Calendar of the Plea and Memoranda Rolls of the City of London: Volume 2, 1364-1381. Originally published by His Majesty's Stationery Office, London, 1929.
This free content was digitised by double rekeying. All rights reserved.
CALENDAR OF THE PLEA and MEMORANDA ROLLS of the CITY OF LONDON
ROLL A 10
Roll of the time of Adam de Bury, Mayor of the City of London A o 39 Edw. III [1365-1366] (fn. 1)
A Congregation of Mayor, Aldermen and Commonalty in full Husting of Pleas of Land held on Monday after the Feast of All Hallows [1 Nov.], at which were present Adam de Bury, Mayor, Adam Fraunceys, John Noot, Thomas de Lodelowe, William Welde, Bartholomew Frestlyng, Thomas de Pykenham, John de Berners, John de St Albans, Simon de Worstede, James de Thame and William de Tudenham, Aldermen, John de Medeford and Simon de Mordon, Sheriffs.
Bartholomew de Thornton, furner (fn. 2), having been committed to the prison of Newgate for contempt and trespass against the assayers of white bread, came before the Mayor on 14 Nov. and found mainprise for keeping the peace towards the said assayers, viz. Robert Lambard, chandler, Hugh Refham, fishmonger, and Stephen Vanner, baker, who undertook, body for body, that no damage or peril should befall the said assayers by the said Bartholomew or by his means.
John Lylleston and John Balyden delivered to the Mayor a bill, complaining that they had bought five horses for 4 marks 8d from a certain Roger, and that John de Medford, one of the Sheriffs, had seized the horses as having been feloniously stolen, to the damage of the plaintiffs, from lack of guarantee by the said Roger. They pray that the latter may be made to refund the purchase money. [French]
The said Roger was summoned and admitted having sold the horses at his house in the parish of St Andrew, Holborn. Judgment that the complainants recover the value of the horses, and that the said Roger be committed to Newgate till he satisfy them.
Walter de Brokesheved, apprentice of Robert de Potenhale, was attached to answer a charge of assaulting William Bonet, constable of Baynard Castle Ward, who stopped him from emptying a handcart (carecta manualis) full of rubbish and filth (robotisa & putredine) into the Thames at the West Watergate of Baynard Castle. The defendant pleaded that he took the refuse by his master's orders to cast it into the Thames, but admitted beating and knocking the constable down. He put himself on the mercy of the Mayor and Aldermen, and was committed to prison. His master was also committed to prison, but was afterwards released on mainprise of Thomas de St Albans and William Whetele, cordwainer, to come up for judgment.
Simon Edelond, fisshere, complained that he sold a quantity of fresh fish from the Thames to John Cotlond and Thomas Kayho, fishmongers, and having received God's penny (fn. 3) (denarium ad deum) he delivered the fish to their shop, but the said fishmongers refused to pay the purchase money except at a reduction of 12d, and when he refused to take less, the said Thomas struck him with his hand, against the King's peace and to his damage, 40s. The defendant Thomas admitted the assault, and both fishmongers then paid what was due. They were afterwards mainprised by Henry atte Hale and William de Kyngeston, fishmongers, to keep the peace with the said Simon.
Membr. 1 b
John Rote and John de Hidyngham brought a bill complaining that Andrew Grauntcourt, goldsmith, had used threats to them when returning from the court of Sir Robert de Thorpe, Chief Justice of the Common Bench, at St Martin's le Grand, where they were acting as jurors in a nisi prius action, in which James Hopman, hatter, was suing Reginald de Cisterne of Lynn for £200 alleged to be due on an account. Though by the common law of the land any man going to or returning from the King's courts was under his protection, the defendant had assaulted them with swords and knives, pursued them to St Bride's, Fleet Street, and had called them false and perjured (deleax, delezoes), because they would not find an unjust verdict in favour of the above James, who also had offered them £100 as a bribe. The plaintiffs pray for a remedy, so that they may not find it necessary to petition the King's Council. [French]
The defendant appeared on summons and, after denying the above allegations, put. himself on the country. A jury consisting of Robert Mortymer, Simon atte Nax, Robert de Hycford, botelmaker, Richard Amys, Thomas Wynter, William Dyggs, chandler, John Baterel, Simon Fulham, William Bathe, Thomas Hosteler, brewer, Adam Gremesby and Robert de Merston found him guilty, and he was committed to the custody of the Sheriff until etc.
The same jury found that James Hopman, Henry de Bury and William de Fenton, hatters, had used abusive words to John Melewold, clerk of the Common Bench, calling him a false chaplain. They were committed to prison on this charge, and also on a charge of having assaulted and used menacing and opprobrious words to the above John Hidyngham, who proceeded against them by a separate bill in the same Court. [French]
Thomas Cornwaleys, Robert de la More, Henry Boseworth and Geoffrey Neuton were sworn surveyors to see that wines should be properly sold in taverns and that the provisions of the King's Charter to the Vintners (fn. 4), as recorded in Letter Book G, fo. (127 b), should be duly carried out.
A bond in £108 was entered into by William Seynt Albon, chandler, John Grove, armourer, Arnold Peutrer and John Scot, heaumer (fn. 5), for the value of the wine of William de la Rok, in case it should be adjudged forfeit to the King.
Baldewyn de Freville, knight, complained to the Mayor and Aldermen that when he was passing through Cheap on business of the Prince of Wales, he was rudely stopped by John de Lubek, saddler, and charged with owing the said John, as executor of the will of John de Blythe, a sum of money, which he was told he would have to pay whether he wanted to or not. To this he had answered that to his knowledge he owed nothing to any citizen of London, but if money had been borrowed for his use by his servant Gilbert, he was quite willing to answer before the Mayor and Aldermen, whose duty it was to administer the laws of the City.
The said John Lubek, on being summoned to court, denied the charge of insulting behaviour and put himself on the country. A jury was summoned from Cheap, and he was committed to prison meanwhile for lack of mainprise. When questioned about the debt, he produced the will of the abovementioned John de Blythe, saying at the same time that it had been enrolled in the Husting on Monday the eve of St Margaret [20 July] Ao 35 Edw. III  (fn. 6). The will was examined by the Court, when it was found that the surname of " Lubek" and also the endorsement relating to the date of enrolment had been erased, and when search was made on the Roll, no enrolment could be found on the date alleged. Under these suspicious circumstances, the will was retained by the Mayor and Aldermen for further examination. The defendant then asked leave to come to terms with the plaintiff, and the Court assented. Afterwards on 26 Nov. Thomas Askull, Roger de Excestre, John Tykhull, Thomas Bacheler and John Lenechyld, saddlers, mainprised the said John for his good behaviour under penalty of £15.
John de Lubek was committed to prison by assent of the Mayor, Aldermen and Commonalty for coming before the Mayor, Aldermen and Sheriffs, and declaring in full court that they refused him justice in his plaints, in contempt of the King and his court. He was afterwards mainprised as noted above.
John Meredien, butcher, was committed to prison for having perjured himself, when he was being examined on a charge of having sold a wey of tallow (wayam sepe) to John de Pritelwell of co. Essex, for conveyance out of the City contrary to the custom of the City (fn. 7).
John Bayly, brewer, was attached to answer William Frere of Wycombe in a plea of debt on demand of 105s, according to the Statute of Smithfield, for malt bought at Queenhithe. He acknowledged the debt and was committed to prison till he paid.
Membr. 2 b
John Hydyngham, William Pershore and William de Bathe, constables of Fleet Street, brought a bill of complaint against John Maunsiple for having threatened the above William de Bathe, when he went into the defendant's cellar to examine his ale-measures. They also charged him with having rescued by force a man who, after wounding John de Lodelawe, cordwainer, in an affray, had taken sanctuary in a church.[French]
The defendant was summoned to answer the King and the plaintiffs on the above charges. He admitted the first and was committed to prison. He denied the second and put himself on the country, being mainprised to hear the verdict and keep the peace meanwhile by Thurstan de Chesenhale and John Bakere, brewer. Afterwards a jury (including the two mainpernors) found him not guilty, and he was acquitted.
William Nosterfeld and Rose his wife were attached to answer John de Briclesworth, who prosecuted for the Commonalty, on a charge of having sold ale with a quart-measure sealed with a counterfeit seal of the Alderman of Dowgate Ward, which measure was found to be short by one-third when compared with the standard measure of the City. The defendants admitted using the measure and charging a higher price than was allowed by the proclamation, but as regards the charge of counterfeiting the Alderman's seal they put themselves on the country, and were found not guilty and acquitted.
John Curteys was sworn before the Mayor to supervise the sale of hostres, muskeles, cokkes and welkes (fn. 8), to see that they were sold in sealed measures, and to remove them from the stalls if unwholesome, and that the assay should take place at half-prime (ad dimidium prime) (fn. 9).
At an inquest held the same day, a jury of William Clophull, John Clerk, John Popul, Henry Polter, John Conyngburgh, John Clapschethe, Peter Polter, John Wastell, John atte Noke, Adam Polter, John Messager and John Clerk presented John Stukle, poulterer, as guilty of selling his poultry in secret places and not in open market, and of having sold poultry to John Wenge, cook, at the latter's lodgings (fn. 10).
At an inquest held on Tuesday after the Feast of All Saints [1 Nov.], a jury of Hamo Crepulgate, William Hamond, William Senesterre, Robert Hervy, Richard Donmowe and others presented John Cokhow and John Stylle as partners in poultry-selling, and John Belte, a foreign poulterer, for keeping a shop in the Poultry, where he sold the goods of other foreign poulterers, as though they were the goods of freemen, thus defrauding the Sheriff of his customs. The above persons put themselves on the mercy of the Court. The jury said further that all the poulterers of the City sold poultry at a higher price than was allowed by the Statute (fn. 11). On being ordered to give the names of persons so offending, they produced a lengthy list including their own names.
Richard Bayoun admitted that he was an apprentice of William Plumer of Westminster, and because he refused to be enrolled according to the custom of the City (fn. 12), he was committed to Newgate.
John Byrrade, John Cortour, Roger Vanyewylowe, John de Poules, William þe Mayre and Peter Pellyn were mainprised to keep the peace with John Yongehere, Fleming, who was also mainprised with his son John, to keep the peace with the other Flemings. The said John Yongehere had previously been committed to prison on his confession that he had aided and abetted his son John in striking a man of Flanders.
Membr. 3 b
William Holbech, Alderman, brought a bill of complaint against Simon Levelif, brewer, for impleading him by writ at Westminster on matters arising within the franchise of the City, contrary to his oath as a freeman (fn. 13). [French]
Writ, dated at Westminster, 22 Nov., enclosing a petition to the Chancellor from John van Stene, merchant of Ghent, who complained that he had sued John Penetrie and Henry Forester, skinners, before the Mayor of the Staple at Westminster for moneys due for goods supplied, and that the above Mayor had sent a bill of the Staple to the Mayor and Recorder of the City requesting them to do justice therein, but owing to the neglect of John Not, then Mayor of the City, and the fact that his serjeant had been bribed, no sequestration was made on the defendants, who had fled with their goods to Westminster, so that the petitioner was unable to recover his debt in the City. [French]
The late Mayor and his serjeant were summoned to answer the articles in the above bill, but when they appeared the plaintiff said that he did not wish to prosecute his bill. Judgment was given that the plaintiff take nothing by his bill and be in mercy, and that the defendants go thence without a day.
Robert Vynter of Maydenstane (fn. 14) and Andrew Pyebakere of Cornhill entered into a recognizance for the appearance of Roger de Heryetesham, a monk of Boxlee (fn. 15), at an audit of accounts between the said monk and John Burgeys, mariner, as regards the profit and loss of a farcost (fn. 16), engaged in carrying red herrings from Yarmouth to the monastery at Boxley and in other trading.
Vane Camby of Pistoja, Lombard, brought a bill of complaint to the effect that he had bought a letter of exchange in London for £30 from Nicholas Sardouch of Lucca, Lombard, which letter was to be payable to himself or his attorney at Bruges in the form of 200 scudos, each scudo being worth 3s; that he had given the letter to his attorney John Paule, and that the latter had been refused payment in Bruges. [French]
The said Nicholas in his defence said that the plaintiff had instructed him to pay the money, i.e. 200 scudos, value £28 15s, to Sir Paul Johan of Pistoja or to a certain John Paule, and that he had paid the former. He prayed judgment whether the plaintiff had any action against him. To this the plaintiff replied that the payment was to be made to John Paule and not to Sir Paul Johan or any one else.
After ah adjournment that the Court might be advised, the parties agreed that the defendant should enter into a bond to produce a receipt from the person to whom he had paid the money, and also a letter from the Echevins and Burgomasters of Bruges as to the payment. On 16 July next year the action was further adjourned till Monday after the quindene of Michaelmas.
Complaint having been made that many who were born within the franchise of the City of London were prevented from enjoying the freedom, unless they had been admitted to it in some other way (than by birth), it was ordained by the Mayor, Aldermen and Commons that any one born free within the City or the bounds of the franchise thereof, who could prove the fact, should enjoy the freedom as fully as others who had been admitted by apprenticeship or redemption or in any other way, as had always been the custom, provided that if his freedom were challenged and he claimed it by birth (fn. 17), he should take the oath like others. [French]
Membr. 4 b
John de Hatfeld, Gilbert Bonet, vintner, John Chaucier, Blasius de Bury and Thomas de Athelby, pelter, mainprised Richard Lyeuns (fn. 18) of London to keep the peace with Alice de Perers (fn. 19), and not to interfere with her going where she wished on the King's business and on her own.
John Talbot brought a bill of complaint to the effect that he went to lodge at the inn of Richard Pecok, hostiller, in Fancherstret and entrusted (bailla) to him certain goods, viz. £4 13s 4d in gold; 4 ells of scarlet, value 40s; a silver ouche (fn. 20), value 16s; 6 spoons, value 8s; a bond in which the master of the ship called "Katerine" was bound to him in £21; and two acquittances—of which goods he could not have delivery from the said Richard, who was intending to leave the City, and had threatened him. He prays a remedy, and that the said Richard may find security for keeping the peace. [French]
Both parties appearing on 18 Jan., the defendant produced the goods mentioned, with the exception of the money and the acquittances. As regards the money, nothing he said had the effect of exonerating him (nichil dicit in effectu ad exonerandum ipsum), and he was committed to prison until etc. He denied receiving the two acquittances, and in this matter the plaintiff did not prosecute further. The defendant was bound over to keep the peace with the plaintiff.
The same day the defendant sued the plaintiff for 31s 6d due for 6 ells of green cloth, which debt the said John declared that he had paid, and waged and made his law (fn. 21) to that effect, and was acquitted thereof. On this, Richard Pecok drew a knife, and was fined for so doing.
John de Wynchecombe, armourer, came and stated that his apprentice, William atte Hawe, son of Margaret de Grubbelane, refused to be enrolled according to the custom of the City. The apprentice confessed refusing and was committed to Newgate. Thereupon his mother came into court and said that there was an agreement between the two that the indentures of apprenticeship were to be broken and that the master was to give the apprentice a general acquittance. This the master could not deny. The Court allowed the indentures to be cancelled and then fined the master 20s for not having enrolled his apprentice.
The same day Walter atte Grene, Henry Asselyn, William Ryf and William Mareschal, masters of the Butchers at St Nicholas Shambles, reported that a pig found in the shop of John Huntyngdon of Bykleswade, butcher, was corrupt and abominable to the human race. William Cornewaylle, taverner, paid the fine of 20s and mainprised the said John to appear before the Mayor and Aldermen when required.
Writ de minis, dated at Westminster 20 Nov., notifying that the King had taken John de Brampton under his protection, and ordering the Mayor and Sheriffs to take security from William de Nafferton, who had threatened to burn the said John's houses and do him personal injury.
Return to the effect that the above-mentioned William had been mainprised for keeping the peace by William Ledbetere, John Geddyng, glazier, Roger Parchemyner and William Yoman, mareschall (fn. 24).
The Cordwainers of London brought a bill of complaint to the effect that Thomas de Folkeshull, wyrdrawere, claimed to monopolise (fn. 25) the whole outfit of Robert Leg, ageletmakere (fn. 26), who had been accustomed hitherto to make laces for shoemakers in general. [French]
The parties having been summoned to court, the said Thomas admitted buying shoe-laces (aguylettes) from the said Robert at 1¾d and selling them for 2½d, and put himself on the mercy of the Mayor and Aldermen. He was committed to prison. Robert also admitted making the alleged agreement. He was forbidden to make any such agreement again and was ordered to sell his wares to the cordwainers and any others who wanted to buy. The same day the defendant Thomas was allowed to find mainprise for the payment of 20s fine to the Commonalty and undertook not to enter into any such arrangement again to the fraud and deception of the common people.
William Lytherpol, goldsmith, was committed to prison for saying in full court that the Mayor and Aldermen would not listen to him and do him justice. Next day he was mainprised by William de Burton and John Coraunt, goldsmiths, for the payment of 15d fine, and for his good behaviour towards the Mayor and Aldermen and other servants of the King, and also for keeping the peace with John de zeftele and Beatrice his wife.
John de Allesford of co. Southampton was put on the pillory and sent to Newgate for reasons noted in Letter Book G, fo. 147 (fn. 27).
William Gedelyne complained that William de Ely, pouchmaker, had spread a report that the plaintiff was a man of illfame, who had robbed his master of six purses and was not fit to work at the trade. As no one would employ him, the plaintiff had been forced to seek work at York, where his behaviour disproved the scandals moved against him. He brought with him a certificate from York, testifying to his good conduct.
The defendant, being summoned, declared that he would submit to judgment if four good men of his mistery could be found who would declare him guilty. Thereupon four pouchmakers—John Rosemond, John Storm, John Norfolk and Richard Spark—declared on oath that he was guilty. The Court adjourned the case for consultation. Afterwards at the Husting held on Monday the Feast of SS. Fabian and Sebastian [20 Jan.] he publicly did penance for his false statements by standing on a stool (scdbellum) in the great Hall, after which he was released.
Beatrice Langbourne was committed to the custody of the Sheriffs for calling Simon de Worstede, Alderman, a false thief and a broken-down old yokel (falsum latronem et rusticum veterem & defractum), when he arrested her for throwing filth in the street.
Membr. 5 b
Albredala Veyse was committed to Newgate for saying that Rose, wife of Thomas Whytcherche, had been put on la Thewe (fn. 28) for selling ale contrary to regulations and that the Mayor had taken a sum of money to put her there during the night time. Afterwards on 10 Feb. she was mainprised by Thomas atte Lake, latoner (fn. 29), to behave herself and bridle her tongue (lingua sua frenabitur).
Memorandum that Robert Raven found surety, viz. William de Harewedone and Richard Brok, saddler, for producing the will of Richard de Herteleye, mareschal, before the Mayor and Aldermen when required Thereupon the will was returned to him. [French].
John Caysho, butcher, was committed to Newgate for 10 days and ordered to pay 10s for rebelling against the masters elected to govern the trade and for selling meat at too high a price, viz. a shoulder of mutton (spaude de motun) for 6d.
William de Cumberton, skinner, was committed to prison for mixing old and new fur, against the Statute (fn. 30) and in deception of the people.
Robert Mauncel, mercer, sued John de Aldham, mercer, for the price of three sercles (fn. 31), value £14 11s 8d, £4 and 60s respectively. The defendant said that the actual prices were 14 marks, 40s and 30s, which he was willing to pay. The parties came to terms on the latter prices.
John de Hardyngham, mercer, by his attorney Henry de Bray, sued John Prentys for a debt due on a tally sealed with the defendant's seal, which tally the latter admitted as his deed. Judgment for the plaintiff, and the debtor committed to prison until etc.
Thomas de Bryhull, cordwainer, recovered against William Bedel, fuller, the sum of 5s for shoes sold to him. He further charged the said William with having drawn a knife and assaulted him. The defendant denied on oath having drawn a knife or any other weapon (armaturam). A jury of Friday Street found that the defendant did not draw a knife but used a stick, and that he kept the plaintiff a prisoner for half an hour. Both parties having thus perjured themselves, they were sent to prison till the next Husting, when they were made to stand uncapped (decapiciati) (fn. 32) on the stool in Guildhall by way of penance in accordance with the statute, after which they were set free.
All the weavers of the City were summoned for taking apprentices in their court and for exacting fines from them, viz. one mark from William Parker and others in contempt of the liberty of the City (fn. 33).
Membr. 6 b
John de Chalton, junior, came before the Mayor, Aldermen and Sheriffs and confessed to having assaulted Hugh de Brampton. He was adjudged to pay the said Hugh half a mark damages, and because he had drawn blood contrary to the Statute (fn. 34), to pay a fine of the same amount to the Chamberlain.
John atte Hale, tanner, sued John de Lubek, saddler, for 64s 6d, the price of goods sold to him, viz. 20s for 3 hides of Hungrye (fn. 35), 14s for 14 lappes (fn. 36) of hide for saddles, 16s for 2 saddles, 3s for 4 skins silvered (iiii pell' arg' ), 4s in silver and 6d for a pair of knives. The defendant denied the debt, and both parties put themselves on the verdict of a jury. Subsequently the defendant made default, and the jury in his absence found a verdict for the plaintiff.
John Lubek, saddler, came into the Chamber of the Guildhall and there charged the Mayor and Aldermen with denying him justice, and said he would be revenged. Accordingly those who had already mainprised him on a previous occasion in £40 each, viz. Thomas de Askhull, Roger de Excestre, John de Tykhull and John Lenechyld, were committed to the custody of the Sheriff. The said Roger was also committed to prison for contempt in the King's court.
Richard atte Welle, goldsmith, took an oath that he would teach his apprentice, "John in the lane," the trade which he practised, and that he would not send him into the country to thresh his corn or do any other continuous field work (opera campestrina) (fn. 37).
Roger del Ewerye, the King's barber, recovered from John Want the sum of £4 13s 4d in which the said John was bound to him for the custody of a certain beast called an "ore" (fn. 38) from Egypt. The King's privy seal letter on this matter, directed to Adam de Bury, remains in the Mayor's bag in the Chamber of the Guildhall.
Roger atte Grene, cordwainer, was committed to prison for rebelling against the masters of the mistery of Cordwainers. He was afterwards released on mainprise of John de Notyngham and Walter de Barton, cordwainers, for his good behaviour, and of William Canel, cordwainer, for the payment of a fine.
Robert de Watlyngton complained that a cloth cleaned for him by William de Moteshunte, fuller, stank so badly that he lost one mark in selling it. The defendant declared the cloth to have been well and competently fulled according to the agreement between them, and thereon he made his law. He was acquitted. The Court ordered the plaintiff to stay further proceedings in the Sheriffs' Court.
John atte Hale, tanner, was committed to prison for having perjured himself in a plaint against John Lubek. He afterwards had his judgment in the Husting on the stool there, according to the Statute (fn. 39).
Richard de Bromherde, wortesellere (fn. 40), was attached to answer Richard Marchaunt, who complained that the defendant carried a dead woman from Newgate to the plaintiff's house at Castle Baynard, and also assaulted the plaintiff and his wife Agnes, causing a great affray. The defendant pleaded not guilty, and was committed to prison for lack of mainprise. Afterwards the parties came to terms and the defendant went quit.
Membr. 7 b
Gilbert de Walden, tailor, sued John Fraunceys for the return of 30s which had been paid to the defendant in respect of a brewhouse leased by him to the plaintiff, but which the plaintiff had been unable to occupy, owing to its having been claimed as an escheat to the King. The defendant pleaded that he was not indebted in the manner alleged and waged his law, which he made on the spot as a foreigner (fn. 41). Judgment for the defendant.
John de Stoke, brewer, was committed to prison till he paid a fine of 20s to the Chamberlain for drawing his knife and wounding a certain chaplain against the King's peace and the ordinance of the City.
John Knott, fishmonger, was mainprised by John Curteys and Hugh de Ware that he would abide by the award (stet ad rewardum) of the Bishop of London, Robert de Thorpe and John Knyvet, and also that he would not carry a plea into the Court Christian either within or outside the realm.
Thomas Russhemere, goldsmith, residing in Lombard Street, was committed to prison, on the prosecution of the masters of the mistery of Goldsmiths, for rebellious conduct towards them and for making counterfeit work.
Richard de Berdefeld, parson of the Church of Wolcherchehawe, sued Thomas atte More chaplain, for a debt of £7 17s 2½d, being arrears due to the church for rents and other profits. The defendant declared that he would submit to judgment if the parson would make his law that the money was due. Thereupon the parson made his law that the defendant owed him 100s 6½d, but was unwilling to swear concerning the rest. Judgment for the amount sworn. The defendant was committed to prison, being released on 5 May, when he paid.
John Pope, drover, by a bill of the Statute of Smithfield (fn. 42), recovered against John Cornewaille, butcher, the sum of £6 for beasts sold to him, and next day recovered a further 4 marks due from Henry Cornewaille, butcher.
John Pope, drover, complained that Henry de Cornewaylle, butcher, had seized certain animals of his at Westsmithfield, pretending that the plaintiff owed him £20. The defendant confessed to having seized the animals, but declared that he did so because the above John had entered into an obligation (invadiadium) with a penalty of £20, and that that sum accrued to him by failure of the plaintiff to keep the covenants. The plaintiff denied that he ever made any such obligation and, having waged his law, made it on the spot. Judgment that the plaintiff be acquitted of the alleged obligation (fn. 43).
Edmund de Ippegrave, John Bonyng and Bertram Hurst, goldsmiths, mainprised John de Shordych that he would repair a silver cup, weighing 38 shillings, by Easter next in accordance with the order of Simon de Codyngton, knight.
Agnes Drew, poulterer, who had been committed to Newgate on the complaint of the masters of the Poulterers, for buying poultry at Leadenhall before prime in order to forestall the market, was released by favour of the Mayor and sworn not to offend again.
Ernold de Bruyn, taverner, was committed to prison on suspicion of having robbed Baudewyne, the master of a ship belonging to Brele in Seland, of 9 gold nobles and 6 gold motouns (fn. 44) in Cordwainer Street. He was afterwards released on depositing with the Chamberlain pledges to the value of the robbery. A day was given for the proof of the felony (ad probandum feloniam predictani).
Walter de Boston, pursere (fn. 45), was committed to prison, having confessed to being a common maintainour of Richard de Boston, who unjustly prosecuted a writ of imprisonment against John le S...... He was mainprised by Richard Upryht, puchemakere, and John Quyk.
John Rothewelle, wytthazoyere (fn. 46), was committed to Newgate for snatching a beaver hat off the head of James de Dyne, Lombard.
Membr. 8 b
William de Cumberton, skinner, was committed to prison for a defect in a piece of pured fur (furura puratd) (fn. 47) sold by him to John de Fakenham, servant of Isabella the King's daughter. On 1 March Henry de Sudbury, skinner, and Michael de Hakeneye, felmongere, entered into recognizances of £40 on his behalf and he was liberated. The fur remained in the custody of the Chamberlain.
John Huberd, Gregory de Shaldeford, Richard atte Hacche, Richard de Petteworth, William de Louthe, John de Elmeswell and William de Quynton, who had been sworn on an inquest, concerning the repair of certain tenements of Master Richard de Plescy by William Northaw and John de Pelham, chaplains, were asked if they were freemen of the City. They confessed that they were not, and were thereupon committed to prison by the Mayor and Aldermen. Next day they were, released and were told that if they were again summoned to the Guildhall for an inquest, they should raise an objection before being sworn, otherwise they would be sent to the pillory.
William de Bristowe, John Rigal and John Capel, cordwainers, were attached to answer a charge of rebelling against the masters of the mistery of Cordwainers, viz. William de Whetele, John Longe, John de Leycestre, Richard Freman, John Hoke and Henry de Gilyngham, who complained that the defendants had threatened that as soon as the present Mayor was out of office they would have redress for the wrongs they had suffered. [French]
Two of the defendants pleaded guilty, and John Capel, who put himself on the country, was found guilty by a jury. All three were committed to prison. On 13 March John Rigal was liberated on mainprise of Ralph Bassingbourne and William Dene, cordwainers, to pay a fine of one mark, and not to join in covins and confederacies in future. William de Bristowe was also liberated on paying 20s fine.
Richard Curteys, butcher, in his own person sued Adam le Gaoler of Newgate and Alice his wife (fn. 48) for unjust detinue of 20s, which he had entrusted to the said Alice the year before for delivery to Walter de Baldeswell. The defendants Alice and Adam denied the debt alleged in the plaint, and the wife, with the consent of her husband, waged her law. She then made her law immediately in the form in which she had waged it, and she and her husband were acquitted.
William Moot, brewer, John de Henham and Thomas Fraunceys, hakeneymen (fn. 49), were attached to answer charges of being concerned in an affray by night in Candlewickstreet Ward, of keeping their doors open after curfew and of being nightwalkers against the peace. They were committed to prison, but the same day were mainprised to keep the peace and released.
William Skynnere entered into a bond of £10 to Richard Palmere, not to carry away the latter's wife again (si plus caperet uxorem suam in rapdonem), and thereupon all actions between the parties were stayed.
On the sworn complaint of the masters of the Saddlers, John de Brokhurst, saddler, was committed to prison for ten days for rebellious conduct, and was fined for having in his possession two defective saddles. He was afterwards mainprised by Robert Frye and Thomas atte Halle for his good behaviour.
Nicholas de Upton, cardmaker, was attached to answer the Commonalty for having made his law in the Sheriffs' Court as a foreigner, as reported by John Penne, the Sheriffs' serjeant, whereas he was a freeman of the City by birth. He was mainprised by John Abraham, girdler, and Roger Say, haberdasher, to come up on Thursday, when he paid a fine for contempt.
Roger atte Wode, brewer, living without Cripplegate, mainprised Lambert Rutee, webbe (fn. 50), that he would submit to law (ad standum recto) concerning a sequestration made upon him at the suit of James Andrew for a certain defect found in the fulling of a cloth.
Thomas le Northerne, vintner, was attached to answer the King and the Commonalty on a charge of contempt. Richard Lyouns, who prosecuted for the King and the Commonalty, declared that whereas three malefactors had assaulted and wounded his servant, John de Melton, and had then taken sanctuary at St Antholin's Church, the defendant with certain accomplices went at midnight to the church and released and allowed the felons to escape from the City against the laws of the King and the City. The defendant said that he was [not?] guilty and that he was prepared to acquit himself thereof as the Court should direct. He was mainprised by Robert de Whytton, draper, and Robert Breynte, skinner, to come before the Mayor and Aldermen when summoned. He was afterwards acquitted by an inquest (fn. 51).
William Canteys, pewterer, recovered 15s damages against Adam Brabasoun in a plea of covenant submitted to a jury. The jury found that the said Adam was withholding from the plaintiff part of a stable, which belonged to certain tenements conveyed by the defendant to the plaintiff. The Court ordered the serjeant to give the plaintiff seisin of the stable, and also execution of the money, in accordance with the verdict.
Membr. 9 b
John de Fulham was attached to answer a charge of having enticed Joan Gosebak from the service of Thomas Charlewode, girdler, contrary to the ordinance of the mistery of Pouchmakers, which provided that any one so offending should be fined 100s. The defendant pleaded guilty and openly declared in court that he could not succeed before the Recorder (non potuit expedire negocia sua prope Recordatorem) because the latter, as he had heard, was a maintainer (fn. 52) of the Pouchmakers. He gave the name of Richard Storioun of St Lawrence Lane as his informant, but the said Richard denied having said anything of the kind. Thereupon the statute of the Pouchmakers having been read, the defendant was committed to prison till he paid the Commonalty 40s, and also for his contempt of the King and the court. On 18 March he was released on mainprise of John Abraham, William Walais and Richard atte Boure, girdlers, that he would not speak disrespectfully in future of the judges and officers of the City.
Cristina Burnete brought a plaint against Thomas le Bakere for detinue of 18 lbs of red and medley-green woollen yarn, pledged to him for 2s four years before. The parties came to an agreement in court.
Robert de Eye, pelleter (fn. 53), recovered against William de Langford the sum of 2 marks and a bed, as wages earned by his wife for acting as a nurse for four years to the defendant.
Thomas Daubeour, chaplain, came before the Mayor and Thomas de Lodelowe, Recorder, and entered into a recognizance of £100 to the King that he would not prosecute any pleas against any of the King's lieges in the Court of Rome or elsewhere outside the realm to the prejudice of the King's crown and dignity. He also made oath to the same effect, and was thereupon released from prison.
16 March 1365 - Attachiamentum (fn. 54) fonnsecum
An attachment was made on William Basset at the suit of John Moyne in an action of debt. The said William having made four defaults and thus refused to justify himself against the attachment according to the custom of the City, the attachment was valued by Thomas de Wilby and Robert de Guldeford, goldsmiths, as follows: a forcer (fn. 55), 8s; 2 pieces of silver and 12 silver spoons, 48s; a chapelet of small pearls, 7s 6d; 3 pairs of paternosfres (fn. 56), 8s; 2 rings and a nouche (fn. 57), 7s; 4 rings with two clasps (finnaculis), 37s 6d; total 116s. The goods were then delivered to Joan, wife of John Moyne, in part payment of the debt of £7 10s claimed, the said Joan being mainprised by Richard le Goldbetere and William de Fakenham, taverner, to answer for the goods or their value, in case the above William Basset should be able to prove within a year and a day that he owed nothing to the said John Moyne.
Gilbert de Wodewey and Janinus Graunt, skinners, were committed to prison for ten days for their rebellious behaviour (rebellitate) towards the surveyors of their mistery, and were afterwards released on payment of a fine.
Membr. 10 b
Walter Doget, John de Grovele, Robert de la More, Nicholas Brembre, William Wodeford, Thomas Hynxton, John Dony, John Fayrher, Richard de Northbury, Geoffrey Newenton, Thomas Everard, Thomas Gysors, John zakesle, John Croydon, Roger Longe, John Maymond, Thomas Mockyng and Robert Launde came into court and mainprised Nicholas de Exton, Robert de Rameseye, William Fourneaux, Ralph Doubble, Richard Style, William Mondene, John Hanekyn, John Horn, John Horn of Northflete, Hugh Denny, John de Leddrede, William de Kynggeston, John Gatyn, John Rous, William Courtroy, William Chyvenyng and John Rydere, fishmongers, to keep the peace with Alexander Turk, Robert Turk, John Turk, Andrew Pykeman, Robert Stylligo, William Juwel, John Waldesshef and Thomas Clench under penalty of £40. The mainprised persons also became sureties for each other under the same penalty.
The above-mentioned Alexander Turk and his fellows (fn. 58) were similarly mainprised to keep the peace with John Leddrede and his fellows.
The same day Master Adam Rous, Master David, Master Henry de Wotton and Master William Taunton, sworn surgeons to the City, came before the Mayor and Aldermen and testified on oath that Giles Pykeman, fishmonger, was not in danger of death. Thereupon it was considered that Robert, son of John Lyttele, and John de Hedon should be released on mainprise from the custody of the Sheriffs.
Accordingly four Aldermen, John Lyttele, fishmonger, John Pecche, draper, John de Stodeye, vintner, and William Welde, draper, became sureties for them. But when the documents came to be read over to them, William Welde declared that he would only answer for Robert Lyttele and not for John de Hedon.
Robert Blok, horse-dealer (mercator equorum), was committed to prison for insulting Thomas de Pykenham, Alderman of Bishopsgate Ward, and the constables thereof. On 1 April he was mainprised for his appearance on 18 April to pay a fine, and also for his admission to the freedom of the City if he continued to reside and do business in the City.
Robert Waleys, tawyer, successfully made his law in full court that he did not owe to Segelinus de Male, Fleming, a pair of shoes value 2s, and so went quit. And the said Segelinus was sworn in court to serve the said Robert for one whole year from Christmas last according to the agreement between them.
John Nocke, cozour (fn. 59), was committed to prison for detaining a horse belonging to John Levelyf, draper.
William Querdelyng, Walter Garlek, Robert Waleys, William Ramme, John Potbury, William Goldyng, John Creek and Andrew Wylly, tawyers, were summoned to court and asked whether they were willing to observe the articles relating to their mistery ordained in the time of Thomas Leggy, Mayor (fn. 60). The articles were read to them, and in spite of the order of the Court that they should swear to observe them, they twice refused. Accordingly they were committed to Newgate until etc.