STURGEON, John

Originally from Devon, Sturgeon was one of three brothers, all of whom retained a connexion with their native county while pursuing successful careers within their chosen professions elsewhere. Their father was named Nicholas, almost certainly the Nicholas Sturion (fl.1398) of Ashburton who, along with another relative, Richard, exported tin, cloth and other goods through the ports of Dartmouth and Exeter in the late fourteenth century.5 M. Kowaleski, Markets and Trade in Med. Exeter, 274, 347. The three brothers were, from an early age, set upon career paths which would take them away from home. Richard and Nicholas were admitted to Winchester College in 1397 and 1399 respectively, and subsequently studied at New College, Oxford. The latter, who went on to enter the Church, was preferred to several rectorships in the south-west of England before, in 1437, becoming a canon of both Exeter cathedral and the royal college of St. Stephen in the palace of Westminster. In the 1440s Nicholas secured similar positions at St. Paul’s cathedral and St. George’s chapel at Windsor, and, a respected musician, in October 1442, he was asked by the royal council to choose six singers to perform for the Emperor Frederick III. Several of his compositions are still extant.6 Biog. Reg. Univ. Oxford ed. Emden, iii. 1810. Richard for his part entered the ranks of the clerks of the royal Chancery, and rose to become clerk of the Crown, an office which he surrendered in the summer of 1449.7 M. Richardson, The Med. Chancery under Hen. V (L. and I. Soc. special ser. xxx), 98-99; CCR, 1447-54, p. 130; CPR, 1413-16, pp. 297, 362.

Younger by several years than his siblings, John Sturgeon did not embark upon his career as a London mercer until 1415-16 when he was apprenticed to William Ernton. He completed his apprenticeship and duly obtained the freedom of the city of London in 1425. His subsequent advance through the ranks of the craft was rapid: two years later, having presumably established a business of his own, he took on the first of the 14 apprentices which he enrolled during his career. He also passed through the first of the three stages of admission to the livery of the Mercers’ Company, a process which he completed in 1429. In July 1434 he was chosen as one of the four wardens of the craft (a position to which he was elected on another three occasions over the course of the next 20 years), and in 1436 he was among the ‘good men’ of the Mercers who approved the translation of Geoffrey Boleyn* from the craft of hatters to their Company.8 Cal. Letter Bks. London, K, 201.

Like many of his fellow mercers Sturgeon was active in overseas trade, and by 1436 had become part owner of a ship called the Marie which was based in the port of London. In September that year he and his partners were licensed to send their ship to sea for ten weeks against the King’s enemies and to take possession of any merchandise they seized from enemy vessels. Another man granted a similar licence that year was the Devon shipman Thomas Gille II* with whom Sturgeon may have maintained ties, for it was probably around this time that he profited from one of Gille’s acts of piracy. A petition submitted to Chancery by a merchant of the Hanse, Lambert Smyth, alleged that Gille’s ship, the Anthony of Dartmouth, had intercepted two vessels belonging to Smyth off the coast of Normandy and seized 26 tuns of white wine from La Rochelle. Some of the wine, bearing Smyth’s mark, was later found in Sturgeon’s possession.9 CPR, 1436-41, p. 1; C1/73/161. The extent of Sturgeon’s involvement in piracy is not known, although it is unlikely that he took as active a part as men such as Gille. Indeed by the early 1440s he seems to have gained a reputation for probity in mercantile affairs, which was probably responsible for his appointment in December 1441, along with several eminent lawyers, to a royal commission charged with resolving a dispute over a ship from Greenhithe in Kent.10 CPR, 1441-6, p. 30. Similarly, in July 1448 he was elected constable of the staple of Westminster, an office he held for at least two years. Like many mercers Sturgeon imported a variety of goods from the continent into the port of London: in September 1445, for instance, the customs collectors noted four loads of fish and large quantities of linen, while four years later he brought in modest amounts of wine, oil and wax. These commodities were apparently central to his trading interests, and unlike many of his fellow mercers he was not a major exporter of cloth.11 E122/203/3, f. 1; 72/23, f. 12v. He acquired a half share in another vessel, Le Newegoste of London, which in June 1451 was requisitioned by the Crown as part of the preparations for a force to be sent to Aquitaine under the command of Richard Wydeville, Lord Rivers, and again in August the following year when Sturgeon, his partner William Stele and the masters of the ship were granted permission to conscript sailors and servants.12 CPR, 1446-52, pp. 447, 583.

The extent of Sturgeon’s domestic business dealings is apparent from the numerous debts owed to him by individuals from various parts of the country. Many of the debtors failed to answer in court and were outlawed, and it is likely that Sturgeon was never able to recover the sums owed to him. In January 1438, for example, Sir Thomas Malefaunt of Windsor was pardoned his outlawry in respect of a debt of £12 1s. 8d. owed to Sturgeon, while in October 1440 a similar pardon was granted to a chapman from Carlisle, perhaps one of his distributors. Other debtors hailed from Kent, Wiltshire, Lincolnshire and, significantly, Devon.13 CPR, 1436-41, pp. 107, 456, 464; 1441-6, p. 14; 1452-61, pp. 189-90, 315. Equally important as evidence are the ‘gifts’ of goods and chattels which were increasingly adopted by merchants and artisans as instruments of credit during business transactions. During the 1440s and early 1450s Sturgeon was frequently a recipient of such gifts, the vast majority of which were made by Londoners, particularly by less prominent mercers to whom he probably supplied goods. It is, nevertheless, striking that he also had dealings with a range of other craftsmen including tailors, skinners, haberdashers, drapers and upholders, suggesting that he dealt in a wide variety of goods, beyond those traditionally associated with mercers. Individuals with whom he was linked in such transactions included Thomas Cook II*, Henry Frowyk I*, and the latter’s son Thomas II*.14 CCR, 1429-35, p. 117; 1435-41, pp. 245, 428; 1441-7, p. 77, 200, 203; 1447-54, pp. 20, 28, 43, 76-7, 159, 189, 230, 241, 404; 1454-61, pp. 111, 427; Cal. P. and M. London, 1437-57, pp. 169, 173.

Sturgeon’s connexion with the Frowyks was a particularly close one, for by 1447 Thomas had married Sturgeon’s niece, Joan, the daughter of his brother Richard. In 1447-8, the Mercers allowed Richard Sturgeon to become a freeman of their mystery by redemption, on payment of 20s. to the Company. This was probably perceived as advantageous by the Mercers, for whom Richard may have been a valuable contact within the royal Chancery, but it also reflected his position as, respectively, father-in-law and brother of two prominent members of the Company.15 A.F. Sutton, ‘Making of a London Chron.’, Ricardian, x. 91-2; Richardson, 98-99; PCC 9 Stokton. Richard himself had been active in the City during the 1430s, and doubtless saw the advantages of becoming a freeman, despite the fact that he did not practice a trade there. His close relationship with John was another factor: in October 1437, for instance, the two men had been jointly granted the keeping of lands in the parish of Holy Trinity the Less during the minority of Humphrey, son and heir of the earl of Arundel.16 CFR, xvii. 7-8.

Sturgeon also established connexions with other prominent mercers in the capital, by whom he was clearly regarded as a reliable trustee. In April 1443 he and John Gedney* were among those who entered into bond in £1,000 with the chamberlain of London for the patrimony of Richard, son of Robert Large*;17 Cal. Letter Bks. London, K, 280. and he acted in a similar capacity in November 1444 when the patrimony and guardianship of the five children of a prominent member of the Tailors’ Company were committed to Richard Needham* who had married the children’s mother.18 Ibid. 300, 307. For other cases see ibid. 329, 339, 341, 343, 352, 368. Sturgeon’s own marriage, to Beatrice the daughter of Richard Aylmer, must likewise have resulted from his mercer connexions, for Aylmer also belonged to his Company. In October 1445 Sturgeon appeared before the chamberlain to acknowledge satisfaction of Beatrice’s patrimony, their marriage having perhaps taken place a month or two previously. She, like her brother and sister, had been a minor on the death of Aylmer in the spring of 1430, when their guardianship had been entrusted to their mother.19 Ibid. 113, 310. This was in fact Sturgeon’s second marriage, although the name of his first wife, Agnes, is known only from the will of their son, John. Another John, who was apprenticed as a mercer in 1463-4, is almost certainly to be identified as his son by Beatrice.20 Med. Acct. Bks. of the Mercers, 982-3; PCC 18 Dogett (PROB11/9, ff. 143-4).

As well as frequently finding sureties for his fellow mercers, Sturgeon also occasionally acted as a feoffee in London and elsewhere: in 1437 he was one of the feoffees of a brewery in Thames Street which was acquired by a brewer named John Broke; and by the early 1440s he had become a trustee of property in Rochester for William Chapman, a former master of the Tailors’ Company who died in 1446.21 Corp. London RO, hr 165/47; 166/26-27; 173/8; 178/19; 181/3; C1/16/522; London and Mdx. Feet of Fines, 196. Nor had Sturgeon severed his ties with Devon. In the early 1450s he petitioned Chancery alleging that one Richard Polleall had, contrary to an agreement drawn up between them, failed to deliver seisin to him of lands at Ashburton, transferring the property instead to one William Elyot.22 C1/73/149. At about the same time, Sturgeon and another mercer, Thomas Rykes, were party to transactions concerning the manor of West Ogwell which was claimed by Thomas Dowrich II* in right of his wife, Margaret.23 CCR, 1447-54, pp. 404-5, 435. He continued to have dealings with Dowrich and in November 1459 the four recipients of a gift of goods and chattels made by Sturgeon included both him and Thomas Frowyk.24 CCR, 1454-61, p. 427.

Sturgeon’s public career is well documented in the records of the City of London. In November 1437 he had been appointed as one of the receivers of the city’s portion of the tenth and fifteenth, and less than a year later he was chosen as one of the two common councilmen who were to serve as auditors, the traditional first step to higher office.25 Jnl. 3, f. 188v. He served as an auditor for four years, during which period he was appointed to several committees and acted as an arbiter.26 Cal. Letter Bk. London, K, 219, 230, 248, 261. Clearly trusted in financial matters, in March 1439 he was once again chosen as a receiver, this time for a loan of £1,000 to the Crown that was levied on the city’s inhabitants.27 Jnl. 4, ff. 13, 41v, 81, 114v, 115. Strikingly, particularly for a man at a relatively early stage in his career, that same year he sued out a royal licence exempting him for life from service on juries, Crown or civic office, although like many others who received such grants he probably regarded it less as an opportunity to retreat from public life than as an acknowledgement that his service was well-regarded.28 CPR, 1436-41, p. 387. Indeed, his rise to prominence continued. In January 1442 he attested the election of the city’s MPs for the first time, and in March was appointed as one of the collectors of the tax which had been agreed by that Parliament.29 C219/15/2. The following year, however, Sturgeon’s smooth move through the civic cursus honorum stalled. This may have been a consequence of over weening ambition, as much as of an idealistic view of the nature of London’s government. On 21 Sept. 1443 the annual election of the chamberlain and sheriffs was the scene of the latest in a series of disturbances which had escalated from a jurisdictional dispute between the Tailors and Drapers into a wider ‘constitutional’ debate about the participation of all citizens in elections – not just those summoned by the mayor. Earlier, the champion of the radical cause had been Ralph Holland, a tailor alderman, whose candidacy for the mayoralty was rejected on three occasions, much to the resentment of his followers among the city’s artisans,30 C.M. Barron, ‘Ralph Holland and the London Radicals’, in The Med. Town ed. Holt and Rosser, 160-83. but in 1443 the trouble initially centred on the election of the chamberlain. John Chichele (who had served since 1434) was re-elected by those who were summoned, but a large crowd of ‘inferior’ citizens gathered outside refused to agree and shouted instead for William Cottesbroke*, a grocer who was becoming a key figure in the opposition movement. During the course of the next month an armed rising was planned to coincide with the election of the mayor on 13 Oct. The insurgence was thwarted by the mayor and aldermen, but in the ensuing investigation it was found that Sturgeon had detailed knowledge of the secret meetings which had taken place. Indeed, on 16 Oct., three days after the peaceful election of Thomas Catworth*, Sturgeon testified before the court of aldermen that a meeting of radical leaders had been held at Christopher Water’s house attended by, among others, Cottesbroke and John Leving*. The degree of Sturgeon’s involvement is unclear, as no proceedings were ever instigated against him. His evidence certainly suggests that he had contact with some of these men, but it is possible that his association with them was overlooked in return for his testimony at a time when there were more prominent conspirators to be dealt with.31 Ibid. 176; jnl. 4, f. 10.

Sturgeon’s career as a common councilman in fact continued to prosper, suggesting that he had not lost the confidence of those in authority. In April 1443 he had been placed on an important committee with Stephen Forster*, Thomas Canynges*and others which was to deal with a dispute between the city’s linen-weavers and woollen-weavers. Another appointment came his way in October 1444 when, presumably in his capacity as a former auditor, he was chosen as a member of a committee which was to investigate William Wetenhale’s accounts as master of London Bridge; this inquiry dragged on for several years, and it was only in December 1447 that the committee made their report.32 Jnl. 4, ff. 23, 34, 41, 184v, 202v, 203v. On 21 Jan. 1445 Sturgeon, still a common councilman, was chosen for the first and only time as one of the city’s MPs.33 The return made by the sheriffs does not survive but the election was noted in the city’s jnl.: ibid. f. 59v. No details of his activities in Parliament are known, but in March 1446, while the fourth and final session was in progress Sturgeon was forced to defend himself against charges that he had done ‘much harm [multa mala] to the good of the city in Parliament’, brought by two skinners, Robert Osgood and Thomas Creak, who also claimed that Sturgeon had written above a window the words ‘J. Sturgeon alderman, J. Sturgeon alderman, J. Sturgeon alderman’.34 Ibid. f. 119v. The most likely source of discontent among his fellow Londoners were bills which dealt with various trading matters, such as one which was put up by the merchants of Genoa protesting about the unlawful levying by the City of duties on goods brought to London from the continent.35 PROME, xi. 399. Though Sturgeon was ultimately vindicated, it must nevertheless have been significant that he was perceived by some as being over-eager to become a member of the court of aldermen. He was undoubtedly well qualified, having already served two terms as master of his Company, and was clearly a well regarded common councilman, judging from the numerous committees to which he was appointed in the 1440s. It is possible, however, that his ambitions were frowned upon by some who sought to damage him further by alleging that he had betrayed the city in Parliament. Indeed, in the light of his need to defend himself from such charges, it may well be significant that in June the same year he obtained a royal pardon.36 C67/39, m. 41.

Yet once again this slight to his reputation did not prevent Sturgeon from continuing his work on the common council, and in October 1447 he was one of its two representatives entrusted with a key to the great chest in the city chamber. In September 1450 an opportunity for further advancement came his way following the appointment of the chamberlain, John Middleton*, as one of the sheriffs. Sturgeon was duly elected as chamberlain in his place, a natural appointment perhaps given his experience as an auditor and as a repeated member of financial committees. He held the post for four years, and in September 1454 in recognition of his good and diligent service he was granted an annual livery robe by the City as well as various rewards totalling £22 16s. 8d.37 Jnl. 5, ff. 46v, 192, 194v; Cal. Letter Bks. London, K, 332, 340, 348, 361. This did not mark his retirement from civic duties. In May 1455, along with William Marowe*, John Norman* and the new chamberlain, he was ordered to investigate a request by the parishioners of St. Botolph Billingsgate to enlarge their vestry onto land owned by the City. Four months later he served on yet another committee, this time one dealing with the vexed question of rights of sanctuary at St. Martin le Grand, and in the meantime he had been chosen for a fourth time as warden of the Mercers’ Company. He last appears in the city’s journals in March 1457 when he was required to attend a meeting of the court of aldermen for discussion of his accounts for his time as chamberlain.38 Jnl. 5, ff. 241v, 264; 6, ff. 30, 116.

Sturgeon maintained a close relationship with his two brothers throughout his life. Nicholas died in the summer of 1454 and was buried in the chapel of St. Mary and St. Nicholas in St. Paul’s. In his will he left John ‘the hallyng with the ix wirthy and vi cuppes of sylver stondyng’, and bequeathed other silver vessels to John’s wife Beatrice. Not surprisingly both John and Richard were chosen as executors, along with their close associates Thomas Frowyk and Thomas Rykes, and over the next few years the executors were active in trying to recover sums of money from Nicholas’s debtors.39 PCC 10 Rous (PROB11/1, ff. 75v-76): printed in Fifty Earliest English Wills (EETS lxxviii), 131-4; CPR, 1461-7, p. 4; CCR, 1454-61, pp. 306-7. When Richard died three years later (having not long before established a chantry in St. Bartholomew’s hospital, Smithfield, for the benefit of his soul as well as those of his parents, his brother Nicholas and, following their deaths, those of John and Beatrice and the Frowyks), John was appointed overseer of his executors.40 PCC 9 Stokton (PROB11/4, f. 65); Procs. Chancery Eliz. ed. Caley and Baley, i. pp. lxii-lxiii.

The date of John’s own death is uncertain, but it had evidently occurred by November 1464 when another mercer, Everard Brigge, was pardoned his outlawry in respect of a debt of £8 he owed to him. He left as his heir his synonymous eldest son who had already risen to prominence in Edward IV’s service and established himself in Hertfordshire. Another descendant was Henry Sturgeon (d.1526), a London ironmonger, whose own son and heir, John†, was returned to Parliament in the 1540s.41 The Commons 1509-58, iii. 407.