London and Middlesex Exchequer Equity Pleadings, 1685-6 and 1784-5. Originally published by London Record Society, London, 2000.
This free content was digitised by double rekeying. All rights reserved.
'Pleadings, 1685-1686: nos 1-30', in London and Middlesex Exchequer Equity Pleadings, 1685-6 and 1784-5, ed. Henry Horwitz, Jessica Cooke( London, 2000), British History Online https://prod.british-history.ac.uk/london-record-soc/vol35/pp1-11 [accessed 3 December 2024].
'Pleadings, 1685-1686: nos 1-30', in London and Middlesex Exchequer Equity Pleadings, 1685-6 and 1784-5. Edited by Henry Horwitz, Jessica Cooke( London, 2000), British History Online, accessed December 3, 2024, https://prod.british-history.ac.uk/london-record-soc/vol35/pp1-11.
"Pleadings, 1685-1686: nos 1-30". London and Middlesex Exchequer Equity Pleadings, 1685-6 and 1784-5. Ed. Henry Horwitz, Jessica Cooke(London, 2000), , British History Online. Web. 3 December 2024. https://prod.british-history.ac.uk/london-record-soc/vol35/pp1-11.
In this section
Pleadings, 1685-1686: nos 1-30
1. Albyn v Farmer
P: (1) Benjamin Albyn, merchant, London. D: (1) Henry Farmer, packer, London; (2) Richard Yarbury, dry salter, London, allegedly invested with d1's power of attorney; (3) Richard Perkins, allegedly d1's creditor; (4) William Love esq., merchant, London, p & d1's arbitrator, p's deponent, aged 65 years; (5) Richard Onslow, merchant, London, p & d1's arbitrator, p's deponent, aged 51 years; (6) John Harvey esq., merchant, London, p & d1's arbitrator, p's deponent, aged 65 years. C: (1) Edward Hildegard, counsel for p's bill; (2) William Killingworth, counsel for p's exceptions; (3) P. Crawford, counsel for d1; (4) Anthony Upton, counsel for d2. P seeks relief from any suit of ds for payment of bonds totalling £582 which p was allegedly compelled in 1682 to issue d1 by ds4-6, arbitrators of p & d1's dispute concerning cloth sold & sums owed to each other. P claims d1 had agreed in 1681 to sell him cloth & ship it to Turkey (where p was living) but substituted inferior cloth. D1 had p arrested & p sued him in Chancery. P asserts d1 & d3 (allegedly d1's creditor) assigned the bonds to d2, who claims to have d1's power of attorney.
2. Aldridge v Cocke
P: (1) Mary Aldridge, J. Aldridge's widow & administratrix. D: (1) Mary Cocke, Bishopsgate St., London; (2) Benjamin Hart, pawnbroker, London. C: (1) L. Owen, counsel for p; (2) D. Roy, counsel for d2. Add: (1) John Aldridge, looking-glass maker, London, deceased, p's husband; (2) Martha Drew, pawnbroker, London, deceased. P, J. Aldridge's widow & administratrix, seeks recovery of household goods which she claims ds 1-2 acquired by some means unknown to her. D1 reportedly asserts J. Aldridge asked her to pawn the goods to d2. D2 claims when he was apprentice to M. Drew (deceased), p pawned goods which she could not redeem and were therefore sold.
| 1685, Mich | E 112/598 | Bill. LMX 584; dated 12 October? (cf. E 112/594 LMX 305 Aldridge v Milburne). |
| 1685, Nov 24 | E 112/598 | Answer. Swearing date of d2's answer. |
3. Aldridge v Dyke
P: (1) Mary Aldridge, J. Aldridge's widow & administratrix. D: (1) Jonathan Dyke, d2's husband; (2) Elizabeth Dyke, d1's wife, J. Clarke's widow. C: (1) L. Owen, counsel for p. Add: (1) John Aldridge, looking-glass maker, London, deceased, p's husband; (2) John Clarke, looking-glass maker, deceased, d2's former husband. P, administratrix of her husband, J. Aldridge, deceased, seeks payment of debts which she claims ds owed her husband for looking-glasses. Ds deny they owed p's husband, but d2 claims after her first husband John Clarke, looking-glass maker, died, she gave his tools to J. Aldridge in return for work.
| 1685, Mich | E 112/594 | Bill. LMX 308. |
| 1686, Jan 21 | E 112/594 | Answer (with attachments). Swearing date of ds' answer; accounts between J. Aldridge & d2 attached. |
4. Aldridge v Milburne
P: (1) Mary Aldridge, St. Buttolphs out Bishopsgate, London, J. Aldridge's widow & administratrix. D: (1) Mary Milburne, pawnbroker, Howndsditch, St. Buttolphs, London. C: (1) L. Owen, counsel for p. Add: (1) John Aldridge, looking-glass maker, London, deceased, p's husband; (2) Mary Cocke. P, J. Aldridge's widow and administratrix, seeks recovery of her husband's household goods which she alleges M. Cocke delivered to d as security for some debt of J. Aldridge's. D reportedly refuses to return the goods.
5. Arthur v Beane
P: (1) Owen Arthur gent., parish of St. Botolph, Aldgate, London, married to H. Beane's daughter, lessee of hearth duties for Devon & Cornwall. D: (1) Katherine Beane, H. Beane's widow & executrix; (2) Mathew Clements, Wapping, London, H. Beane's executor; (3) Humphrey Arthur, H. Beane's legatee; (4) Beane Arthur, H. Beane's legatee; (5) Samuel Clarke, H. Beane's legatee. C: (1) Edward Ward, counsel for p; (2) William Rowney, counsel for d5; (3) Thomas Smith, counsel for ds1-2. Add: (1) Humphrey Beane esq., deceased, p's father in law, d1's husband, farmer of the hearth duties for Devon & Cornwall; (2) Sir Richard Piggott, knight, farmer of the hearth duties for Devon & Cornwall; (3) Perient Trott, farmer of the hearth duties for Devon & Cornwall; (4) Edward Rutter gent., London, lessee of hearth duties for Devon & Cornwall; (5) Thomas Collier, St. Olave's, Southwark, Surrey, lessee of hearth duties for Devon & Cornwall; (6) John Parsons, brewer, parish of St. Katherine's, Midd, lessee of hearth duties for Devon & Cornwall; (7) Thomas Birkhead, lessee of hearth duties for Devon & Cornwall. P seeks payment of his debts by ds. P became lessee of 1/8 part of the hearth duties for Devon & Cornwall with E. Rutter, T. Collier, J. Parsons & T. Birkhead, from the farmers of the duties R. Piggott, P. Trott & p's father in law H. Beane. When p became indebted to the farmers & others he assigned his brewhouse and a £2000 judgement to H. Beane to pay his debts & a £100 annuity to p. P claims H. Beane did not pay his creditors & died in 1679, leaving the judgement to ds3– 5, with his wife d1 & d2 as executors. Ds1-2 claim the judgement was for debts p owed H. Beane. D5 has allegedly sued ds1-2 in Chancery for the judgement.
6. Auberry v Gwyn
P: (1) Samuel Auberry, coachmaker, St. Martin in the Fields, Midd, E. Auberry's son & administrator. D: (1) Edward Gwyn esq., Heref, d2's husband; (2) Dame Frances Gwyn, d1's wife, previously Throckmorton; (3) Sir Thomas Geary, St. Giles in the Fields, Midd, knight; (4) Henry Phillipps, d3's trustee; (5) Richard Aillsbury, d3's tenant. C: (1) William Ettricke, counsel for p; (2) Ra. Darnall, counsel for ds 1-2; (3) Ri. Bayly, counsel for d3. Add: (1) Edmond Auberry, coachmaker, St. Martin in the Fields, Midd, deceased intestate, p's father. P, as administrator & son of E. Auberry (deceased intestate), seeks possession of a Warwickshire farm in payment of £180 damages for which he obtained a judgement in KB in 1682 ag ds1-2. D3 claims d2 had mortgaged the farm to his trustee d4 for £200 in 1676, which d2 did not repay so d3 possessed & transferred it to another party. Ds1-2 claim they had agreed with p (& are willing) to pay him £108 in instalments.
7. Axton v Renew
P: (1) Thomas Axton, merchant, London, owned 1/4 of a ship, the St. Mary. D: (1) Peter Renew, merchant, London, or resident in France; (2) Peter Hasler, Fareham, Hants, P. Richards' administrator. C: (1) A. Newnam, counsel for p; (2) Robert Gillmore, counsel for d1. Add: (1) Paul Richards, merchant, deceased intestate, owned 1/2 of a ship, the St. Mary; (2) George Perin, merchant, Kensington, London. P seeks relief ag ds' suits for payment of a £97 2s 2d bill of exchange which p drew upon G. Perin in 1675 allegedly as a loan for P. Richards, who endorsed it to d1. Perin refused to accept the bill. P claims Richards also owed him for sums spent building a ship, the St. Mary, & for payment of a £400 bond to the Crown, etc. Richards died intestate & d2 became his administrator. Ds claim the bond was for debts p owed Richards, & that p allowed Richards to endorse it to d1.
8. Barrington v Smith
P: (1) Abraham Barrington gent., London. D: (1) Richard Smith, apothecary, Thames St., London, first d listed in the schedule. C: (1) Charles Porter, counsel for p. Add: (1) Joseph Ayloffe esq., barrister, Gray's Inn, Midd, deceased, owner of London Bridge waterhouse. P (lessee of London Bridge waterhouse for past 13 years from J. Ayloffe) seeks payment of arrears of rent from d and others listed in the schedule, for pipes laid and water transported to the ds' houses. The ds reportedly assert they received no water when the pipes were frozen, but p claims this was for a short time for which he is not responsible.
| 1685, Easter | E 112/588 | Bill (with attachments). LMX 12; dated 8 May; schedule attached of arrears of rent owed by d and others. |
9. Bennett v Bennett
P: (1) Thomas Bennett the younger, cheesemonger, St. James Market, Midd, John Bennett's son, d1's nephew, M. Bennett's brother, T. Bennett the E's grandson. D: (1) James Bennett, uncle of p & M. Bennett, John Bennett's executor, T. Bennett the E's executor; (2) Elizabeth Bennett, T. Bennet the E's widow & executrix. C: (1) Robert Rawlins, counsel for p. Add: (1) John Bennett, tanner, Westminster, Midd, deceased, father of p & M. Bennett, T. Bennett the E's son; (2) Thomas Bennett the elder, tanner, deceased, grandfather of p & M. Bennett, d2's husband, John Bennett's father & executor; (3) Mary Bennett, deceased, p's sister, John Bennett's daughter, T. Bennett the E's granddaughter. P seeks possession of estates willed to him & his sister M. Bennett (deceased) by his father John Bennett (deceased in 1667) & grandfather T. Bennett the E (deceased in 1679). John appointed his father T. Bennett the E & d1 as his executors. T. Bennett the E appointed his widow d2 & d1 as his executors. 9 months ago p reached 21 years, but ds reportedly deny the estates were willed to him, or claim they are of little value.
10. Bennett v Ironsides
P: (1) Richard Bennett, infant under 21, Dame B. First's grandson. D: (1) Ralph Ironsides, doctor in physic, M. Ironsides' husband; (2) Thomas Gallopp the elder esq., Netherberry, Dors, p's trustee, T. Gallopp the Y's father; (3) Thomas Gallopp the younger gent., Netherberry, Dors, p's trustee, T. Gallopp the E's son; (4) Robert Freke the elder gent., Upway, Dors, p's trustee, R. Freke the Y's father; (5) Robert Freke the younger, Upway, Dors, p's trustee, R. Freke the E's son. N/f: (1) George Bennett, p's father & next friend. C: (1) Thomas Jenner, counsel for p. Add: (1) Dame Bridget First, deceased, p's grandmother, M. Ironsides' mother; (2) Margaret Ironsides, d1's wife, Dame B. First's daughter; (3) Dr William Denton, p's previous trustee; (4) Dr Henry Jones, p's previous trustee. P, under 21, with his father & next friend G. Bennett, seeks payment of interest from £421 7s willed to him by his grandmother Dame B. First, or possession of a leasehold manor, Stottingway, Dorset, which d1 mortgaged to ds2-5 for the £421 7s. In 1678 p transferred the money by a suit in this Court from trustees W. Denton & H. Jones to ds2-5, who lent it to d1. D1 has not paid the interest. Ds claim if p dies before 21 the money goes to d1's wife M. Ironsides (Dame B. First's daughter), who should be a defendant to this suit.
11. Bertie v Dickins
P: (1) Peregrine Bertie esq., London, N. Bertie's son & heir. D: (1) William Dickins esq., barrister, Gray's Inn, Midd; (2) John Dickins gent., St. Dunstan's in the West, London. C: (1) P. Crawford, counsel for p; (2) Thomas Skipwith, also counsel for p; (3) W. Vaughan, counsel for d1. Add: (1) Nicholas Bertie esq., Westminster, London, deceased, p's father; (2) Paul Elliott gent., London, deceased; (3) Henry Owen gent., Fulham, Midd, deceased. P seeks relief from d1's suit for payment of a £400 counter bond issued by p's father N. Bertie as part of an agreement N. Bertie made with ds & H. Owen (deceased) to imbank his marshes in Ely & Lincs in 1664. P claims his father, ds & Owen became bound to P. Elliott (deceased) for £100 to pay d1's expenses, & that N. Bertie issued a £300 counter bond to d2 & the £400 counter bond to d1. D1 claims N. Bertie agreed to settle 1/6 of the marshes on him.
| 1685, Trin | E 112/589 | Bill. LMX 55; dated 8 July. |
| 1685, Nov 9 | E 112/589 | Answer. Swearing date of d1's answer. |
12. Bickerton v Taylor
P: (1) George Bickerton, merchant, Midd. D: (1) Samuel Taylor, button seller, parish of St. Andrews, Holborn, Midd; (2) Peter Squoles, d3's husband; (3) Anne Squoles, d2's wife, E. Williams's widow & administratrix. C: (1) Henry Hatsell, counsel for p; (2) William Brooke, counsel for d1. Add: (1) Edward Williams, tailor, St. Martin in the Fields, Midd, deceased intestate, d3's former husband. P seeks payment of a judgement for £500 he had obtained at KB in 1676 ag E. Williams, who, before paying, died intestate in 1678, leaving his widow & administratrix, d3. P agreed with d3 that he & d1 (another creditor of E. Williams) would collect the debts. P now claims d1 conspires with d3 & her new husband d2 to receive the debts & defraud p of his £500, and that d1 also owes p £19 for goods. D1 claims d3 received debts without accounting for them with p or d1.
13. Birt v Searne
P: (1) Richard Birt, mariner, parish of St. Pauls, Shadwell, Midd. D: (1) Mary Searne, R. Searne's widow; (2) Nicholas Mann gent., solicitor, employed by d1; (3) William Nash, served on the Robert of London. C: (1) Mich. Drew, counsel for p; (2) Francis Browne, counsel for ds 1-2. Add: (1) Richard Searne, boatswain, St. Pauls, Shadwell, Midd, deceased, d1's husband, served on the Robert of London. P seeks inj ag the suit at c1 of d1, executrix of her deceased husband R. Searne, for full payment of her husband's wages while boatswain on a ship, the Robert of London, bound for Jamaica. P offered to pay her the wages minus board and lodging, medical and funeral bills, but ds claim the receipts are false.
14. Blaney v Howard
P: (1) Isaac Blaney, mariner, Stepney, Midd. D: (1) Edward Howard, mariner, Stepney, Midd, d2's husband; (2) Mary Howard, Stepney, Midd, d1's wife. C: (1) J Hordesnell, counsel for p; (2) Godfrey Thacker, counsel for d2. P seeks inj ag ds' suit for payment of a £32 bond he was allegedly compelled to issue after ds had him arrested in the Court of White Chapel for board & lodging debts. P lodged in d2's house while d1 was at sea & claims d2 borrowed £13 from him, for which she compelled him to issue a release after his arrest. D2 denies borrowing the sum or receiving a release.
15. Booth v Hayter
P: (1) Richard Booth, merchant, London; (2) Samuel Story, merchant, London. D: (1) Charnell Hayter. C: (1) Philip Neve, counsel for ps; (2) John Heames, counsel for d. Ps seeks relief ag a judgement for £80 damages which d obtained ag p1. P1 claims he sold d 5 hogsheads of tobacco at £52 13s 5d, which d did not then pay. P1 had the hogsheads removed from d's shop by a Replevin which proved irregular. D obtained the £80 judgement ag p1 in an action of Trover and Conversion at KB. D claims this cause, concerning damages, is not a matter for equity.
| 1685, Mich | E 112/593 | Bill. LMX 273, dated 17 November. (cf. E 112/590 LMX 101 Booth v Wybourne). |
| 1685, Nov 23 | E 112/593 | Demurrer. Swearing date of d's plea & demurrer. |
16. Booth v Wybourne
P: (1) Richard Booth, merchant, London; (2) Samuel Storey, merchant, London. D: (1) Isaac Wybourne, d2's husband; (2) Elizabeth Wybourne, d1's wife, R. Wymondesold's widow & executrix. C: (1) Francis Fuller, counsel for ps; (2) Sam. Dodd, counsel for ds. Add: (1) Richard Wymondesold, tobacconist, London, deceased, d2's husband. Ps seek discovery of the personal estate of R. Wymondesold (deceased), & payment of a £530 18s 5d debt Wymondesold owed them for goods. Ps claim Wymondesold's widow & executrix d2 paid them £150 towards the debt, but after her marriage to d1, refused to pay the rest. Ps sued ds in the Court of Common Pleas, where ds pleaded that Wymondesold owed bonds exceeding his estate.
| 1685, Mich | E 112/590 | Bill. LMX 101. |
| 1686, April 24 | E 112/590 | Answer (with attachments). Swearing date of ds' answer; inventory attached of R. Wymondesold's personal estate. |
17. Bowd v Allen
P: (1) Isaac Bowd, draper, Hertford, Herts, p2's son, p3's brother; (2) Adlord Bowd the elder, draper, Hertford, Herts, father of p1 & p3; (3) Adlord Bowd the younger, draper, Hertford, Herts, p2's son, p1's brother. D: (1) Samuel Allen, merchant, London. C: (1) Edward Ward, counsel for ps; (2) Jason Kingsman, counsel for d. Ps seek inj ag d's suit at KB for payment of a £500 penal bond. In 1682 p1 became partners with d as merchants in New Hampshire, America. D advanced £750 to the business as his 3/4 share, & lent p £250 for his 1/4 share, in return for the £500 penal bond of p1 & his father p2. P1 claims he sent d the profits, & bought a ship on account of the business, but that d compelled him to sign erroneous accounts & had him imprisoned. D claims ps1-2 did not repay the bond on time.
18. Brandon v Peirce alias Ash
P: (1) John Brandon, framework knitter, London, R. Peirce's nephew, heir at law & administrator. D: (1) Richard Peirce alias Ash gent., London; (2) John Bland, merchant tailor, College Hill, London. C: (1) R. Lechmere, counsel for p. Add: (1) Richard Peirce, cook, London, deceased intestate. P, nephew, heir at law & administrator of R. Peirce (deceased intestate in 1681 leaving realty & a personal estate worth £20,000), seeks recovery of Peirce's estate from ds. D1 reportedly claimed he paid Peirce's debts & obtained an order in this Court to possess his estate. D2 reportedly refuses to pay p a £100 debt he owed Peirce & has also possessed some of the estate, asserting Peirce owed him for clothes made.
19. Brereton v Tanner
P: (1) Ralph Brereton gent., Beech, Staffs. D: (1) John Tanner, merchant, London. C: (1) Francis Browne, counsel for p; (2) William Brooke, counsel for d. Add: (1) Richard Brereton, p's son, d's former apprentice. P seeks inj ag d's suit for payment of a £50 bond, half the fee p agreed to pay for his son to become d's apprentice. Having initially paid £50, p claims he became suspicious of d, delayed paying the bond, then d went insolvent and absconded. D denies going insolvent, claims he went abroad on business, whereupon p's son left his service.
20. Brooker v Adams
P: (1) Joseph Brooker, pewterer, Minories, London. D: (1) John Adams, haberdasher, London. C: (1) Edm. Jones, counsel for p; (2) ? Hely, counsel for d. P seeks repayment of £50 he paid d as a deposit on a £300 lease for a messuage with pewter and tools in Leadenhall St. P claims d received a higher bid, and prevented p from raising the rest of the £300 by encouraging p's creditors to sue and have him imprisoned. D claims p delayed the execution of the lease, and that the £50 was for goods he sold p.
21. Broome v Browne
P: (1) John Broome gent., London. D: (1) Elizabeth Browne, T. Browne's widow & administratrix; (2) William Millett gent., scrivener, London, renounced executorship of T. Browne's will; (3) Sir William Gostlin, sheriff of London; (4) Sir Peter Vandeputt, sheriff of London. C: (1) William Ettricke, counsel for p; (2) William Cherry, counsel for ds1-2. Add: (1) Thomas Browne, deceased, d1's husband; (2) John Forth, brewer, London; (3) Collett, (no forename given). P seeks repayment of £100 he was compelled to pay ds3-4 after d1 (T. Browne's widow & administratrix) revived her husband's suit ag p in KB for arrears of rent on a cellar. P claims in 1681 he leased the cellar as J. Forth's trustee at £14 per annum for 7 years from T. Browne (deceased). P repaired the cellar, but Forth then refused to lease it, so p leased it to a Mr Collett, who quit the premises. T. Browne sued p for remaining rent on the lease, but died leaving d2 who renounced executorship.
| 1685, Mich | E 112/595 | Bill. LMX 368; dated 19 November. |
| 1689, May 8 | E 112/595 | Answer. Swearing date of d2's answer & disclaimer. |
| 1689, May 9 | E 112/595 | Answer. Swearing date of d1's answer. |
22. Bryant v Wordell
P: (1) Elizabeth Bryant, Totnam, Midd. D: (1) John Wordell gent., Totnam, Midd; (2) Thomas Chipps, chirurgeon, Totnam, Midd. C: (1) Jo. Danyell, counsel for p; (2) Edward Ward, counsel for d2. P, a widow, seeks recovery of a brewhouse d1 allegedly mortgaged to her in 1684 as security for a £600 debt. P claims d1 was later imprisoned in KB, and d2 persuaded her to become security for d1's bond, and to assign the mortgaged brewhouse to d2 in case the marshall of KB should seize it. D2 claims p & d1 absconded after issuing the bond to KB, and sold d2 the brewhouse absolutely for £250.
| 1685, Mich | E 112/591 | Bill. LMX 135; cf. E 112/591 LMX 136 Wordell v Chipp. |
| 1686, Jan 25 | E 112/591 | Answer. Swearing date of d2's answer. |
23. Bucknall v Barton
P: (1) Ralph Bucknall esq., St. Giles in the Fields, Midd; (2) John Bucknall esq., Oxhey Place, Herts; (3) William Thompson esq., solicitor, Middle Temple, London; (4) William Gulston esq., solicitor, Middle Temple, London; (5) William Hall gent., London; (6) John Tomkins gent., Abington, Berks; (7) William Green gent.. D: (1) William Barton; (2) Thomas Priggs; (3) Henry Doble; (4) George Shuttleworth; (5) Sir Richard Dutton, Pall Mall, Midd, knight, & other ds. C: (1) Edward Smyth, counsel for ds3-4; (2) William Ettricke, counsel for d5. Ps, licensed to raise Thames water in York House Garden, Midd., seek payment of rent from ds, residents of Middlesex, for water piped to their premises. D3 claims he leased a watercourse from ps, who failed to supply water. D3 also maintains the bill is vexatious as his lease includes penalties for ps' failure to supply water. Ds4-5 deny any knowledge of the water rent, claiming they only lease their premises.
24. Chace v Sterling
P: (1) Robert Chace. D: (1) James Sterling, J. Rouse's executor, d2's husband; (2) Mary Sterling, d1's wife, J. Rouse's executor. C: (1) James Dodd, counsel for p. Add: (1) Jarvis Rouse, deceased; (2) John Lindsay, goldsmith, p's former partner; (3) Peirce Reeve, goldsmith, p's former partner. P seeks revival of suit he filed ag J. Rouse seeking enforcement of an alleged agreement that Rouse would accept £400 in lieu of farm rents for which p and his former partners had offered to cancel their three bonds to Rouse. Rouse was suing p at KB for full payment of the bonds, denying any such agreement. Rouse then died, leaving ds as executors.
25. Chancellor v Castle
P: (1) Marke Chancellor, joiner, London, J. Chancellor's son, R. Chancellor's brother, N. Knapp the E's grandson. D: (1) Richard Castle, yeoman, Chilton, Berks, M. Castle's husband. C: (1) Richard Knapp, counsel for p. Add: (1) Nicholas Knapp the elder, Chilton, Berks, deceased, grandfather of p, N. Knapp infant & R. Chancellor, father of N. Knapp Y & J. Chancellor; (2) Nicholas Knapp the younger, deceased, N. Knapp the E's son, M. Castle's prior husband, N. Knapp the infant's father; (3) Nicholas Knapp, deceased, infant, son of M. Castle & N. Knapp the Y, N. Knapp the E's grandson; (4) Jane Chancellor, deceased, insane, mother of p & R. Chancellor, N. Knapp the E's daughter; (5) Rebecca Chancellor, p's sister, J. Chancellor's daughter, N. Knapp the E's granddaughter; (6) Mary Castle, deceased, d's wife, N. Knapp the Y's widow, N. Knapp the infant's mother. P seeks possession of a messuage & lands which his grandfather N. Knapp the E left to his son N. Knapp the Y, who died leaving his son N. Knapp the infant, who died, so the premises reverted to p's mother J. Chancellor (N. Knapp the E's daughter), who went insane & died in 1678. D claims the premises had belonged to his wife Mary (N. Knapp the Y's widow, deceased) for her life, and that p's mother conveyed the premises to her daughter R. Chancellor, who sold it to d for £264.
| 1685, Mich | E 112/590 | Bill. LMX 117. |
| 1685, Mich | E 112/590 | Copy bill. |
| 1685, Nov 28 | E 112/590 | Commission. For d's answer. |
| 1686, Jan 21 | E 112/590 | Answer. Swearing date. |
26. Cherry v Cooper
P: (1) Richard Cherry, vintner, London. D: (1) Thomas Cooper, fishmonger, Thames St., London; (2) John Haughton, attorney at law; (3) Joseph Saunders, Indian gown man, Royal Exchange, London. C: (1) John Yalden, counsel for p. P seeks payment of £20 d1 allegedly borrowed but did not repay, so p sued him in one of the Compter's Courts, London. D1 engaged d2, an attorney at KB, who issued a bond to d3 in trust for p as security for d1's debt. The ds now reportedly conspire to defraud p, with d1 claiming he repaid p, or d2 denying he issued the bond, or claiming it was irregular and void.
27. Clarke v Morgan
P: (1) Richard Clarke, wire drawer, Little Britain, London, p2's husband; (2) Mary Clarke, Little Britain, London, p1's wife, daughter of C. Morgan & d. D: (1) Elizabeth Morgan, C. Morgan's widow & administratrix, p2's mother. C: (1) William Ettricke, counsel for ps. Add: (1) Charles Morgan, wire drawer, Little Britain, London, deceased intestate, p2's father, d's husband. Ps seek possession of a distributive share of the estate of p2's father C. Morgan (deceased intestate). D (C. Morgan's widow & p2's mother) became administratrix, & ps claim she has issued shares to p2's 3 sisters but not to p2. D reportedly claims C. Morgan's estate is worth very little, & that his debtors are insolvent.
28. Coape v Gwynn
P: (1) Henry Coape, mercer, St. Paul's, Covent Garden, Midd, partner with ps2-4; (2) William Nicholas, mercer, St. Paul's, Covent Garden, Midd, partner with p1 & ps3-4; (3) Samuell Coape, mercer, St. Paul's, Covent Garden, Midd, partner with ps 1-2 & p4; (4) Richard Alchorne, mercer, St. Paul's, Covent Garden, Midd, partner with ps 1-3. D: (1) Ellen Gwynn, St. Martins in the Fields, Midd, named Ellinor in the bill. C: (1) John Powell, counsel for ps; (2) W. Barnsley, counsel for d. Add: (1) John Leonard Millins, lieutenant, Ireland, deceased; (2) Abraham Yarner, Ireland, Dublin. Ps, mercers & partners, seek payment for silks & goods they sold d. In 1683 d agreed to pay ps a £100 bond towards debts which J. L. Millins in Ireland owed her, if p2 could collect on it. D issued the bond & a letter of attorney to A. Yarner, ps' colleague in Ireland, who sued J. L. Millins, who was killed in a duel leaving no assets. Ps assert d refused to receive back the bond & pay her debts, but d claims ps refused to return the bond to her.
29. Dallow v Lyford
P: (1) Edward Dallow, glassware maker, Whitechapel, Midd, partners with ps2-3; (2) John Dallow, glassware maker, Whitechapel, Midd, partners with p1 & p3; (3) Phillip Dallow, glassware maker, Whitechapel, Midd, partners with ps1-2. D: (1) Robert Lyford, imprisoned in KB. C: (1) Edward Ward, counsel for ps. Ps, partners as glassware makers & owners of glasshouses in Well Close, Whitechapel, seek relief ag d's suit for payment of £411 10s which d reportedly claims ps owe him for carriage of coal, ash, metal, timber, etc., to their glasshouses before 1683. Ps claim d owes them for glass bottles totalling £464, for which ps obtained a judgement in KB.
30. Daniell v Griffin
P: (1) Anne Daniell, Dukes Place, London, P. Griffin's sister. D: (1) Joane Griffin, P. Griffin's widow. C: (1) Samuel Blackerby, counsel for p; (2) Francis Brown, counsel for d. Add: (1) Peircy Griffin, mariner, Stepney, Midd, deceased, gunner's mate of the ship Constantinople Marchant, p's brother, d's husband. P, a widow, seeks payment of half the personal estate of her brother P. Griffen, who she claims died intestate. D, Peircy's widow and administratrix, claims her husband fell ill and died on a voyage from the East Indies and made his will by word of mouth, leaving everything to his wife.