283 Haslewood v Pratt

The Court of Chivalry 1634-1640.

This free content was Born digital. All rights reserved.

'283 Haslewood v Pratt', in The Court of Chivalry 1634-1640, (, ) pp. . British History Online https://www.british-history.ac.uk/no-series/court-of-chivalry/283-haslewood-pratt [accessed 5 March 2024]

In this section


Francis Haslewood of Offenham, co. Worcester, esq v Edmond Pratt and Thomas Dangerfield

No date


Haslewood complained that, although he was unarmed, Pratt and Dangerfield had assaulted and wounded him at Pershore, Worcestershire, on a market day on 17 May last. Haslewood added that Dangerfield then challenged him to a duel, vowing that if he refused, he would 'proclaime him a coward'. Pratt and Dangerfield denied the challenge and assault, admitting only that they had uttered 'words of dislike' against Haslweood for a wrong he had done them. They petitioned Arundel to refer the cause to the arbitration of 'gentlemen of quality' in Worcestershire, because 'in this contagious time', their witnesses were afraid of travelling to London. No further proceedings survive.

Initial proceedings

EM304, Petition

'Sheweth unto your lordship that where of late, vizt. the seventeenth day of May last one Edmond Pratt and Thomas Dangerfield, being men of loose and meane qualitie, did in the towne of Pershore in the countie of Worcester, on a markett day there, make an assault and affray upon the petitioner, being then unarmed, whereby they not only then put him in danger of his life, but also, after the same day, challenged Francis to fight with Dangerfield who vowed that if he refused the same Dangerfield would proclaime him a coward, with divers other further and disgracefull speeches uttered against your petitioner. In regard whereof, and for avoiding future mischeifes likely to ensue such insolent and exorbitant abuses,' he petitioned for the 'punishment of such presumptuous and incorrigible disturbers of the peace'.

No date.

No signatures.

EM305, Defendants' petition

'Whereas Francis Haselwood, esq., procured your honor's warrant against your petitioners by some supposed misbehaviour used by your supplicants against him, whereupon your supplicants gave bond for their appearance before your Honor at this time.

Humbly sheweth unto your Honor that your petitioners having sundry witnesses that were present when the words which were spoken by your supplicants were delivered, against which Mr Hasselwood taketh exception, and who will depose that none of the same tended to any matter of challenge or outrageous misbehaviour, but only some words of dislike against him for some wrong he had done against your petitioners respectively, which Mr Hasselwood freely acknowledged and your supplicants rested fully satisfied, without any blowe or challenge, or the least assault made or offered in revenge thereof. Which witnesses in this contagious time are fearfull to travill to the Citty of London to deliver their testimony before your honor for your supplicants' justification.

Wherefore your supplicants humbly beseech your honor to be pleased to refer the examination of the premises to some gentlemen of quality in the county of Worcester, where the said parties and witnesses dwell, who, by consent of parties may either reconcile them, or certifie your honor the state of the business, and the truth of your supplicants' behaviour.'

No date.

No signatures.


None of the parties appeared in the 1634 Visitation of Worcestershire: A. T. Butler (ed.), The Visitation of Worcestershire, 1634 (Publications of the Harleian Society, 90, 1938).


  • Initial proceedings
    • Petition: EM304 (no date)
    • Defendant's petition: EM305 (no date)

People mentioned in the case

  • Dangerfield, Thomas
  • Haslewood, Francis, esq (also Haselwood, Hasselwood)
  • Howard, Thomas, earl of Arundel and Surrey
  • Pratt, Edmond

Places mentioned in the case

  • Worcestershire
    • Offenham
    • Pershore

Topics of the case

  • allegation of cowardice
  • arbitration
  • assault
  • challenge to a duel
  • plague