Thomas Clarkson - BUILDING A FUTURE

    Back in England, the home office was refusing to grant the penal colony an official currency of its own, and since Sterling currency was leaving NSW as quickly as it came in, the old bartering and promissory system was flourishing. Many court affidavits we've consulted referred to its legitimacy as being "according to the usage and custom of Merchants frog time memorial".
    Along with many other inhabitants of the time, Thomas Clarkson had promissory notes circulating. These were understood to be redeemed or honoured on demand, after a certain date which was usually included on the note. The notes could be passed from hand to hand, even within the stipulated period for payment, as long as they were endorsed with the signature of the parties concerned. These notes were accepted as legal tender and failure to honour the same, when presented, could result in prosecution to recover the amount owed the injured party.
    In 1810 Thomas had circulating, promissory notes of a Copper Plate nature, which he now requested be presented for payment.(20)
    The Sydney Gazette of mid 1811(21) reported the theft of a parcel of Colonial Bills from the home of Mrs Sarah Wills, all of which were drawn by Thomas Clarkson and amounted to the sum of £36. They were described as varying from written bills, payable in colonial currency, to printed notes of various denominations. Sarah Wills was the recently widowed wife of Edward Wills who had operated a very large warehouse at No 96 George St, in partnership with Thomas Reiby. Thomas Reiby had died on the 5 April 1811(22) and then on the 14 May 1811 Edward Wills also passed away.(23) Thomas Reiby's wife, Mary, continued the business with great success. It was into the hands of Sarah Wills that the above mentioned promissory notes found themselves.
    Failure to honour these notes, (which remind us so much of our current Credit Card System) resulted in prosecution to recover the money owing. Sometimes the drawer was caught without the available means to make good the notes, and, several times in his lifetime, Thomas Clarkson was to find himself in court to answer writs for non-payment of a debt. Conversely, he was also, from time to time, to instigate proceedings against those who did not settle with him.
    One such case was brought against him by William Mansell, on 22 July 1611, to recover £26 in promises. Thomas did not appear officially before the court, and Mansell received a judgement in his favour.(24)
    Thomas immediately appealed against the verdict, and the case went to the Courts of Appeal on 24 August.
    Thomas claimed Mansell had not approached him to make good his debt and had been taken by surprise to be served a writ instead. He said there existed among merchants, an unwritten law that said a demand for payment preceded any court action. He stated he had in fact been present that day in court, and had informed the Court Members that he had previously advised Mansell, by note, of his intention to pay.(25)

Sir.
I have not received any good money this 24th. But I have some good money to receive to your purpose. I have not any by me now or I would not give you the trouble
I remain yours truly Thomas Clarkson Sydney April 25th.

    Thomas further claimed the whole action was aimed at injuring his credit rating as a trader, and that Mansell had gone behind his back in the way he had handled the whole situation.
    Thomas' appeal was commendable in content but unfortunately the court chose to uphold its former decision.(26)
    Thomas may well have been right in his statements regarding the way credit could be undermined. A man's honesty and his finances went hand in hand, and much damage could be done to a dealer's reputation by slandering his credit rating.
    In 1813 Thomas Clarkson had occasion to support a man who claimed his credit was being questioned. Mr E. Kinsela declared, in the Sydney Gazette, that he would award £5 to anyone who could name the parties, who were circulating scandalous rumours, that he had sold his home and premises at No 8 Clarence St. He then advertised the names of those dealers who would honour his current notes in circulation. Among others was the name of Thomas Clarkson.(27)
    Honesty was a variable commodity, everyone was out to survive and perhaps make a little on the side but everyone in turn expected the other man not to take advantage of him. It was like this in every aspect of life ... even in the baking of the daily loaf (as we've mentioned before). So much so, that by 1815 bakers were required by law to brand their loaves with their initials so a check could be kept on the weight and quality sold.(28)
    On 19 October 1813 a Mr James Mannix entered the Baker shop of Thomas Clarkson and bought a loaf of bread (priced that day at 10d) from his daughter, Catherine. He tendered an eighteen penny bill but claimed he was charged 1/-. Thomas was ordered to appear before the Bench Magistrate to answer the charge and being found guilty, he was fined 40/-(29).
    Curiously the three other bakers charged in a similar manner that day had all had the pleasure of Mr Mannix's custom and all had been found to be overcharging.(30) It would appear that James Mannix was an inspector of sorts, employed to check the prices at random.
    The beginning of an industry was developing on the agricultural front. Macquarie was encouraging the farmers to grow wheat and other grains and to raise cattle. As an incentive, he accepted tenders to supply grain and beef for the colony's use. This was controlled by the Commissary General and payment was usually made by receipt. Shopkeepers and publicans were among the few who could change these receipts and often this payment was made out in goods, not necessarily the goods required by the settler, but that which the dealer was willing to give him to make up the amount. If the Government Store was full, the publican was the only one with facilities to take his grain and would do so, but at a much lower price. Unfortunately some unscrupulous traders would make tremendous profits from this, and really, the little settler didn't stand a chance. It's small wonder that many small farms found their way into the hands of the traders for a very small outlay.

Page last updated - 7 July 2006