604 Somerset v Good

604 SOMERSET V GOOD

Sir John Somerset of Pauntley, co. Gloucester, knt v William Good of Redmarley, co. Worcester, yeoman

February 1637 - March 1640

Abstract

Somerset, a younger son of the Earl of Worcester, complained that Good had declared in summer 1636, in Good's house, that he 'was a base knight and as base a conditioned knight as any was in England, and that he did mainteyne one Clarke to defraud and deceave the country'. Good, the younger brother of Worcestershire J.P. Thomas Good esq, maintained that Somerset had forgiven him, 'albeit he had byn informed that Good had given out ill language against him...for that he had received his information in that behalfe from jailebirds and undone fellows.' The prosecution was driven forward, Good insisted, by Charles Harbert, an attorney who had been struck off the roll of the Court of Common Pleas, and Edward Clarke, Somerset's bailiff. Harbert had declared that he was determined 'to rid Good out of the countrie' and Clarke that 'if Sir John Somersett would not prosecute Good in this courte and undo him, he should look for another bailiff'; and the two men had procured several dishonest witnesses, including 'a common affidavit man' and a notorious drunkard who had a grievance against Good for putting him in the stocks when he had been constable.

Proceedings were under way by February 1637 and Somerset's witnesses were examined in May-June. Good's witnesses were examined by a commission of Thomas Baldwyn, clerk, Thomas Cooke, esq, and Thomas Coxe, gent, on 17 January 1638 at the King's Arms Inn, at Ledbury, Herefordshire. In spite of producing several local gentlemen to testify for him, including his brother Henry, Good lost the case and Somerset was awarded £40 in damages and £30 in expenses. The money had been paid by November 1638. Good's submission was at first arranged for 2 June 1639 at the market cross in Newent, Gloucestershire, but was altered to be performed before the judges of the assizes in the town hall of Gloucester on 13 March 1640. He duly apologised for his 'false and scandalous words', promising 'to behave myself ever hereafter with all due observance and respect towards Sir John Somersett and all the gentry of this kingdome.'

Plaintiff's case

14/1ee, Defence interrogatories

1. The witnesses were warned of the penalty for perjury and bearing false witness. What was the age, occupation and condition of the witness? Where did they live now and where had they lived previously?

2. Was the witness related to Good and in what degree? Was the witness indebted to Good and if so by how much? Was the witness a household servant, retainer, farmer or tenant to Good? If so specify for what lands or wage.

3. Did the witness know Charles Somerset of Redmarley D'Abitot, gent, Edward Clarke of Newent, co. Gloucester, yeoman, George Wood of Pauntley, co. Gloucester, gent, George Picton of Staunton, co. Worcester, husbandman, James Ambler of Dymock, co. Gloucester, sawyer? How long had the witness known them and were they of good name, credit and reputation, and would not swear an untruth?

4. Had the witness heard Good say that Somerset was 'a base knight or as base a knight, and of as base a condition, as any lives or as any is in England'? Where and when, and in whose presence did Good say this? If the witness had only heard it reported, then from whom, when and where?

5. How the witness knew the words had been spoken or actions done, when and where, and in whose presence?

6. Had the witness deposed of their own knowledge? Speak the truth of what you know, believe or have heard.

No date.

Signed by Thomas Eden.

Defendant's case

Cur Mil I, fo. 232, Defence

1. Charles Harbert, Edward Clarke, George Wood, George Purton and James Ambler, witnesses examined on behalf of Sir John Somerset, were either relatives, tenants or household servants of Somerset, or capital enemies to Good, or paupers who could be brought to depose anything.

2. Charles Harbert was a 'capital enemy' to William Good, who had 'prosecuted divers suits informations and controversies civill and criminall against Good, whereby he have procured Good to spend much of his estate; and have and did, divers times, give out and threaten that he would undoe Good, and rid the town of him. And this is true, publike and notorious.'

3. Charles Harbert was an attorney at law but was put out of the roll by some judges at Westminster for misdemeanours. Harbert was the solicitor of the cause for Somerset, to whom he had informed Good's pretended words. Harbert had procured the witnesses and paid them for their testimony. 'And this is true publike and notorious'.

4. Charles Harbert had privately discussed with witnesses what they would depose, and had procured their signatures to a paper testifying Good had spoken the pretended words, especially one George Wood, whom Harbert plied with drink at his own house to get him to sign. 'And this is true publike and notorious'.

5. Edward Clarke was tenant and bailiff to Sir John Somerset's manors and lands and 'a capital enemie' to Good. He had procured witnesses and solicited the cause against Good. He had informed Sir John Somerset of Good's pretended words 'to procure Sir John his anger and displeasure against Good. And did further sweare and saie that if Sir John Somersett would not prosecute Good in this courte and undo him, he should look for another bailiff'.

6. George Wood was 'a man of lewd life, a frequenter of innes and alehouses and given to excessive drinking, and may easely be drawne to depose an untruth upon his oath for favour or reward and especially by Charles Harbert against Good. And Wood confessed that when he subscribed his name to the note or writing menconed in the fourth article, he was drunk and knew not what he did.'

7. George Picton was 'a poor beggarly fellow, and that wandereth up and downe the countie and have no certaine place of abode, and a common affidavit man. And Picton have made several desperate affidavits for Harbert and others, and a capital enemie to Good; and have many ways expressed his malice towards him, for that Good did sue Picton and recovered costs against him. And this is true publike and notorious'.

8. James Ambler was 'a poor beggarly fellow and have no certaine place of abode, a common frequenter of inns and alehouses, and much given to excessive drinking and tippling in the places, and a capital enemie of Good: for Good being a constable and finding Ambler drunk caused him to be set in the stocks, since which time Ambler hath threatened and sworn that he would mischief Good. And since his production in this cause, Ambler being asked why he deposed against Good, answered for that Good had laid him by the heeles, and that now he had done Good as badd a harme'.

9. Picton and Ambler had deposed that 1 ½ years since, they had heard Good in his own house say that 'Sir John Somerset was as base a condiconed knight as was in England; and that he kept a rogue Clarke to cozen the country and at the time of speaking of the words one Richard Picton was present with them... for that Richard Picton did not at any time of his being in the company of the witnesses in Good's house, hear Good speak the words of or against Sir John Somerset; and if any such had byn spoken Richard Picton must have heard them and did not, and soe much Richard Picton have confessed.'

10. Good 'protesteth that he never spake the pretended words for or against Sir John Somerset, but have always, as occasion have been offered spoke reverentlie and respectivelie of him before this suite began as became him, and ready to do him all good offices; and Sir John have in like manner testified his good opinion he had of Good by entertaynment of Good as other of his neighbours.'

11. Good protested not out of malice but for his just defence.

Good implored the judges that the cause be dismissed and his expenses paid.

Signed by Clere Talbot.

[Overleaf] Hilary term 1637

Cur Mil I, fo. 233, Letters commissory for the defendant

Addressed to commissioners William Skinner, Dr of Law, Francis Kirle, esq, Thomas Baldwyn, clerk, and also, Sir Robert Cooke, Thomas Cooke, esq, Edward Rich, gent, and Thomas Coxe, gent, to meet in a cause of scandalous words provocative of a duel, from 16 to 18 January 1638 at the inn of John Barnsley called the King's Arms in Ledbury, co. Hereford.

Gilbert Dethick assigned Thomas Smyth as notary public.

Dated 28 November 1637.

Cur Mil I, fos. 224-231, Defence depositions

Taken before commissioners Thomas Baldwin, clerk, Thomas Coxe, gent, Thomas Cooke, esq, on 17 January 1638 at the Kings Arms, Ledbury, co. Hereford.

fo. 225r (Witness 1), Richard Picton of Redmarley D'Abitot, co. Worcester, yeoman, born there, aged 53

To Good's defence:

8-10. To his knowledge 'he never was at the house of Good in company with James Ambler and George Picton at anie and the same instant; neither did he ever heare Good utter or speake any the words against Sir John Somersett in their companies or elsewhere.'

Signed by Richard Picton and by the three commissioners.

fos. 225r-227r (Witness 2), Henry Good of Redmarley D'Abitot, co. Worcester, gent, born there, aged 47

To Good's defence:

1-2. Charles Harbert 'hath much envied and borne hatred towards' William Good, and in the last 5 years had procured information against him in the Council of the Marches, one of which was for scandalous words pretended to be spoken by Good against the name of Herbert. Harbert had told him he wanted to 'make an end of Good, whereby this witness conceaved that his meaning and intent was to rid Good out of countrie.'

3. Charles Harbert had been an attorney 'in one of his Majesty's courts holden at Westminster, and that upon conference had several times betwixt this witness and one Mr Thomas Debitate, this witness understood by relation from him, that upon complaints made unto Sir John Finch, knight, then and nowe Chief Justice of his Majesty's Court of Common Pleas, against Mr Harbert, for certain oppressions by him acted against his neighbours, under colour of his writ of priviledge, Mr Harbert was put out of the roll upon petition proferred by Mr Debitate, and that Debitate was the man that rased him out of the roll.' About 15 June 1637 he was at the house of Thomas Roberts in Redmarley D'Abitot with Richard Barston and Charles Harbert, where he saw Harbert produce a letter subscribed with Sir John Somerset's name, 'and which Mr Harbert then affirmed was from Sir John Somerset immediately directed, which said letter imported a request unto Mr Harbert to goe unto Edward Clarke and wish him to provide witnesses enough to be examined upon a commission formerly expedited in this cause against William Good, saying the more witnesses they had the better it would further the cause; and thereby Mr Herbert was also desired, to send a note of the charges, and withal to let Sir John Somersetto understand what recompence he should make to his solicitor, which makes [Good] to believe that Mr Harbert did solicit the cause.'

4. At John Heyward's house in Redmarley D'Abitot, around Lammas 1637 in the presence of John Pauncefoot and others whose names he cannot remember, George Wood told him that he had recently been at Harbert's house, 'and there being made drunke, Harbert caused a note to be drawen importing the words supposed to be spoken by William Good against Sir John Somerset and caused him in such his weakness to subscribe his name thereunto as a witness. And that Wood, upon consideration had to what he had so done, in the next ensuing morning required a sight of the subscribed note, which Mr Harbert then denied. And George Wood at the time so farre expressed himself unto William Good being then and there also present, that albeit he had subscribed the note, yet he knew not the contents thereof, neither could he accuse Good of uttering any ill language at all against Sir John Somerset in his presence.'

5. Edward Clarke was Sir John Somerset's bailiff and 'maliciously affected against William Good, for that he hath impounded Good's cattle'. He also believed that 'Clarke doth follow this suite on the same Sir John Somersett's behalf, and hath procured witnesses for him, for that he hath seen a letter from Sir John Somersett to that purpose.'

6. George Wood 'is reputed to be very much affected to haunting of alehouses and excessive drinking'. He had 'several times seen him overcome with such excesse, and believeth that he is a man that may be easily seduced to depose an untrueth.'

7. George Picton 'is reputed to be a poore wandering fellow, that liveth by almes received from doore to doore, and a man that hath byn and is very forward to make affidavits contrary to trueth; and namely he at several tymes deposed falsely in several of his Majesty's courts against William Good, and this witness to their greate damage and detriment.'

8. James Ambler 'is reputed to be a poore wandering fellow that liveth by carrying materials for the making and mending of sieves about the country, a great frequenter of alehouses and much addicted to excessive drinking, *suspected for stealing sheep*. About two years last past he being drunk at Redmarley was put in the stocks by William Good, then constable there, for the same, and being released he divers times since (as this witness hath heard) given out many threatening speeches against Good, saying that he would requite him for so doing; and this witness talking of late with Ambler's wife asked her why her husband would so falsely sweare against Good in this business'. She replied that her husband owed Good 'a good turne for putting him in the stocks.'

10. William Good 'hath ever expressed much respect and reverence towards Sir John Somersett, and likewise Good since the time of the *pretended* words hath received much respect and favour from Sir John Somersett, and byn respectively entertained at his house; and Sir John Somersett soe farre expressed himself to this witness, that albeit he had byn informed that Good had given out ill language against him, yet he intended not to trouble him for the same, for that he received his information in that behalf from jailebirds and undone fellows'.

Signed by Henry Good, and by the three commissioners.

fos. 227v-228r (Witness 3), William Lane of Newent, co. Gloucester, yeoman, born there, aged about 60

To Good's defence:

1-2. In the last 2 years William Good's wife told him several times that Charles Harbert 'gave out in speeches that he would spend eight oxen, certaine kine, and other of his estate to rid Good out of country'.

4. On 7 August he was at John Heyward's house in Redmarley D'Abitot, in the presence of George Wood, John Pauncefoot, gent, John Heyward and Robert Ayleway, gent. There Wood and Pauncefoot confessed they were at Harbert's house not long before the execution of the commission, and, 'being merry with drink or sider, Harbert caused them to subscribe their names to a note conceaved in writing to that purpose, importing some scandalous words pretended to be spoken by Good against Sir John Somersett'. They also confessed that the next morning neither of them understood the contents of the note they had subscribed.

5. Edward Clarke was 'maliciously effected towards Good...for that he hath earnestly solicited this witness severall tymes to testifie some words pretended to be spoken by Good against Clarke, which this witness never heard related. Likewise for that he hath heard it reported by one Mr John Coxe that Clarke should saie unto him, that if Sir John Somersett did not prosecute Good in this suite he should looke him another Baylive'.

Signed by William Lane and by the three commissioners.

fo. 228v (Witness 4), William Wodley of Redmarley D'Abitot, co. Worcester, yeoman, born there, aged 40

To Good's defence:

1-2. He had heard that George Picton had begged.

8. 'About Whitsuntide last was twelvemonths' James Ambler was drunk and abused Good and others. Good was then constable so he had Ambler put in the stocks.

Signed by William Wodley [his mark], and by the three commissioners.

fo. 229r (Witness 5), Grimbold Pauncefoot of Newent, co. Gloucester, gent, lived there about 25 years, aged about 53

To Good's defence:

1-2. He had heard of several past lawsuits between Charles Harbert and William Good.

3. Harbert had been an attorney in the Court of Common Pleas.

5. He believed Edward Clarke 'beareth little or no goodwill to Good, and that there heretofore did arise a suite or difference betwixt them concerning one George Wood's lands, and some trespasses pretended to be made by [Good]and Clarke* in and upon the lands.'

7. George Picton 'is reputed to be a poore fellowe, and hath heard that he doth usually begge, and hath made severall affidavits.'

10. 'He hath oftentimes heard *before the commencement of this suite* Good to denie that he ever spoke any scandalous words of or against Sir John Somersett, but in this witness's hearing reported very reverently and respectively of him.'

Signed by Grimbold Pauncefoot and by the three commissioners.

fo. 229v (Witness 6), William Spilman of Redmarley D'Abitot, co. Worcester, sawyer, born there, aged about 23

To Good's defence:

1-2. As witness 5.

3. He was working on Redmarley Green with James Ambler when Charles Harbert gave Ambler money 'and read a billet unto him wishing him to remember to be at Gloucester on a day then shortly after'. After Harbert left, Ambler acknowledged he had just received 12 pence to testify in the cause against William Good at Gloucester.

Signed by William Spilman [his mark], and by the three commissioners.

fo. 230r (Witness 7), Richard Barston of Redmarley D'Abitot, co. Worcester, yeoman, lived there for 30 years, aged about 52

To Good's defence:

3. Around 15 June 1637 he was with Harbert and Henry Good at the house of Thomas Roberts in Redmarley D'Abitot, when Harbert read a letter, which he said was from Sir John Somerset. The letter desired that Harbert or Clarke procure witnesses for Sir John, saying that the more witnesses the better, 'and withal thereby desired Mr Harbert to send him an answer what recompence his solicitor should have.'

7. George Picton 'is reputed to be a poore fellowe, and liveth not with his wife.'

10. During the last 3 months, William Good had 'utterly protested and denied unto [Barston] upon conference betwixt them had in that behalf that he never spake any the scandalous words or any other words at all of, or against, Sir John Somersett.'

Signed by Richard Barston, and by the three commissioners.

fo. 230v (Witness 8), John Nelmes of Newent, co. Gloucester, gent, aged about 35

To Good's defence:

5. Edward Clarke was a tenant and bailiff to Sir John Somerset.

6. Between Easter and Trinity term 1637 he was going from Newent to George Wood's house, with Wood and William Lane, when he heard Wood confess he had never heard William Good speak scandalous words against Sir John Somerset.

Signed by John Nelmes and by the three commissioners.

fo. 231r (Witness 9), William Foliot of Hanly, co. Worcester, gent, born at Perton, co. Worcester, aged about 48

To Good's defence:

2. On Tuesday 16 January he was at Ledbury with Mr Coxe a commissioner for this cause 'and upon conference with him perceived that he had newly received notice from Good to speed the same at this day, which was then conceaved to be but short warning; and afterwards happening to have like conference with Mr Harbert touching the same, he said if it were his case as it was Mr Coxe's he would not speed the commission, whereupon Mr Harbert said we can do no good of him, meaning Mr Coxe; I pray you see what good you can doe with him.'

Signed by William Folyot and by the three commissioners.

Cur Mil I, fo. 231v, Notary public's certificate

Certificate in Latin signed by Thomas Smyth, notary public for the diocese of Hereford, that the examinations had been completed and were now being returned.

18 January 1638

Notary's mark.

Sentence / Arbitration

12/2h, Plaintiff's sentence

£40 filled in, although unclear whether this is under first or second heading.

No date.

12/2d, Defendant's sentence [damaged]

[Too badly damaged to read]

No date.

12/2k, Plaintiff's bill of costs

Hilary term, 1637: £5-5s-10d

Easter term, 1637: £4-7s-6d

Trinity term, 1637: £32-1s-8d, including £10 for the notary and £13-6s-8d for the expenses of the commissioners.

Michaelmas term, 1637: £5-5s

Hilary term, 1637: £10-15s, including £5 for the expenses of the commissioners.

Easter term, 1638: £10-5s

Total: £68

Signed by Thomas Eden.

Taxed at £30.

Signed by Maltravers.

Submission

4/33, First submission

William Good was to perform his submission between 1 and 2pm on Whitsunday, 2 June 1639, at the market cross in Newent, co. Gloucester, standing bareheaded and in an audible voice. [All this was later crossed out]

'Whereas I, William Good, stand convict... to have uttered and spoken many disgraceful and scandalous speeches in contempt and tending greatly to the disparagement of Sir John Somersett, and in particular to have said that Sir John Somersett was a base knight and as base a conditioned knight as any was in England, and that he did mainteyne one Clarke to defraud and deceave the country, I doe hereby confesse and acknowledge that I am hartily sorry for my indiscreete uttering of the said words; and doe further acknowledge Sir John Somersett to be an honest and worthy knight descended of a noble family and the naturall and lawfull sone of the right honourable Henry now earle of Worcester. And I do hartily and humbly pray the pardon and forgiveness of the said right honourable Thomas Earle of Arrundell and Surrey, Earle Marshall of England, and Courte Militarie aforesaid, and also of Sir John Somersett, for my such rash and inconsiderate speakeinge of the said words, which I do hereby acknowledge to be most false and scandalous. And I doe promise to behave myself ever hereafter with all due observance and respect towards Sir John Somersett and all the gentry of this kingdome.'

'William Good on the thirteenth day of March next ensuing between the howres of nine and eleven in the forenoon of the day in the towne hall of the city of Gloucester before the judges of assizes, then and there judicially sitting, shall stand bareheaded in some eminent place and with an audible voice read, or after the clarke of the assize or his deputy readinge the same unto him, say as followeth.'

4/44, Second submission

William Good was to perform his submission between 9 and 11am on 13 March in the town hall of Gloucester, before the judges of the assizes 'standing bareheaded in some eminent place and with an audible voice':

The wording was identical to the first submission: 4/33.

Dated 20 February 1640

'Let this submission be made in manner and forme accordingly.

H. Maltravers'

[Overleaf]

'This submission being performed in manner as aforesaid William Good is to subscribe his name thereto and to desire the clarke of the assize, and two or three other persons then present, to testify his performance thereof by the subscribing their names hereto and returne the same into the Registry of the Courte Military at or before the first Court day of Easter Terme next ensuing'.

Signed by William Lewin, Registrar.

4/44, Certificate of submission

'This submission was performed by William Good according to the contents of this order, (but only in respect of much business in the Court concerning the delivery of the Gaole) it could not be done until the next day following the said thirteenth day of March menconed in this order, by witness wheareof William Good hath sett to his hand according to the direction of this order.'

Signed by William Good in the presence of George Cradock, clerk of the assizes, Zachory Babington and John Nelme.

[14 March 1640]

Summary of proceedings

Dr Eden acted as counsel for Somerset and Dr Talbot for Good. Proceedings were under way by 16 February 1637. On 31 October 1637 the statements of Somerset's witnesses were published and Dr Talbot was required to present Good's defence at the next sitting, failing which the court would proceed to sentence. On 28 November Dr Talbot was again required to provide material for the defence. The commissioners to examine Good's witnesses were appointed: William Skinner L.L.D., Francis Kirle esq., and Thomas Baldwyn clerk, and also, Sir Robert Cooke, Thomas Cooke esq, Edward Rich, gent and Thomas Coxe, gent. They were to meet from 16 to 18 February at the King's Arms in Ledbury, co. Hereford. On 3 February 1638 Dr Talbot was required to go through the material for the defence. On 12 February Good was condemned to be fined for delaying the proceedings and Dr Talbot produced on Good's behalf the witnesses Thomas Pauncefoote and Robert Ayleway. On 6 November 1638 the court required certification of Good's performance of his submission and payment of the £40. Proceedings on 20 November 1638 included the note: '£30 paid to Sir John last terme; £40 paid my man now which is ready for Sir John.'

Notes

Sir John Somerset of Pauntley, co. Gloucester, was a Catholic royalist lieutenant-colonel in the regiment of Sir Edmund Fortescue.

P.R. Newman, Royalist officers in England and Wales, 1642-1660: A biographical dictionary (London, 1981), pp. 352-3.

William and Henry Good were the younger brothers of Thomas Good of Redmarley D'Abitot, a J.P. for co. Worcester in the 1634 Visitation. William was the son of another Thomas Good of Redmarley and Mary, daughter of William Nutbrowne of Bocking.

A. T. Butler (ed.), The Visitation of Worcestershire, 1634 (Publications of the Harleian Society, 90, 1938), p. 39.

Henry Somerset, earl of Worcester, and Sir John Somerset had alienated 12 acres of meadow in Redmarley D'Abitot, Worcestershire to Sir Charles Somerset and others in September 1632 which may have had some bearing on the case.

J. Broadway, R. P. Cust and S. K. Roberts (eds.), The Docquets of Lord Keeper Coventry 1625-1640 (List and Index Soc., Spec. Ser., 34-37), p. 627.

One of Good's witnesses, Grimbold Pauncefoote of Newent, co. Gloucester, appeared as defendant in cause 506.

Documents

• Plaintiff's case
  • Defence interrogatories: 14/1ee (no date)
• Defendant's case
  • Defence: Cur Mil I, fo. 232 (Hil 1637)
  • Letters commissory for the defendant: Cur Mil I, fo. 233 (28 Nov 1637)
  • Defence depositions: Cur Mil I, fos. 224-31 (17 Jan 1638)
  • Notary public's certificate: Cur Mil I, fo. 231 (18 Jan 1638)
• Sentence / Arbitration
  • Plaintiff's sentence: 12/2h (no date)
  • Defendant's sentence: 12/2d (no date)
  • Plaintiff's bill of costs: 12/2k (Eas 1638)
• Submission
  • First submission: 4/33(2 Jun 1639)
  • Second submission: 4/44 (20 Feb 1640)
  • Certificate of submission: 4/44 (14 Mar 1640)
• Proceedings
  • Proceedings: 68C, fos. 1r-11r (16 Feb 1637)
  • Proceedings before Arundel: 8/26 (14 Oct 1637)
  • Proceedings before Maltravers: 8/27 (14 Oct 1637)
  • Proceedings before Maltravers: 8/28 (31 Oct 1637)
  • Proceedings before Maltravers: 8/29 (18 Nov 1637)
  • Proceedings before Maltravers: 8/30 (28 Nov 1637)
  • Proceedings before Arundel: 1/5, fos. 23-35 (3 Feb 1638)
  • Proceedings before Arundel: 1/5, fos. 38-56 (12 Feb 1638)
  • Proceedings before Maltravers: R.19, fos. 454r-468v (6 Nov 1638)
  • Proceedings before Maltravers: R.19, fos.400v-412v (20 Nov 1638)

People mentioned in the case

• Ambler, James, sawyer
• Babington, Zachory
• Baldwyn, Thomas, clerk (also Baldwin)
• Barnsley, John, innkeeper
• Barston, Richard, yeoman
• Clarke, Edward, yeoman
• Cooke, Robert, knight
• Cooke, Thomas, esq
• Coxe, Thomas, gent
• Cradock, George, clerk of the assizes
• Debitate, Thomas, Mr
• Dethick, Gilbert, registrar
• Eden, Thomas, lawyer
• Finch, John, knight
• Fortescue, Edmund, knight
• Good, Henry, gent
• Good, Mary
• Good, Thomas, esq
• Good, William, yeoman
• Harbert, Charles, attorney
• Heyward, John
• Howard, Henry, baron Maltravers
• Howard, Thomas, earl of Arundel and Surrey
• Kirle, Francis, esq
• Lane, William, yeoman
• Lewin, William, registrar
• Nutbrowne, Mary
• Nutbrowne, William
• Pauncefoot, John, gent (also Pauncefoote)
• Pauncefoot, Grimbold, gent (also Pauncefoote)
• Pauncefoot, Thomas (also Pauncefoote)
• Picton, George, husbandman
• Picton, Richard, yeoman
• Rich, Edward, gent
• Roberts, Thomas
• Skinner, William, Dr of Law
• Smyth, Thomas, notary public
• Somerset, Charles, gent
• Somerset, Charles, knight
• Somerset, Henry, earl of Worcester
• Somerset, John, knight
• Talbot, Clere, lawyer
• Wood, George, gent

Places mentioned in the case

• Essex
  • Bocking
• Gloucestershire
  • Dymock
  • Gloucester
  • Newent
  • Pauntley
• Herefordshire
  • Ledbury
• Worcestershire
  • Hanley
  • Perton
  • Redmarley D'Abitot
  • Staunton

Topics of the case

• allegation of cheating
• allegation of perjury
• assizes
• constable
• Court of Common Pleas
• denial of gentility
• drunkenness
• justice of the peace
• military officer
• office-holding
• other courts
• Roman Catholic
• royalist