Background

Background

Author: Nev. Ramsden


The Coupland Family of Whitehaven

There is no way that the word Coupland, or its many spelling variations, could be considered to be Norman in origin. Therefore it is most unlikely there was any ancestor of today’s Coupland families came ashore at Hastings, with William the Norman, in 1066. Indeed it is considered to be Norse in origin deriving from a Norse word ‘Cowpe or Kaupe’ meaning ‘bought or merchant’. It was this connection that led early historians to believe that Coupland derived from the word ‘kaupland’ meaning ‘the bought land’ arising from the idea that Gospatrik? the then Earl of Northumbria, did a deal with King William for continuing control over that land that eventually became Cumberland, at the time when William had little or no interest in the Border lands.

In fact the Coupland family was probably resident in West Cumberland when William landed in 1066; and in all probability was indeed Norse in origin. The family was likely to be a local ‘tribal’ leader when the control of west Cumberland alternated between the Kingdoms of Strathclyde & Northumbria. It has been stated that the Coupland families homeland was situated in what became known as the Manor of Seaton in the parish of Bootle & situated to the South of Bootle village and above the Bootle / Whitbeck parish border. It was likely to have been associated with the location of the later Seaton Priory or Nunnery. It is claimed that this family left Bootle parish during the reign of Edward III (1327-1377) for the Furness district of Lancashire. The male line became extinct in the reign of Richard II (1377-1399), when the heiresses married into the Huddleston (of Millom), Pennington (of Muncaster) and the Senhouse (of Gosforth) families, but younger branches of the family carried the name on to the present day in the district, one of the family, Joanna, being prioress of Seaton Nunnery.

The 17th & 18th century families who came to Whitehaven to make their fortunes and have left varying amounts in the written record; the Coupland family has left less than most & they did not have to travel any distance, as the earliest mention of this family is in the St.Bees register, which shows the baptism of Anna the daughter of John Cowpland of St.Bees, on the 15 January 1612.

There are several Coupland men of Whitehaven who can be classified as mariners but only two that can properly be classified as a Merchant, or perhaps more accurately, as a merchant / mariner, they were John Coupland, 1713 – 1768 who married Isabell Craikplace in 1739 and his eldest son John Coupland, 1742 – 1785, who married Eleanor Douglas in 1763. The mariners include (1) Edward Coupland, 1734 – 1773 who married Isabell Troughton; (2) John Coupland, 1726 – 1803 who married Martha Wheelwright & Mary Bowman, and his son (3) John Coupland jnr., 1764-1786 who married Ann Pearson; (4) William Coupland, 1769 – 1783 who married Hannah Atkinson; (5) Thomas Coupland, 1776 - 1808 who married Mary Scott and their son (6) William Coupland, 1805 – 1846 who married Margaret Mossop.

With the advent of the Liverpool to Manchester Railway (1830) & the Manchester ship canal (1894), the centre for commercial shipping interests moved south to the port of Liverpool. It was only natural that the Whitehaven merchant & mariner families made the same journey, so it was not unusual to see the sons of such families living in Liverpool whilst their parents remained in Whitehaven. For the family historian the problem is to prove that any member of a local trading family, with a recognised west coast name, really did arrive from Whitehaven and not elsewhere in the Country. This difficulty applies particularly to the evidence concerning the Coupland family.

An example (1)

…… and in 1787 the abolitionist Thomas Clarkson visited Liverpool to investigate the town‘s links to the triangular trade. There he met two of Davenport‘s key merchant partners: Ambrose Lace and John Copeland (also spelled Coupland). After his meeting with the two men, then Clarkson “began to perceive that I was known in Liverpool, as well as the object for which I came [abolition]. Mr. Coupland, the slave-merchant had given the alarm to those who were concerned in the trade, and Captain Lace, as may be now easily imagined, had spread it”.

Taken from :- William Davenport, the Slave Trade, and Merchant Enterprise in Eighteenth-Century Liverpool by Nicholas James Radburn

also (2)

A Liverpool business paper records another member of a Coupland family who was involved with a Merchant business partnership in Liverpool in the 1760’s. In 1766 one Ralph Earle was trading beads used in the Africa trade, in partnership with his brothers Thomas and William, together with William Davenport, Peter Holme, Thomas Hodgson and John Copeland. It goes on to record that one of the partners, John Copeland, was the captain of the Calypso, the second vessel used by the partnership for trading to Africa in July 1760, and owned by William Earle and John Copeland. So all this shows this John Coupland was a master mariner, a merchant & a ship owner whilst resident in Liverpool.

Reference:-The Earle Collection: The Records of a Liverpool Family of Merchants & Sipowners by Dawn Littler

later (3)

Concerning Dividend payments - Date of Fiat 1826

John Coupland of Liverpool Lancashire, factor partner with William Thomas Coupland of Kingston in Jamaica, factor and carrying on business with him in Liverpool under the firm of William, Thomas & John Coupland and in Kingston under the firm of Coupland & Co. - a joint dividend – 1826

taken from - The Law Journal for the Year 1832-1949.

and (4)

Nicholas Salisbury, Liverpool Cotton Broker, counterclaiming with Henry Wilson on St Lucia Nos. 695A & 695B and 844 & 845 - was identified as of Liverpool and as surviving assignees of William Coupland and Co. In 1843 new assignees were sought to replace Nicholas Salisbury, Henry Wilson and John Harvey deceased.

Note:- St Lucia 695A & B were valued at £1,260 0s 10d Unsuccessful claimant

Taken from - Legacies of British Slave Ownership

More such examples are easily found – but are they from Whitehaven?