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.
ROLL A 19
Memorandum that on 9 Nov. Ao 47 Edw. III  John, the chaplain of John Rothyng, brought into court for safe custody a box containing deeds which had been handed over to the said John Rothyng by a carpenter in his employment. To this box Henry Yevele (fn. 1) and the wife of William Waldern laid claim.
The following vintners were sworn to make a scrutiny of wines in taverns and cellars and to condemn and pour out in the streets all such as they should find to be unwholesome. For the east side [of Walbrook]: Thomas Cornwaleys, Roger Long, Gilbert Bonet, John Ederop, William More and Richard Blake. For the west side: John Clyvele, William Tong, Henry Herbury, Thomas Medelane, William Sharpyng, John Ponder and John Selys.
Geoffrey Colman and Thomas Ballard, cooks of Bread Street, and Edmund Cadent and William Longe, cooks of East Cheap, were sworn on Wednesday the Feast of St Edmund Archbishop [16 Nov.], to make scrutinies and exercise supervision over the men of their trade and the Pybakers, to prevent the sale of unhealthy food and the charging of unreasonable prices, and to report offences from time to time to the Mayor and Aldermen.
Membr. 1 b
The same day a petition was received from several good men of the Ward of Cheap complaining that a stone house belonging to the Prior and Convent of Neauwerk (fn. 2) in St Lawrence Lane was ruinous and a danger both to the neighbours and to passers-by. [French]
Evidence having already been given to the same effect by the sworn Masons and Carpenters of the City, Walter Salman, William Strokelady and other tenants were ordered to execute repairs immediately, failing which the Mayor and Aldermen threatened to send in workmen to do what was necessary at their expense.
Mayoral precept to the Aldermen of the Wards, ordering them to see that the constables, scawageours, beadles and rakyers should perform their duties properly; that the bakers make their bread of the requisite weight; that the brewers and brewsters sell their ale by the Alderman's sealed measure at 2d the gallon for the better and 1d the gallon for the inferior sort, and that all vendors of ale should find sufficient surety; that lodging-house keepers (hostillers) sell hay at not more than 2d per day and night for each horse and oats at 6d the bushel, and do not charge more than the regular prices for ale, and provide horse-bread of the proper weight; that no farrier take for the shoeing (ferrure) with a shoe of six nails more than 1½d, or of eight nails more than 2d, and for the taking off of a shoe of six or eight nails more than ½d, for the shoeing of a courser (fn. 3) more than 2d, and of a destrer more than 3d, and more than 1d for removing their shoes; that the streets and lanes be cleared of ordure for the honour of the City, and that all nuisances be speedily amended; that no corn or barley be sold out of market, and if any be found offending in this matter, the grain be brought to Guildhall and the buyer and seller there receive judgment according to the ancient ordinances; and that all officers of the Ward found neglecting their duties be punished according to their deserts. Written the 4th day of November. [French]
John Clerk, junior, dwelling in the Poultry, acknowledged that he bought of a certain foreign poulterer, outside the market, 4 malard, 4 teles, 2 wodecok and a partrich contrary to the ordinance. The birds were confiscated.
The same day John White, poulterer, who sold the birds was cautioned not to offend again. Richard Robyn of Isleworth confessed to having sold malt outside the market. The malt was confiscated to the use of the Sheriff.
John Marian came before the Mayor and announced that he had been assigned by James Penyke to receive debts of £30 from the Earl of Herford (fn. 4), and £50 and more from the Earl of Pembroke. He further acknowledged that the claim made by Turellus Gascoigne by bill against the said James was good.
Isabella, widow of John de Worstede, made a complaint against William Grene, plasterer, who had made a chimney (fumerellum) in her house. Owing to bad workmanship, she alleged, the chimney had fallen in, and it had been adjudged by the Mayor and Aldermen that the said William should repair it at his own expense. He was now merely patching up the old plaster of the chimney with new plaster, and she was told by workmen of the same trade that in a short time the chimney might easily collapse again.
A list was submitted containing the names of wyndrawers for the Third Company (fn. 5) (pur la tierce compaigne) who were not employed by any one else, but were ready to be of the Company of Henry Herbury, viz. John Croydon, master of the takell of the said Henry, John Bisshopesgate, John Waltham, John Langeley, Robert Bisshopesgate, Augustine Waley, Elias Wyndrawer, Nicholas Maddok, John Cartere, Richard Henle, John Marchaunt, John Pulton and Ralph Hulle.
William Grene, plasterer, appeared to answer a charge of having burnt plaster of Paris (fn. 6) in his house so that the fumes were obnoxious to Sir John de Foxton, knight, and other neighbours. He denied that the fumes were obnoxious, and said that if it could be proved that they were, he was willing to abate the nuisance.
Membr. 2 b
The Tallowchandlers and the Butchers appeared on summons, when the former were forbidden to sell a pound of candles for more than 2d, and the latter to sell tallow to foreigners for export. The price was fixed at 18s for the wey of Roughtalewgh, and 22s for the wey of Moltetaleugh, the wey to contain 28 cloves, and this by the balance and not by the auncer.
Henry Gerard, tailor, lately committed to prison for citing Thomas Bettenham, who had impleaded him coram Rege by writ for rape, before the Consistory Court (fn. 7), was mainprised under penalty of £100 that he would make no more citations to the prejudice of the King's Court.
William Herdele, shearman, was committed to prison for being a common maintainer (fn. 8) of plaints and for evil conduct towards the officers of the City. He was afterwards released on undertaking to pay £100 if again convicted.
Fredus de Genesane, proctor of James Penyk, merchant of Lucca, was committed to prison for a debt of £160 due to Edward, Lord le Despenser, whereof he was convicted by examination before the Mayor on a writ of the privy seal; John Darundell (fn. 9) arid Ralph de Ferrers, knights, prosecuting as attorneys of Lord le Despenser.
John Wold, parson of the Church of St Botolph near Billingsgate, John Wroth, Robert Gurdeler, Andrew Pikeman, Ralph Double, Thomas Chaundeler and Robert Pountfreyt, parishioners of the same, brought a bill notifying (fn. 10) that, whereas Henry Sterre of Halyngborne, fishmonger, by his will enrolled in the Husting on Monday after the Feast of St Dunstan [19 May] Ao 24 Edw. III  devised the sum of £4 annual rent issuing from all his tenements in the said parish for the purpose of a chantry, which chantry was maintained until the tenements came into the hands of William Glendale and afterwards into those of Roger de la Chambre and Agnes his wife, the latter had withheld the rent for eight years. Wherefore they prayed that the said Roger and Agnes might be summoned to show cause why the terms of the will should not be fulfilled.
As it appeared from an inspection of the will that the sum of £4 had been devised as alleged, precept was issued to summon the said Roger and Agnes, and the rector and parishioners were told that they might appear at the same time if they wished. The said Roger and Agnes, after hearing the bill, asked leave to impart, which was granted till Monday before the Feast of St Thomas the Apostle [21 Dec.]. They then pleaded that the matter in the bill showed that the Court had no cognisance in the case. Being asked if they had anything further to say, they pleaded that William de Glendale by his will enrolled in the Husting on Monday after the Purification B.M. [2 Feb.] Ao 43 Edw. III [1369-70] devised his lands and tenements to Agnes his wife for life, with remainder to the heirs of their bodies, John and Richard, and Joan Glendale, who married a certain John Chaumbur, and so the widow Agnes, who had married Roger, held the property with him for the term of her life with remainder to the above-mentioned children, without whom the tenements could not be charged or discharged. Accordingly they demanded aid of the children.
And because there was no plaint as between the parties nor was anything demanded by either party from the other, the Mayor and Aldermen held that aid could not be granted, and the said Roger and Agnes were again asked if they could show any cause why the terms of the will should not be fulfilled. They showed no cause why etc. Whereupon it was agreed (concordatum) by the Mayor and Aldermen that one of the Mayor's serjeants should be assigned to distrain upon the tenements for the rent of £4 and arrears, according to the ancient custom of the City in such cases. John Chamberleyn, serjeant, was then ordered to distrain upon the tenements from time to time until the said Roger and Agnes should make satisfaction, in order that the will might be fulfilled.
Be it known that this precept was made by the common assent of Adam de Bury, Mayor, William Halden, Recorder, Adam Fraunceys, John Stodeye, James Andreu, John Pyel, John Lytle, Adam Stable, William Walworth, John Philipot and Nicholas Brembre, Aldermen, and with the assent of many commoners of the City then being present.
Membr. 3 b
Edmund Aldeford, John More, mercer, and John Pagrave, executors of the will of Robert Northwold, late citizen and mercer, were summoned to answer Joan, widow of the said Robert, who complained by William Dykeman, her guardian, that they were withholding from her goods to the value of £150, being half of goods to the value of £300, of which her husband was possessed on the day of his death on Sunday after Michaelmas 1373. The executors did not dispute the claim of the plaintiff and judgment was given that she recover the half of the above goods to the value (precii) of £150. She was told to sue execution thereof. Afterwards on Monday after the Feast of the Purification [2 Feb.] the executors assigned to her goods and divers debts (of a total amount of £180, of which £73 18s 0d were desperate debts), the names of the debtors being as follows: Richard Qwetyngdon, ... Botelee, John. Bosham, Robert Bekerton, Sir...Lotyn, knight, John Essex, cutler, John Masoun of Beverley, Nicholas Cutler, Walter Peryngdon, Walter Kynton, Richard Loweche of Ludlow, John Lemman, William Prat "de le Stowes," John Charnell, John Bocher of Gloucester, John Sewall, mercer, Walter Leche of Oxford, Alexander Flamme, Lombard, John Medbrok, Margaret Reynam, John Farneberth dwelling with Sir Luke Ponyng, Thomas Chapman of Westbury, Adam Sylat, John Davy, John Waryn of Gloucester, William Hynderwell of York, William Gryffyn, John Adam of Gloucester, Richard Hertelaund of Gloucester, John zefille of Winchester, Geoffrey Kent, tailor, William Halden, spicer, for a bascinet, price 20s, and John Actone, for a sword, price 20s.
It was agreed by the executors that if the desperate debts were recovered, the said Joan should receive the amounts, that they would appoint any attorney she should choose to prosecute in their name for the debts, that no hindrance would be put in her way, and that they would deposit the will in court for her use on condition that she returned it if they required it for legal proceedings.
Ralph Strode the Common Pleader (fn. 11) (communis narrator) informed the Mayor and Aldermen that Robert Lucas, goldsmith, who had married Katherine, widow of Richard de Sutton, on his wife's death had assumed the guardianship of her children by her former husband, viz. Elmyng and Margaret, who were under age, together with divers sums of money and other things bequeathed to them by their father, without finding the accustomed security in Guildhall for the guardianship of the orphans.
The said Robert was summoned by William Greyngham, serjeant of the Chamber, to appear in court and bring the will of Richard de Sutton and the children. He duly appeared, and at the same time the executors of the will also came, claiming that by the terms of the will the guardianship of the children had been entrusted to them; In reply, the said Robert said that his late wife by her will had left the guardianship of the children and their goods to him. The Court fixed a day in order to have further information, the children in the meantime being placed in the custody of the Mayor. As the result of their investigations, the Court discovered that the late Richard de Sutton was not a freeman and had died outside the liberties of the City, and that the children were born outside the liberties, and accordingly they decided that they had no concern with the guardianship. At this juncture, the parties announced that they had come to an agreement, whereby the executors should have the guardianship of the said Elmyng and Margaret, and that they should receive the two legacies of £50 bequeathed to each child, together with 40 marks bequeathed to each of two other children, Richard and Alice, and £20 to another child, Joan. As regards certain leases which the testator held of John Blount, it was agreed that the said Robert Lucas should continue to hold that half, which had belonged to the widow Katherine and had been sub-let to John Pykard, chaplain, and as regards the remainder, the parties agreed to put themselves on the arbitration of Master Thomas Yong, or some other person. Thereupon, with the assent of the Mayor and Aldermen, the children and their rents and goods were handed over to the executors, together with the guardianship of the other daughters Alice and Joan, and the executors gave a quitclaim to the said Robert Lucas.
John Dorset, fuller, who was plaintiff in an action of ejection against William Blount, brewer, was fined 40d, because he had, without permission of the Court, handed in a bill to the jury containing evidence designed to influence their verdict in his favour.
Membr. 4 b
Information having been given to the Mayor that Andrew de Oo—to whom the guardianship of Stephen, son and heir of Richard atte Halle, had been committed, together with tenements of £12 annual value, by Simon de Mordon, late Mayor, and John de Cantebrig, Chamberlain, as shown in Letter Book G, fo. 220—had sold the guardianship and marriage of the boy at a great price to John de Wiltshire, grocer, the Mayor took possession of the boy on behalf of the City, till it should be otherwise ordered.
Afterwards the said John de Wiltshire brought a bill of complaint setting forth that Richard atte Halle had died seised of certain lands in Hodesdon, which he held by knightservice from Sir Robert Geddynge, and that the latter seized the heir and his lands and sold them to a certain Andrew Hoo, who in turn conveyed the guardianship and marriage to the complainant, who held them undisturbed until on 17 Dec. last the boy was taken into the hands of the" City. [French]
As it was found on investigation that John de Hodesdon (sic), father of the said Stephen, was not a freeman of the City and died in a "foreign" county and that the boy was born outside the City, the Mayor and Aldermen held that they had no power of disposing of the boy's marriage, and it was agreed by them that he should be given up.
Matilda, widow of Thomas de Welleford, draper, residing in the parish of St Michael Hoggenlane, and John Topymoi, executors of the above Thomas, were sued by John de Gerlethorpe for a debt of £86 13s 4d due on a bond from the deceased to the plaintiff. The executors pleaded that they had fully administered the estate of the deceased on the day when the present plaint was levied. After denying this, the plaintiff conceded that if the executors would swear on the Gospels (fn. 12) that they had done so, he would desist from his action and cancel the bond. In answer to a question by the Court he stated that there was no other bond on which the deceased had been indebted to him. The executors immediately took the oath, and judgment was given in their favour.
Thomas de Thormeston, Prior of the Hospital of St Mary without Bishopsgate (fn. 13), confirmed to Margaret, widow of Stephen Stanhard, a term of years in a house and wharf in the parish of St Benedict Woodwharf. The lease for fifteen years had been originally granted to the said Stephen and his first wife Joan and had been devised by him to Margaret and her unborn child, but afterwards, without her knowledge, her co-executor William de Wotton had surrendered the deed to the Prior for cancellation. The Prior brought the deed before the Recorder and undertook that she should enjoy the remainder of the term due to her.
Membr. 5 b
John Parker, butcher, was summoned to answer Clement Spray in a plea of trespass, wherein the latter complained that the said John, who had hired a tavern at the corner of St Martin le Grand from him for 15 months, had committed waste and estrepement therein, although by the custom of the City no tenant for a term of years was entitled to destroy any portion of the buildings or fixtures let to him. He alleged that the defendant had taken down the doorpost (punchon ostii) of the tavern and also of the shop, the boarded door of an enterclose of the tavern, a seat (sege) in the tavern, a plastered enterclose-wall (fn. 14), the stone flooring in the chamber, the hearth (astrum) of the kitchen and the mantle-piece (mantellum) above it, an enterclose in the kitchen, two doors and other partitions, of a total value of £4 1s 8d and to his damage £20. The defendant denied the trespass and put himself on the country. Afterwards a jury of Richard Bole and others found the defendant guilty of the aforesaid trespass to the plaintiff's damage 40d. Judgment was given for that amount and a fine of 1s to the King, which the defendant paid immediately in court.
Writ of protection in favour of John de Florence, who was then about to cross the sea for the provisioning of the castle of St Sauveur in Normandy. Dated at Westminster, 27 Aug. Ao 48 Edw. III .
Robert Duke of Brampton, who had been committed to prison for shooting arrows by night at the inhabitants of Fleet Street to the terror of the City, was mainprised by Simon Machyng, hostiller, and Henry Kyng, who undertook to bring him into court quo & quando.
Letter of attorney from Peter Vandersole, merchant of Bruges in Flanders, to Reginald Aleyn, pepperer, and Margaret his wife to recover a debt of £23 8s 2d due on a bond from John Swyft, mercer, and John Lane his servant. They were empowered to prosecute jointly or separately, and to distrain in any court.
Membr. 6 b
Andrew Cothull, clerk, entered into a bond with the Mayor and Commonalty of London in £100, that he would not draw up any public instrument relating to any contract previously made between Robert Chaumpayn, saddler, and Lucy, daughter of Richard Russel.
Walter Sharpyng, vintner, was summoned to answer Walter Southous in a plea of debt of £100 due on a recognisance dated 7 Feb. 1370 (fn. 15). The defendant pleaded that the plaintiff had no ground of action against him, because it was provided in an indenture dated next day that the recognisance should be defeasible if certain conditions were fulfilled, which he had in fact fulfilled. The plaintiff replied that the conditions were that the defendant should not interfere with or obstruct his wife Joan, daughter of Richard de Cotenhale, who was seeking a divorce. Nevertheless on Monday 21 Feb. 1373 the defendant had molested the said Joan as she was going to visit her advocate, John de Hartelyngburgh (fn. 16), so that she was forced to take refuge in the plaintiff's house, and thus the defendant had broken the conditions.
The defendant answered that on 24 Dec. 1369, after his wife had left him, he had found her in the Vintry and taken her home without resistance, but this was before the indentures, and since then he had not molested her, as he was prepared to verify by a jury. The plaintiff likewise claimed a jury. Afterwards on 22 Feb., a jury of John Maymund and others brought in a verdict for the defendant, and judgment was given that he go quit and that the plaintiff be in mercy for a false claim.
Peter Sayer, dyer, was fined half-a-mark for digging a well on the soil of the Commonalty (fn. 17), and putting a cask therein to store water for the purposes of his trade.
Roger Cuteler of Tower Ward found sureties that within fifteen days he would do away with a pit and gutter which were a nuisance to the neighbours, and for which a presentment had been made against him before the Alderman of the Ward.
Michael Lybard was attached to answer the Commonalty in a plea of deceit and trespass. Ralph Coo, who sued for the Commonalty, declared that on several occasions the defendant had sold baskets of figs, in which new fruit had been put above old and rotten fruit, to the deception of the people and the scandal of the City (fn. 18). The defendant pleaded that he sold the baskets for a certain John France, receiving 2d on each basket. The said John immediately came into court and denied this arrangement, which denial he was prepared to verify by a jury. The defendant also prayed that the matter might be inquired into by a jury.
At the same time Arnald Vanloven, who was present in court, was likewise questioned as to supplying such deceptive baskets for sale (de bajulacione ad vendendum). A jury was summoned, and meanwhile he and the above John were committed to prison. The latter was released by the Mayor on 9 March, on his taking an oath not to engage in deceptions of this kind and to report any cases which came to his notice.
Membr. 7 b
Roger Coggere was attached to answer the Commonalty of London on the prosecution of Ralph Strode, for having bought corn by sample at Billingsgate from the ship of John Bryd of Colchester, which was then lying at the Wollekaye and had not yet arrived at its proper port of Billingsgate. He admitted having bought 20 quarters, which were forfeited to the Sheriff. The same forfeiture was imposed on Richard Elin, baker, who confessed to a like offence.
Membr. 8 b
Roger Legat of Holborn was attached to answer William, Bishop of Chichester, who sued by his attorney Henry Perot, in a plea of trespass, wherein the latter complained that the defendant had dug a ditch in Chauncellereslane so deep and so near the foundations of the Bishop's hospice that a great part of the stone and mud walls had fallen down and the bakehouse, brewhouse and other walls were breaking down and in danger of falling.
The defendant pleaded that the ditch was four feet away from the Bishop's foundations, that the Bishop's buildings were so weak and ancient and so badly roofed that they had succumbed to wind and rain, and that their condition was not due to the digging of the ditch. The Bishop's attorney did not admit that the ditch was four feet distant and repeated that it was solely owing to the ditch that the buildings were falling. Both parties prayed a jury, which was summoned for Monday after the three weeks of Easter.
Robert Brynkele (fn. 19), mercer, was committed to prison for not rendering an account of a sum of £300 entrusted to him to trade therewith for the benefit of Thomas, son and heir of Hugh atte Boure, late mercer, and also for having taken the said Thomas, during his wardship, as his apprentice without licence of the Court. The boy was handed over to the safekeeping of the Mayor.
Robert de Langedon, Serjeant-at-arms of the King, by Ralph Coo his attorney, offered himself against John Stratton, horsedealer, in a plea of debt on demand of £260. The defendant had been attached to appear by certain rents stopped in the hands of his tenants, John Sendale, John Cook, Henry Lakenham, John Grauntcort, Henry Gook, William atte Hill, Robert Hornere, Roger Begge, Richard Reve, Agnes de Ely and Robert de Blithe, to a total amount of £27 18s 8d. As the defendant made four defaults and did not submit himself to justice, the plaintiff prayed that the moneys thus stopped should be levied from the tenants and delivered to him under security according to the custom of the City. Thereupon came Sir Thomas Fitz Hugh, clerk, Ralph Whaddon, clerk, and Simon Rodesdale, clerk, who said that they were tenants in fee simple of the tenements, from which the rents were claimed, the defendant and his wife Isabel having conveyed the property to them by feoffment at a date prior to the levying of the present plaint, wherefore they demanded that the rents should be de-arrested. They proffered the deed of feoffment which was dated 21 June 1374.
The plaintiff replied that the defendant, before the levying of the plaint, had fled to Westminster in order to exclude him from his action, and at the time the plaint was levied he was seised of the tenements, and that the interveners had no interest in the property except at the will of the defendant, nor did they derive any profit therefrom except for the use of the defendant, whereof he prayed verification etc.
Afterwards a jury of John Hydengham and others of the venue "del Bayly" outside Ludgate found a verdict that the feoffment took place before the levying of the plaint, but that the defendant on delivering seisin expressly laid down that the said Thomas, Ralph and Simon should derive no profit therefrom except for his own use and that they should reenfeoff him when required.
Note that previous to the taking of a verdict the Court examined Thomas Fitz Hugh at the request of the plaintiff, and the said Thomas swore that he was enfeoffed together with the others but not to derive any benefit therefrom; he did not know what was to become of the profits, and he had not bought the tenements nor paid anything for them.
Membr. 9 b
After two adjournments for consultation the Court ordered the tenants to appear with the stopped rents for delivery to the plaintiff, and the defendant was again summoned by distress on three occasions. At the request of the plaintiff the annual value of the tenements was ascertained by an inquest of twelve jurors, the amount being returned at £11 clear per annum. Several further distresses were necessary to force the tenants to appear and it appeared on examination that portions of the tenements had been sublet and deductions in the rents made for repairs carried out by the tenants. Ultimately 4s was paid by one of the tenants, but this sum was returned to him on an agreement being arrived at between the parties.
The following deeds were read and enrolled: a recognizance of a debt of £100 owed by Henry Blake of Dorking to Sir Alan de Stokes, clerk, dated 22 Oct. 1374; a release from the said Henry and his wife to the same of the same date; a letter of attorney, dated 24 Oct. 1374, from John Tannere of Andevere to Adam de Fernham.
Joan Sewale, widow and executrix of Roger Sewale, fishmonger, who sued Robert de Croydon, taverner, for a debt of £48 12s, was given possession of the foreign attachment; on the defendant making four defaults. The goods were valued by oath of John Sewale, mercer, William Davi, pelter, John Dyminok, tailor, and William Aylesham, goldsmith, as follows: 5 pieces of silver and 12 silver spoons weighing 4 marks 10s, at 16s 8d the mark, £3 19s 2d; 3 furred garments, viz., one goune and two gites, 30s; 3 pairs of sheets, 20s; 11 rings and one necklace, 34s 2d; 47 yards of napery, 24s; one bed of Fancherch (fn. 20), 13s 4d; another bed, 6s 8d; one small mazer cup, 30d; one pair of aumber and one pair of jet beads, 6s 8d; one canvas sheet, 12d; 56 lbs of brass at 2½d the lb, 11s 7d; one basin, 5s; 40 lbs of peutre at 2½d the lb, 8s 4d; 31 ells of linen cloth at 6d the ell, 15s 6d; total £13 12s 11d. The plaintiff was pledged by John Sely, pelter, and John Clopton, vintner, to answer for the above goods or their price and also for another 20s, which she was willing to add as representing their true value, in case the defendant should appear within a year and a day and clear himself of the debt.
Torellus Gascoyne, who sued James Penyke, Lombard, for a debt of £50, prayed that the foreign attachment in the hands of John Maryan might be delivered to him, the defendant having made four defaults. The said John appeared on summons and asked leave to prove that the foreign attachment belonged to himself, Francis Penyc and Fride de Gysane, Lombard, and that the defendant had no property in it to the value of 4d. The plaintiff pleaded that the said John ought not to be admitted to such proof, because on 20 Nov. 1373 (fn. 21) he had acknowledged before the Mayor that he had been assigned by James Penyke, the defendant, to receive debts of £80 due from the Earl of Hereford and the Earl of Penbruge, and that the claim of the plaintiff against the defendant was just. The said John had received payment of these debts before the foreign attachment was made. Accordingly the plaintiff demanded judgment whether in the face of these facts he could be admitted to proof. To this the said John replied that he did not acknowledge having received the money or having made any admission as alleged, and he pleaded that by the custom of the City he could not be excluded from proof.
After three adjournments that the Court might consider its judgment, the said John failed to put in an appearance, whereupon judgment was given that the plaintiff should have the foreign attachment of £50 under the usual security to answer therefor if etc., and that if the said John had nothing from which the £50 could be levied, he should be taken and imprisoned until the money was forthcoming.
Membr. 11 b
Richard Hurel, spicer, of London entered into a bond of 200 marks that he would not sue his father, Richard Hurel, spicer, of Bristol or Thomas Glastynbury on any contracts or other matters previous to the above date.
A deed relating to an annuity granted by Matilda, widow of Richard Toky, to William de Blacolnesle, chaplain, which had been deposited with the Chamberlain in connection with legal proceedings begun by the said William, was delivered by the Mayor to Richard Lyouns, Alderman, under security to return it to the Chamberlain when required.
The executors of Elias Spryngere, lumynour (fn. 22), delivered to Richard, a monk of Rochester, a portiphory which the latter said he had left with the deceased for the purpose of illumination.
John Parker, butcher, was summoned to answer Clement Spray (fn. 23), mercer, in a plea of debt of £40 due on a recognizance of 20 Dee. 1372. The defendant pleaded that the plaintiff had no ground of action against him because the recognizance was defeasible if he duly paid his rent and did no damage in a tenement at the corner of St Martin's Lane, which he took for a year from the plaintiff, and he had in fact fulfilled these conditions. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant had torn up the pavement and broken doors, windows and walls. A jury found that no destruction or damage had been done against the form of the agreement, and judgment was given for the defendant.
Adam Boneton, cordwainer, brought a bill against William Newport, complaining that whereas he had a fifty-five years repairing lease of a tenement and shop in the parish of St Nicholas Olof from the Prior and Convent of Cristecherche within Aldgate, the said William had prevented him from carrying out the repairs and had diverted the water from a gutter between the two houses. At the same time William Newport also brought a bill against the said Adam charging him with having broken down a portion of his house, removing a wall and timber to the value of 100s. [French]
After further proceedings the parties put themselves on the arbitration of John Bernes, William Waleworth and John Tornegold, who awarded that Adam Boneton should reconstruct a wall which formerly stood above a latrine between their respective houses and which he had wrongfully destroyed, that William Newport should have the use of the latrine which lay between the wall and his house, and that he should allow the water from the eaves of Adam Boneton's buildings to fall on his ground as was formerly accustomed. The question of damages for the destruction of the wall was left by the arbitrators to the Mayor's discretion.
Membr. 12 b
John Wastel, poulterer, was attached on a charge of buying up poultry from foreign poulterers before it reached Billingsgate in order to forestall it, viz. 6 cureleues, one malard, 12 teles and 10 stickes (fn. 24) with 22 birds. He admitted the offence and put himself on the mercy of the court, which declared the birds forfeited and committed him to prison until he paid the value of them together with a fine. On his paying 6s for the birds and half-a-mark fine, he was liberated the same day. The 6s was paid over to John Wakefeld, the Sheriff's serjeant, for the use of the Sheriff, by precept of the Mayor.
Roger Norhampton, William Rysyng and William Palmere, scawagers for the Ward of Billingsgate, indicted in the same ward on a charge of extorting heavy fines, under colour of their office, from men of the ward, were committed to prison for rebellion towards their Alderman and for refusing to plead before him or obey his summons to appear, as was testified by him to the Mayor and Aldermen. On the following day Roger Norhampton and William Palmere pleaded guilty and were ordered to restore the money so taken arid to be committed to prison till they paid a fine. Mainprise was accepted and later the fine was paid. Upon William Rysyng being brought into court, a certain John de Colcestre, netarius, appeared and declared that the whole court was excommunicate. He was committed to prison for contempt of the King.
The aforesaid William Rysyng was likewise indicted in the Ward for being a common disputant (communis debatarius) and was committed to prison. Afterwards on Monday before the Feast of SS. Perpetua and Felicitas [7 March] he was released on paying a fine of half-a-mark and entering into a bond of £40 in the Husting that he would not take any proceedings in prejudice of the King's court (fn. 25).
Membr. 13 b
Thomas de Maldon, John Davy and John de Stratton, collectors of the Fifteenth, the half and third part of the Fifteenth, and of 40d the pound of the Fifteenth, for the Ward of Broad Street, were charged with having levied £14 18s more than the ward was assessed at and with retaining for their own use the money thus extorted, in deceit of the people and in contempt of the King and to the scandal of the City (fn. 26). On admitting the charge they were committed to prison. A month later they were released on paying the money into court together with a fine of £20 for their trespass and deceit.
Thomas Paterlyng, who was recently committed to prison for maintenance and aid given by him to deliver a certain felon from prison (fn. 27)—which felon was afterwards convicted of his felony before the Justices and hanged—was released and paid a fine of 20s in the presence of the Mayor.