129 Coppleston v Bailey

129 COPPLESTON V BAILEY

Lancelot Coppleston of Alverdiscott, co. Devon, gent v John Bailey of the same, clerk

February - October 1640

Abstract

Coppleston complained that Bailey had called him 'a base fellow, a base gentleman, a base rascall, a base knave, a base slave, and a base lying knave, or words to the like effect, and spit in his face, or att least did boast, and said that he spit in his face'. Process was granted on 15 February 1640 and order was given to publish the depositions of Bailey's witnesses in December; but no further proceedings survive.

Initial proceedings

2/12, Petition to Arundel

'Your petitioner, being a gent of a verie auntient discent and familie in Devon, hath been much scandalized and abused by one John Bayly clerk, who called your petitioner, base gent, base knave, base Rascall; and spit in your petitioners face, by all which your petitioner is insufferblie wronged.'

Petitioned that Bayly be brought to answer.

Maltravers granted process on 15 February 1640.

2/15, Plaintiff's bond

22 February 1639/40

Bound to appear 'in the Court in Arundell house scituate within the parish of St Clements Danes without Temple Barr, London'.

Signed by Nathaniel Stephens of Lyons Inn, co. Middlesex, gent, on behalf of Coppleston.

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

5/19, Defendant's bond

6 May 1640

Bound to 'appear in Arundel house in the Strand without Temple Bar, London'.

William Warman of Lyons Inn, co. Middlesex, gent, to act on the defendant's behalf.

Signed by William Warman.

Signed, sealed and delivered in the presence of John Watson.

R.19, fo. 2r, Summary of libel

'Coppleston and his ancestors, for up to 300 or more years past, is and have bin gentlemen, and soe commonly reputed, and that Bayly said that Coppleston was a base fellow, a base gentleman, a base rascall, a base knave, a base slave, and a base lying knave, or words to the like effect, and spit in his face, or att least did boast, and said that he spit in his face, thereby to provoke, and c.'

1640

No signature.

Summary of proceedings

Dr Parry acted as counsel to Coppleston and Dr Eden to Bailey. The depositions of the witnesses for Bailey were sent for in October 1640 and order given to publish them in December, before Lord Maltravers and the earl of Huntingdon.

Notes

Lancelot was the second son of Christopher Copplestone of Higher Kingdon in the parish of Alverdiscott, and Mary, daughter of John Addington of Bideford. He was aged 21 in 1620.

F. T. Colby (ed.), The Visitation of the County of Devon in the year 1620 (Publications of the Harleian Society, 6, 1872), p. 72.

Documents

• Initial proceedings
  • Petition to Arundel: 2/12 (15 Feb 1640)
  • Plaintiff's bond: 2/15 (22 Feb 1640)
  • Defendant's bond: 5/19 (6 May 1640)
  • Libel: R.19, fo. 2r (1640)
• Proceedings
  • Proceedings: 1/11, fos. 56r-64v (10 Oct 1640)
  • Proceedings before Maltravers: 1/11, fos. 79r-87v (4 Dec 1640)

People mentioned in the case

• Addington, John
• Addingtorn, Mary
• Coppleston, Christopher, gent (also Copplestone)
• Coppleston, Lancelot, gent (also Copplestone)
• Coppleston, Mary (also Copplestone)
• Bailey, John, clerk (also Bayly)
• Eden, Thomas, lawyer
• Hastings, Henry, earl of Huntingdon
• Howard, Henry, baron Maltravers
• Howard, Thomas, earl of Arundel and Surrey
• Parry, George, lawyer
• Stephens, Nathaniel, gent
• Warman, William, gent
• Watson, John

Places mentioned in the case

• Devon
  • Alverdiscott
  • Bideford
  • Higher Kingdon
• London
  • Arundel House
  • Temple Bar
  • St Clement Danes
  • Strand
• Middlesex
  • Lyon's Inn

Topics of the case

• denial of gentility
• giving the lie
• inns of court
• provocative of a duel
• spitting