172 Duck v Doubleday

172 DUCK V DOUBLEDAY

Arthur Duck, LL.D., King's Advocate v Thomas Doubleday, Robert Walsh, Cassy Borrough, gents, and John Coxe, the Earl Marshal's messenger

May - June 1638

Abstract

This was a cause of office presented by Dr Arthur Duck, the king's advocate, against the defendants for seeking to fight a duel. The quarrel between Walsh and Doubleday had arisen when Doubleday tried to extricate himself from a £100 bet on a horserace arranged at Hyde Park, and when Walsh refused to allow this, called him a liar. According to Walsh's answer, he struck him with a switch, whereupon Doubleday tried to draw his sword, but was prevented by onlookers and so struck Walsh with his hand. Doubleday later sent Borrough to the house of Mr Colt, a friend of Walsh's, to request satisfaction from Walsh. Borrough also met Walsh near St James's and told him that Doubleday had called him a coward for not agreeing to fight him. Walsh responded 'that it was true, he durst not offend the kinge and breake the lawes, in soe high a nature; but that he durst and would meete him in any place, out of the king's dominions'. Doubleday claimed Walsh set the time and place as Calais sands in nine days' time.

On 1 May 1638 the Earl Marshal sent his messenger, John Coxe, to arrest Walsh and Doubleday to prevent them from fighting. Doubleday surrendered to him, but 'fearing that this would lie heavie upon his reputacon if he used not all meanes possible to acquitt himselfe of the infamie and disgrace cast upon him by Walsh', he escaped from the messenger, and went with Borrough to Colt's house to tell Walsh that he still wished to fight. Walsh maintained his refusal, 'understanding that the right honorable the Earl Marshall had taken knowledge of the business'. Doubleday was charged with contempt of the Earl Marshal's authority for his escape, Coxe with aiding and abetting him and William Browne, constable of Westminster with an unspecified offence. Coxe claimed that he did not know Doubleday planned to escape and that he was absent when he did so, blaming his deputy, Hubert Stopford, for failing to prevent it. Although Stopford recaptured Doubleday within two hours, Coxe acknowledged his fault and submitted himself to the Earl Marshal's mercy. Dr Duck sought a sentence to prevent the defendants from duelling or carrying weapons. Doubleday was bound for £1,000, Walsh for 1,000 marks, Borrough for 1,000 marks and Coxe for £30. [For Walsh's habitual duelling, see cause 676].

Initial proceedings

13/2x, Articles of Duck against Doubleday, Walsh, Borough and Cox

1. In April and May in London and Westminster Doubleday and Walsh quarrelled over contumelious words that were provocative of a duel, and arranged to meet to duel on a field in France.

2. Doubleday and Walsh were arrested for attempting to duel.

3. Doubleday and Walsh were to be taken into custody to prevent their intended duel on Calais sands, in France, that was against his Majesty's laws and edicts against duelling.

4. Cassy Borough was to be prosecuted for having aided in the arrangement of the duel and for having acted as Doubleday's second.

5. Duck sent the court's special messenger, John Coxe, to take Doubleday and Walsh into custody to prevent their intended duel. But Doubleday's subsequent escape was in contempt of the Earl Marshal's authority.

6. Arthur Duck, King's Advocate promoted the cause against them.

7. This was all true, public and notorious.

Duck pleaded the judges to punish Doubleday, Walsh, Borough and Cox, and to condemn them to pay expenses.

No date.

No signatures.

12/2e, Articles of Duck against William Browne of Westminster, perfumer [too badly damaged to pick up much text]

Browne was a constable in the City of Westminster. The document referred to Walsh and Doubleday, and their arrest and seizure over an attempted duel.

13/2p, Examination of Thomas Doubleday

Headed: 'Mr Dubleday his relacon concerning the falling out betweene Mr Welch and him taken 5 May 1638'

Endorsed: 'Mr Doubleday's examination'

'Receaving an injury from Mr Welch in Hide Park, I sent by Mr Borowgh to Mr Welch to give mee satisfaction which hee promised to doe appointing a place Callis sands, the day 9 dayes after; but in the meane time I was taken by my lord messenger by Mr Welch his servant's meanes. And being committed to Mr Coxe his hands I conceaved the injury to bee soe greate that I sent him word by Mr Burrough on Tewsday that I would meete him five mile out of towne anyway to have satisfaction, which hee denying by not returning an answer I rested satisfied till the present Thursday when, getting abroade, I went to Mr Colte's his house and told him that rather then I would suffer any thinge in my reputacon I would fight with Mr Welch in any place within three houres that hee should appoint; and bidd him tell Mr Welch soe, conceaving the injury the greater I being a prisoner and hee at liberty and would not come in. Mr Borrowghs was to have binne my second and to have gone over with mee.'

Signed by Thomas Doubleday.

13/2q, Examination of Robert Walsh

Taken 10 May 1638

'Hee sayth that being in Hyde Park on Saturday last where there was a horserace run between a grey nagg of [Walsh] and another horse, [Walsh] being in companie wth Mr Dubleday offered to laye three to one against the grey beinge his owne horse, though not knowne to bee soe to Mr Dubelday. Mr Doubleday refused the offer and yet the grey nagg wonn the race, whereupon Mr Dobleday offred to take the grey nagg and run against [Walsh's] horse hee then ridd upon for £100, which [Walsh] accepted and not having money to lay downe hee went to fetch some. In the meane tyme, Mr Dobleday had learned that the grey nagg hee had chosen to runn with was [Walsh's] and theruppon conceaving the match to be desperate refused to make stakes, sayinge hee meant a nagg of his owne called Grymes;whereupon some question and arguing grew betweene them, [Walsh] arguing it was the grey nagg hee had made the match for, and either hee should runn, or [Walsh] would have the money. Whereunto Mr Doubleday answeared, in a jearinge manner, You have my money; if I lett you have it then every man that list will have my money. To which [Walsh] replied that it was his right and hee would have it, and if any man should say the match was not made for the grey nagg hee should not say right. Mr Doubleday answeared with an oath, Whosoever sayth soe lyes, upon which word [Walsh] strooke Mr Dobleday with his switch, and Mr Dobleday, having gotten a sword, drew it and, that being taken from him by some that were there, hee strook [Walsh] with his hand, and soe they parted. [Walsh] coming home wardes Mr Dobleday sent Mr Borrough to Mr Colt, a friend of [Walsh], to tell him that hee thought Mr Welch was a coward and durst not meete him to give him satisfaccon for the affront hee had offered. And Mr Burrough overtooke [Walsh] neere St James's and delivered the same? [damaged] message to himself from Mr Doubleday, to which [Walsh] returned this answeare, that it was true hee durst not offend the kinge and breake the lawes in soe high a nature, but that hee durst and would meete him in anie place out of the king's dominions.

[Walsh] went imediatley out of towne and upon Tuesday came back againe to his friend Mr Colt's house, from whom hee understood that Mr Borrough had been with him from Mr Doubleday to lett [Walsh] knowe that though hee were under custodie by warrant from the Earl Marshall yet hee would gett loose from his keeper and come fight with him if he durst make him. And againe [Walsh] understood from Mr Colt that this day Mr Doubleday, accompanyed with Mr Borrough, came to Mr Colt's house and told him hee had made an escape from the messinger and would fight with Mr Welsh if hee durst meete him. But [Walsh] understanding that the right honourable the Earl Marshall had taken knowledge of the busines, and sent forth warrants for them both, hee submitted himself to his lordship without being moved with anie of the foresaid provocacons from Mr Dobleday.'

Signed by Robert Walsh.

13/2w, Personal answer of John Coxe

'The personall answers of John Coxe , one of the sworne messengers in ordinary of his Matie's chamber, to the articles objected against him by Dr Duck his Matie's advocate of this hoble court'. He 'answereth and confesseth that, by your honour's favour (which this respondent acknowledgeth with all humble thankfullnes), he for thirteene yeares last past hath beene and is a speciall messenger appoynted to execute all warrants, processes and commands issueinge and directed from your honnor and this honourable court, by all which time untill this present business in question he hath imployed his best endeavors faithfully, diligently and without offence to performe the duty of his place under your honnor. And he further answereth and confesseth that uppon the 1 May last past he received a warrant from your honnor for the attachinge of Thomas Doubleday and Robert Welch, and to keepe them in safe custodye for there forthcominge before your honnor to answeare there misdemeanors, by vertue whereof he did, by his deputy, cause Dobleday to be attached and to be brought into his custodye in his howse uppon Munday 7 May where Mr Dobleday remained untill 10 May; in all which ... Walsh kepte himselfe soe close as he could not by any diligent inquiry be found or apprehended by [Coxe] or his deputies. But [Coxe] beinge uppon the Thursday in the morninge inforced to goe abroad about his necessaary business and imployments did give speciall charge to Hubert Stopford, his deputye and servant, not to suffer Mr Dobleday to stirre out of [his] howse, and told him if he should it mighte be [his] undoeinge. But Mr Dobleday, without the privity and knowledge of [Coxe] (watchinge the opportunity of his absence) did suddenly, and by the negligence of [Coxe's] deputye which he soe charged, gett out of the howse'.

Whereupon, he came home that day and found Mr Doubleday had gone, 'was much troubled and offended with his servante and caused him presently to find him out, who soe did, and within two houres after his departure broughte him back againe into [Coxe's] howse and on that Thursday in the eveninge [Coxe] receiving a command from your honnor brought him before your honnor to answeare his misdemeanours'. He 'denieth that he was any wayes acquainted or had notice of Mr Dobleday's goeinge, or with his intentions or plotts, or what he did in his beinge abroad'. But in regard that he 'did not performe that diligence that in duety he mighte to have done, by trustinge his servant in a busines of that consequence', he 'doth humbly acknowledge his great error and faulte and humbly submitteth himself to the mercy of your honnor and this honorable court'.

Introduced on 8 June 1638.

Signed by John Coxe.

15/1o, Personal answer of Robert Walsh

Identical to the examination on 10 May 1638 in 13/2q

Introduced on 12 June 1638

Signed by Robert Walsh.

13/2v, Personal answer of Thomas Doubleday [damaged]

1. At Hyde Park Robert Walsh 'making a match with [Doubleday] upon a certaine horserace there to bee runn, and a difference falling thereupon... ... ... one thing for the truth and Walsh the contrarie, [Doubleday] desired Walsh to referr it to gentlemen then present... ... ... their knowledge therein. Walsh replied that they were base fellowes that would affirme any such matter as ... ... had saied. And thereupon [Doubleday] conceiving a foule disgrace to bee putt upon mee in the presence and hearing of soe many gents as were there present by such his language, but unwilling to raise a tumult in that place to the disturbance of soe maine persons of qualitie and others then and there assembled, did afterward send my loving friend Mr Cassy Borrough unto Walsh in private to demand satisfaction for the wrong he had done mee in using the wordes aforesaid. and thereupon Walsh sent mee back word by Mr Burrough that hee and his friend or second would meet [Doubleday] and his friend or second att Calice Sands upon a certaine day then named and there give him satisfaction or to that effect and that this respondent though unwilling to engage any but himselfe in his private and particular quarrell, did accept thereof and prepared himselfe and his loving friend Mr Cassy Borrough, whome he entreated therunto, to meete Walsh and his second att the time and place aforesaid, all which hee confesseth.'

2. 'He doth believe that the Earl of Arundel, Earl Marshal hearing thereof did thereupon send out his lordship's mandate or warrant by one John Coxe, his lordship's messenger, for the apprehending as well of [Doubleday] as Walsh, of purpose to stay and hinder them from going to Calice Sands, or any other place, there to enter into a duell or single combatt accordinge to theire appointment. and hee further confesseth that hee was apprehended by the messinger and submitted himselfe thereunto, as was fitt for him to doe. Nevertheless fearing that this would lie heavie upon his reputacon if hee used not all meanes possible to acquitt himselfe of the infamie and disgrace cast upon him by Walsh att the time and place aforesaid hee privilie did make an escape from the messenger purposinge he would have mett with Walsh in anie convenient place to have required satisfaction of him for the disgrace received from him. All which he now acknowledgeth to have beene rashly and unadvisedly done, and for want of judgment, in that hee thought this would not have bin interpreted for a contempt against his lo[rdshi]pp's; authoritie and hee now seeth it is for the which hee is verie sorrie and craveth his lordshipps pardon, submitting himself etc.'

No date

Sentence / Arbitration

10/12/4, Plaintiff's sentence

Dr Duck sought a sentence to prevent the defendants from duelling: '...that they nor any of them shall weare any weapon.'

Thomas Doubleday was bound for £1,000, Walsh for 1,000 marks, Borrough for 1,000 marks and Coxe for £30.

Signed by Arthur Duck and Arundel and Surrey.

Notes

John Coxe may have been the John Cox of London, gent, whose daughter Elizabeth married Cuthbert Burbage. The rest do not appear in the London Visitations.

J. Jackson Howard and J. L. Chester (eds.), The Visitation of London, 1633, 1634 and, 1635, vol. I (Publications of the Harleian Society, 15, 1880), p. 121; J. B. Whitmore and A. W. Hughes Clarke (eds.), London Visitation Pedigrees, 1664 (Publications of the Harleian Society, 92, 1940); T. C. Wales and C. P. Hartley (eds.), The Visitation of London begun in 1687 (Publications of the Harleian Society, new series, 16 and 17, 2004).

P. Stein, 'Arthur Duck', Oxford DNB (Oxford, 2004).

Documents

• Initial proceedings
  • Articles: 13/2x (no date)
  • Articles: 12/2e (no date)
  • Examination of Doubleday: 13/2p (5 May 1638)
  • Examination of Walsh: 13/2q (10 May 1638)
  • Personal answer of Coxe: 13/2w (8 Jun 1638)
  • Personal answer of Walsh: 15/1o (12 Jun 1638)
  • Personal answer of Doubleday: 13/2v (no date)
• Sentence / Arbitration
  • Plaintiff sentence: 10/12/4 (no date)

People mentioned in the case

• Borrough, Cassy (also Burrough, Borowgh)
• Browne, William, perfumer
• Burbage, Cuthbert
• Burbage, Elizabeth
• Coxe, Elizabeth
• Coxe, John, gent
• Colt, Mr
• Doubleday, Thomas (also Dobleday, Dubleday)
• Duck, Arthur, lawyer
• Howard, Thomas, earl of Arundel and Surrey
• Stopford, Hubert
• Stuart, Charles I, king
• Walsh, Robert (also Welch)

Places mentioned in the case

• France
  • Calais sands
• London
  • Hyde Park
• Middlesex
  • St James
  • Westminster

Topics of the case

• allegation of cowardice
• assault
• cause of office
• challenge to a duel
• constable
• gambling
• giving the lie
• office-holding
• sport
• weapon