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. Car. 2.
Booke & al. versus Watson & al.; Forgery of a Deed; Trin. 2 Car.; Perjury in an Affidavit.; 100 l. Damage.
The Defendant Watson having gotten into his Custody a Deed of certain Lands, made by John Shaw, the Grandfather to John Shaw the Son, in the Habendum whereof was contained an Estate Tail limited, John the Son did forge and procure the other Defendant Richard Barrow to forge and write another Deed of the same date; and agreeing in all points with the true Deed, saving that in the Habendum of the false Deed, he made it to contain an Estate in Fee-simple, limited to the said John Shaw the Son and his Heirs, and thereto subscribed the name of John Shaw the Grandfather, with his Hand and Seal thereunto, and endorsed, or procured to be endorsed on the back-side of the said forged Deed, the true names of the Witnesses, as testifying the sealing and delivery thereof, and Execution of livery thereupon; and at a Trial in September 17 Jacobi, publshed and justified the said false Deed to be a true Deed, thereby to make good his Title to the said Lands; and the now Plaintiffs thereupon exhibiting their Bill into Chancery against Watson, they examined Barrow as a Witness, and there he truly confest that he writ the said forged Deed at Watsons earnest solicitation, out of a Copy which Watson delivered him, written with his the said Watson's own Hand; yet afterwards the said Barrow, by the subornation of the said Watson, falsely deposed before a Master of Chancery, that the now Plaintiffs procured him to confess upon his said Examination as a Witness that he writ the said forged Deed out of a Copy delivered to him by the Defendant Watson, and that they promised him 40 l. for the same, and that thereby, and by the threats of one of the Plantiffs, then Commissioners, he was drawn to confess that he writ the said Deed, whenas in truth he never made the said Deed. And for this Forgery and subornation of Perjury Watson was committed to the Fleet, bound to his good behaviour, fined 200 l. for the Forgery, and 200 l. more for the subornation of Perjury, and to stand in the Pillory at Westminster, and in the Country, with a Paper on his Head, declaring the nature of his offence, and his Ears nailed to the Pillory; and Barrow in respect of his Confession and Penitency at the Bar, and for that he was drawn thereto by Watson, for fear of him to whom he stood indebted, and was not able to satisfie him, was only committed, and fined 100 l. for the Forgery, and to wear Papers on his Head declaring his Offence of wilful Perjury, and both of them to pay the Plaintiff 100 l. Damages.
Trin. 2 Car.
Woodrow versus Crisp & al.; Marrying the Plaintiff's Son in his sickness, whereof he died, in order to make a prey of his Estate; All benefit of the Marriage taken away.
The Defendant Dorothy Crispe took upon her to cure the Plaintiff's Son of the Falling-sickness, and had 20 l. given her in hand, and was to have 20 l. more when he was perfectly cured; and the said Dorothy, under pretence of the more conveniency to work the Cure, got the Plaintiff to place her Son at a House near to the said Defendant's House: And having a secret Intention in the time of his Weakness to procure him to marry her Daughter Eleanor Crispe, who then was a Servant, and attended a Lady; she first endeavoured to persuade the Plaintiff's Son that Marriage would be a great means to procure his Recovery, and told him that she knew a Gentleman that was cured by it. And the better to accomplish her Design, got him home to her own House, and endeavoured to draw and allure the Servant that attended him to further her Design; but he, not yielding to it, gave notice to his Mother that he was not bettered by the said Dorothy's cure, but grew weaker both in Body and Mind thro the violence and continuance of his Fits; the Plaintiff took him home to her House, and kept him there from May to October. And then the said Dorothy continuing her Resolution to make a prey of the said Plaintiff's Son, who had a great Estate left him by his Father, and a possibility of a great increase thereto by the Plaintiff her Mother, persuaded the Plaintiff to let her have her Son home again, pretending that by taking the benefit of the Season of the Year, being then the Fall of the Leaf, and of the Spring following, (she confidently assured the Plaintiff) she would perfectly recover him thereof; and having by this persuasion gotten him again into her House, she then upon a false Suggestion got his Servant, who formerly attended him, to be turned away, and ptocured the Defendant Lancelot Ainsworth, a fit Instrument for her purpose, to be appointed to attend him; and then acquainted all the Defendants with her purpose of marrying the Plaintiff's said Son to the Defendant Eleanor; and for that purpose sent for her home from Service, and caused the Defendant Anthony Crispe to provide a Wedding-Ring, and to get a License in readiness to authorize their Marriage, for the obtaining whereof, the said Anth. Crispe, with others, entred into a Bond of 100 l. with condition that there was no Let or Impediment but they might lawfully marry; and that they should not proceed to marry without consent of Parents or Governors; and thereupon obtained a License, directed to the Minister of the Parish, who refused to meddle therewith, and persuaded the Defendant Dorothy to desist from her practice; yet she by practice with the other Defendants gave him sundry Potions, and endeavoured by many Persuasions, and taking advantage of his Insensibility, by giving him over-much Wine, to take a liking to the Defendant Eleanor, telling him his Mother was content with it; and in the end, when by reason of the weakness of his Body and Understanding, they knew not how well to effect their Desire, the Defendants agreed together immediately after his next Fit to solemnize the Marriage, which they effected accordingly, the Plaintiff's said Son being at that time without common Sense or Understanding, and scarce able to utter the words of Matrimony, altho the Defendant Hugh Jones, that married them, helped and directed him the best he could; and then the said Deféndant Eleanor, with the Advice and Direction of the other Defendants, sued for Alimony out of the said Plaintiff's Son's Estate: And for this soul Practice the Defendants were all committed to the Fleet. Dorothy Crispe fined 500 l. Eleanor 500 l. Anthony Crispe 300 l. Lancelot Ainsworth 250 l. and Hugh Jones Clerk 200 l. And to discourage others from the like Attempts, the Court further decreed, that the said Eleanor Crispe, alias Woodrow, and all claiming from or by her, should be barred and excluded from claiming any manner of benefit or advantage by Dower, or by the Custom of the City of London, or otherwise, out of the real or personal Estate of the Plaintiff's said Son since deceased.
Broadgate versus Glover & al.; Deeds damned, tho no body sentenced for the Forgery; and possession given the Defendants, tho three Verdicts had past against their Title.
The Bill was exhibited for and concerning the forging, framing, and publishing a Deed of Feoffment supposedto be made by William Glover deceased, Grandfather to the Defendant William Glover, of divers Messuages, Lands and Tenements in Hellidon in the County of Northampton, to defeat the Plaintiff and other Purchasers of the Lands by them purchased. by William Glover, Father of the Defendant William Glover: and upon the hearing, albeit the Court could not sentence any of the Defendants for the Forgery, or for publishing the Deed, knowing it to be forged, yet upon comparing the Deed with other true Deeds, and upon consideration of sundry forcible Circumstances and violent Presumptions, the Court was satisfied, adjudged and decreed, that the Deed complained of was a forged Deed, and that it should be damned and made void, never to be given in evidence after, and withal settled the Plaintiffs and their Heirs in the quiet possession of the Lands in question, never to be again molested for the same, altho three Verdicts and a Judgment by Nihil dicit had formerly past in countenance of the said forged Deed, and Affirmation of the Defendant's Title: and all those Verdicts and Judgments were ordered to be of no use, benefit, or advantage to the Defendants, or any other claiming from, by, or under them.
Hill. 2 Car
Frize versus Bennet & al.; Publishing libellous Songs.
The Defendants bearing malice to the Plaintiff did at several times and places, and to several Persons in Alehouses, and elsewhere, publish, divulge, and sing several Libels to the Scandal of the Plaintiff, and alledged the Plaintiff was intended thereby; one of which Libels was intitled, A proper Song of a great Blockhead Woollen-Draper, dwelling in Holborn, who gave a Tailor's Wife a yard of old Freize for a Jerkin, &c. and contained obscene and scurrilous matter, not fit to be recited; and for this they were committed to the Fleet, Bennet fined 500 Marks, Aylet 200 l. and Longdale 100 Marks: But the Court would give the Plaintiff no Damages, because he took delight in repetition of the Libel, and because he was of suspected Life and Conversation.