The free trade policy of the Statute of Herrings had not the desired effect of reducing the price of herrings, and the condition of Yarmouth was getting worst. Her haven was again becoming unnavigable, and merchants were leaving the town. On the cliff, a mile south of the mouth of the harbour, the little town of Lowestoft was growing up, and beginning to take an important share in the trade on which Yarmouth depended for her existence. It was under these circumstances that Yarmouth petitioned the King to giant her a charter which could protect her trade against the competition of Lowestoft, and mitigate the evil caused by the blocking up of the mouth of her harbour. Edward III. had every reason to befriend Yarmouth, and to prevent the ruin of an important naval town. So in 1371 he issued a Commission to enquire how far the charter demanded by Yarmouth would be advantageous or disadvantageous to the country. The Commission reported in favour of the grant, and in 1373 the charter was granted which was to put the towns of Yarmouth and Lowestoft at loggerheads for some 300 years, and involve them in bouts of costly litigation. The effect of the charter was to give Yarmouth two strings to her bow against Lowestoft. (1) It annexed to Yarmouth the “place in the high seas called Kirkley Road” _i.e._ the whole of the roads along the coast from Pakefield to the mouth of Yarmouth harbour, wherever that might happen to be, and gave the Yarmouth Bailiffs the right of taking the same tolls from ships discharging cargo in any part of these roads, which they were empowered to take from ships inside the harbour. (2) It prohibited the buying and selling of herrings during the time of the Autumnal fair at any place on sea or land, within “7 leucæ” of the town of Great Yarmouth, except at the town itself, and gave the Bailiffs authority to seize any ship &c. from which any herrings were sold in contravention of the charter. As it was stated in the report of the Commission, on which this charter was granted, that Lowestoft was 5 “leucæ” from Yarmouth, it is clear that it was intended to include Lowestoft in the prohibition. It is also clear than the word “leuca” was used to denote a distance of nearly two miles. There was no legally established measure of distance at this time. Our statute mile was not established until 200 years afterwards, in Queen Elizabeth’s reign. That the Yarmouth merchants had some reason to desire the protection of their trade against the competition of Lowestoft, is shown by a statement in a letter of complaint written from Yarmouth to the Barons of the Cinque Ports some years afterwards, in which they are blamed for not enforcing the observance of the charter by their own fishermen, and requiring them to take their fish to Yarmouth, “for if they can deliver at Lowestoft, they will bring very few or none to us.” {39}