BROWN, Stephen (d.1462), of London.

Brown, who hailed from Newcastle-upon Tyne, probably came to London in the first decade of the fifteenth century, when he became a member of the Grocers’ Company. He is to be distinguished on chronological grounds from the Londoner of the same name who held the bailiwick of the Thames at Billingsgate from 1381-2 and who in 1401-2 was farmer of scavage from the city’s sheriffs, The other Stephen was the s. of Richard Brown and held property in Surr.: Cal. P. and M. London, 1381-1412, p. 76; CCR, 1399-1402, p. 477; 1402-5, p. 285. and does not himself appear in the records of the city until 1414 when, described as ‘citizen and grocer’, he was among a group of feoffees granted land by William Sevenoak†. Cal. Letter Bk. London, I, 192; London hr 142/32, 148/46, 150/10. Brown rose rapidly in the Company: he was a liveryman by 1425 and the following year served for the first time as one of the wardens. From the late 1420s onwards, like other prominent grocers, he was closely concerned in the purchase of the site of the ‘groceris place in Conyhooplane’, where the first stone of Grocers’ Hall was laid in May 1427. The total cost, including the purchase of the site, came to more than £290 and the Company was therefore keen to offset this by raising money from the membership. Brown contributed £5 to a levy raised that year, more than most of his fellows, and the size of his donation was clearly related to his growing wealth as a merchant. Another levy raised in 1428-9 produced a further £181 1s. 2d. towards the Company’s costs, and once again Brown was at the forefront with a contribution of £3 6s. 8d. Despite the fact that his wealth clearly outstripped that of many London grocers, particularly at a time of economic difficulties, there are indications that he was aware that others were faring badly: in August 1429, for instance, alms were granted to one Thomas Leicester ‘at the prayer of S. Brown’. Ms. Archs. Grocers’ Co. 155-7 , 164, 177, 182-4, 190, 195, 228. This prominence within the Company was reflected by his subsequent election, on no fewer than five occasions, as its ‘governor’, responsible for the supervision of the wardens, a position reserved for aldermen. During the 1430s the Company found itself in financial trouble, a consequence both of its continuing expenditure on the Hall and of the economic problems caused by a contracting money supply. To counter this the Company resorted to further levies of its most prosperous members: in 1433-4 Brown contributed £3 to a levy, compared with the 10s. advanced by the young Richard Lee* and the 40s. paid by Thomas Catworth*. Ibid. 232; Nightingale, 426.

Brown’s trading interests were diverse and set him apart from some of his fellow grocers, particularly because he was not noticeably involved in the wool trade. He did, however, export large quantities of cloth to the continent through the port of London. Thus, in the seven months from January to July 1433 the surviving customs account lists 11 separate shipments of cloth belonging to him, giving a total of 716 cloths. He also exported cloth from Southampton in Italian ships, while importing items traditionally associated with grocers, such as pepper, through the same port. On one occasion the Grocers’ Company paid the sum of £3 8s. 8d. ‘for losse of ii balles peper off Steven Broun’. He was one of the few London grocers who managed to avoid being squeezed out of the trade in dyes and alum by merchants from Bristol and Salisbury, and by the growing number of alien merchants in Southampton who now dealt directly with cloth workers in the West Country. In the spring of 1428, for instance, Brown imported 70 bales of alum into Southampton and was one of only eight Londoners recorded in the port book for the years 1427-30. E122/203/1, mm. 4, 7v-8v, 11, 22-23, 34v, 36; Port Bk. 1427-30 (Soton. Rec. Soc. 1913), pp. xviii, 65; Ms. Archs. Grocers’ Co. 153.

Apart from these commodities, Brown appears to have dealt extensively in corn, a trade which was unusual in that it was not subject to the same degree of organization as was the case with most other goods. It could thus be a profitable line of business for merchants of all kinds. Fishmongers handled a large percentage of this trade, but there was also room for grocers such as Brown, particularly during times of shortage. This was highlighted during his first mayoralty (1438-9) when the city of London was affected by shortages of wheat which led to soaring prices for this staple food item. The only solution was to buy up large quantities of grain from wherever such supplies could be found. Thus in December 1438 Brown was granted royal authority to buy at his own expense 2,000 quarters of corn in Sussex, Kent, Lincolnshire and Northamptonshire to alleviate the situation. Six months later he was permitted to buy a similar quantity, while in November 1439 – after the end of his term of office – he was authorized to buy another 1,000 quarters in Kent, Sussex, Yorkshire and Lincolnshire. Even so, these supplies were not enough; during this same mayoralty Brown also organized some of London’s leading merchants into a ring of importers who were to bring grain in from the continent. Nightingale, 445; E. Power and M.M. Postan, English Trade in 15th Cent. 266; CPR, 1436-41, pp. 232, 253, 345; DKR, xlviii. 250, 252-4, 258. These measures appear to have been successful, for according to John Stow ‘Stephen Brown … sent in to Prussia causing corne to be brought from thence, whereby hee brought downe the price of wheate from three shillings the bushell to less than halfe that money’. J. Stow, Surv. London ed. Kingsford, i. 109-10. Over the centuries Brown’s actions became the subject of eulogy, and led to his inclusion among lists of the country’s ‘Worthies’. T. Fuller, Worthies (1840), ii. 551.

This ‘adventure’ almost certainly reflected the direction of Brown’s own trading links with the continent. These were furthered in 1451 when he acquired a large property comprising a quay, garden and seven messuages in Bishop’s Lynn in Norfolk, a port which was an important outlet for the Baltic and German trade. He purchased it from a fellow grocer, John Lawney, who had himself acquired it on his marriage to the daughter of a local man, and then conveyed it to feoffees, who included William Marowe* as well as a mercer, John Tate (later named as one of his executors). The timing of Brown’s acquisition is probably significant, as it occurred just two years after the start of the long and damaging war with the Hanse. It is likely that he and other Londoners were attempting to take advantage of the departure of the Hanse merchants from England by establishing trading bases of their own in ports such as Bishop’s Lynn. After Brown’s death the property was conveyed to his executors who, following the end of the war with the Hanseatic league, granted it to Edward IV. The King, who was now searching for a location for a ‘steelyard’ in the town, transferred the premises to the Hanse. A.F. Sutton, A Merchant Fam. of Coventry, London and Calais, 19-20.

Shortages of bullion affected the capital in the second quarter of the fifteenth century, and the grocers are thought to have been among those groups particularly hard hit. Among the precautionary measures taken by merchants was the importation of valuable items of plate which could be used at a later stage in order to make ‘cash’ purchases. This may well have been the reasoning behind Brown’s dealings with a Lucchese merchant, Niccolò Giles, in the autumn of 1450 when he agreed to buy two large silver spice plates and four other silver and gilt vessels, the total weight of which was 105lb. 2oz. (Troy). CCR, 1447-54, p. 284; Nightingale, 465. A more usual method of avoiding the use of bullion was the advancement of credit to customers and business partners. Brown’s dealings in London and elsewhere can be traced through the debts he was owed, as well as through the many ‘gifts’ of goods and chattels which were made to him and others, normally to provide security for the giving of credit. This latter role appears to have formed a major part of his business dealings, for in London those making such grants to him came from a wide range of occupations, a sure sign that he was concerned principally in lending money to them rather than in selling them merchandise. In May 1443, for instance, he was a recipient of a ‘gift’ made by an armourer, while in 1444 and 1445 similar grants were recorded from a fruiterer and a hackneyman. CCR, 1441-7, pp. 201, 287; Cal. P. and M. London, 1437-57, p. 167. A similar pattern is apparent in the debts owed to him, many of which he tried to pursue through the courts. In some cases it is probable that he was supplying goods, particularly when the debtors came from outside London: in 1432 a royal pardon was granted in respect of the outlawry of a ‘hosteler’ from Doncaster in Yorkshire, whose debt of £8 6s. 8d. Brown had evidently tried to recover. CPR, 1429-36, p. 231; 1446-52, p. 490.

The giving of credit was, of course, a controversial activity that could lead to accusations of usury and of other charges including illegal dealings with alien merchants. Although the Crown generally took a fairly relaxed approach to these issues, the increasingly tense political climate in London towards the end of the 1450s prompted it to try to intimidate many of the capital’s merchants into either pledging their support to the King or maintaining a discreet neutrality. To this end in the middle of 1459 a flood of prosecutions for giving illegal credit began, such that in the Trinity and Michaelmas terms 104 cases were heard, compared with just eight in the previous four years. The political purpose of this campaign appears to be confirmed by the targetting of men such as John Young*, but also by some notable absences from the lists of those prosecuted. According to a register compiled by the scrivener William Styfford, Brown himself was among the heaviest lenders to Italian merchants in the late 1450s, advancing a total of £228, a substantial proportion of the debts owed by the Italians to London grocers; yet unlike some of the more overtly pro-Yorkist aldermen he escaped prosecution in 1459. Nightingale, 470, 510.

Brown’s extensive business dealings enabled him to purchase property in London and elsewhere, and by 1436 his holdings in the city alone were said to be worth a highly respectable £65 p.a. E179/238/90; S.L. Thrupp, Merchant Class Med. London, 379. By this time he had acquired his principal residence, a property in the parish of St. Dunstan in the East which was at various times known as ‘Asshelyneswharf’ or ‘Paknameswharf’. It lay to the west of Water Lane and occupied the whole space between Thames Street, on which the main gate stood, and the river to the south. A rent of £12 and the reversion of the property had been left to Holy Trinity priory by William Sevenoak in 1432, and this was subsequently acquired by Brown along with a lease on the property which he and John Hatherley* received from the executors of Richard Loxley in 1434. Ten years later Brown was granted a fresh lease from Holy Trinity priory for 80 years at a rent of a red rose for the first 15 years and £12 p.a. thereafter. C.L. Kingsford, ‘A London Merchant’s House’, Archaeologia, lxxiv. 137-40; London hr 162/57, 172/50. Details of the property’s construction and layout survive in an earlier lease and in a deed concerning the dower of Brown’s daughter-in-law, Agnes, and show that ‘Brown’s place’, as it was known by 1463, was a substantial residence, with its frontage extending some 130 feet along Thames Street. Though smaller than Crosby Place, Brown’s residence – which he appears to have partly rebuilt during his lifetime – was larger than most houses of its kind in mid fifteenth-century London, and was a fitting setting for his business dealings in the capital. Kingsford, 148-58. The location of Brown’s other properties in the city is less easy to establish, largely because although he was concerned in numerous transactions involving property it is clear that in most cases he was acting as a trustee for others. However, it is certain that he held property elsewhere in St. Dunstan’s parish, which he and a group of feoffees were granted by Sevenoak in 1429. Two years later Brown and his fellows conveyed these holdings to William Estfield*, John Fray† and others who then settled them upon Brown and his second wife, Alice. By 1434, however, Alice had died and Brown once again conveyed the tenements to a group of feoffees, including Estfield and John Carpenter II*. London hr 159/40-41, 162/40. During the 1430s Brown also seems to have acquired property in the nearby parishes of St. Botolph Billingsgate, St. Magnus the Martyr and All Hallows Barking. Ibid. 162/23, 169/27, 171/15, 173/2, 176/20.

Brown’s main interests outside London were acquired on his third marriage, to Rose, daughter and coheiress of Robert Scott, a leading member of the Huntingdonshire gentry who died in 1441. Rose brought to the marriage ‘Scotts manor’ in Abbotsley in that county, which she initially held with her first husband, the London salter Eustace Valdrian. In December 1443 Thomas Pyttes, who had married her widowed mother, quitclaimed any interest he had in the manor to her and Brown. CCR, 1441-7, p. 204; The Commons 1386-1421, iv. 319-22; VCH Hunts. ii. 258; C1/26/210-11. Close to London Brown held property at Fulham in Middlesex, and at Poplar in the same county, where Rose is said to have died in late 1456 or early 1457. London hr 195/48; London and Mdx. Feet of Fines, 197; C1/28/143. Besides his activities as a feoffee for his fellow Londoners, notably for William Sevenoak, John Hatherley and their fellow alderman John Paddesley, Brown served in a similar capacity outside the capital, in transactions involving lanc in Surrey and Essex. London hr 142/32, 148/46, 150/10, 157/25, 159/47, 159/51, 162/77, 81-82, 163/17, 166/45, 179/25; CCR, 1422-9, pp. 394-5, 446; 1429-35, p. 224; 1435-41, pp. 247, 455.

Brown enjoyed a highly successful career in London government from the mid 1420s onwards. His earliest appearance on the civic stage was in October 1423, when he stood surety before the chamberlain in the award of the wardship of the son of one of his fellow grocers. Two years later, having by now served as a warden of his craft, he was chosen by the court of aldermen to act as an arbiter in a dispute, while in 1426 he attested the election of the city’s MPs for the first time. Cal. Letter Bk. London, K, 13; jnl. 2, f. 50v. These were typical beginnings for someone wishing to ascend through the city’s cursus honorum, but in Brown’s case an early boost to his fortunes came with his election as an alderman in May 1429 while still relatively inexperienced. It is almost certain that by this stage his business successes had already made him a prominent figure whose advancement to the aldermannic bench was inevitable. He served first for the ward of Aldgate which was evidently close enough to his own place of residence for him not to seek an immediate move to another ward. In October 1445, however, he took the opportunity to apply for the vacant ward of Billingsgate, which had the advantage of lying close to the river and which was the location of some of his tenements. In the meantime, in September 1431, he had been chosen as one of the sheriffs. Following his election the Grocers’ Company spent the sum of £3 15s. 2d. on a celebration. Ms. Archs. Grocers’ Co. 211. Seven years later he was elected as mayor of London for the first time, and, as we have seen, it was during this term of office that, drawing on his experience as a merchant, he co-ordinated the city’s efforts to bring in badly needed supplies of grain. These pressing matters may have led to other city business being overlooked, however, for in the autumn of 1443 when ordinances concerning the assay of leather were shown before the mayor and aldermen, it transpired that they had been made during Brown’s mayoralty, but had been left in the custody of the chamberlain and never entered in the formal records of the city. Cal. Letter Bk. London, K, 289.

After the end of his mayoralty Brown was regularly appointed to important city committees. In April 1440 he was one of four men chosen to supervise the new granary at Leadenhall, while in September the same year he was placed on a deputation sent to the King in order to discuss the vexed question of rights of sanctuary at places such as the college of St. Martin le Grand with which the City had been in dispute for several years. Jnl. 3, ff. 40, 59, 60v. Following disturbances at the mayoral election of 1441, when the choice of Robert Clopton* was vociferously opposed by a large crowd who gathered at the Guildhall, Brown was one of five aldermen chosen to investigate. Ibid. f. 101v. Further committee appointments followed over the next few years, and in October 1448 he was chosen for a second time as mayor. Few men held the office more than once in this period, and ordinances passed during the previous two decades had stipulated that no one should serve more than twice or if he had been mayor within the previous seven years. Brown’s election was thus a clear indication of his standing in the city. Ibid. f. 137; jnl. 4, ff. 24, 53v, 63v, 108v; Cal. Letter Bk. London, K, 34n. No sooner had Brown completed his second term than, on 13 Oct. 1449 (the day his successor was elected), he was chosen for the first time as one of the City’s MPs. The Parliament was a stormy one, with the impeachment of the duke of Suffolk taking centre stage. A petition from the staplers argued for restrictions on the granting of licences to alien merchants and others to take wool to the continent by routes other than through Calais, although Brown’s lack of involvement in the wool trade meant that he was not personally affected by the growing tensions between the Crown and the staplers. Jnl. 5, f. 45; PROME, xii. 57-60.

In the aftermath of the Parliament and the popular revolt led by Jack Cade the following summer, Brown was appointed as a member of several royal commissions in London, the first of which was charged with investigating the activities of the insurgents in the capital; while subsequent commissions on which he served were directed against a number of prominent members of the royal household, whose activities had been denounced by the rebels. Following his return to Parliament Brown became much less active in London’s administration. He served on fewer committees, although he continued to attend meetings of the court of aldermen, and in June 1452 he obtained a royal pardon. C67/40, m. 30. In February 1453 he was chosen again as an MP for the city to attend the assembly summoned to meet at Reading on 6 Mar. It was while this assembly was in progress that the King became incapacitated, eventually resulting in the appointment of the duke of York as Protector.

This was Brown’s last public duty on behalf of the city of London, although he was to serve for a final time as ‘governor’ of the Grocers’ company in the summer of 1456. Nightingale, 503. He probably fell ill in the winter of 1459-60, for on 15 Feb. 1460 he was formally exonerated from his aldermanry. However, he remained on the list of aldermen until 17 Oct. when the court agreed to the election of a replacement. Jnl. 6, ff. 198, 208v, 272v. On 29 Apr. 1461 Brown made the first of two wills concerning his lands and tenements. This document was solely concerned with his tenements in the parish of St. Mary at Hill near Billingsgate which he had conveyed to Geoffrey Feldyng*, William Cantelowe* and John Middleton* for the purpose of granting them to the mayor and commonalty of the city. Negotiations with the city had already been underway, for five days earlier the court of aldermen had agreed to appoint feoffees of these properties. On 2 May a charter of enfeoffment was handed to the chamberlain, and an indenture with Brown was drawn up. Ibid. ff. 53v, 56; London hr 210/10. Brown’s main will was not made until 28 Apr. 1462. In it he established a chantry in the church of St. Dunstan in the East for 60 years out of the rent issuing from his property in Thames Street. The chantry was to benefit his soul and those of his three wives. His other bequests included £20 to the fabric of the church of St. Nicholas in Newcastle and a total of £30 to the Grocers’ Company. The bulk of his property in London was left to his son, John, in tail-male, with remainder to his feoffees who were to sell them. London hr 195/48; Cal. Wills ct. Husting, ii. 553-4. The will was not enrolled in the court of husting until 1466, but it is clear that both Brown and his son were dead by November 1463 when his principal executor, and former apprentice, Thomas Bledlowe entered into a bond with the chamblerlain for the payment of a total of £324 3s. 11¾d. to the use of Rose and Agnes, Brown’s two remaining grand-daughters, when they came of age. A similar bond in £383 6s. 8d was drawn up early the following year. The delay in enrolling Brown’s will was almost certainly connected with an attempt by John Brown’s widow, Agnes, to keep possession of her late father-in-law’s impressive residence in Thames Street, which, according to Brown’s wishes, should have been sold. An agreement was drawn up in December 1463 concerning Agnes’s rights of dower and she appears to have been allowed to keep hold of the property until her own death. It then became the subject of a further dispute between her second husband, Peter Pekham, and Brown’s executors, but in the event ‘Brown’s place’ was acquired by Bledlowe himself. Cal. Letter Bk. London, L, 40, 49; Kingsford, 141; hr 196/10-11; Cal. P. and M. London, 1458-82, pp. 45, 49; Sutton, 18.