Cecil Papers: December 1605 | British History Online

Calendar of the Cecil Papers in Hatfield House: Volume 24, Addenda, 1605-1668. Originally published by Her Majesty's Stationery Office, London, 1976.

'Cecil Papers: December 1605', in Calendar of the Cecil Papers in Hatfield House: Volume 24, Addenda, 1605-1668, (London, 1976) pp. 36-57. British History Online https://www.british-history.ac.uk/cal-cecil-papers/vol24/pp36-57 [accessed 20 April 2024]

December 1605



	John Cusack to the Earl of Salisbury.
[After December 2, 1605].	He is a merchant of Dublin, and complains that he has been unjustly treated by two merchants of Coventry. In a case involving the sum of £161, which petitioner declared he had discharged and produced two receipts to prove it, the Mayor of Coventry gave judgment against him on the grounds that the receipts were not sealed. This was done despite an order from the Court of Chancery that proceedings should be stopped. Petitioner has come from Ireland to attend the Court of Chancery and seek redress for the wrong committed at Coventry. He requests that letters be written to the Lord Chancellor on his behalf, that his counsellor at law be heard in the matter.—Undated. ½ p. (P. 1167.) [See PRO, Chancery 2, James I, C 18/39.]
	The Burgesses, Churchwardens, Constables and other officials of the Liberty of the Duchy of Lancaster in the Strand to the Earl of Salisbury.
[Before December 3, 1605].	On Sunday last Sir John Fortescue, Chancellor of the Duchy, issued a warrant for the demolition of a house recently erected for the use of the Liberty. Petitioners attended on him before they proceeded to execute the warrant, and learnt that Salisbury regarded the building as being offensive to Somerset and Arundel gardens. Petitioners, who know and appreciate the generosity and charitable activities of Salisbury, invite him to read the attached letter and, when he has the leisure, to summon before him both them and the persons who have complained to Salisbury about the inconveniency of the building, or to refer it to some other person of his choice. If Salisbury remains convinced of the undesirability of the house and wishes it to be demolished, petitioners "will not onlie with theire owne handes pull down the same", but execute any further orders he issues to them. "Maye it also please your good honor to understand that theis petitioners have fullie satisfied thearle of Arrundell."—Undated. 1 p. (P. 2081a.)
	Attached
	Sir Walter Cope to Sir John Fortescue.
1605, December 3.	"Accordinge to your honors pleasure wee have taken viewe of the newe erected house in Strand lane intended for a prison to punishe vagrant persons. And wee finde the same as it is now built in our opinions noe waye offensive ether to Somerset or Arundell gardens. Nether is the same anie waye prejudiciall to Holmeade, the taylor, except it be in his prospect which is verye litle hindered thereby, ffor notwithstandinge the said house he hath full prospecte over the Thames and over some parte of Somersett garden, which wee thincke to be sufficient prospecte for a man of his qualitie. Ffor the hurte of the workeman wee have moved the partyes, whome the same concerneth, to a neighbourly agreement, wherein wee hope our directions wilbe followed." Given this iii of December, 1605. Signed: Walter Cope, Philip Gerard. ⅓ p. (P. 2081b.)
	Enclosed
	A map of the prison erected for the Liberty of the Duchy of Lancaster in the Strand, London.
	Richard Holmead to the Earl of Salisbury.
[? After December 3, 1605].	At the request of some neighbours, Salisbury has undertaken to issue a warrant for the erection of a prison for the Liberty of the Duchy of Lancaster in a place called Strand Lane. In the opinion of many members this will prove offensive to the Earl of Nottingham and other residents, but most of all to petitioner who has bought a house there for his old age. He asks for letters to the officers of the Duchy that they proceed no further with the proposed building, but look for a more convenient place for such a prison.—Undated. ½ p. (P. 1128.)
	John Turpin and James Johnson to the Earl of Salisbury.
[After December 3, 1605].	They have been examined and their innocence established by the commissioners before whom they appeared. They ask that Salisbury be provided with the examinations, so that he may be satisfied and order given for them to be released. (fn. 1) —Undated. ½ p. (P. 460.)
	Dorothy Huddleston to the Earl of Salisbury.
[? After December 7, 1605].	She is the wife of Henry Huddleston, now close prisoner in the Marshalsea. She understands that an order has been issued that the goods of those arrested for high treason, following upon the recent conspiracy, should be redelivered for the relief of their wives and children. The sheriff of Worcestershire has seized four horses and other property belonging to her husband, but has not complied with this order. She prays that Salisbury direct that the horses and other goods be returned to her by the sheriff.—Undated. 1 p. (P. 461.) [See Cal. S.P. Dom., 1603–10, p. 268.]
	Lancelot Browne to the Earl of Salisbury.
[Before December 11, 1605].	He is dangerously ill, and asks Salisbury to be a true friend to his family, should he die, (fn. 2) and to procure the continuation of the King's pension for the relief of his wife and education of his children.—Undated. ⅓ p. (P. 1586.)
	James Garvey to the Earl of Salisbury.
[After December 11, 1605].	He is a prisoner in the Marshalsea, and was formerly page to Lady Mary Digby. In that capacity he was sent by her to guide Mr Sheldon and a groom with horses to the house of Mr Winter at Huddington. A mile or so away he met his master, Sir Everard Digby, who ordered him to remain there in attendance. Seeing an assembly of people with Digby, petitioner feared that there was something sinister on foot and tried to escape, but was restrained and threatened with death by shooting. He succeeded eventually in breaking away from the company, but being a stranger in those parts he lost his way in the darkness of the night. He found himself at the house of Sir Robert Digby, and Lady Digby immediately sent for Sir Clement Fisher who examined petitioner and then committed him to the custody of the sheriff of Warwickshire. Later the sheriff brought him to London where he has been detained in the Marshalsea ever since. He pleads his ignorance of the conspiracy, his youth and the unscrupulous manner in which he was used by his master and mistress, and asks that, for these reasons, the King's clemency be extended to him.—Undated. ½ p. (P. 1459.) [See Cal. S.P. Dom., 1603–10, p. 270, and H.M.C. Salisbury MSS Vol. XVII, P. 523.]
	Horsepoolestone Pillory.
1605, December 13.	"An asseasment made the thirtenth daye of December anno dni 1605 by the persons whose names are underwritten for a cadge and a pillorye to be made and sett uppe within the parishe of Endfeild in the county of Middlesex. And for v¹ which was levied upon Mr Jason for an amerciament that was sett upon the said parishe for the want of the same." 1 p. (Legal 39/13.)
	Anne Tresham to the Earl of Salisbury.
[December, 1605].	Salisbury has already been informed by Dr Gwyn of the grave illness of her husband, Francis Tresham. (fn. 3) She requests that she be allowed to visit and nurse him.—Undated. ½ p. (P. 348.)
	Sir Melchior Levan to the King.
[1605].	As a result of the intervention of the King of Denmark and the Duke of Holstein on his behalf, and in consideration of his war service in Portugal, Ireland and the Low Countries and at Cadiz during the late Queen Elizabeth's reign, he was granted a licence to import steel into this country upon condition that it did not constitute a monopoly. Upon due examination of the licence, both the Privy Council and the Judges have declared that it contravenes the laws of the realm as being of the nature of a monopoly. Since the grant has been thus invalidated, petitioner asks that he be given the benefit of forfeitures or penalties due to the Exchequer up to an amount judged fair and reasonable in view of his past services.—Undated. ½ p. (197. 18.) [See Cal. S.P. Dom., 1603–10, p. 220, and H.M.C. Salisbury MSS., Vol. XVII, p. 610.]
	Thomas Heaton to the Earl of Salisbury.
[1605].	Lawrence Asmall (? Aspinall) (fn. 4) and James Picopp of Nether Darwen, co. Lancs., yeomen, deceased, left property of small value to their heirs at the time of their death two years ago. Petitioner suggests that an inquiry would probably reveal that these lands are held in capite. He asks that the custody of their heirs and their estate be bestowed upon him, in return for which he will endeavour to establish the King's title to the wardship.—Undated.
	Note at bottom: "Let him resort to any two of the Counsayll of the Court, and if he can shewe sufficient matter to prove a tenure and procure an order, I will have consideration of him in the composition." Faded in part 1 p. (P. 2344.)
	Robert Acton to [The Earl of Salisbury].
[1605].	He refers to a survey made of his lands. He inherited from his father, Henry Acton, the manor of Doyver (? Dolwar) in Montgomeryshire, later sold to Sir Thomas Bromley, Lord Chancellor; and the manors of Rock, Hollin, Ribbesford and Stildon, in Worcestershire, all of which except Ribbesford were sold to Churchill. Ribbesford is held in trust for the indemnification of Churchill as a surety for the money lent to Acton. There follow a description and valuation of the manor, the latter being put at £4660. Acton "humbly beeseecheth your Lordshipps comiseration for himselfe, his wieffe and five children growen to men and womens estate". Note at bottom by H. [? Guneshed]: "My very good Lord, this I certefy for a truth." Endorsed: "1605. Note of Mr Actons lands." 1 p. (P. 2220.) [See H.M.C. Salisbury MSS, Vol. XVII, pp. 90, 126, 511 and 582.]
	Thomas Chamberlain versus Richard Green.
[1605].	Details of the case between Chamberlain and Green concerning certain lands at Wollaxton, co. Oxford, and the rightful ownership of a quantity of woad. The case has been submitted to the Star Chamber. (fn. 5) —Undated. Endorsed: "1605. Cause between Chamberlin and Green." ¾ p. (P. 2153.) [See H.M.C. Salisbury MSS, Vol. XVII, pp. 557 and 647.]
	William Crashaw and William Beau to the Earl of Salisbury.
[1605].	Crashaw is a preacher of the Temple (fn. 6) and, like Beau, a prebendary of Ripon, and they are both submitting the petition on behalf of the Dean and prebendaries there. At the request of the neighbouring countryside and at the mediation of the Lord President, the King refounded the Collegiate Church of Ripon with a Dean, six prebendaries and a choir for the services held there, and endowed it with the fee farm of such of the church lands as were yet unsold at £100 per annum. This grant passed the Great Seal over a year and a half ago, but the letters patent have been held back on the ground either of the greatness of the grant or of alleged indirect methods in the procuring of it. Petitioners are ready to answer both allegations to the satisfaction of the Privy Council to whom they understand the King has referred the matter. Petitioners declare that, "the cuntrye is ignorant and full of papists and have beene longe untaught, the parishe great of 10,000 publicke, the act honorable to God, the Kinge, our religion and state, the notice of it publicke and published over all that cuntrye to the dauntinge of papists". They ask that Salisbury obtain for them a speedy hearing before the Privy Council, and afford them his assistance and favour, "as beinge the piller of learninge and protector of our universities, and one who hath alreadye done the like good worke in Lancashire".—Undated. 1 p. (P. 2004.) [See Cal. S.P. Dom., 1603–10, p. 135.]
	Peter Proby to the Earl of Salisbury.
[1605].	He details the background to the dispute which has arisen over certain lands within the manor of Brampton, co. Huntingdon, formerly leased by his brother, now deceased, and at present in the possession of his widow. After her death, the lands are to descend to petitioner. In the meantime "divers busye fellows of small worthe", who have never been tenants under his brother or sister-in-law and who have no claim to these lands, declare themselves to be tenants of the Queen and are attempting to procure a lease in reversion. Petitioner is the rightful tenant in reversion (after the decease of his brother's widow). Moreover, there is one further consideration. "By my brothers wyll wherto I am an executor, my second sonne (whom it pleasd my honorable good Lords the Erle of Sowthampton and the Lo. Stanhopp with the La. Maynerd for to name Henry and personally to be at his baptizinge) he is to have that which my brother held by lese and otherwyse in Brampton." Petitioner requests that his interest and that of his son be taken into consideration by Salisbury and the Privy Council in the granting of the lease.—Undated. Endorsed: "1605". Followed by a note by Salisbury: "I pray you Mr Chancelour, let this be considered of." 1 p. (P. 1969.)
	Richard Glanville to the Earl of Salisbury.
[1605].	Mr Richard Staper, Mr Sandy and petitioner brought home last January in the Marigold of London a cargo of currants, of which petitioner's share was twenty tons. The currants are of bad quality, and for that reason Staper undertook for himself, Sandy and petitioner to request Salisbury that there should be abatement in the tax recently imposed on that fruit. Petitioner allowed Staper his part of the expenses of riding to the Court, etc., which amounted to £60. Eventually Staper, by Salisbury's favour, obtained a reduction of one half or more for his own currants, but none for petitioner's. In view of the fact that these are as bad if not worse than Staper's, and that they are detained by Wright and Hamersley until the tax is paid, and so likely to become totally spoiled, petitioner asks that the same reduction be awarded to him. He adds that he has now paid the imposition to Wright and Hamersley.—Undated. ½ p. (P. 1882.) [See H.M.C. Salisbury MSS, Vol. XVII, p. 208.]
	Sir Thomas Burgh to the Privy Council.
[1605].	He is of Ballinasloe, co. Galway, Ireland. In the summer of 1603 he was a suitor to the King for a debt which he claimed in the right of Anthony Brabason, deceased, whose widow he had married. The King referred the suit to the Privy Council, directing its members to write to Sir George Carey, then Lord Deputy, that until the matter of the debt was settled, petitioner should retain the rents due to the King for the rectory of Mullingar and the monastery of St. John's of Atherdee which he held in the right of his wife. Petitioner caused the letter to be enrolled immediately in the Exchequer upon his arrival in Ireland. However, the reversioner of these rents has attempted to deprive him of these rents on the grounds of their non-payment to the King. He therefore requests that the Council renews its former letters to the present Lord Deputy, (fn. 7) acquainting him with the original order of the King's, prohibiting any further proceedings by the reversioner, and permitting him to enjoy the rents until the matter of the King's debt to him has been finally settled.—Undated. 1 p. (P. 1468.)
	William Kyddall to the Earl of Salisbury.
[? 1605].	He has always been a dutiful and loyal subject to the King, and considers that the worst dangers which threaten the Crown and State emanate from "a damnable crew of homebred foes, the viperous brood of papists and popish seminaries" as exemplified in the late conspiracy. He requests a commission for one year to search for seminarists and popish priests within the counties of York, Lincoln, Durham, Northumberland, Cumberland, Westmorland and Lancashire, and to bring those whom he discovers before Salisbury and the Privy Council "together with all such vestments, books and other popishe reliques as may be found".—Undated. ¾ p. (P. 1467.)
	William Cardinal to the Earl of Salisbury.
[1605].	His petition and answer to the charges brought against him by Thomas La Broch.
	(1) Upon the complaint of the father of Thomas La Broch concerning a debt owed to him by Robert Cardinal, brother to William Cardinal, petitioner's late father, the Privy Council referred the matter to the Lord Mayor and two Aldermen of London. It was discovered that Robert Cardinal was dead and that a certain Huntinge had taken over the administration of his property, who compelled petitioner's father to pay £500 to him, which four merchants of Ipswich declared to be due from him to Robert his brother.
	(2) Upon being informed of this, the Lord Mayor and Aldermen referred the case to the Masters of the Requests who decreed that petitioner's father should pay La Broch £500 in five years, and that La Broch should deliver him the said Robert's estate to maintain himself.
	(3) La Broch refused to observe the terms of the decree and returned to France, claiming that he could obtain more profit out of Robert Cardinal's estate, which he did for seven years. After his death his widow cunningly took out letters of administration of his estate in England, and gave power of attorney to her son, Thomas [? John] La Broch. The latter brought a suit against petitioner's father in the Court of Requests, and it was decreed that La Broch should be paid £500, because petitioner's father had failed to abide by the terms of the previous decree although it was La Broch senior who had not fulfilled the conditions by not surrendering Robert Cardinal's estate. Petitioner's father was subsequently imprisoned and died.
	(4) La Broch has commenced another suit against petitioner and his mother, and they have both been summoned to appear before the Privy Council. They have been waiting to be called for a considerable time at their own expense, and they now request that either the case be heard and determined without further delay, or that it be dismissed to the ordinary course of law "which is free for all his Ma^ts good subjects".—Undated. 1 p. (P. 1391.)
	John La Broche to the King.
[1605].	He is the son of Elizabeth La Broche, widow of Thomas La Broche, late merchant of Bordeaux, deceased. In January 1604–5, he submitted a petition to the Privy Council, together with letters from the French Ambassador. These declared that in 1584 Thomas La Broche engaged himself to certain merchants in France in the sum of £1800 for goods bought in France by Robert Cardinal for the use of his brother William Cardinal of Suffolk, merchant. Through the default of the brothers La Broche was obliged to satisfy the French merchants himself, and came to England in 1586 to seek redress from the Privy Council. The French King wrote letters on his behalf, and the Privy Council referred the matter to the consideration of certain London aldermen. The evasiveness of the brothers Cardinal served to protract the business, until in 1593 it was decided to ask Sir John Herbert, Sir Julius Caesar, Dr Aubrey and Dr Rookby to examine and conclude it. They decreed that £500 should be paid to La Broche by William Cardinal, and a bond for £1000 surrendered by him to the same. But Cardinal fulfilled neither of these terms, and La Broche returned empty-handed to France where he died. His widow sent petitioner over to England and he, in turn, presented his petition to the Privy Council on the same matter. They referred him to the Court of Requests, from whom he procured a new decree against William Cardinal to the effect that he should pay Elizabeth La Broche the £500 which he should have paid twelve years ago. Cardinal, however, has ignored the decree and contemptuously disregarded the proclamation of rebellion issued against him. Petitioner asks that Cardinal's property should be distrained to indemnify his mother who has failed to obtain redress and compensation for twenty-one years.—Undated. ¾ p. (P. 1141.)
	Edward Forrest and James Spencer to the Earl of Salisbury.
[1605].	They are prisoners in the Marshalsea, as being implicated in a matter of fraudulent accounts in Ireland, concerning which a petition by Sir John Ramsay has been referred by the King to Salisbury and the Privy Council. Petitioners have been detained for 18 weeks, and ask to be brought before Salisbury and the Council. If their intentions, as explained in Ramsey's petition, are commendable, they ask to be released with an allowance for their expenses since they are too poor to pay them.—Undated. ½ p. (P. 933.) [See H.M.C. Salisbury MSS, Vol. XVII, p. 625.]
	David Allen to the Earl of Salisbury.
[1605].	He is a prisoner in the Marshalsea and an embroiderer by profession. Because of the scarcity of work in London, he decided to go to Paris to seek both employment and greater skill in his trade. He landed at Calais where Wyles, a merchant who had committed some offence in England and dared not return home, brought certain charges against petitioner, in the hope of gaining favour in London, and caused him to be sent back to England. He was committed to prison by Salisbury seven weeks ago, and since that time has petitioned the Lord Chief Justice who knows of no official charge against him. He therefore asks to be released or afforded an opportunity to answer any matter alleged against him.—Undated. ¾ p. (P. 1184.) [See H.M.C. Salisbury MSS, Vol. XVII, p. 647.]
	Sir Francis Vincent and Sir Edward Hext to the Privy Council.
[1605].	Sir Anthony Paulet, deceased, (fn. 8) late Governor of Jersey, had money owing to him by the inhabitants of that island to the amount of 1000 marks or more. A part of them was payable out of the revenues of Jersey, and a part by private contract between Paulet and his debtors. Petitioners, who are his executors, have tried for five years to obtain payment by the ordinary course of law in Jersey. But since they live at some distance from the island, and some of the jurats and judges are themselves debtors to Sir Anthony, delays and evasions have been inevitable and proved prejudicial to the heir who is a King's ward. They ask for letters of commission to be directed to the present Governor of Jersey, George Paulet, Lieutenant of Jersey, Philip Cartaret, Seigneur of St. Ouen, Thomas Oliver, clerk, and Henry Pike, authorizing them to summon all the debtors and, upon examination and verification of their debts, to take measures for their payment; and to report the names of any refractory debtors who refuse to comply with their directives.—Undated.
	Endorsed: "The humble petition of Francis Vyncent and Edward Hext, knights, and others the executors in truste of Sir Anthony Poulet, knight, deceased, to the use of his children. They shewe that whereas the inhabitaunts of the Isle of Jersey were indebted to the said Sir Anthony by pryvat contracts, as allso by rents due out of the revenews of the said Isle, to the some of 1000^li and upward which they have endevored these fyve yeres to recover by course of justice in that island. But for that some of the said debtors are jurats and judges there, and other some of kindred to them, they have not had that expedition for the recovery of there debts as was fitt, but have bene putt of from time to time with extraordinary shifts and delaies to there great charge, travaile and expences.
	They desire your Lordships letters of commission to be directed to the Governor ther, George Poulet, esquire, his leftenant, Phillip Cartarett, Seingor of St. Owen, Thomas Oliver, clarke, and Henry Pyke, authorizing them, three or two of them, to call before them the said debtors, and upon due proofe had and made of the said debts, to take such order with them for the payment thereof as the said comissioners in right and equitie shall thinke fitt. And if in case the debtors refuse to performe there order and award herein, then the comissioners to certifie your Lordships of there refusall, that further order may thereuppon be taken by your Honors. ¾ p. (P. 1066.)
	Henry Hammond to the Earl of Salisbury.
[1605].	He is M.A. of Trinity College, Cambridge and curate of the parish of St. Martin's-in-the-Fields. The vicarage of Rainham, co. Essex is Salisbury's gift by the wardship of Lady Southwell's child. Petitioner asks to be granted the incumbency, (fn. 9) upon the death of the present vicar.—Undated. 1 p. (P. 684.)
	Maurice Peter and Peregrine Cony to the King.
[1605].	They request a confirmation of a grant made by the late Queen Elizabeth to Margaret Hodges, widow, in recompence of the loss suffered by her late husband, Christopher Hodges, maimed in the late wars. The grant was made to petitioners who were Hodges's sureties and had been imprisoned for his debts, and was "an office of survey to searche, finde out and reforme the great decetefull dyinge and coloringe of all manner of silkes within your Ma^ts realme of England decetefully dyed which hathe bin of longe tyme heretofore and as yett still is used amongst the silkemen to the utter impoverishinge of all your Ma^ts subjectes that use and weare the same". They ask for a lease for 21 years of this grant, becoming farmers of the same to the Queen and rendering an account for half the profits.—Undated. ¾ p. (P. 485.) [See H.M.C. Salisbury MSS, Vol. XIV, p. 168 and Cal. S.P. Dom., 1603–10, p. 277.]
	John Norden to the Earl of Salisbury.
[1605].	In return for past services, the King was pleased, at the instance of the Earl of Nottingham and Salisbury himself, to grant petitioner a patent of the surveyorship of the Duchy of Cornwall with a fee of 20 marks annually. Out of necessity he has been forced to convey the grant to Robert Drake who, because of a new patent, has been denied the allowance by the Lord Treasurer. Inasmuch as petitioner is bound to assure the post and fee to Drake, he begs Salisbury to intervene with the Lord Treasurer to the effect that the patent and fee had been the King's gift to him, and that the fee should henceforth be paid by the Receiver of the Duchy of Cornwall.—Undated. ½ p. (P. 324.) P. 929 is a duplicate of this petition. [See Cal. S.P. Dom., 1603–10, p. 191.]
	Alexander Cotes to the Earl of Salisbury.
[1605].	He has filled the office of Deputy-Baron of the Exchequer of the County Palatine of Chester for 46 years under the several grants of the late Queen Elizabeth's patentees of the same office. William Tatton, the first, appointed petitioner his deputy, and for 20 years he enjoyed the profits of that office. Tatton surrendered his patent for the use of Sir Thomas Egerton, deceased, son of the Lord Chancellor of England, who allowed petitioner to retain his place and the fee of £100 per annum. Sir John Egerton, son and heir of the Lord Chancellor, then obtained the same office by grant from the late Queen, and he also permitted petitioner to continue in the office and draw his fee. Sir John resigned the office to Edward Dodd, (fn. 10) who had procured a patent of it for life from the King. However, William Powell, whom petitioner had trained and trusted as his chief clerk for 16 years, and Henry Crosby, petitioner's servant in livery and clerk for 20 years, have conspired with Dodd to supplant him in the office. Despite petitioner's offer to execute the duties of the position upon reasonable conditions as before, he has been removed without just cause. His reputation is unimpaired, his integrity never questioned by the public or legal officials, and he believes that he "is the most auntient Chauncerie man in England, being allowed a cursitor of the High Court of Chauncerie almost 50 yeares synce". He is now more than 66 years old and has no other calling. He has complained to the Earl of Derby, who has promised to intervene on his behalf. He asks Salisbury and the Lord Chancellor (to whom he has submitted a similar petition) to move the King that he be allowed to hold his former office, even without fee or profits, or be allotted another post in Chancery which, in the Lord Chancellor's opinion, he is competent to fill.—Undated. 1 p. (P. 930.)
	William Fells to the Earl of Salisbury.
[1605].	In return for his services in denouncing counterfeiters of coin, Salisbury had promised him a reward. He asks for letters to be directed to Sir Richard Molyneux that he authorize petitioner to enclose one hundred acres of waste within the Lordship of Derby in return for a reasonable rent.—Undated. ⅓ p. (P. 323.) [See Cal. S.P. Dom., 1603–10, p. 208, and H.M.C. Salisbury MSS, Vol. XVII, p. 127.]
	New College, Oxford.
[1605].	Two letters:
	(1) [The Earl of Salisbury] to the Wardens of New College.
	"I have been moved to intreate your favoures for the electinge of one John Heath, (fn. 11) a child of your College of Winchester, into Newcollege in Oxford, and am informed he is for tyme, learninge and manours as eligible as any other. I doe the rather request your best furtherance for hym bycause I understand he stands upon his last possibilytie, and yf by this your election he doth not speed he is in danger to be turned out of his course, wherin he hath spent all his youth. For which causes, and for that I wish well to the forwardnes to that scholler in particular, I doe earnestly intreate you to nominate hym in a speedinge place."—Undated.
	Draft in another hand. Copies to be sent to the Wardens of the New College, Winchester College, and to the rest of the electors to those colleges. 1 p.
	(2) [The Earl of Salisbury] to the Bishop of Winchester.
	"The Lady Marquesse of Northampton hath intreated me to be a meanes to preferre one John Heath, a child of Winchester College, into Newcollege in Oxford. I am informed that he is fitt both for tyme, learninge and manners, and that my Lady Marquesse doth much affect to bring hym to the perfection of that course wherin she was his first meanes to place hym. And that yf he speed not now, there will be no hope of that purpose by reason of the Statuts of those Colleges.
	I understand your Lordships interest in those elections is such as that yf he hath your speciall favour he cannot miscarry. Therefore I earnestlie intreate your Lordship to effect that for me, as farre as you may, which my good Lady Marquesse intreateth at my hands.—Undated. Draft in another hand. 1 p. (General 74/7.)
	The Complaints of the Spanish Ambassador and of the States General.
[1605].	"That many officers of Companies are come to take up soldiers for supplies of their bandes in Holland.
	That the course held in the same is so publicq both in the levying them and the transporting with troupes and ships full, as it can not but be construed that it is done by adress of the Kings Ma^ty and the State.
	That Mons^r Caron hath order, when this supplying of Companies is done, to erect some 10 or 12 new Companies either here at London or in the countrey elswhere. [Marginal note in the Earl of Salisbury's hand: There shalbe no levys in publick.]
	That many English ships under cullor of merchandise goe into Holland where they become men of warr and receave some few Dutch mariners amongst them, and soe goe with commission of reprisall from Count Maurice to the coasts of Spaine, where they take and spoile many of the King of Spaines subjects, which is directly against the Treatye that wee shall not assist each others ennemys with any warlyke provision either of ships or other materials.
	That the States send divers of their owne ships all manned with English under some Dutch capten or officers on the coast of Spaine, who under cullor of being English committ more spoiles uppon the Spaniards then heretofore was done in tyme of warre.
	That the States men of warr are not onely suffred to take and spoile such English merchants ships as goe from England to the Archdukes portes, whereby they cutt of all the benefytt which by the peace is to come to the Archdukes; but also that the States are suffred, yf any ship of Dunkerke be in any of the portes of England, to come and besiedg the same even in the English portes. So as the Archdukes ships have no meanes to returne homewards but must starve in the portes or els be taken at the goeing out, which is against the article whereby is granted free access and recesse into each others portes.
	That the States men of warr having taken any prises or prisonners on the coaste of Spaine are permitted and receaved in the harbours of England without seasure made on such prises or restitution of prisonners.
	The States complaints
	That the Archdukes men of warr are suffered to linger in the portes of England without any necessary occasion, of purpose to spie any shipping of the States coming or goeing forth, to intercepte the same; and that it is an usuall practise of these small men of warr of Dunkerke, when they come into one porte of England and find no pray there, they slippe into an other and so range from porte to porte onely of purpose to intercept the merchants ships of the United Provinces.
	That divers English and Scottish ships and barkes resorting to the Archdukes portes, these take in lading for Spaine and so claime to be free from being searched or intercepted by the Hollanders, which is directly against the poinct of neutrality.
	That the Count of Arenberg geveth as well comission to English ships to serve against the Hollanders as Count Maurice doth against Spaine or the Archdukes.
	That the Archdukes hath captains and officers here to make leavys of soldiers in London as well as the States have their officers.
	That the States men of warr having taken some prises from the coasts of Spaine or the Indies and bringing them along the narrow seas towards Holland, yf peradventure by tempest or for provision of necessaries they are constrained to putt into the roades or havens of England, ought not de jure to be arrested or staied, much less their prises to be taken from them.
	That the Archdukes men of warr have taken and dayly doe take within his Ma^tys havens and roades, divers of the States shipping and goodes, even to the value of 10,000¹ sterlin and upwards; for which as yet no restitution hath ben made, notwithstanding any interposition from his Ma^ty."—Undated. Endorsed: "Complaints of the Spanish Ambassador and of the States." 3½ pp. (124. 155.) [See H.M.C. Salisbury MSS, Vol. XVII, pp. 197 and 253.]
	Verses.
[1605].	A poem in Latin dedicated to James I, accompanied by a verse in English composed in honour of Anne of Denmark and Prince Henry. It runs as follows: "And you, renowned queene and prince Take part in schollers toyes; The mother of our future hopes, Hope of our future joyes. The goodly vine, faire olive branch To highest Britaine Cedar, Next collaterall, first subordinate, In honor of the sceptre, To you I chandge my muse and tongue Our duetyes to present. But Muses, tongues and heartes accord In welcomes full consent." —Undated. Endorsed: "1605. Oxford. To be digested." 1 p. (140. 97.)
	The Dean and Chapter of Chester to the Earl of Salisbury.
[1605].	They complain that Hugh Glasier, a gentleman of Chester, and one of their principal tenants, has refused to pay his due rent for some years. This action has so impoverished them that "neither our Societie or Officers can receive their stipends in due tyme nor our church gett oute of debt". They first sued him in the Exchequer Court at Chester where a decree was awarded against him, but which he chose to ignore. He then promised verbally to discharge his rents but violated his promises. When further legal proceedings were taken, no lawyer would appear on their behalf "because he sitteth in the Vice-Chamberlaines place daily as judge". Glasier then proposed to seal bonds for the payment of the monies, but promptly forgot about them. "So that unlesse we wold see our Companie dissolved and our church ruined before our faces, the debt is so accrued that we have none other remedie but the highest authoritie, that is by humble petition to his Ex^ent Ma^tie to request a redresse of this unkind wrong." Hearing that Glasier is in some manner dependent upon Salisbury, petitioners have decided, upon the advice of the Dean, before submitting their petition to the King, to ask Salisbury either to order Glasier to pay his debts or to authorize them to proceed with their petition.—Undated. Endorsed: "1604 [sic]. Deane and Chapter of Chester to my Lord." ½ p. (90. 53.) [See H.M.C. Salisbury MSS, Vol. XVII, p. 628.]
	Cranborne.
1605.	Terrier of Cranborne manor undertaken by John Norden in 1605 for Robert Cecil, Earl of Salisbury. On the first page there is a plan and elevation of the manor house, and the terrier provides full details of the tenants, their holdings and tenures, together with 21 maps. Twenty of the latter appear to be more detailed sections of the large scale survey map inscribed by Norden and dated 1605. (CPM supplementary 18.)
	Cranborne.
1605.	Plan of the manor of Cranborne, with a list of tenants, the acreage of their holdings and the nature of their tenures.— 1605. 1 sheet. (CPM supplementary 71.)
	Roger Howe to the Earl of Salisbury.
[c. 1605].	William Watson, his servant, has been imprisoned in the Inquisition House in Portugal, and upon a recent petition Salisbury was pleased to convey the information to the Spanish Ambassador, and persuade him to write to Spain and Portugal for his release. This has not been done, and the Spanish Ambassador has advised petitioner to obtain letters from Salisbury to the English Ambassador in Spain to press for his release. He therefore asks Salisbury to provide him with such letters.—Undated. ½ p. (P. 757.) [See PRO, State Papers Spain (S.P. 94), Vol. 12, fol. 202b.]
	Francis Honyng to the Earl of Salisbury.
[? 1605].	He is the Deputy-Porter for the Council of the Marches of Wales, and is held responsible for the safe keeping of those committed to his custody. John Farley of Hereford and Walter Witherley of Gloucester were two such persons put in his charge, but a year ago they commenced an action against him in the Court of King's Bench for alleged false imprisonment. He has answered their charges, but the case is to be debated in the court on the 25th of the present month. Since the King's prerogative is involved, he asks Salisbury to take the necessary measures to preserve it from any prejudice.—Undated. ½ p. (P. 546.)
	Francis Honyng to the King.
[? 1605].	He is the Deputy-Porter for the Council of the Marches of Wales, and is under an obligation to detain in custody all persons committed to his charge by the Lord President and Council until they are officially released. He complains about John Farley of co. Hereford and Walter Witherley of co. Gloucester, who were placed in his charge. About a year ago, taking advantage of the dispute between the Court of King's Bench and the Council, they began suits against him for alleged wrongful imprisonment, basing them on the Statute of Magna Carta and commencing them in the King's name as well as their own. Petitioner answered their charge, but the case has now been brought to a demurrer, in which the royal prerogative and the jurisdiction of the Council of the Marches in Herefordshire and Gloucestershire are involved. The matter has often been discussed by the Privy Council and Parliament, but despite this Farley and Witherley have persuaded their counsel to request and obtain a day on which to argue the case. Since the King's counsel cannot speak in defence of the royal prerogative, inasmuch as the cases were begun in the King's name, petitioner asks that the situation be dealt with in such a way that the King's prerogative be not prejudiced nor himself molested.—Undated. ¾ p. (P. 1074.) [See Cal. S.P. Dom., 1603–10, p. 181.]
	Richard Haydock to the Earl of Salisbury.
[? 1605].	He asks to be protected by Salisbury against the King's displeasure "concerning such slipps as have improvidently escaped his pen in that treatise which he commended unto your Honors hands, by your commandement, never presuming that any thing therin should stand save what was by your wisdome ratified; whoe attendeth (as a longe time he hath) to add, diminish or alter what shalbe judged most requisite for plenary satisfaction to the world, it being the thing he most desireth."—Undated. 1 p. (P. 1264.) [See Cal. S.P. Dom., 1603–10, pp. 212–13.]
	John Crane to the Earl of Salisbury.
[? 1605].	He refers to a former petition for permission to convey his pension to another person, and to Salisbury's answer that, "it was unreasonable to convert olde mens pentions to younge men". Petitioner has now chosen William Vernon, who is as old as he is, and has served for 30 years at Berwick. He prays that Salisbury will extend his favour to Vernon, otherwise petitioner cannot escape imprisonment.—Undated. ½ p. (P. 352.) [See H.M.C. Salisbury MSS, Vol. XVII, p. 574.]
	John Parker to the Earl of Salisbury.
[? 1605].	On February 12, 1605, the King granted petitioner the reversion of an almsroom within the collegiate church of St. Peter's Westminster. There is now an almsroom which has been unoccupied for three quarters of a year, for the reason that the persons who had the next grant of it have been carefully examined by the Dean of Westminster and rejected since they were not in need of charitable maintenance. Petitioner has submitted a plea to the King for his admittance to the place, and begs Salisbury to support it. He has no means of livelihood except as a water carrier, which he has carried on for the past eight years with the assistance of his dog, but is now too old, infirm and blind to continue with it.—Undated. ½ p. (P. 592.) [See Cal. S.P. Dom., 1603–10, p. 197.]
	The Preachers of Ripon Church to the Earl of Salisbury.
[? 1605].	They request that a date be determined for the final hearing of the case which has been referred to him amongst others. They have been ordered to attend the business by the Lord Treasurer, but in the meantime a great number of people have been deprived of their ministry. They appeal to him to have the matter settled expeditiously.—Undated. Signed: Moses Fouler, Christopher Lyndall, William Barker, William Beau. 1 p. (P. 2018.) [See H.M.C. Salisbury MSS, Vol. XVII, p. 343.]
	The Merchants of the North to the Privy Council.
[? 1605].	They provide details of the Customs duties which have been imposed upon coarse cloths exported from York, Hull and Newcastle upon Tyne, and adduce reasons why they should be granted certain concessions.—Undated. 1 p. (P. 2099.)
	The Merchants of York, Hull and Newcastle upon Tyne to the Earl of Salisbury.
[? 1605].	They request him that, if their bill is not accepted in Parliament, he intervene on their behalf with the King for a privy seal similar to that which they had in the time of the late Queen Elizabeth. They solicit this favour in view of the long and expensive suit which they have prosecuted, and of the interests of the large number of people who depend on the cloth industry for their livelihood in the North. There is nothing to be hoped for or expected from the farmers of the Customs "who neither respect the honor of his Ma^tie nor the good of the common wealth, but only theire owne lucre and gaine for the tyme of theire lease."—Undated. ½ p. (P. 2070.) [See H.M.C. Salisbury MSS, Vol. XVII, p. 586.]
	—to the Earl of Salisbury.
[? 1605].	Petitioner asks Salisbury to write to the Lord Chancellor that he issue an extraregnum against Gabriel Fernandez and Gomez d'Avila, Portuguese merchants resident in London, and appoint commissioners to examine them and oblige them to give an account of the goods of Matthew de Renzi. They have hitherto refused to do so, thereby prejudicing the interests of Renzi's creditors to whom he wishes to give satisfaction but cannot do so except in this manner.—Undated. Endorsed: "Mattheo Rienzi." ⅓ p. (P. 1193.)
	The Creditors of Matthew de Renzi to the Earl of Salisbury.
[? 1605].	Salisbury wrote to the Lord Mayor of London to look for certain wares sent to Matthew de Renzi from abroad, and to sequestrate them until such time as their lawful ownership was established. Certain merchandise have been seized which bear the mark of Martin de la Faile, a baron living under the government of the Archduke, on the grounds that they belong to some of his subjects. Petitioners have gone beyond the original intentions of Salisbury's order, for they have transported these goods from the place where they were taken. They have also begun a suit for them in the name of John de Walle, a merchant of Amsterdam and no subject of the Archduke's. It is apparent that the name of Martin de la Faile, he being a baron, was used to add to the security of the goods in transit. Petitioners, who are Englishmen, request that they be allowed to deal by ordinary course of law with John de Walle.—Undated. ¾ p. (P. 1138.) [See H.M.C. Salisbury MSS, Vol. XVII, p. 594.]
	Anne Somerville to the Earl of Salisbury.
[? 1605].	The King has referred her suit, concerning a pension of £50 annually for life, to Salisbury and the Privy Council. The prosecution of the suit has reduced her to great poverty, but in view of the fact that her sister has been given a similar pension, (fn. 12) she asks Salisbury to support her petition.—Undated. ½ p. (P. 1059.)
	Edward Lylle to the Earl of Salisbury.
[? 1605].	Salisbury had been pleased to speak to the Venetian Ambassadors then in England about a case affecting Hugh Whitbrooke, and to discuss it in letters to the English Ambassador in Venice. These letters were conveyed by a messenger to Venice last July, and he has since returned with the information that if the King sent a word to the Signory of Venice, the matter would be effected. He requests Salisbury to procure the requisite letters from the King.—Undated. ½ p. (P. 316.) [See Cal. S.P. Venetian, 1603–7, pp. 272 and 352–3.]
	Allen Maingard, Servan and Lewes Grave of St. Malo to the Privy Council.
[? 1605].	Their ship was seized at sea in 1601, when it was sailing from Spain with a cargo valued at £4000, by the Pearl of Weymouth, owned by William Walton and Thomas Geere, and captained by Edward Veale. Petitioners commenced suit in the Court of Admiralty for the restitution of ship and cargo, and after two and a half years, judgment was given in their favour. Walton and Geere appealed against it, despite the protest made by the French Ambassador based on a Royal proclamation against such appeals, and the matter was referred to a special commission whose members were Lord Kinloss, Sir John Fortescue and others. The commission upheld the validity of the original judgment, and ordered Sir Julius Caesar, who had been the judge in the case, to grant execution for the recovery of money and legal charges. Caesar had only allowed £13 for the expenses, although petitioners had disbursed £300 in prosecuting their suit over four years. Walton and Geere have obtained a further prohibition of the execution of this latest order. Petitioners request that the Council authorize them to proceed immediately with the execution of the commission's directive.—Undated. ½ p. (P. 305.)
	Matthew Clayton, Elizabeth his wife, and Margaret Bowman, widow, to the Earl of Salisbury.
[c. 1605].	Edward Taylor, father of the said Elizabeth and Margaret who are his co-heirs, was seised of the half of a tenement in Westminster called the Brewhouse. Because of his debts he was forced to mortgage his interest in the property to William Strachey for £187, the land itself being worth over £1000 at that time. When Taylor failed to discharge his debt on the day stipulated, Strachey occupied the premises and evicted him and his daughters. Since then Strachey has died, but petitioners can obtain no relief from his heirs. They ask that Salisbury hear their case or refer it to some whose integrity can be relied upon to deal justly with them, since they themselves have not the means to take legal proceedings. (fn. 13) —Undated. ¾ p. (P. 455.)
	Jean Jacques Flechamer to—
[1605 or before].	Some three months ago the late Treasurer to the Archdukes sent various items of furniture to Dunkirk to be shipped from there to Spain for the use of Don Juan Carillo, resident secretary to the Archdukes at the Court of Spain. These were inadvertently transported to London, where they are now being detained in the Customs House and a duty demanded for them. Flechamer, who has succeeded as Treasurer, requests that a letter of explanation be sent to the Earl of Salisbury, so that he may order the Customs officials to deliver the furniture to Matthew Renzi, (fn. 14) merchant stranger, resident in London, and that the latter may forward them to their proper destination without payment of duty.—Undated. French. Endorsed: "A request of the Treasurer of the Archduks household." ½ p. (129. 5.)
	Oliver Lloyd to the Earl of Salisbury.
[1605 or after].	He is a servant to Thomas Graves, Keeper of the Council Chamber, and has spent a long time in that Chamber, a part of it in the service of Humphrey Rogers before entering Graves's employment. He has never sought preferment, but hearing that Thomas Mathew, Salisbury's servant, has recently died, he asks to be appointed to his place.—Undated. ½ p. (P. 1585.) [See Cal. S.P. Dom., 1603–10, p. 215.]
	Deborah Mervyn to the Earl of Salisbury.
[? 1605 or after].	She is writing on behalf of her son, a King's ward. (fn. 15) She entreated her brother Dunch to solicit from Salisbury a lease of a manor in Somerset, inherited by her son from his grandmother, recently deceased. She asked him to pay £150 to any persons recommended by Salisbury, and to recoup himself out of the profits of that manor. Dunch was directed by Perceval to procure a survey of the manor. He produced the required document, but has been told that Salisbury will give his answer next term. Her son has only £6:13:4 a year, and petitioner hopes that Salisbury will augment it in this manner.—Undated. Endorsed: "Lady Mervyn to my Lord." Seal. 1 p. (P. 1974.)
	Wardship.
[Before 1606].	Thomas Snelling declares that John Snelling, a ward, has an estate of £40 a year, and that after his grandmother's death he will inherit property worth £50. He has nine younger brothers and sisters who are to be provided for. There can be little profit from his land, since he is within three months of attaining his majority. (fn. 16) He is Thomas Snelling's next neighbour, "and one to whome I would be very desirous to plesure without seking any profit to my selfe".—Undated. Endorsed: "Sir William Strowde. June. Snelling." ½ p. (P. 2217.)
	Medical Prescription.
[? Before 1606].	Prescription signed by Richard Smythe and Thomas Langton. (fn. 17) —Undated. Endorsed: "Mr Dr Smyth and Mr Dr Langhtons opinion." 1 p. (200. 134.)
	John, Bishop of Oxford, to the Earl of Salisbury.
[Before January, 1605–6].	The late Queen Elizabeth, in compensation for certain lands appropriated by her from the Bishopric of Oxford, granted by letters patent in 1590 the rectory of Burford and the chapel of Fulbrook, formerly demised to Mary Haman and William Johnson for the term of their lives. This lease came into the possession of William Moseley, who is now trying to persuade the King's Commissioners for Leases to award a new grant of the rectory to Clement Paman and John Mallos, (fn. 18) rather than procure one from petitioner with whom he should have compounded. To prevent any loss of the premises to petitioner and successors, he requests that order be given for the stay of that grant at the signet and privy seal, until petitioner produces proof of his lawful title to the premises in the next legal term.—Undated. ¾ p. (P. 1589.)
	Thomas Higginson to the Earl of Salisbury.
[Before January 9, 1605–6].	During the time of his recent employment with Proclamations in the King's special service, he was credibly informed that certain prominent Catholics in Shropshire and Flintshire met together on the first day of Parliament. Their names were Richard Banister of Wenne, Francis Manering of Welshampton, Richard Morgan of Betfield, who was regarded as the priest who sang mass for them, and one Kinaston, of Braydon Heath. They assembled at Manering's house, and newly-shod horses were sent to them at that rendezvous. It was also reported to him that Thomas Higginson, who had converted all his means into money, joined them there, and that it was believed Robert Winter (fn. 19) and Stephen Littleton were being hidden and protected by them. Petitioner considered it his duty to acquaint Salisbury with these reported items of information.—Undated. ½ p. (P. 347.)