398 Madeson v Holt

The Court of Chivalry 1634-1640.

This free content was Born digital. CC-NC-BY.

Citation:

Richard Cust, Andrew Hopper, '398 Madeson v Holt', in The Court of Chivalry 1634-1640, ed. Richard Cust, Andrew Hopper, British History Online https://www.british-history.ac.uk/no-series/court-of-chivalry/398-madeson-holt [accessed 27 July 2024].

Richard Cust, Andrew Hopper, '398 Madeson v Holt', in The Court of Chivalry 1634-1640. Edited by Richard Cust, Andrew Hopper, British History Online, accessed July 27, 2024, https://www.british-history.ac.uk/no-series/court-of-chivalry/398-madeson-holt.

Richard Cust, Andrew Hopper. "398 Madeson v Holt". The Court of Chivalry 1634-1640. Ed. Richard Cust, Andrew Hopper, British History Online. Web. 27 July 2024. https://www.british-history.ac.uk/no-series/court-of-chivalry/398-madeson-holt.

In this section

398 MADESON V HOLT

William Madeson of Rickleton, co. Durham, gent v William Holt of Harraton, co. Durham, yeoman

December 1637

Abstract

Madeson complained that within the previous six months, Holt had given him the lie, and called him a 'cheater, cosener and base gentleman'.Ralph Pudsey of Stapleton, Yorkshire, gent, who featured in a number of other cases, entered bond to prosecute the cause on behalf of Madeson on 5 December 1637. No indication of sentence survives.

Initial proceedings

3/35, Petition to Arundel

'The petitioner, being a gentleman of armes and antient descent, was within sixe months last past much abused by many evill and base words given him by one William Holt of Harroton, yeoman. Holt, amongst other base speeches, in a very opprobrious manner giving the petitioner the lye in his throate, cheater, cosener, and base gentleman, without any provocation, the petitioner humbly prayeth your honor would be pleased to grant forth process out of your honor's Court Military to call Holt to answer him in a legall course for the abuse and the petitioner shall daily pray andc.'

Duck desired Dethick to grant process.

4 December 1637.

Signed by Arthur Duck.

3/36, Plaintiff's bond

5 December 1637

Bound to appear 'in the Court in the painted Chamber within the Pallace of Westminster'.

Signed by Ralph Pudsey of Stapleton, co. York, gent, on behalf of Madeson.

Sealed, subscribed and delivered in the presence of Humphrey Terrick.

Notes

William Madeson of Rickleton may have been the William Maddisone who was a younger son of Ralphe Maddisone of Unthank, and Joan, daughter of Richard Blundell of Crosby, co. Lancaster. [For Ralph Pudsey see causes 124, 546-549].

J. Foster (ed.), Pedigrees Recorded at the Visitations of the County Palatine of Durham, 1575, 1615, 1666 (London, 1887), p. 221.

Documents

  • Initial proceedings
    • Petition to Arundel: 3/35 (4 Dec 1637)
    • Plaintiff's bond: 3/36 (5 Dec 1637)

People mentioned in the case

  • Blundell, Joan
  • Blundell, Richard
  • Dethick, Gilbert
  • Duck, Arthur, lawyer
  • Holt, William
  • Howard, Thomas, earl of Arundel and Surrey
  • Madeson, William (also Maddisone)
  • Maddisone, Ralph
  • Pudsey, Ralph, gent
  • Terrick, Humphrey

Places mentioned in the case

  • Durham
    • Harraton
    • Rickleton
    • Unthank
  • Lancashire
    • Crosby
  • Middlesex
    • Westminster
  • Yorkshire, North Riding
    • Stapleton

Topics of the case

  • allegation of cheating
  • denial of gentility
  • giving the lie
PreviousTable of contentsNext