Plea Rolls for Staffordshire
14 Edward II

Sponsor

Institute of Historical Research

Publication

Author

Major-General Hon. G. Wrottesley (editor)

Year published

1889

Pages

34-40

Citation Show another format:

'Plea Rolls for Staffordshire: 14 Edward II', Staffordshire Historical Collections, vol. 10, part 1 (1889), pp. 34-40. URL: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=52340 Date accessed: 21 September 2014.


Highlight

(Min 3 characters)

Coram Rege. Mich., 14 E. II.

Staff. Simon de Lollynton, chaplain, Nicholas Everard, Robert Geffreysman of Greseley, and ten others, were attached to answer Thomas de Hyntes in a plea that they had come, vi et armis, to Allerwas on Wednesday, the Feast of St. Barnabas, 13 E. II., and had insulted, beaten, and wounded him, and taken his goods and chattels, viz., linen and woollen cloth to the value of 60s., and for which he claimed £100 as damages. The defendants appeared by attorney, and denied the trespass and injury, and appealed to a jury, which is to be summoned for the Octaves of Hillary. m. 13.

Staff. The Sheriff had been ordered to put into the exigend, Juliana, formerly wife of Thomas Murdak, Robert de Yolretoft, Roger the chamberlain of the said Juliana, John de Vaus and Elias his brother, Robert, the chaplain of the said Thomas, and two others, and to outlaw them if they did not appear, and if they appeared to keep them in safe custody, to answer to the King for the death of the said Thomas Murdak of which they had been indicted; and the Sheriff returned that they had been exacted at four County Courts held at Stafford and had not appeared, viz., on the Thursday the Vigil of St. James, 14 E. II., on the Thursday before the Feast of St. Bartholemew, 14 E. II., on the Thursday before the feast of St. Matthew, 14 E. II., on the Thursday before the Feast of St. Luke the Evangelist, 14 E. II., and on the Thursday after the Feast of St. Martin, 14 E. II., but with respect to the said Juliana, the King had sent a mandate to the Sheriff to supersede all the proceedings against her in the County, inasmuch as she had been committed to the Marshalsea. The defendants, with the exception of Juliana, were therefore to be outlawed, and the Sheriff was ordered to make a return of all the goods and chattels held by them, on the date that they were outlawed. m. 4, Rex. N.B. At the following Easter term, the Sheriff returned they had no chattels.

Staff. The Sheriff had been ordered to arrest Alice, formerly wife of Vivian, son of Vivian de Staundon, and to produce her at this day, viz., on the Octaves of Michaelmas, for not prosecuting her appeal against John, son of John Hastang and others for the death of Vivian her husband, and the Sheriff returned she could not be found, and he was therefore ordered to put her into the exigend, and if she did not appear, etc. A postscript states that the King by Letters Patent, dated 12th November, 14 E. II., pardoned the said Alice for the above transgression, and the proceedings in the County Court were therefore to be superseded. m. Rex, 3, dorso.

North. The King sent his writ to the Sheriff and Coroners of co. Northampton in these words, viz., that whereas Robert Rugel our late approver, taken and detained in our gaol of Northampton, had appealed John de Vans (fn. 1) and Juliana his wife for the death of Thomas Murdak. We, wishing to do what is just, and to be further certified respecting the matter, command you, in the event that the said approver be dead, to transmit the said appeal to be heard before us at the Quindene of St. Michael. Dated 9th July, 14 E. II.

In pursuance of the said writ, the Sheriff and Coroners returned that the said Robert, the approver was dead, and sent the appeal in these words—

The appeal of Robert Ruggele, approver, lately made before Hamon de Vieleston, Coroner of co. Northampton, on the Friday the morrow of St. Michael, 11 E. II. Robert Ruggele of Yelvertoft acknowledged himself to have aided and abetted the death of Thomas Murdak, who had been feloniously killed in the castle of Storton in co. Stafford, on the Monday in Easter week, 9 E. II., and he appealed for the death of the said Thomas, Sir John de Vaus, who had commanded and sent the said Robert and others to commit the said felony. He also appealed Juliana, formerly wife of the said Thomas Murdak, of abetting the death of the said Thomas, formerly her husband. He also appealed William, son of Richard de Bodekisham, dispenser of the said Thomas, for the said death, and stated that the said William struck the said Thomas on the head as he lay in bed with a certain staff. He also appealed Robert the Chaplain and Seneschall of the said Sir Thomas of the said death, and stated that he struck the said Thomas with a certain Bydewe up to the hilt when he attempted to rise. He also appealed Roger the Chamberlain for the said Juliana for the said death, and stated that he spitted (brochiavit) the said Thomas in the belly above the navel with a knife. Also on the Sunday next following, on the third day of the appeal, before the same Hamon, the Coroner, the said Robert, the approver, appealed William Shene, the cook of the said John de Vaus, at that time the servant of the said Thomas, and Adam the palfreyman of the said John de Vaus, of abetting the said death. And the said John de Vaus having been found within the city of London and having been attached by the King's precept, was delivered to the custody of John de Crumbwell, the Constable of the Tower of London, and the said Constable, afterwards by command of the King, produced the said John de Vaus, coram Rege, and he was committed to the custody of the Marshal, and the said John being arraigned for the death of the said Thomas, stated that he was a clerk, and could not answer without his Ordinary, upon which, ex parte the King, it was objected that the said John was a bigamist, inasmuch as on the Thursday in the week of Easter, 9 E. II., at Lichfield, in co. Stafford, he had married the said Juliana, and up to this time had kept her as his wife, by which he could not avail himself of the benefit of clergy (privilegio clericali), and the said John de Vaus stated as before that he was a clerk, and not a bigamist as imputed to him. And the Sheriff was therefore ordered to produce coram Rege at the Octaves of Hillary, 24 knights and freemen, of which twelve were to be Knights girt with the sword, per quos, etc., and the said John was committed to the custody of the Constable of the Tower; and at the Octaves of Hillary the said John appeared again coram Rege and the jury aforesaid, and because the said John had been elsewhere put into the exigend and had been outlawed in co. Stafford at the County Court held on the Thursday after the Feast of St. Martin last past for the said death, he was asked why judgment should not be delivered at once on the said outlawry. And the said John stated that the outlawry should not be to his injury, because on the Saturday after the Feast of All Saints preceding the said Feast of St. Martin he had been taken in the City of London, and on the morrow had been delivered to the said Constable of the Tower, and up to this time had been detained by him as a prisoner, so that he could not be present at the County Court of Stafford held on the Thursday after St. Martin. And because it was evident to the Court that the said John was in the custody of the Constable of the Tower on the day that the outlawry was promulgated, it was considered that the outlawry should be annulled, and the said John restored to the common law, (ad communem legem restituatur). And the jury, elected ad hoc, say on their oath that the said John was a bigamist, because on the said day and year he had married the said Juliana at Lichfield in co. Stafford, and the said John being asked how he wished to be acquitted of the said death, denied the felony and put himself on the country. A jury is therefore to be summoned for the Quindene of Easter. A postscript states that the process was continued de die in diem up to the morrow of St. John the Baptist, 18 E. II., on which day a jury consisting of Philip de Somerville, Philip de Barynton, William de Boeles, Hugh de Aston, Roger de Levynton, Robert de Gresebrok, John Dymmok, Roger Golde, Robert son of Nicholas de Russhale, William de Derlaston, Thomas de Blakeleye, and Roger de Peek stated on their oath that the said John was not guilty of the said death, nor of sending. or procuring, or abetting it. He was therefore acquitted of the same. m. 31, Rex.

Coram Rege. Hillary, 14 E. II.

Staff. Philip de Somerville appeared in person against Walter de Monte Gomeri and Joan his wife, Edmund de Gryseley, Ralph Broun, Vincent de Greseleye, and Geoffrey, his brother, Thomas Pipe, Richard de Aston and thirty-eight others named, in a plea of trespass, and the Sheriff had been ordered to distrain Walter and Joan, and to arrest the others. None of the defendants appeared, and the Sheriff returned 40s. distrained from the goods of Walter and Joan. He was therefore ordered as before, and to produce them at the Quindene of Easter. m. 12.

Staff. William de Mere appeared by attorney against William de Verneye of Madeleye, Richard, his brother, William de Chauldon, John, his brother, Richard, son of William de Chauldon, and Adam, brother of Richard, in a plea of conspiracy and trespass. None of the defendants appeared, and the Sheriff was ordered to arrest, and produce them at the Quindene of St. Michael. m. 16.

Staff. Hugh de Gonestone appeared by attorney against Thomas de Cressewalle and Agnes his wife, and Margaret the daughter of the said Thomas, and Robert Atteford and Agnes his wife, in a plea of trespass. None of the defendants appeared and the Sheriff returned they could not be found, and held nothing within his bailiwick. He was therefore ordered to arrest and produce them at three weeks from Easter. m. 78, dorso.

Warw. The Sheriff had been ordered to put into the "exigend" John Dunheved, of Duncherche, Oliver Dunheved, Henry le Neuman, and Adam le Norreys, and if they did not appear to outlaw them, and if they appeared, to arrest and produce them at this term to answer Edith de Gressebrok in a plea of rape and breach of the peace, and the Sheriff returned that at the fifth summons, viz., on the Monday after the Feast of St. Nicholas, 14 E. II., the said John, Oliver, and Henry had surrendered, and had been bailed by John Pecche, senior, John de Heyford, and Alexander de Crulefeld, and the said John Dunheved now appeared, and the said Edith being solemnly called on the first, second, third, and fourth day, did not appear. Her sureties for the prosecution are therefore in misericordiâ, viz., Roger, son of Robert de Felton, and Robert, son of Robert de Morley, of co. Norfolk, and the said Edith is to be arrested. m. 4, Rex.

Warw. The Sheriff had been ordered to arrest Juliana, formerly wife of Thomas Murdak, Alice la Chaumberere, and Adam le Someter, and produce them, coram Rege, at the Octaves of St. Michael, 11 E. II., to answer the appeal of John, son of William Murdak, for the death of Thomas Murdak, his kinsman, and the said John, son of William, being solemnly called on the first, second, third, and fourth days, did not appear. He is therefore to be arrested, and his sureties for the prosecution, viz., Simon Jones, and William de Eyton, are in misericordiâ, and respecting the said Juliana, Alice, and Adam, the Sheriff returned they could not be found, and held nothing within his bailiwick. And he was ordered to arrest them at the suit of the King, and produce them at the Octaves of Hillary next ensuing. to answer to the King for the said death, at which Octaves the Sheriff returned they could not be found, and he was ordered to put them into the exigend, and if they did not appear the said Adam was to be outlawed, and the said Juliana and Alice were to be waiviatæ. (fn. 2) And if they appeared, the Sheriff was ordered to produce them coram Rege at the Octaves of St. Michael, 12 E. II. At which Octaves the Sheriff returned that the said Juliana, Adam, and Alice had been exacted at five County Courts, and had not appeared, and the said Adam had been outlawed, and the said Alice had been wayviata, and with regard to the said Juliana, as it was notified to the King that she had been arrested and was detained in the King's prison at Stafford, and as it would not be consonant to right that she should be wayviata whilst detained in prison, the King sent a writ to supersede the proceedings in the County of Warwick against her, dated from Clipstone, 15th August, 12 E. II. And the Sheriff of Staffordshire was ordered to produce the said Juliana, coram Rege, at the Octaves of Hillary following, to answer for the said death, and the Sheriff of Staffordshire, viz., Robert de Grendon, returned at that date, that the said Juliana had never been apprehended by him, nor detained in prison at Stafford, because, immediately after the perpetration of the said felony, she had left the County; and because Roger Trumwyne, lately Sheriff, had testified that the said Juliana was in prison at Stafford, and the Sheriff now returned the contrary, the said Sheriff was ordered to attach Roger Trumwyne, and produce him at the Quindene of Easter following to answer to the King for the body of the said Juliana; and the said Sheriff and Coroners, at the above named Octaves of Hillary had likewise returned that on a scrutiny of their Rolls, they had found no indictment against the said Juliana for the said death, but they had been informed (bene constitit eis) that the said Juliana had been indicted before Roger de Cheigny and William de Stafford, and their fellow Conservators of the King's peace in co. Stafford, for the said death, and a precept was therefore sent to the said Conservators to return the indictment coram Rege at the following Quindene of Easter, at which Quindene of Easter, viz., in 12 E. II., the said Conservators of the King's peace in co. Stafford, returned that on a scrutiny of their Rolls, they found that the said Juliana was indicted for the death of the said Thomas Murdak, killed at Stourton, co. Stafford, but the inquisition made no mention of the names of those by whom, etc. (sic in orig.) and the said Conservators were ordered to send the indictment to the King at the Octaves of St. John the Baptist following, on which day they sent the indictment in these words:—

Inquisition made before Roger de Cheigne, Sheriff of co. Stafford, at the Great Hundred of Seysedon on the Tuesday, the morrow of the Invention of the Holy Cross, 9 E. II., by the oath of Henry de Morf, Robert Buffray, Ralph de Evenefeld, William de la Horewode, Edmund de Penne, William de Lowe, John de Molesleye, Robert de Sewalle, Richard de Pycheford, William de Fynchinfeld, William Buffray, and John de Prees, who stated on oath that the said Juliana, formerly wife of Sir Thomas Murdak, Robert de Yolvetoft, Roger the Chamberlain of Juliana, William son of Richard, the Esquire (Armiger) of the said Thomas, and Matilda de Hastang had killed the said Thomas at Stourton on the night following the Monday in the week of Easter, with the assent and procurement of Sir John de Vaus, and Elias, his brother, and of Robert the Chaplain of the said Thomas. In testimony of which, the said Jurors had set their seals to this inquisition. On account of which indictment the Sheriff of co. Stafford had been commanded to arrest them and produce them at the Octaves of St. Michael to answer to the King for the said death. And the Sheriff of co. Warwick was ordered to put the said Juliana into the exigend, de novo, and if she did not appear, etc., and if she appeared, to produce her at the Octaves of Hillary, 13 E. II. On which day the Sheriff made no return to the writ, and he was ordered as before, and to produce her at the Quindene of St. John the Baptist, on which day the Sheriff returned that the said Juliana had appeared at the fifth County Court held on the Vigil of St. John the Baptist, 13 E. II., and he had arrested her, and she was detained in the King's prison, but was so ill and weak he could not produce her at the said Quindene of St. John the Baptist without danger of death. And he was ordered to produce her at the Octaves of St. Michael 14 E. II. On which day the Sheriff sent the said Juliana coram Rege, and she was committed to the custody of the Marshall, and being afterwards brought up by the Marshall and questioned respecting the said death, she denied the felony and put herself on the country, and a jury was summoned for the Octaves of St. Hillary, of which twelve were to be Knights gladio cincti; on which day the said Juliana was brought before the Court by the Constable of the Tower, and the jury stated on their oath that the said Juliana had feloniously and insidiously (seductive) killed the said Thomas Murdak, formerly her husband. Ideo, etc. [the word comburenda (to be burnt) appears in the margin]. She had no lands or chattels in co. Stafford, and it was testified she held lands and chattels in co. Warwick. The Sheriff and Coroners of co. Warwick were therefore ordered to return on oath what goods and chattels and lands the said Juliana held on the Friday after the Octaves of St. Hillary, 14 E. II., on which day the said Juliana had been convicted, etc. m. Rex, 7.

On the back of the same membrane are recorded the proceedings against the other defendants up to the date of the Roll, viz., Hillary term, 14 E. II. None of them had appeared at the exigend, and they had all been outlawed, but as it had been shown that John de Vaus at the date of the outlawry promulgated against him, viz., on the Thursday after the Feast of St. Martin, 14 E. II., was in the custody of the Constable of the Tower, a writ was issued to revoke and annull it, and the said John being afterwards questioned respecting the death of the said Thomas Murdak, at Michaelmas term, coram Rege, stated he was not guilty and a jury was summoned for the Quindene of Easter.

After which are recorded the proceedings up to date against Roger Trumwyne, late Sheriff of Staffordshire for returning falsely that the said Juliana was in the King's prison at Stafford, by which it appears that the said Roger had been arrested by the Sheriff of co. Stafford and sent coram Rege at the Quindene of Easter, 12 E. II., when he was committed to the custody of the Marshall, but afterwards released on bail, and at the Octaves of St. John the Baptist following, the said Roger appeared before the King and denied that he had made the return in question, viz., that the said Juliana had been taken by him and was detained in custody, and he put himself on the country. A jury was therefore summoned for the Quindene of St. Michael, and the said Roger was committed to the custody of the Marshall, but afterwards released on bail; Thomas de Assheburn, William de Waleye, Adam de Reresby, Robert de Clifton of co. Derby, John de Cestria of co. Warwick, and Simon de Ruggeleye of co. Stafford, being surety for him.

Kancia. A writ was sent to the Sheriff of co. Kent, stating that the King having been informed that Richard de Tutbury and Ernald de Codenoure, who had been indicted for a robbery at the Castle of Dudley had been arrested within his bailiwick, he was required to send them coram Rege at the Octaves of the Purification. Dated from Westminster, 24 January, 14 E. II. And the Sheriff of co. Kent returned that he had sent a precept to John de Breideston the Bailiff of the Archbishop of Canterbury, who had thus answered.

Richard de Tuttebury and Nicholas Arnold of Codenovere were attached at the suit of John Mot of Canterbury, having been taken with the manner manuoperc), viz.: with a sum of £38 and 20 pence sterling, belonging to John Somery, and in the custody of John Mot, feloniously stolen from the Castle of Dodeleye, in co. Stafford, of which money the said Richard had £37 9s. and the said Nicholas 12s. 8d., and the Sheriff now sent the said Richard and Nicholas, who were committed to the Marshall but he did not send the said manuopus. The Sheriff was therefore ordered to send it at three weeks from Easter —if in his custody, and if not, to send John de Breideston, the Bailiff, coram Rege to answer for it at the same term. And it was testified before the King, that the said Richard de Tutteburi was attached at Derteford by John Lambyn and Henry le Shotter, the Bailiffs of the Bishop of Rochester, with a horse worth four marks, and with a saddle and bridle worth 6s., and with £50, and 16s. in money, and with a sword and bow worth 10s. And the said Nicholas Ernald was attached at Derteford by William de Tyngewik, and John his brother, Bailiffs of the King at Derteford with a horse worth 20s., and with 26 marks in money, and with a trunk (una mala) and three yards and a half of cloth, worth 13s. The Sheriff was therefore ordered to make enquiry upon oath respecting the said arrest by the said Bailiffs at Derteford, and if it should appear that they had concealed the manuopus, to attach and produce them coram Rege, at the same term, viz., at three weeks from Easter.

Staff. And afterwards Robert de Grendon, the Sheriff of co. Stafford, in answer to the King's writ returned the tenor of the indictment in these words, viz.:—"Richard de Tuttebury and Nicholas Ernald of Codenover were indicted before me at the Great Tourn of the Hundred of Seysdon, held after the Feast of St. Michael, 14 E. II., that they had broken into the Castle of John de Somery at Dodleye, and had carried away from it £1,000, and more; and as it appeared to the Court that the return was insufficient, because the Sheriff made no mention in it of the day and year of the felony, nor of the inquisition made respecting it, nor the names of the jury by whom the said Richard and Nicholas were indicted, he was ordered to return another at three weeks from Easter, on which day the Sheriff sent an inquisition in these words, viz., An inquisition taken before the Sheriff of co. Stafford at his Great Tourn of Seysdon, held at Wolverhampton on the Monday next after the Feast of St. Andrew, 14 E. II., by Henry de Morf, Robert Buffry, John de Tresel, Thomas de Overton, Thomas de Bradleye, John de Mollesleye, Richard de Ovyoteshay, Richard de Bekkebury, William de Fynchenefeld, William Buffrey, Ralph de Evenefeld, and John de Pretz, who say on their oath that Ralph le Deyer, Robert le Pestour of Gnonsale, Nichola sde Somery, Nicholas Ernald of Codenovere, John le Freremon, William atte Chircheyord, Richard de Tuttebury, Walter de Whitelynge, Henry Lyvet, Walter, the servant of Nicholas de Burmyngeham, and two others named, had broken into the Castle of John de Somery at Duddeleye, on the Sunday, the Feast of All Souls, in the above year, and had taken £1,000 and more of money. And afterwards on the day above named, the said Richard and Nicholas being brought up by the Marshall, denied the felony and appealed to a jury which is to be summoned for the Octaves of Trinity; and the Sheriff was ordered to arrest Ralph le Deyer and the others named, and produce them coram Rege, at the same date. m. 20, Rex, dorso.

Coram Rege. Easter, 14 E. II.

Staff. Letitia, formerly wife of Alexander de Swynnerton, appeared in person against William de Chetelton, James, son of William de Stafford, the younger (junioris), and John brother of the said James, John de Staundon, John Godard, Henry de Cressewalle, Richard le Hore, Thomas son of Thomas Gerveys and Roger his brother, John Fox of Staundon, William, son of William Parent and two others, for the death of her husband, and the Sheriff returned that the defendants could not be found within his bailiwick, and as regarded the said James son of William, and John his brother and John de Staundon he had sent a precept to Alexander de Lekebourne the Bailiff of the Liberty of the Earl of Lancaster and they had done nothing, and with regard to Thomas Gerveys and Roger his brother and three others named, he had sent a precept to Richard de Ronton the Bailiff of the Bishop's Liberty and he had done nothing. The Sheriff therefore was ordered by writ of "non omittas propter libertates" to arrest the defendants, and produce them at the Octaves of Trinity, and to produce before the Court at the same time the said Bailiffs to show cause why they had omitted to execute the King's writ directed to them. m. Rex, 9.

Staff. John de la Ware in person appeared against Nicholas de Arderne for the death of Gilbert de la Ware, his brother. Nicholas did not appear, and the Sheriff returned "non est inrentus" and that he held nothing within his bailiwick. He was therefore ordered to put him into the "exigend" and if he appeared, to keep him in safe custody, and if he did not appear, to outlaw him. m. Rex, 15.

Staff. The jury called at the suit of the King, to make recognition if John de Vaus was guilty of the death of Thomas Murdak, in the Castle of Stourton, on the Monday in Easter Week, 9 E. II., for which Robert Ruggele, the King's approver in the Castle of Northampton had appealed the said John, before the Coroners of the said county, was respited till the Octaves of Trinity, as none of the jury appeared. m. Rex, 11, dorso.

Footnotes

1 The King had granted to John de Vaus the custody of the Manor of Storton, and of the Forest of Kynfar in the 4th year of his reign. (Originalia, 4 E. II).
2 The equivalent of outlawry in the case of a woman.