719 Winter v Hewes

The Court of Chivalry 1634-1640.

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

Citation:

Richard Cust, Andrew Hopper, '719 Winter v Hewes', 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/719-winter-hewes [accessed 20 July 2024].

Richard Cust, Andrew Hopper, '719 Winter v Hewes', in The Court of Chivalry 1634-1640. Edited by Richard Cust, Andrew Hopper, British History Online, accessed July 20, 2024, https://www.british-history.ac.uk/no-series/court-of-chivalry/719-winter-hewes.

Richard Cust, Andrew Hopper. "719 Winter v Hewes". The Court of Chivalry 1634-1640. Ed. Richard Cust, Andrew Hopper, British History Online. Web. 20 July 2024. https://www.british-history.ac.uk/no-series/court-of-chivalry/719-winter-hewes.

In this section

719 WINTER V HEWES

Henry Winter of Sandford Orcas, co. Somerset, gent v Richard Hewes of Henstridge, co. Somerset

December 1639 - February 1640

Abstract

Winter complained that before a company of gentlemen Hewes had said that he was a better gentleman than Winter, that Winter 'was a fellow that came forth of his countrey, noe man knowing from whence he came, nor whither he would [go]'; and that if Winter 'had not layen with his wife in her former husband's time, he had never had her'. Hewes also allegedly called him 'a beggarly fellowe [who] durst not goe home for feare of bayliffs'. Process was granted on 16 December 1639 and both parties entered bonds; but nothing further survives.

Initial proceedings

2/61, Petition

'Your petitioner and divers other gentlemen being in company together, one Richard Hewes, yeoman, intending into the roome, and intruding to putt a publique affront and disgrace upon the petitioner, entered into a tearmes of comparison with him, affirming that he was a better gentleman than the petitioner; and further said that your petitioner was a fellow that came forth of his countrey, noe man knowing from whence he came nor whither he would [go]; and that if your petitioner had not layen with his wife in her former husbands time he had never had her; And further said that your petitioner was a beggarly fellowe and durst not goe home for feare of bayliffs, with other opprobrious speeches, whereby the petitioner is insufferablie wounded in his reputation, and being a gentleman of an ancient discent, capable of your lordship's reliefe in the Court Military.'

Petitioned that Hewes be brought to answer.

Maltravers granted process on 16 December 1639.

2/62, Plaintiff's bond

18 December 1639

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

Signed by Henry Winter.

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

2/2, Defendant's bond

22 February 1640

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

Signed by Richard Mawdesley of Lyon's Inn, co. Middlesex, gent, on behalf of Hewes.

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

Notes

Neither party appeared in the Somerset Visitations of 1623 or 1672: F. T. Colby (ed.), The Visitation of the County of Somerset in the year 1623 (Publications of the Harleian Society, 11, 1876); G. D. Squibb (ed.), The Visitation of Somerset and the City of Bristol, 1672 (Publications of the Harleian Society, new series, 11, 1992).

Documents

  • Initial proceedings
    • Petition: 2/61 (16 Dec 1639)
    • Plaintiff's bond: 2/62 (18 Dec 1639)
    • Defendant's bond: 2/2 (22 Feb 1640)

People mentioned in the case

  • Hewes, Richard
  • Howard, Henry, baron Maltravers
  • Mawdesley, Richard, gent
  • Watson, John
  • Winter, Henry, gent

Places mentioned in the case

  • Middlesex
    • Lyon's Inn
    • Westminster
  • Somerset
    • Henstridge
    • Sandford Orcas

Topics of the case

  • allegation of bankruptcy
  • comparison
  • fornication
  • inns of court