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 12
Baldewyn Gyles and Gerard atte Hyde, bailiffs of the Flemish weavers, were committed to prison because they had allowed certain workmen to go about preventing others, including the masters of their craft, from working, and because they refused to certify the names of these offenders to the Mayor.
John Depham, ironmonger, John Guldeford, chandler, Simon Macchyng, hosteler, and William Bedel, cordwainer, came before the Recorder, Aldermen and Chamberlain, and entered into a bond of £20 to indemnify John Lovekyn, stockfishmonger, towards the King as regards escheats of lands and tenements belonging to Thomas de Bereden.
Membr. 1 b
Baldewyn Gyles and Gerard atte Hyde, bailiffs of the Flemish weavers (fn. 1), were attached and committed to prison for refusing to inform the Mayor and Aldermen of divers evildoers among the Flemish weavers, who made covins and assemblies in the City and suburbs, also for having levied unlawful tolls from Lambekyn Ruyt and others, and further for having told the above weavers that they need not work, thus allowing them to wander about the City to the grave damage of the common people. On the Monday following the said bailiffs were released on mainprise of John Yonkere, John Otemele and John Persoun for their appearance on Thursday after the Feast of All Saints, on condition that they repaid to the said Lambekyn the money unjustly taken. When the day came, it was found that they had not repaid the money. Thereupon John Yonkere, John van Everden, John Otemele, John Persoun, Henry Nauger, John van Loo and Lenin van Dyke became sureties for payment and for the appearance of the bailiffs before the Mayor and Aldermen when required. At the same time the above mainpernors, together with Peter Sterteway, Henry Cloffhamer, William van Aughten, Gerard van Brugge, John Maaz, Peter van Thelbroke, Lodewic Fynk, Giles van de Baaz, Michael Mummard, John Brunols, John van Legh, John Omekyn, Peter de Gotham, John Gaunsterman and John van Wettre became sureties for the good behaviour of all the Flemish weavers, who were forbidden to hold any covins, leagues or assemblies in future, or to levy any subsidies from the men of their mistery except on behalf of the infirm, blind and lame. The mainpernors also undertook to inform the Mayor and Aldermen if they could not by themselves cope with any evildoers in their mistery.
William de Wodeford, mercer, was committed to prison by judgment of the Mayor and Aldermen for public maintenance in Guildhall of a suit between Thomas de Eston, plaintiff, and John de Kestevene, defendant. The said William confessed his fault and put himself on the mercy of the Mayor and Aldermen. After a fortnight in prison he was released on mainprise of William de Essex, John Dony and Laurence Constable for his appearance before the King and his Council if required, and for his good behaviour in future.
John Gloucestre, fishmonger, was summoned to answer Agnes Pepul, poulterer, in a plea of debt of 15s 8d. The debtor admitted owing 9s, but cleared himself of the remainder by making his law. The sum of 9s was forthwith paid, but as evidence was given that John Pepul, the plaintiff's husband, was outlawed for a felony, i.e. for the death of John Brid, the money was attached as a felon's chattel forfeited to the King (fn. 2).
John de Sutton, mareschal, was mainprised by William Strode, William atte Chaumbre, Richard Wermenstre, Andrew Cornewayle, John Littlecote and William Syward to keep the peace with John Baldak, son of the King of India (fn. 3).
The defendant failed to appear, the Serjeant reporting that he could not be found, but that he had been summoned at his rents by William atte Wode and John Russe. By order of the Court, all his rents were stopped in the hands of his tenants as a sequestration. The defendant failed to appear a third time, but there came instead his widow Margery, who informed the court that the Serjeant had stopped certain rents, which she held for life with remainder to her son John Maryns, and she demanded that no execution should be made on these rents, because her husband was dead at the time of the levying of the plaint, and she herself was thus a feme sole. A jury from Billingsgate found that her allegations were true, whereupon delivery of her rents was made to her.
Membr. 2 b
John atte Noket was summoned to answer Laurence de Magh', Cornelius van de Bukle and John Rossart, merchants of Ghent, who sued him for a debt on demand of 50s 1d due for linen cloth supplied to Isolda his wife about Michaelmas last past. The defendant denied owing anything to the plaintiffs in the form declared in their bill of complaint and waged his law. A day was given on Sunday when he made his law with the sixth hand (fn. 4), as a freeman of the City, according to custom. Judgment was given that he go quit and that the defendants be amerced.
Membr. 3 b
Walter Baldeswell sued William Clerk, butcher, for 41s 6d for sheep bought of him at Smithfield four years before, which ought to have been paid for on the spot according to the Statute of Smithfield (fn. 5). The defendant denied any debt and put himself on the verdict of a jury, which found that he was not bound to the plaintiff in the sum claimed. Judgment that the plaintiff take nothing by his action and that the defendant go quit.
The same Walter sued Adam Pulter, dwelling without Aldersgate, in a plea of trespass, wherein he complained that the defendant's dog four years ago had bitten 54 sheep, which had died of the bites, to the plaintiff's damage 40s, and this was owing to the neglect of the defendant. The latter denied that the dog had bitten the sheep through his neglect and put himself on his country. The same jury as in the other actions found for the plaintiff with 20s damages, which the defendant paid in court, as well as a fine to the King.
Margaret Kemestere, Fleming, plaintiff, and Lambkyn Flemyng, weaver, came to terms in a plea of detinue of a furred gyte (fn. 6) and kyrtile and other things. The defendant was in mercy.
Membr. 4 b
Richard, clerk of the Church of St Mary atte Hulle in Billingsgate Ward, was attached to answer a charge of having assaulted Richard Derby with swords, bucklers and other weapons, beating him and tearing his clothes against the King's peace and to his damage 100s. The defendant denied the charge of force and arms and put himself on the country. He pleaded further that if the plaintiff received any harm it was owing to his having assaulted the defendant first. Both parties put themselves on the country, which found the defendant guilty of having maliciously acted as the plaintiff alleged. They assessed damages at 40s, which were paid in court. Afterwards the defendant was mainprised to attend the court to pay a fine to the King for contempt, and both he and the plaintiff were bound over to keep the peace with each other.
Cecilia Lumbard recovered against William Estby, freynsshbaker (fn. 7), the sum of 14s 6d, and was paid in court.
Peter Duchman, chamberlain, Thomas Kegworth, hostiller, John Wrytel, John Bedale, servant of Wrytel, William Fourbour, William Middil, Thomas Morice of Brayles co. Warwick (fn. 8) and Richard Nottele, servants of John Baldak, son of the King of India, were committed to prison for a breach of the peace against their master, whereof they were indicted before the Mayor and Sheriffs. On Monday the Feast of the Conversion of St Paul [25 Jan.] they were released on mainprise to come before the Mayor when required.
John Penne, maltmonger, and William Pratte were attached to answer John Pake and Isabella his wife on a charge of having violently assaulted the said Isabella. The defendants denied the charge and put themselves on the country. A jury was summoned from the venue of St Sepulchre's Church, and the defendants were mainprised by the Sheriff's clerk, John Penne, to hear the verdict. The defendant John Penne failed to appear and in his absence the jury brought in a verdict for the plaintiffs with 5 marks damages. The other defendant, William Pratte, was committed to prison, and order was given to take and imprison the said John Penne and his mainpernor until they paid the damages and a fine to the King. Afterwards on Wednesday after the Feast of St Valentine [14 Feb.] the defendants paid the damages by the hands of John Penne, Sheriff's clerk.
John Burdeaux, whitetawyer, and John Chalneye, briggeldelmakere (fn. 9), dwelling in St Lawrence Lane in Old Jewry, came to an agreement in an action of debt on demand of £4.
Membr. 5 b
John Norhampton sued Thomas Wytleseye by bill for a debt of £32. The defendant, who had been attached by divers goods and chattels sequestrated in his cellar, made four defaults, whereupon the plaintiff prayed that the goods might be valued and delivered to him. The value was found by oath of Robert Croydon and Bartholomew Taverner as follows: three casks and one pipe of red wine, 29 marks 10 shillings; two remnants of red wine, 40s; one pipe of Rynes wine (fn. 10), two aumes (fn. 11) and three ferthedeles (fn. 12) of the same, £3 12s; one and a half aumes of Rynes wine, 30s. The goods were delivered to the plaintiff under pledge of William Essex and...to answer therefor etc.
John Philippot was mainprised by John Pecche, Alderman, John Aubrey, John Worsted, Adam Wymondham, Thomas Montenay, Robert Warbulton, William Stodeye and John Dony to keep the peace with John Northwych.
John Chelerston, brewer, of Colman Street made his law with his sixth hand (fn. 13), viz. Thomas Wylkok, Richard Wodelok, John Conynton, John Pouleshunt, William Dyrfeld and Thomas atte Ram, that he did not owe £4 8s to John atte Noket for two horses and wool bought of the said John. Judgment that he go quit and that the plaintiff be in mercy for a false plaint.
Membr. 6 b
Nicholas Negrebon was summoned to answer the masters of the Grocers (grossariorum) for having acted as a broker in their trade, contrary to the orders of the Mayor and Aldermen. He was mainprised by John Gynge and John Lapee to appear on Monday after Midlent, or earlier if he should arrive in London before that date.
Memorandum that on 13 Feb. John Aubrey and Richard Toky, pepperers, came into court and paid to Alexander de Stratford, son of Robert de Stratford, cordwainer, deceased, the sum of 100s, part payment of £40, by the hands of Alianora his wife, and that subsequently they made five further quarterly payments of the same amount.
John Sely, skinner (fn. 14), brought a bill of complaint against Robert Beauchamp, plumber, to the effect that the latter on 9 March the preceding year had entered into a bond to pay him £100 at the Feast of the Nativity of St John the Baptist and had failed to pay. [French]
The defendant, who appeared next day on summons, asked leave to imparl (diem inde loquendi), which was given. On 13 Feb. he pleaded that the plaintiff was not entitled to any action against him for the following reasons: The plaintiff had married Sibil, the widow of Ralph de Cauntebrigge, and on 10 March 1366 had sold to the defendant for £100 his wife's portion of all the debts owing to her late husband and of all his goods and movables, as well as her share of the residue of two parts of those goods, but not including her share of such of her late husband's merchandise as was in his shop in Cornhill. She had received already £43 9s 8d as her portion of certain cloth which was valued at 200 marks and was stored in the shop of Nicholas Potyn. It had been provided in the indenture, which contained the agreement as to the £100, that if the defendant paid this amount in quarterly instalments of 20 marks, beginning at Midsummer last, then the bond should be cancelled. Before that term arrived the defendant had handed over certain goods to the value of £19 17s 7d, to cover the first and part of the second instalments. They were received by the plaintiff on that understanding, as the defendant was prepared to prove. Altogether the defendant had delivered the following (fn. 15) :
3 vessels of pewter, weighing 26 lbs at 1¾d the lb; pots (olle) of pewter weighing 16 lbs at 2½d the lb; superior vessels of pewter weighing 23 lbs at 2½d the lb; 3 pewter saltcellars, value 6d; 12s 5d
4 bowls (pelves) and wash-bowls (lavatoria), 13s 4d; 5 brass pots and 6 posnets weighing 108 lbs at 2d the lb; brass weighing 114 lbs sold by Sibilla herself; 1 tripod and 1 cooking-pot (cacabo) 3s 4d; i iron pan (patella) for putting a fire in, 3s 4d; 58s 8d
1 coverture (coopertura) with a tester, 8s; 2 covertures, 8s; 1 mattress, 2s 6d; 1 blanket (chalon'), 6s 8d; 1 blanket, 3s 4d; 1 blankete, 16d; 1 coverture with a tester of red colour, 26s 8d; 1 coverture with a tester of bluet, 8s; 1 bed canevas and 1 bolstre 4s; 68s 6d
Membr. 7 b
A further amount of cloth as follows: one cloth of mixed appelblome (fn. 16), 106s 8d; another of the same, £4 1s 8d; 1 cloth of plunket, 66s 6d; one cloth of Louvain tawny (taunee de Loveyne), 43s 4d; one cloth of the same, 50s; one cloth of Louvain silk (s'cie), 43s 4d; one cloth of green porre (fn. 17) of Louvain, 51s 8d; £22 3s 2d
Arrears of the rents of three shops in Broad Street, 12s; one quarter's rent from the shops formerly belonging to William Laurenz, 100s; one large dosser, 3 bankers with 12 dustcloths, £6 13s 4d; 2 furnaces (fornes'), one tappetrough' (fn. 18) and one sesterce of lead, £10 £22 5s 4d
All the above goods, the defendant pleaded, were now retained by the plaintiff, who was unwilling to surrender them, as the defendant was prepared to prove. Accordingly he prayed judgment as to whether the plaintiff ought to have any action against him.
The plaintiff answered that he did not acknowledge the truth of any of the defendant's allegations, viz. that the goods and chattels were of the value claimed, or that he was detaining them, or that they belonged to the portion of Sibil, or that he received them in part payment of £100. On the other hand, since the defendant did not deny that the bond was his deed and that he had failed to pay at the terms mentioned in the indenture, and since the plaintiff was not bound to answer as regards the alleged detinue or the proof which the defendant claimed that he could produce, and since further the bond and the indenture contained no evidence supporting the alleged sale, and therefore the alleged sale rested merely on the word of the defendant, which he was not bound to answer—for all these reasons, the plaintiff prayed judgment.
The Court wished to consult about the above pleadings and appointed a day for the giving of judgment on Wednesday after the Feast of St Peter in Cathedra [22 Feb.]. On that day the plaintiff appeared and the defendant made default. Thereupon the plaintiff, on the ground of this default, prayed judgment as to the recovery of the debt and his damages. The record and process having been read, the Court gave judgment for the plaintiff, but reserved the question of damages.
John de Wyndesore and Isabel his wife demanded against Robert Schepeye, tailor, executor of the will of Simona Hereford, divers goods and chattels of the value of £6 10s 4d, viz. one tymbre (fn. 19) and a half of miniver (fn. 20) (minevers de ventres), 12s; 6 gold rings with stones called saffers, rubyes and one dyamand, 4 marks; 15 silver rings, 5s; coverchefs of Wormoys (fn. 21) and Lombardy, 26s 8d; 1 coverlyt with a new tester of Norfolk, large size (magna assiza), 20s; 1 girdle of silk harnessed with silver for a woman, 13s 4d;—which goods the plaintiff Isabel, when she was sole, had delivered to the said Simona in the parish of St Mildred, Friday Street, in the 22nd year of the present reign, for custody and return when required. The said Simona having died, the goods had come into the hands of the defendant, her executor.
The defendant denied that the goods had come into his hands, and a jury found a verdict in his favour. Judgment that the plaintiffs take nothing by their bill, and be in mercy for a false plaint, and that the defendant go quit.
Andrew Pontadour, merchant of Lucca, brought a bill against Thomas Serlond, merchant of Lucca, complaining that whereas the said Thomas had been adjudged in legal proceedings to be debtor to the plaintiff in a certain sum of money, of which £85 15s 9d was still in arrears, the said Thomas, planning to deprive the plaintiff of his due by deceit, promised to assign to him a number of valid debts and to help him to collect them, and thus by this means he deceitfully obtained from the plaintiff a general acquittance in exchange for the following debts: £51 3s due from Sir Peter de Lacy on behalf of the Princess and other debts due from Bernard Donat of Florence, Nicholas de Mont Pissa, John Haydok, esquire, Thomas Askyn, Isabella Beauflour, Henry Forester, mercer, Sir Thomas de Gransson, Ralph Cantebrigge, Katerine Grantham, mercer, Thomas Everard, mercer, John Pycot, taverner, the executors of Richard Cherleton, Katerine Wysmar, mercer, William Morewode, Margery Ware, mercer, Adam Wymondham, mercer, Dame Agnes de Kyrkeby, mercer, Ibote Bourcere, John de Coltray, John Burstall, fourner, the Duke of Anjou (le due Dangeo), John Pecche, Master John Paladyn, the King's physician, and Henry Cove, mercer. Some of the above persons had paid the defendant, but others owed him nothing; and thus the defendant had obtained the acquittance falsely and had deceived the plaintiff to his damage £200. [French]
The defendant, after one default, appeared in court and while not acknowledging the matters alleged in the plaint, pleaded that there was nothing in the bill in the nature of an action for deceit which he was bound to answer. He prayed judgment thereon. The plaintiff answered that inasmuch as the defendant, by promising to assign him valid debts, had obtained from him a general acquittance, he would be excluded from receiving what was due to him, and also from bringing an action of covenant or indeed any other action, and there would be no remedy for him unless he could have an action for deceit, and therefore he prayed judgment.
After several adjournments in order that the Court might be advised, the parties appeared on Thursday after Easter week and agreed to put themselves on the arbitration of four good and lawful men, who were immediately chosen, viz. Jacopus Jacopyn and Turrellus de Gascoigne on behalf of the plaintiff, and Nicholas Maryns and Walter de Bardes on behalf of the defendant. The above arbitrators produced their award on Monday before the Feast of St Dunstan.
Award under the seals of the above arbitrators, attested by William de Bridport, public notary of the diocese of Sarum, on 16 May 1367. Both parties are to withdraw all actions and claims against each other, including certain proceedings begun by the defendant against the plaintiff in the Sheriffs' Court. [French]
Membr. 8 b
Lazaret Lazary of Lucca brought a bill complaining that, whereas Paul Penyk of Lucca and John de Pykenham had pledged with him for £44 certain silver vessels belonging to the latter, and the said Paul had promised that he would either cause the said John to seal a deed of sale to the plaintiff, or he would himself on their joint behalf repay the money when required, nevertheless he had refused to do either. [French]
The defendant appeared on summons and denied that he owed any money to the plaintiff as alleged, and declared himself ready to acquit himself by his law as a foreigner. Thereupon he made his law in the form in which he had waged it. Judgment was given in his favour and that the plaintiff take nothing by his bill.
Thomas Eston, mercer, brought a bill of complaint alleging that he and John Kestevene had placed the sum of 13s 4d in nobles in the hands of Adam Stable on the understanding that if the said John was allowed by the auditors the sum of 380 Flemish crowns, value £69, for 17 kaces of soap and 156 pieces of coverchefz of Cambray on behalf of Simon Fraunceys and John de Noute of Courtrai, then he should receive the 13s 4d, but if not, then it should be paid to the plaintiff. Though the said John Kestevene had in fact been disallowed the £69, the said Adam Stable refused to pay the money to the plaintiff. [French]
The defendant denied that he owed the plaintiff anything as alleged, and offered to acquit himself by his law as a freeman of the City, but the plaintiff refused to accept a law (as a means of proof). The Court held that the law offered was acceptable according to the custom of London (fn. 22), and gave judgment for the defendant.
Memorandum that on 12 April a certain bond between Matthew Broun and John Permay, woolmen of London, on the one part and Canalcus Passe, Lombard, on the other, was delivered for safe-keeping to the Chamberlain till the quindene of St John the Baptist.
Also that on the same day Matthew Broun delivered to the above Canalcus two letters which Master Robert de Wodhull, late rector of the Church of Thirllowe Parva (fn. 23), had received from Simon Bochel, entitling him to draw 40 marks from John Spusoun at Avignon. The said Master Robert had died at Peytirs (fn. 24) on the way. Accordingly the letters had been entrusted by Master John ... and Robert de Grandon, clerks, to Matthew Broun to receive the money from the said Canalcus (fn. 25).
William de Wodeford, mercer, brought a bill of complaint alleging that an agreement had been arrived at between himself and Richard Essex, carpenter, with regard to a debt of £22 incurred by the latter's wife, Alice, for goods supplied. The said Richard had agreed to pay £10 down, for which the plaintiff was to give him a general acquittance, on condition that he used his best endeavours with his wife to pay the rent. But if he did not urge his wife to pay and she still remained his wife, then he should be liable for the whole amount, and the acquittance should lose its force. No payment beyond the £10 had in fact been made, and the said Richard had not assisted in obtaining the residue from the said Alice, who still remained his wife; wherefore the plaintiff prayed a remedy. [French]
The defendant appeared on summons and after inspecting the bond produced by the plaintiff, pleaded that the date was erased, that it was interlined and written in divers hands and that several parts of it were suspect, and he demanded judgment whether the plaintiff could found an action against him on such a document and whether he need answer to it. The plaintiff replied that the defendant had not denied that the deed was his own, and further, since it was one of a pair of indentures of which one part was sealed with the defendant's seal and the other with the plaintiff's seal, which latter indenture was in the defendant's keeping, the document could not be in any way suspect, unless some variation could be found between the two indentures, and since the defendant did not produce his own indenture, as he might have done, the plaintiff prayed judgment as to whether such an allegation against the genuineness of the document should be admitted.
Membr. 9 b
William Kene brought a bill complaining that he had leased for ten years certain premises for a hostelry from Richard Gillyng at a rent of 8 marks for the first year and £11 13s 4d for each of the succeeding years, on condition that the lessor rebuilt a dwelling house of two stories, 50 feet wide, within the premises, and carried out external repairs against wind and rain. The lessor, however, had done neither, with the result that the complainant's guests had left the hostelry, to his loss of 20 marks. He prayed a remedy, and that the said Richard should be summoned to show cause why the complainant should not be released from his tenancy and rent. [French]
The defendant admitted the covenant, which provided, he said, that if the house was not rebuilt within the first year, no further payment should be made than at the rate of 8 marks until the work should be carried out. The house was now nearly rebuilt, and the interval between the end of the first year and the present date (i.e. Michaelmas 1366 to 20 Feb. 1367) was a quarter, for which he asked only 2 marks in accordance with the agreement. He prayed judgment whether the complainant ought to have any action against him. As regards the external repairs, he was ready to verify that he had carried them out.
The complainant repeated that the repairs had not been properly executed and that the defendant had broken his agreement to rebuild within a year, so that he was unable to carry on his trade of brouderie (fn. 26) or any other trade, wherefore he prayed judgment and damages.
After two adjournments a jury found that the defendant had not executed the external repairs, to the complainant's damage 5 marks. Judgment was given for that amount. As regards the other matters alleged in the bill, the Court adjourned for consultation. Finally on Saturday before the Feast of St Ambrose [4 April] the complainant failed to prosecute his bill, and judgment was given that the defendant go thence without a day.
Master Simon de Bredon, rector of Aldenham in the diocese of Lincoln, executor of Sir Adam Sallouwe, priest, acknowledged receipt of £3 of Flemish grosses (tres libras grossorum de Flandria) (fn. 27), due to the said Adam from Silvester Nicholas, a partner in the Society of Karolus Stroce (fn. 28).
Thomas de Walden, spicer, brought a bill of complaint against John Mychel, vintner, alleging that the latter refused to pay £5 12s 8d arrears of £12 19s 4d, due for spices supplied to his servant, Simon Clerk, in Cheap. [French]
Having failed to appear on summons, the debtor was attached by goods in the hands of Henry de Ware, ironmonger. He made four defaults, after which the plaintiff asked that the goods might be valued by good men of the City and delivered to him under security to answer etc., according to the custom. Thereupon came Henry de Ware and prayed that the goods should not be valued inasmuch as they were left with him as pledges for a debt of £9 4s due to him from the defendant. The plaintiff declared that the goods were worth more than the said Henry's debt. Accordingly the Court had them valued by oath of John Forster and William Burdeyn, goldsmiths, as follows: one girdle of black silk ornamented with silver, 5 marks; one cup with a silver cover called a "Byker (fn. 29) " 48s; one piece of silver, 12s; and one mazer with a cover of maple (unum maser cum cooperculo murre), 16s; total, £7 2s 8d. Since this was less than Henry de Ware's debt, the Court adjudged that the goods should be returned to him and that the plaintiff should take nothing.
William Stoket, William Berkhampsted and their fellows, masters of the Fullers, and Henry Lyndraper, Adam Carlel and their fellows, masters of the Drapers, chosen by the Mayor and Aldermen to examine a white cloth belonging to Edward Hycchyn, which was fulled by Nicholas Tamworth, fuller, reported that the defects in the cloth were due, not to the fulling, but to the spinning of the woollen yarn, from which the cloth was made.
Henry de Broke, merchant of Almaine and attorney of Tideman Broke, brought a bill of complaint against John Waver, ferroun (fn. 30), of London, for not paying a debt of £17 15s due on a writing obligatory. [French]
After the defendant had made four defaults, the plaintiff prayed that the goods attached in the debtor's house to compel his appearance in court might be valued and handed over to him in accordance with the custom. The goods were valued by oath of William Fromond, Simon de Ware and Thomas de Ware as follows: 80 fes (fn. 31) and 10 garbes of steel (in asser') at 6¼d each garbe, £12,15s 2½d; one pyx for keeping silver in, 12d; 22 iron nails for a cart, 18d; trasshnayles (fn. 32), 20d; 10 empty barrels for keeping steel in, 20d; 5 strakys (fn. 33), 4s; 2 cwt. 1 qr. of iron at 6s 10d the cwt., 15s 4½d; 2 bascats (fn. 34),8d; 2 bemys with the levys (fn. 35),13s 4d; an aunser (fn. 36), 18d; clowys (fn. 37), 54s 1d; garnettys (fn. 38), 12d; an anvell and 2 hamers, 12d; 15 lbs of lead, 10d; 1 sqyre (fn. 39) of iron, 2d; empty barrels, 4d; 4 panels to make a bothe (fn. 40) with, 13s 4d; bed-boards, 12d; a form, 2d; a bascat and boards, 4d; more boards, 2d; nails for a cart, 8s; total, £18 16s 4d.
Thereupon came Richard de Kyllyngworth and demanded that a portion of the above goods to the value of £3 5s might be delivered to him for arrears of rent due for a house let to the defendant. Goods as desired were accordingly handed over under pledge of John Burgeys, draper, and Robert Warewyk, that he would answer therefor if the defendant should appear within a year and a day and be able to disprove the debt. The residue was then delivered to Henry de Broke on similar terms under pledge of John Olyday, skinner, and John Ordy, skinner.
Membr. 11 b
Before William Halden, Recorder, William Welde, Alderman, and John de Cauntebrigg, Chamberlain, came John Sely, skinner, and acknowledged receipt of 80 marks, part payment of £100 recovered against Roger Beauchamp, plomer, who covenanted to pay further instalments.
John de Leycestre, on behalf of Adam de Bury, skinner, came into court and paid to Richard Aunger, baker, and Agnes his wife, relict of Thomas Derby, the sum of 15s claimed as due to the said Thomas for divers pictures (pro diversis picturis rerum) made by him, on condition that the money should be returned if the said Adam should prove that he had already paid the debt by the hands of Richard de Gayton.
John Gyle sued William Draycote by bill for a debt of £74 for cloth supplied, and the defendant was attached by the sum of £54 in the hands of Nicholas Bruset, draper. After four defaults by the defendant, the plaintiff asked that the attachment might be delivered to him. Thereupon the above Nicholas informed the Court that he owed the defendant £54 payable in two instalments and he prayed judgment as to whether he was bound to hand over this money before it was due. Being asked if the money had already been attached in a previous suit, he answered no. Eventually judgment was given for the delivery of the money to the plaintiff and the said Nicholas entered into a bond to pay the same at the terms originally appointed.
Afterwards on 18 Nov., a further sum of £10, attached in the hands of John Croydone, taverner, as due to the defendant, was also delivered to the plaintiff, after the usual defaults, and on the accustomed security being given for repayment, if the debtor should appear within a year and a day and disprove the debt.