664 Vincent v Longmore

The Court of Chivalry 1634-1640.

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

Citation:

Richard Cust, Andrew Hopper, '664 Vincent v Longmore', 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/664-vincent-longmore [accessed 21 July 2024].

Richard Cust, Andrew Hopper, '664 Vincent v Longmore', in The Court of Chivalry 1634-1640. Edited by Richard Cust, Andrew Hopper, British History Online, accessed July 21, 2024, https://www.british-history.ac.uk/no-series/court-of-chivalry/664-vincent-longmore.

Richard Cust, Andrew Hopper. "664 Vincent v Longmore". The Court of Chivalry 1634-1640. Ed. Richard Cust, Andrew Hopper, British History Online. Web. 21 July 2024. https://www.british-history.ac.uk/no-series/court-of-chivalry/664-vincent-longmore.

In this section

664 VINCENT V LONGMORE

William Vincent of Hascote, co. Stafford, gent v Thomas Longmore of Kinver, co. Stafford, yeoman

June - November 1637

Abstract

Vincent complained that Longmore had said that he had challenged him 'to meete him in the field but that he durst not.' Process was granted on 24 June 1637 and Vincent entered bond on 4 July; however, by 31 October 1637 the case had been dismissed, with Longmore awarded £20 expenses. [For another case against Longmore brought at the same time by John Whorwood, J.P., see cause 708].

Initial proceedings

3/156, Petition to Arundel and Maltravers

'Thomas Longmore of the parish of Envield gave out in speeches that he had challenged your petitioner to meete him in the field, but that he durst not.'

Petitioned that Longmore be brought to answer.

Maltravers granted process, 24 June 1637.

15/1i, Citation

Longmore to appear at the suit of Vincent for scandalous words provocative of a duel.

Dated: 24 June 1637

By special direction of Gilbert Dethick.

3/155, Plaintiff's bond

4 July 1637

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

Signed by Thomas Richards of Walsall, co. Stafford, gent, on behalf of Vincent.

Sealed, subscribed and delivered in the presence of John Watson.

Sentence / Arbitration

10/12/13, Defendant's bill of costs

Bill for defendant, total £7-10s-4d

Dated November 1637.

Signed by [illegible]

Summary of proceedings

Dr Lewin acted as counsel for Vincent and Dr Duck for Longmore. There were proceedings on 14 October and 15 November 1637, but on 31 October 1637 the cause was dismissed and the court heard a plea concerning expenses. Sir Henry Marten taxed the cause at £20. On 18 November 1637 the court was again required to hear the verdict of Sir Henry Marten on the expenses.

Notes

Neither party appeared in the Staffordshire Visitation of 1663-4: G. J. Armytage and W. H. Rylands (eds.), Staffordshire Pedigrees based on the Visitation of that County made by William Dugdale, 1663-4 (Publications of the Harleian Society, 63, 1912).

Documents

  • Initial proceedings
    • Petition to Arundel and Maltravers: 3/156 (24 Jun 1637)
    • Citation: 15/1i(24 Jun 1637)
    • Plaintiff's bond: 3/155 (4 Jul 1637)
  • Sentence / Arbitration
    • Defendant's bill of costs: 10/12/13 (Nov 1637)
  • Proceedings
    • Proceedings before Arundel: 8/26 (14 Oct 1637)
    • Proceedings before Maltravers: 8/28 (31 Oct 1637)
    • Proceedings before Marten: 7/20 (15 Nov 1637)
    • Proceedings before Maltravers: 8/29 (18 Nov 1637)

People mentioned in the case

  • Dethick, Gilbert, registrar
  • Duck, Arthur, lawyer
  • Howard, Henry, baron Maltravers
  • Howard, Thomas, earl of Arundel and Surrey
  • Lewin, William, lawyer
  • Longmore, Thomas, yeoman
  • Marten, Henry, knight
  • Richards, Thomas, gent
  • Vincent, William, gent
  • Watson, John
  • Whorwood, John, esq

Places mentioned in the case

  • Middlesex
    • Westminster
  • Staffordshire
    • Enville
    • Hascote
    • Kinver
    • Walsall

Topics of the case

  • allegation of cowardice
  • challenge to a duel
  • defendant victory
  • justice of the peace