167 Dorset v Rigges

167 DORSET V RIGGES

Edward Sackville, 4^th Earl of Dorset v Robert Rigges of Fareham, co. Hampshire, gent

June - December 1640

Abstract

Dorset complained that while Rigges and Thomas Badd were arguing at the Red Lion Inn, Fareham, Hampshire, on 27 January 1640, Rigges had said 'what care I for my Lord of Dorset, he is but a poore beggarly lord, and hath but one voice after twenty att Councell Board; and there are twenty voices there above him'. [See causes 21 and 557 for the actions between Badd and Rigges connected with this incident]. Rigges argued that Badd had informed Dorset of the pretended words in revenge because Rigges had indicted Badd for contemptuous words against the king at the Hampshire assizes in June 1640. His interrogatories threw further light on the long history of quarrelling between the two men. Dorset's witnesses included Thomas Badd, esq, John Barton, esq, Alexander Drew, gent, Thomas Woolgar and Samuel Rowte, all of whom deposed on Badd's behalf in August 1640. Their depositions were published on 30 October 1640 and Rigges began his defence in November. The suspension of the court's proceedings after 4 December, however, probably ensured that the case was never completed.

Initial proceedings

5/88, Defendants' bond

20 June 1640

That he was to 'appear in the Court in the Painted Chamber within the Pallace of Westminster'.

Signed with their seals by Robert Riggs, Anthony Haberley and Cornelius Dowse

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

20/1g, Libel

1. He was Baron Buckhurst, earl of Dorset and a royal councillor.

2. On 27 January in Fareham town, Thomas Badd and Robert Rigges were arguing when Rigges said 'that his great friend the Lord of Dorset would shake him off in case he went to trouble him in every triviall business as he did, Thomas Badd answering that he never yet had any cause worth the troubling of the Lord of Dorset, but if he had it was likely he would repayre to his lordship, and make use of him. Rigges thereupon replied, wounds, what care I for my Lord of Dorset; he is but a poore beggarly lord, and hath but one voice after twenty att Councell Board, and there are twenty voices there above him'.

3. These contemptuous words against his dignity were provocative of a duel.

No date.

Signed by Arthur Duck.

4/38, Order to amend libel

'Whereas in the cause depending in the Courte Militarie between the right honourable Edward earle of Dorsett, plaintiff, against Robert Riggs, defendant, the christian name of Riggs is mistaken in the libell, and therein he is called by the name of Roger for Robert. Lett the register of the courte amend the same mistaking in the libell, and alter the name of Roger to Robert Riggs as it ought to be. And this shall be his warrant for so doing. Dat. at Arundell house, 27 July 1640.

Signed by Maltravers.

Plaintiff's case

Cur Mil II, fo. 182, Defence interrogatories

1. The witnesses were warned of the penalty for perjury and bearing false witness. How did they know the parties?

2. Was the witness related to the earl of Dorset and if so in what degree? Was the witness a household servant to the earl?

3. Did the witness know that one of the witnesses, Mr Badd, had married a 'gentlewoman allied to the earl of Dorset', and did another witness Mr Barton, marry Mr Badd's sister?

4. Did the witness know that for a long time there had been suits between Mr Badd and Mr Rigges, and between Mr Rigges and the kindred of Mr Badd and Mr Barton?

5. Did the witness know that when Badd was riding with Rigges, Badd 'did utter bold and contemptuous words touching the king's majestie, the judges and justices of the kingdom, and that Mr Rigges, for his own safetie, was forced to reveal and make knowne the same to certayne justices of the peace who bound Mr Rigges to prosecute and Mr Badd to answer the same at the next assizes. All which was said and done since the pretended speaking of the words and before Mr Badd made the same known to the right honourable the earl of Dorset'. Was not Mr Badd's current prosecution merely in revenge for this?

6. Did the witness know that Mr Badd, and Penford, Mr Barton's brother, had formerly questioned Mr Rigges for speaking against one or more J.P.s, for which Rigges was condemned and pronounced guilty, when it is 'common fame and report' that Mr Rigges never spoke the words sworn against him by Mr Badd and Penford, and over 20 witnesses had confirmed this.

7. Did the witness know that Mr Badd had set up a race post on or near Mr Rigges's ground near Fareham, and had said to a servant of Rigges 'that he did set up a gibbet for his master to hange himself on, speaking the same in a jeering disgraceful manner before a great company of people... and whether doe you not believe or conceive by the speech that Mr Badd doth wish or desire that it might soe fall out unto Mr Rigges'?

8. Did the witness know that Penford and Wolgar were questioned by Rigges over their accounts as collectors for the poor, and that they were condemned by two or three JPs for deceiving the poor of about £30?

9. When and where were the pretended words in the libel spoken, who was present and what was their occasion for coming there? Were any of the witnesses urged to take notice of the words, if so by whom?

10. Had Mr Badd and Mr Barton not confessed that they 'had been drinking hard and were distempered thereby, especially Mr Badd who confessed that he had been drinking healths at the Lady Norton's. Did not their words appear to be by their carriage and behaviour at the time and place, and were they not drunk or very far gone in drink' at the pretended speaking of the words?

11. Did Badd first mention the Earl of Dorset, and say to Rigges in a jeering manner 'Sirrah, if you remember my lord of Dorset is an honourable person and a great peere of the realme, and if you trouble my lord of Dorset with all your trivial business and quarrels, my lord of Dorset will shake you off'?

12. Did Badd say that if Rigges had not had him questioned for words against the king, he would never have had Rigges questioned for words against the earl of Dorset?

13. Did the witness know that Rigges was suing Badd upon an action of assault or battery? Did the witness know that Badd had threatened the life of Rigges and that Rigges 'was forced to swear the peace against Mr Badd'. Did the witness know that Badd had been found guilty of this assault or battery and had been bound to the peace?

14. Was there 'deadly and capital enmity and malice' between Rigges and Badd, Barton and the other witnesses?

15. Was the witness testifying voluntarily or was he compelled by a process of the court? Who produced him as a witness?

16. Had the witness been given instructions for commencing and prosecuting the suit?

17. Had the witness born his own charges in the suit, or promised to do so in case he could not make it appear that Rigges said the words in the libel?

18. 'How long after the speaking of the pretended words did he acquaint the right honourable earl therewith, did he acquaint him therewith att the first time he saw or spake with the right honourable after the pretended speaking of the words, and how many times did he speak with the earl before he acquainted him therewith'?

19. 'Whether he hath not promised courtesies to other, or been promised courtesies by other of his [witnesses] or namely that he would speake them or some of them from being pressed to be soldiers or bearing of armes, or that they should be so spared in case they would depose the words [in the libel], and have they not been threatened with danger if they would not sweare'?

20. 'Whether he came not in person to Rigges's house with the messenger that came to serve the warrant on Rigges in this cause out of this honorable court'.

No date.

Signed by William Merrick.

Summary of proceedings

Dr Duck acted for Dorset and Dr Merrick for Rigges. The prosecution was required to prove the libel in Michaelmas term, 1640, and on 14 October Dr Duck produced Dorset's witnesses, Thomas Badd, esq, John Barton, esq, Alexander Drew, gent, Thomas Woolgar and Samuel Rowte. On 30 October, Dr Duck published their depositions and Dr Merrick began relating the material for Rigges's defence. In November Rigges defended himself in person and was given until the first session of the next term to prove his allegations.

Notes

During the civil wars, Dorset joined the king in Oxford, but was a noted moderate and prominent in attempts for a negotiated settlement. In January 1644 he was appointed lord chamberlain of the king's household and was closely involved in the royalist Oxford parliament.

D. L. Smith, 'Edward Sackville, 4^th earl of Dorset', Oxford DNB (Oxford, 2004).

There was no pedigree for the Badd family, but Jane, daughter of Emanuel Badd. married Thomas Leigh, mayor of Newport. Emanuel Badd died in 1632 and Thomas Badd was created a baronet in 1642. The pedigree of the Riggs family of Fareham survives in BL, Harleian MS 1544, fos.135-7.

W. H. Rylands (ed.), Pedigrees from the Visitation of Hampshire (Publications of the Harleian Society, 64, 1913), pp.154, 180; W. Page (ed.), The Victoria History of the County of Hampshire and the Isle of Wight (London, 1908), vol. 3, p.214.

On 9 July 1640 at the Hampshire assizes in Winchester castle before the judge John Bramston, Robert Rigges brought a bill of indictment against Thomas Badd, esq, of Fareham, who was bound over to the Assizes for speaking scandalous words against the King.

J. S. Cockburn (ed.), Western Circuit Assize Orders, 1629-1648 (Camden Society, 4^th series, 17, 1976), p. 200.

CSP Dom. 1635-6 , pp.397-8: John Barton of Fareham informed against Riggs for complaining against the Bishop of Winchester and abusing him when he threatened to complain to the Privy Council in April 1636. Barton also complained that Riggs had made an unfair assessment for ship money, altering an earlier assessment by Badd in April 1636.

CSP Dom. 1636-7 , pp.139, 163, 185, 343, 352, 387; CSP Add. 1625-49 , p.600: Between September 1636 and January 1636/7 Rigges was the ringleader in throwing down fences on land being improved in Hampshire by Lady Wandesford under a royal patent.

CSP Dom. 1636-7 , pp.405, 476: In January 1636/7 Rigges and his neighbours complained about John Barton's collection of ship money in Fareham.

CSP Dom. 1637 , pp.251, 276, 277, 291, 294, 295, 298, 303, 309, 474, 496, 528, 558: Between June and November 1637 there werea series of complaints against Rigges for interfering with the king's collection of timber for the navy in the Hampshire. He had allegedly been obstructing John Robins, a royal purveyor, by using abusive speeches and serving warrants on him.

CSP Dom. 1637 , p.525; CSP Dom. 1637-8 , pp.126-7: Badd and others petitioned the council to complain about Rigges for unjustly assessing the ship money rate for Fareham. In retaliation for Barton complaining against him, Rigges had allegedly raised Badd's rate by 10s and then persuaded the attorney general to prosecute him in Star Chamber for refusing to pay.

Documents

• Initial proceedings
  • Defendants' bond: 5/88 (20 Jun 1640)
  • Libel: 20/1g (no date)
  • Order to amend libel: 4/38 (27 Jul 1640)
• Plaintiff's case
  • Defence interrogatories: Cur Mil II, fo. 182 (no date)
• Proceedings
  • Proceedings: 1/12 (Mic 1640)
  • Proceedings: 1/11, fos. 56r-64v (10 Oct 1640)
  • Proceedings: 1/11, fos. 73r-78v (10 Oct 1640)
  • Proceedings before Marten: 1/11, fo. 72r (14 Oct 1640)
  • Proceedings before Stafford: 1/11, fos. 41r-44v (24 Oct 1640)
  • Proceedings before Maltravers: 1/11, fos. 19r-30v (30 Oct 1640)
  • Proceedings: 1/11, fos. 5r-9r (20 Nov 1640)
  • Proceedings before Maltravers: 1/11, fos. 79r-87v (4 Dec 1640)

People mentioned in the case

• Badd, Emanuel
• Badd, Jane
• Badd, Thomas, esq
• Barton, John, esq
• Bramston, John, judge
• Dowse, Cornelius
• Drew, Alexander, gent
• Duck, Arthur, lawyer
• Haberley, Anthony
• Howard, Henry, baron Maltravers
• Howard, William, baron Stafford
• Leigh, Jane
• Leigh, Thomas, mayor
• Marten, Henry, knight
• Merrick, William, lawyer
• Norton, Lady
• Penford, William
• Rigges, Robert, gent (also Riggs)
• Robins, John, royal purveyor
• Rowte, Samuel, yeoman
• Sackville, Edward, earl of Dorset
• Stuart, Charles I, king
• Wandesford, lady
• Watson, John
• Woolgar, Thomas, yeoman (also Wolgar)

Places mentioned in the case

• Hampshire
  • Fareham
  • Winchester
• Isle of Wight
  • Newport
• Middlesex
  • Arundel House
  • Westminster

Topics of the case

• assault
• assizes
• drinking healths
• drunkenness
• other courts
• ship money
• Star Chamber
• taxation