in 1636. (Cal. C. M. 1635/39 pass.).