The Court of Chivalry 1634-1640.
This free content was Born digital. CC-NC-BY.
Richard Cust, Andrew Hopper, '453 Muschamp v Turner', in The Court of Chivalry 1634-1640, ed. Richard Cust, Andrew Hopper, British History Online https://prod.british-history.ac.uk/no-series/court-of-chivalry/453-muschamp-turner [accessed 21 November 2024].
Richard Cust, Andrew Hopper, '453 Muschamp v Turner', in The Court of Chivalry 1634-1640. Edited by Richard Cust, Andrew Hopper, British History Online, accessed November 21, 2024, https://prod.british-history.ac.uk/no-series/court-of-chivalry/453-muschamp-turner.
Richard Cust, Andrew Hopper. "453 Muschamp v Turner". The Court of Chivalry 1634-1640. Ed. Richard Cust, Andrew Hopper, British History Online. Web. 21 November 2024. https://prod.british-history.ac.uk/no-series/court-of-chivalry/453-muschamp-turner.
In this section
453 MUSCHAMP V TURNER
Edmund Muschamp of Hoxton, co. Middlesex, gent v Dominic Turner of London, vintner
October - December 1640
Abstract
Muschamp complained that Turner abused him in the presence of several people on 25 September 1640 in the city of London, saying 'he was a stinking rogue, a rascall, a coxcombly asse and a drunken idle puppie', and 'that he kept better boys in his house... to wipe his shoes', then ever Muschamp or his father were. Muschamp's libel was presented on 30 October 1640, but the case was lost with the suspension of the court's proceedings in December.
Initial proceedings
5/154, Plaintiff's bond
15 October 1640
Bound to 'appear in the said court in the Painted Chamber within the Pallace of Westminster'.
Signed by Edmund Muschamp.
Sealed, subscribed and delivered in the presence of John Dynham.
5/155, Petition
'Your petitioner being descended of an ancient family of gentry bearing armes. Notwithstanding one Dominic Turner of London, vintner about the 25th of this instant month of September, and within the freedom of the City, did before divers credible persons verie much abuse your petitioner and gave him many rayling and reviyling speeches tending to your petitioner's great disgrace; and amongst other speeches told your petitioner that he was a stinking rogue, a rascall, a coxcombly asse and a drunken idle puppie, and said that he kept better Boys in his house then ever your petitioner or his father were to wipe his shoes, thereby very much provoking your petitioner to duell.'
Petitioner that Turner be brought to answer.
Arundel granted process, 17 October 1640.
Summary of proceedings
Dr Zouch was counsel for Muschampe and Dr Roane for Turner. Dr Zouch gave the libel on 30 October 1640, and Dr Roane was required to respond on 20 November. On 24 October a penalty had been reserved for Turner's non appearance, and on 4 December, Turner was required to respond to the libel within a week.
Notes
The arms of the Muschamps of Middlesex appear in G. J. Armytage (ed.), Middlesex Pedigrees (Publications of the Harleian Society, 65, 1914), p. 131.
A Dominick Turner appears in the 1634 Visitation of London as having married Elizabeth, daughter of Felix Kingston of London, stationer.
J. J. Howard (ed.), The Visitation of London, 1633, 1634 and 1635, vol. II (Publications of the Harleian Society, 17, 1883), p. 32.
Documents
- Initial proceedings
- Plaintiff's bond: 5/154 (15 Oct 1640)
- Petition: 5/155 (17 Oct 1640)
- Proceedings
- 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
- Dynham, John
- Howard, Henry, baron Maltravers
- Howard, Thomas, earl of Arundel and Surrey
- Howard, William, baron Stafford
- Kingston, Elizabeth
- Kingston, Felix, stationer
- Muschamp, Edmund, gent (also Muschampe)
- Roane, William, lawyer
- Turner, Dominic, vintner
- Zouch, Dr, lawyer
Places mentioned in the case
- Middlesex
- Hoxton
- Westminster
Topics of the case
- coat of arms
- comparison
- drunkenness