30 Barker v Hoden

30 BARKER V HODEN

Matthew Barker of St Michael, Wood Street, London, gent v Robert Hoden of St Christopher-le-Stocks, London, Sergeant at Mace

January - April 1637

Abstract

Barker complained that Hoden had given him scandalous words provocative of a duel. Dr Duck delivered Barker's libel in February 1637 and Hoden was required to respond in April; but nothing further survives.

Documents

• Proceedings
  • Proceedings before Arundel: College of Arms MS 'Court of Chivalry' (act book, 1636-8) [pressmark R.R. 68C], (hereafter 68C), fos. 51r-59r (28 Jan 1637)
  • Proceedings: 68C, fos. 23r-36v (11 Feb 1637)
  • Proceedings: 68C, fos. 14r-20v (16 Feb 1637)
  • Proceedings: 68C, fos. 37r-41v (29 Apr 1637)

Summary of proceedings

Dr Duck acted as counsel for Barker. On 28 January 1637 Duck was to give the petition concerning scandalous words provocative of a duel. On 11 February he was required to give the libel and Hoden respond. On 16 February Dr Duck gave the libel for Barker. On 29 April 1637 Hoden was required to respond to the libel.

Notes

Neither Barker nor Hoden appeared in the Visitations of London: J. J. Howard and J. L. Chester (eds.), The Visitation of London, 1633, 1634 and 1635, vol. I (Publications of the Harleian Society, 15, 1880); J. J. Howard (ed.), The Visitation of London, 1633, 1634 and 1635, vol. II (Publications of the Harleian Society, 17, 1883); J. B. Whitmore and A. W. Hughes Clarke (ed.), London Visitation Pedigrees, 1664 (Publications of the Harleian Society, 92, 1940).

People mentioned in the case

• Barker, Matthew, gent
• Duck, Arthur, lawyer
• Hoden, Robert
• Howard, Thomas, earl of Arundel and Surrey

Places mentioned in the case

• London
  • St Christopher-le-Stocks
  • St Michael, Wood Street

Topics of the case

• office-holding
• provocative of a duel