250 Gray v Carr

The Court of Chivalry 1634-1640.

This free content was Born digital and sponsored by AHRC and University of Birmingham. CC-NC-BY.


In this section


Edward Gray of Howick, co. Northumberland, esq v Robert Carr of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, co. Northumberland, gent

November 1638 - January 1639


The cause of Gray's complaint against Carr remains unknown, but it appears to have been unsuccessful as in November 1638 Gray was ordered to pay damages and Carr awarded expenses. [For the counter suit, see cause 98].

Summary of proceedings

Dr Duck acted as counsel for Gray and Dr Eden for Carr. On 6 November 1638 Carr was warned to appear and Dr Duck was to give the libel at the next sitting. On 20 November the cause was to be dismissed if Dr Duck did not give the libel. Duck delivered the libel for Gray, but Gray was to pay damages by 20 January 1639, and Carr was awarded expenses, Dr Duck dissenting. The cause was to meet again in the second session of Hilary term.


Edward Gray of Howick, esq (d. 1653) was the son of Philip Gray of Howick, esq. Edward married the daughter of Martin Fenwick of Kenton. Robert Carr of Newcastle-upon-Tyne was the third son of Raphe Carr, a merchant of that town, and Isabell, daughter of Ralph Jenison, another Newcastle merchant.

J. Foster (ed.), Pedigrees recorded at the Heralds' Visitations of the county of Northumberland, 1615, 1666 (Newcastle-upon-Tyne, 1891), pp. 28, 61.


  • Proceedings
    • Proceedings before Maltravers: R.19, fos. 454r-468v (6 Nov 1638)
    • Proceedings before Maltravers: R.19, fos. 400v-412v (20 Nov 1638)

People mentioned in the case

  • Carr, Isabell
  • Carr, Raphe, merchant
  • Carr, Robert, gent
  • Duck, Arthur, lawyer
  • Eden, Thomas, lawyer
  • Fenwick, Martin
  • Gray, Edward, esq (also Grey)
  • Gray, Philip, esq (also Grey)
  • Howard, Henry, baron Maltravers
  • Jenison, Isabell
  • Jenison, Ralph, merchant

Places mentioned in the case

  • Northumberland
    • Howick
    • Kenton
    • Newcastle-upon-Tyne

Topics of the case

  • defendant victory