Historical Collections of Private Passages of State: Volume 3, 1639-40. Originally published by D Browne, London, 1721.
This free content was digitised by double rekeying. All rights reserved.
Pasc. 4 Car.
Reade versus Penruddock & al.; Riot.
The Plaintiff and the Defendant Seymor being struggling together in the Field about a Distress which the said Defendant endeavoured to take of the Plaintiff's working Horses, five of the other Defendants went armed into the Field, and there riotously assaulted, beat, and wounded the Plaintiff, and dragged him on the Ground by the Hair of the Head; and for this Riot six of them were committed to the Fleet, one of them fined 40 l. the rest 20 l. apiece.
Attorn. Regis versus Mady Cler.; Scandal of the High Commission Court and the Judges thereof.; By an Answer and Rejoinder in the Court of Chancery.
The Defendant Mady being justly deprived by the Sentence of the High Commission Court of the Church of Blagden, one Parker was duly admitted to the said Parsonage, and enjoyed the same about seven Years, till Mady (pretending his Deprivation was reversed by King James's Pardon, and he thereby restored to be Parson as before) made several Entries; whereupon Parker, with others, was enforced to exhibit a Bill in Chancery against Mady, and others, to be relieved therein. And Mady in his answer thereunto (to the Scandal of the High Commission Court and Judges thereof) alledged that the Sentence there given against him was not in legal manner given, or upon sufficient proof, and that there was neither Articles, Libel, nor Allegation exhibited, nor Witnesses produced touching the Defendant's Irregularity to induce the Sentence of his Deprivation; and the said Defendant Mady in his Rejoinder in that Cause, did also scandalously set forth and alledge, that this Deprivation was so far from being legal, that it was a most illegal and irregular Sentence, contrary to the Ecclesiastical Common and Statute Laws of this Realm, and directly contrary to the Word of God: that he was deprived partly for irregularity in preaching, being suspended, whereas there was never any Suspension, nor Witnesses produced, nor Articles exhibited, and for Incorrigibility, which Incorrigibility had no warrant from the Law of God, or Man, and that he was unjustly deprived without desert: That the main Offence for which he was deprived, was not simply a breach of any of God's Commandments, forasmuch as it was for exercising his Function; that by the courses taken against him it was more than manifest that they sought not his Reformation, but Deprivation, that one of the Commissioners might have the bestowing thereof; and that for the effecting thereof there were divers Snares laid for him, which by the Wit of Man could not be avoided; that this Parsonage was taken from him merely by Injustice and Oppression, and contrary to the Laws of God and Man. And for this Scandal the Defendant was committed to the Fleet, fined 200 l. to acknowledge his Offence, and make his Submission to the High Commission Court, his Answer and Rejoinder to be taken from the File and cancelled, and that he shall in this Court publickly acknowledge his Sentence to be just.
Trin. 4 Car.
Brighouse versus Poole & al.; Riotous Assault and maiming the Plaintiff.; 500 l. damage.
The Defendant Sir German Poole bearing malice to the Plaintiff, and having vowed revenge, did, with intent to murder him, shoot two Pistols at him out at a Window, both which missing him, he gave a charge to two of his Servants that they should kill the Plaintiff wheresoever they met him, and swore he would have a Leg or an Arm of the Plaintiff; and the said Sir German, not long after meeting the Plaintiff in a Lane near the Parliament-Stairs at Westminster, justled him, and the Plaintiff passing by and taking it patiently,' Poole called to the Defendant Roby, and another Servant who then attended him, and commanded them to kill the Plaintiff; whereupon they persued him with their Swords drawn, and run him thro the Cloak between the Arm and the Body, and had like to have slain him before he perceived them; but upon the outcry of a Woman to look to himself, the Plaintiff drew his Sword, and so defended himself that they two could not hurt him, which Sir German perceiving, he likewise drew his Sword, and therewith cut and wounded the Plaintiff in his Arm, and bid him put that in his Sleeve; by reason whereof the Plaintiff lost the perfect use of his right Arm and Hand; and for this Sir German Poole and Roby were committed to the Fleet, Sir German fined 500 Marks, and to pay the Plaintiff 500 l. Damages, and Roby fined 100 l. Sir German bound to his good Behaviour during Life, and to pay Roby's Fine, if he be not able; and Roby to be also liable to the Damages, if Pool be not able to pay them.
Almond versus White & al.; Practice to procure the Escape of prisoners in Execution.
The Defendant Payn alias Fencer being Prisoners in Stafford Goal in Execution for Debt, and knowing no other way to free themselves practised with the Defendant Bunnington to work their escape, which they thus effected: Bunnington at a day and place by them appointed and agreed on, attended with Horses and Weapons safefy to convey and carry them away; and Payne and Blackmore knowing they were in readiness, Blackmore got the Under-Goaler, who kept the Keys of the Prison, to go with him into the under Goal for a Sheet of Paper, and there shut him up, and got away the Keys of the Prison, and then he and Payne opened the Prison-door and escaped, and they and Bunnington rid away together: and for this Payne and Bunnington were committed to the Fleet, and fined 100 l. apiece, and the Plaintiff left to the Law for his Damages, he having made proof of none here.
Mich. 4 Car.
Attor. Regis per Rel. Mlinard Esq; versus Rowe Gent.; Oppression.; Extortion in a High Constable.; Unjustly detaining his Majesty's Bay.; Affronting his Majesty's Commissioners 100 l. damage.; 10 l. restitution.
The Defendant Rowe being Head-Constable of Tavestock, and being one of the eight Men that had the ordering of the private Affairs of the Parish, took upon him to dispose of the Soldiers that were to be billetted in the said Town, and having conceived malice against one Fairchild, a Weaver of the said Town, he offered to place three Soldiers with the said Fairchild, who was willing to receive two of them, or to pay twelve Pence apiece a Week for their Entertainment elsewhere, but was unwilling to receive or billet any more; and hereupon the Defendant went to the said Fairchild's House with three Soldiers, and finding the door shut, sent for a Sledge, and endeavoured therewith to break open the Door; and the said Fairchild's Wife then opening the Door unto him, he thrust in the said three Soldiers, and told them they must there expect their Entertainment: And Fairchild's Wife then desiring to have but two of them, the Defendant threatned her that her Husband should be sent away for a Soldier, and that she should be hanged by martial Law, and thereupon procured a Warrant from one of the Commissioners for Billeting the said Soldiers, who dwell five or six Miles off at the said Fairchild's, but never acquainted the Commissioners, who lived in the said Town, therewith, and the Commissioners, who dwelt so far off to carry the said Fairechild and his Wife to Plymouth before the Commissioners for martial Law, and served his Wife therewith: But Fairechild for Fear ran out of the Country; and then, to make a peace and reconciliation between them, the Defendant extortiously demanded and received from Fairechild for a Composition, a piece of Kersey, worth 4 l. 10 s. and upon delivery thereof Fairechild was suffered to return to his House without further trouble upon the Warrant: The Defendant did also unlawfully detain and keep in his hands the Pay or Billet-money which he received from his Majesties Commissioners, to pay for the Billetting of divers Soldiers, Captains, and other Officers; and when complaint was made thereof to his Majesty's Commissioners; and that they sent several Precepts for him to come and give an account to them of the Money he had received; the Defendant disobeyed them, yet at last appeared upon their Warrant; and then, and there, in despiteful manner, reviled the Relator Maynard, being one of the Commissioners, and then sitting in Commission, tells him he went to Plymouth to tell Tales or Fables, and that he had cozened the Parish as little as the Relator had cozened the Earl of Bedford: And for these Offences he was committed to the Fleet, fined 500 Marks, bound to his good Behaviour a Year, disabled ever to be Constable after, to pay Fairechild for his Kersey 10 l. and 100 l. damage to Mr. Maynard, and acknowledge his Offence to the Relator in the Parish Church were he dwells.
Tayler versus Tolwyn & al.; Conspiracy to accuse the Plaintiff of a Rape.; Labouring of Jurors.
The Defendant Joan Faulk, with the privity and by the advice of the Defendant Tolwyn, did falsely and maliciously accuse the Plaintiff of a Rape, supposed to be by him committed upon the said Joan, and thereupon procured a Warrant for him from a Justice of Peace, and at his coming before him, the Defendant Joan retracted her Accusation; yet afterwards divers scandalous Speeches being by the Defendant divulged, accusing the Plaintiff thereof, the Plaintiff commenced his Action at Law against them for the said Scandal; but before the same was tried, they procured another Warrant against him, and got him bound over to answer it at the Assizes, where they procured a Bill of Indictment to be preferred against him, and to be prosecuted, whereupon the Plaintiff was acquitted; and Tolwyn before the Assizes laboured two of the Grand Jury to appear upon his Trial, telling them they should do Sir John Henningham a good turn, for that the Plaintiff had a great deal of Copy-hold that would come to him by Escheat, if the Plaintiff were convicted; and for this Conspiracy the Defendants were committed to the Fleet, Tolwyn fined 200 l. and Joan Faulk, then the Wife of Edmund Eaton, 100 l. both bound to their good behaviour during Life, and to acknowledge their Offences, and ask the Plaintiff forgiveness at the Assizes, Joan to be whipped, and Tolwyn, for labouring the Jurors, disabled ever to be of a Jury himself hereafter. But the Fine of Joan Faulk not to be levied upon the Lands or Goods of her now Husband, because they were married since the offence committed, but to be levied on her Estate after her Husband's Death.
Attor. Regis ore tenus versus Heron and Banier.; Going about the Country with false news to get Money by it.; Helping to change his name, when he confess'd himself guilty of Murder.; False accusation.
The Defendant Heron about Whitsontide last Loham in Cambridgeshire fell into acquaintance with the Defendant Banier, whom he never saw before, and falsely told him his name was Robert Rich, and that he was a Kinsman to the Earl of Warwick, and that he had killed the Duke of Buckingham in the King's Privy Chamber, and was glad to flee for it; and thereupon Banier entertained him, lent him Money, and called him his Cousin, and agreed that Heron, who then took upon him the name of Robert Rich, should be called John Henderson, and be said to come out of Kent, and to be Banter's Kinsman; but Banier never complained thereof to any Justice, whereby he might have been apprehended and punished, but let him depart when he knew his news was false; and Heron, upon examination before the Earl of Newcastle, did, by the name of Robert Savage, confess himself privy to the intention of Felton to murder the said Duke, and that Felton offered him Money to effect it, and told him if he would do it, there would be many to back him, and that he would provide him a Pistol and white Powder to effect it; and in that his Examination did accuse divers Noblemen, and other Persons of good Rank and Quality to be Conspirators with Felton to murder the said Duke, and to have moved him the said Heron to kill the Duke; and the said Heron upon an Examination taken before the Lord Keeper, and other the Lords of his Majesty's Privy Council, confessed he had conference with Felton concerning the said Murder, that Felton pressed him to give an Oath to keep his Counsel, and that he did take an Oath to that purpose; and therein doth likewise accuse some other noble and great Personages to have solicited him to murder the said Duke, and that at Huntingdon Assizes he was burnt in the shoulder for taking on him to be the Earl of Warwick; and that he also took upon him the name of Charles Percy, and was whipt for it in Sussex. And in the latter end of that Examination he confesseth, that all that he hath said in his several Examinations concerning the Lords and other Persons of Quality mentioned in his said Examinations is utterly false, and that he knows not Felton, nor that any thing contained in his Examination, taken before the Earl of Newcastle, is true, and that his name is not Savage, but Heron. And for this Banier was committed to the Fleet, fined 1000 l. and bound to his good behaviour during Life; and Heron was committed, fined 2000 l. to be whipt from the Fleet to Westminster, and be there set in the Pillory, with one of his Ears nailed and cut off, his Nostrils slit, his Face branded with the letter F in one Cheek, and the letter A in the other Cheek, for a false Accuser of himself and others: And at another time to be whipt from the Fleet to Charing-Cross, and be there set in the Pillory, with his other Ear nailed and cut off, and from thence be carried to Bridewell, there to be kept at work during life.
Huet versus Overy & al. Riotous carrying away of Corn.
George Overy, upon pretence of Title, came with the other Defendants, and eighteen or twenty more, to a parcel of ground where the Plaintiff's Wife with others were reaping of Wheat, and there bound up the Wheat that was reaped, reaped the rest, and violently carried it all away, threw down the Plaintiffs Wife when she opposed them, and struck the Tythingman with a Truncheon when he required them to keep the Peace, and refused to shew any right to the Corn, altho he were offered to have it quietly if he could shew any title to it; and for this they were all committed, George Overy fined 40 l. the rest 20 l. apiece, and the Principal to pay it if they be not able.
Attor. Regis ore tenus versus Sir Edward Herne Kt. a Justice of the Peace.; Whipping a Patent-gatherer, contrary to Law.; 50 l. damage to one no party to the Suit.
His Majesty having granted Letters Patents under his Great Seal for a Collection to be made for the repair of the Port and Haven of Rye in Sussex, one Luxford a Merchant was lawfully deputed to make the Collection in Lincolnshire, who coming to the Town where the Defendant dwelt, and was a Justice of the Peace, the Churchwardens carried him before the Defendant, and the Defendant, notwithstanding the said Luxford shewed him the Letters Patents under the Great Seal, and his Deputation under the Hand and Seal of Sir Thomas Sackvile, and other Justices of the Peace of the County of Sussex, made a Warrant, and caused the said Luxford to be whipt as a wandring Rogue; for which offence, being done contrary to Law, and in contempt of his Majesties Great Seal, the Defendant was committed to the Fleet, and fined 200 l. and to pay Luxford 50 l. damages.
Escourt Kt and Bar. versus Carleton Esq; & al.; Prosecuting a Man for Murder after he had obtained a grant of the forfeiture of his Estate in case he were convicted.; Tampering with Witnesses.
Carleton, having received information that the Plaintiff was charged with the Murder of Mary Winkle, (notwithstanding the Coroners Inquest had found and returned that she died Visitatione Dei) became a Suitor to the King for the forfeiture of his Estate, and having obtained Grant of it, obtained a Warrant from the L. C. J. to have the matter better examined by two Justices of the Peace, which was done, and no cause found to suspect the Plantiff for the Murder, yet the Defendant Carleton, who in Person attended that Examination of the Justices, at the next Assizes caused an Indictment to be preferred against the Plantiff for the said supposed Murder, and attended the same in Person, and procured Witnesses to be summoned to give Evidence, yet the Jury returned Ignoramus; yet the Defendant Carleton being not satisfied, at the next Assizes caused another Bill of Indictment to be preferred against him, and attended in Person to prosecute it; and the Defendant Edwards knowing the Plaintiff was questioned for the Murder, and the forfeiture granted to Mr. Carleton, he being discontented with the Plaintiff, sent for a Woman, and examined her what she could testify concerning the Plaintiffs supposed striking the said Winkles, and she answering she could say nothing; Edwards sent for her again, and told her, if she could testify that the Plaintiff struck the said Winkles, and said, she must hold with the Poor, and bid her take heed what she said, for the Plaintiff did strike the said Winkles, and at the Assizes he came to her, and other Witnesses, and bid them have a care, for if they would they could testify that the Plantiff struck Winkles; and for this prosecution of Carleton against the Plaintiff, after he had begged his Estate, he was committed, and fined 500 Marks; and Edwards for solliciting and tampering with the Witnesses, was committed, and fined 200 l.
Crew Kt. versus Vernon Kt.; Matter of Title Decreed.
The Court upon the Plaintiffs motion, no cause being shewed to the contrary by the Defendant ABp. several days were given him in that behalf, did confirm a Decree formerly made, about 10 Jacobi, between the same parties touching digging and graving of Turfs in a Moss called Okehanger-Moss to be spent in his Manner House of Crew, and did also Decree and Confirm a Certificate made by the Lord Viscount Cholmley, and others, with divers additions for the Plantiff more full and free enjoying of the said Turfs, and prevention of the destruction thereof in time to come.
Hill. 4 Car.
Goad Esq; ver Bainbrig, Gent. Sinrgle Battery.; 100 l. damages.
The Defendant having long before conceived displeasure at the Plaintiff, came up into a Room were the Plaintiff and others were ready to go to Supper, and there without any offence offered or given him, struck the Plaintiff twice in the Face with his Hand and Fist, whereby one of his Eyes swelled very much, and called the Plaintiff (being then Deputy Clerk of the Court) base Rogue and Rascal, and swore he would pull the Plaintiff's Gown over his Ears where or whensoever he met him in the Streets, and cut it all in pieces, and for this the Defendant was committed to the Fleet, Fined 100 l. to make his submission and acknowledgment to the Plaintiff at the Bar of this Court, and pay the Plaintiff 100 l. damages.
Garton ver. Mellershe.; Riotous wounding the Plantiff 400 l. damage.
The Plaintiff with three of his Brothers Servants having taken an Ox for a Herriot due to the Plantiffs Brother, after the death of the Father of the Defendant William Mellershe, was pursued by the Defendants all armed, and the Defendant having overtaken him, William Mellershe struck him twice with his Spade-Staff, and another of the Defendants with his Forest Bill gave the Plaintiff such a Cut on the back of his left Hand, that he fainted and hath lost the perfect use of three of his Fingers, and for this Riot they were all committed to the Fleet, two of them fined 100 l. apiece, and three others 40 l. apiece, and William Mellershe to pay all their Fines, if the rest be not able, and the Defendant to pay the Plaintiff 400 l. damage in respect of his Maim, notwithstanding he had recovered and received 100 l. damage before upon an Action of Battery.