CP40/665: Easter term 1427

Court of Common Pleas, CP 40/665, rot. 103

Term: Easter 1427
County: London
Writ type: Trespass (against statute)
Damages claimed: 20m
Case type: Breach of Statute; Contract (service/employment)

Pleading: William Okeley, citing the terms of the statute of Labourers, states that on 1 January 1425 he retained Christina Shorter to be his servant, embroidering beds and tying cauls, for one entire year then next following. However, on 7 January 1425 CS withdrew from his service without reasonable cause or licence, and entered the service of Thomas Cok. Damages are claimed at 20m.

Pleading: TC and CS defend, and separately say that CS was never retained by WO to do the work aforesaid or for the period aforesaid. Parties on country, jury here at quindene of Trinity 1427. Pledges named for defendants.

Court of Common Pleas, CP 40/665, rot. 105d

Term: Easter 1427
County: London
Writ type: Trespass (force and arms)
Damages claimed: £10
Case type: Trespass (chattels)

Pleading: John G. claims that on 01/11/1422, at London, Thomas V. used force and arms to break a certain tally which had been made between JG himself and Ralph S. towards the victualling of Humphrey duke of Gloucester, for the said duke Humphrey himself, taking by his letters patent, two oxen which were made to have been sold from ('de') the same JG to RS for 53s 4d, to the work of Duke Humphrey. Damages are claimed at £10.

Pleading: TV says that he is not to blame and puts himself upon the country, and JG puts himself likewise. Order to the sheriff of London to make a jury come in Trinity term 1427. Pledges are named for the defendant.

Court of Common Pleas, CP 40/665, rot. 106d

Term: Easter 1427
County: Essex
Writ type: Debt (bond)
Damages claimed: £10
Damages awarded: 6s 8d
Case type: Bond

Pleading: John B. claims that John W. owes him 9m. Per a bond. Damages are claimed at £10. Bond shown in court. And upon this JB says that the bond was made at [left blank].

Pleading: JW defends and seeks licence to imparl as far as Trinity term 1427.

Postea text: 4 posteas - all further licences to imparl as far as Trinity term 1428.

Postea text: postea 5 - JW does not come and so the decision is that JB is to recover the aforesaid 9m plus 6s 8d damages.

Court of Common Pleas, CP 40/665, rot. 113

Term: Easter 1427
County: London
Writ type: Debt (bond)
Damages claimed: £20
Case type: Bond; Imprisonment

Pleading: William S. is in mercy for many defaults. Walter G. claims that William S. owes him £40 per a bond. Damages are claimed at £20. Bond shown in court. And upon this WG claims that the bond was made at London etc.

Pleading: Ws says that the force of the bond ought not hold because at the time of its making he was imprisoned by WG and others of his coven at Harefield, Middlesex.

Pleading: WG says that WS was a free man at the time of the bond's making and seeks inquiry upon the country, and WS seeks likewise. Order to the sheriff of Middlesex to make a jury come in Trinity term 1427.

Postea text: postea 1 - 31/01/1429 WG comes before this court in his own person and seeks a writ of the sheriff of London to re-summon WS to be at this court to hear record and judgement, and also to place a jury of the country concerning the aforesaid plea, so that the aforesaid plea, just as was before the court in the octave of St John the Baptist 1428 (Trinity term 1428) and has since remained without day because WS has been in the service of the king with Thomas earl of Salisbury and (count of) Perch in France from 26/06/1428 for the half year next following, might continue. WG wishes that a jury should be empanelled, and the writ should be returnable in the octave of the Purification of St Mary 1429 (later in Hilary term 1429).

Court of Common Pleas, CP 40/665, rot. 113d

Term: Easter 1427
County: London
Writ type: Debt (bond)
Damages claimed: £40
Case type: Bond; Loan; Real action / rents / damage to real estate

Pleading: William S. (Jr.) is in mercy for many defaults. Walter G. claims that William S. (Jr.) owes him £40 per a bond. Damages are claimed at £40. Bond shown in court. And upon this WG says that the bond was made at London.

Pleading: WS (Jr.) defends and seeks licence to imparl as far as Trinity term 1427.

Pleading: [further information drawn fromCP40/666 rot.109] WS (Jr.) says that the force of the bond ought not hold because after the making of the aforesaid bond an indenture was made between WS (Jr.) and WG at London on 02/08/1406, one part of which indenture WS (Jr.) presents to the court with the seal WG. This indenture says that Joan S. who was wife of WS (Sen.), ought to have and to hold for the term of her life, by grant of the late WS (Sen.), certain lands and tenements called 'Sannfordes' (probably meaning 'Samford's' as WS [Sen.] had been granted land in Harefield by the heirs of Sir. Thomas de Samford in the fourteenth century - VCH Middlesex vol.3); these same lands to remainder, after the death of Joan S. the wife of WS (Sen.), to Thomas S. the son of WS (Sen.) for the term of his life; thereafter to then remainder, after the death of Thomas S., to Joan S. the sister of TS for the term of her life; with reversion of these same lands to WS (Jr.) the son and heir of WS (Sen.) after the death of the aforesaid Joan S. wife of WS (Sen.), TS, and Joan S. sister of TS. However, by this indenture, WS (Jr.) bargained to sell and grant the reversion of these lands, with all his rights and estate in the aforesaid lands, to plaintiff WG for the sum of £20. Of which £20, WS (Jr.) was to receive 100s on the day of the indenture's making (02/08/1406), under the condition that if WS (Jr.) should repay the same 100s to WG in the feast of Michaelmas then next following the making of the indenture (29/09/1406) that the aforesaid bargain and sale for the reversion of the aforesaid lands would be null and void. But, if it should be that WS (Jr.) should default, in part of wholly, on the payment of the aforesaid 100s by Michaelmas 1406, then it has been agreed that WS (Jr.) grants and obliges himself, per the same indenture, 'to make to be secure and sufficient', to WG or whomever he should name, the whole of the said reversion prior to All Saints next following (01/11/1406), payable to WG or whomever he should name (i.e. WS [Jr.] has to offer security, payable to WG, that he will hold to the reversion agreement). And also, in these circumstances, WG should pay WS (Jr.) the outstanding £15 of the aforesaid £20 agreed by indenture, for the aforesaid reversion. Further WS (Jr.) granted himself to be held and obliged to WG in £40 per the aforesaid bond with the condition that if he should hold to all the terms of the aforesaid indenture that the bond would be null and void. WS (Jr) says that he repaid WG the aforesaid 100s in the feast of Michaelmas 1406 according to the terms of the indenture, namely at North Mymms, Hertfordshire, and so the bond should be null and void.

Pleading: WG says that WS (Jr.) did not pay him the aforesaid 100s per the terms of the indenture and seeks inquiry upon the country, and WS seeks likewise. Order to the sheriff of Hertfordshire to make a jury come in Michaelmas term 1427.

Postea text: postea 1 - the sheriff of Hertfordshire did not send the writ and so the case is forwarded as far as Hilary term 1428.

Postea text: postea 2 - 31/01/1429 WG comes before the court and seeks a writ of the sheriff of London to re-summon WS (Jr.) to be to the court to hear judgement, and also a writ of the sheriff of Hertfordshire to place a jury in this suit. Writs returnable in the octave of the Purification of St Mary 1429 (late in Hilary term 1429). WG says that this case was before the court in Trinity term 1428 but that proceeding were suspended because WS (Jr.) was in the king's service with earl of Salisbury Thomas M. for one-half year next following 26/06/1428.

Case notes: further information drawn fromCP40/666 rot.109

Court of Common Pleas, CP 40/665, rot. 113d

Term: Easter 1427
County: London
Writ type: Debt (bond)
Damages claimed: £40
Case type: Bond

Pleading: John M. claims that John S. owes him £37 per a bond. Damages are claimed at £40. Bond shown in court. And upon this JM says that the bond was made at [location left blank].

Pleading: JS defends and seeks licence to imparl as far as Trinity term 1427.

Court of Common Pleas, CP 40/665, rot. 114

Term: Easter 1427
County: London
Writ type: Debt (bond)
Damages claimed: £40
Case type: Bond; Imprisonment

Pleading: William S. is in mercy for many defaults. Walter G. claims that William S. owes him £40 on 3 bonds and a loan. The bonds were for: 40s made on 06/05/1403 and payable in the nativity of St John the Baptist 1403 (24/06/1403); £10 made on 02/01/1404 and payable in the vigil of the purification of St Mary 1404 (01/02/1404); £27 13s 8d made on 06/01/1412 and payable in Easter 1412 (03/04/1412). The loan was for 6s 4d made on 02/10/1413 and payable in Christmas 1413 (25/12/1413). The bond are shown in court. And upon this WG says that the bonds were made at London etc. Damages are claimed at £40.

Pleading: WS says that he does not owe WG the aforesaid 6s 4d per a loan and offers his law, to be made in Trinity term 1427. Pledges of law are named. And it is decided that WS's attorney, John C., is to have his master to this court to make his law in the term aforesaid. Concerning the remaining £39 13s 8d WG claims to be owed by WS on bonds, WS says that the force of the bonds ought not hold because he was imprisoned by WG and others of his coven at Harefield, Middlesex, at the time of their making.

Pleading: WG says that WS was a free man at the time of the bonds making and seeks inquiry upon the country, and WS seeks likewise. Order to the sheriff of Middlesex to make a jury come in Trinity term 1427.

Postea text: postea 1 - concerning the making of law on the 6s 4d aforesaid WS makes essoin, and so law is to be made in Michaelmas term 1427.

Postea text: postea 2 - concerning the making of law on the 6s 4d aforesaid WS does not come to make his law and so WG is to recover the aforesaid 6s 4d plus 6s 8d damages.

Postea text: postea 3 - 31/01/1429 WG comes before this court in his own person and seeks a writ of the sheriff of London to re-summon WS to be at this court to hear record and judgement, and also to place a jury of the country concerning the aforesaid plea, so that the aforesaid plea, just as was before the court in the octave of St John the Baptist 1428 (Trinity term 1428) and has since remained without day because WS has been in the service of the king with Thomas earl of Salisbury and (count of) Perch in France from 26/06/1428 for the half year next following, might continue. WG wishes that a jury should be empanelled, and the writ should be returnable in the octave of the Purification of St Mary 1429 (later in Hilary term 1429).

Case notes: default only on one part of the case (debt on loan), some litigation still ongoing (debt on bond)

Court of Common Pleas, CP 40/665, rot. 117

Term: Easter 1427
County: London
Writ type: Debt (loan)
Damages claimed: 100s
Case type: Loan

Pleading: William H. claims that Thomas G. owes him 5m per a loan. Damages are claimed at 100s.

Pleading: TG says that he does not owe WH the aforesaid 5m nor any other monies and offers his law, to be made in Trinity term. Pledges of law are named. And it is decided that TG's attorney, Richard B., is to have his master to this court to make his law in the term aforesaid.

Postea text: postea 1 - TG makes essoin and so the case is forwarded as far as Michaelmas term 1427.

Postea text: postea 2 - TG makes his law and so is without day. WH is in mercy for false claim.

Court of Common Pleas, CP 40/665, rot. 120d

Term: Easter 1427
County: London
Writ type: Trespass (force and arms)
Damages claimed: £10
Case type: Abduction; Breach of Statute; Contract (service/employment)

Pleading: John Langwith claims that on 22/10/1424 John Luke, together with John M. and John S, used force and arms to abduct his servant Peter F. at London, so that John Landwith was without PF's service for one and a half years following then next following. Damages are claimed at £10.

Pleading: John Luke says that long before the aforesaid supposed trespass, at Salisbury (Wiltshire) on Michaelmas 1423 (29/09/1423) he had retained the aforesaid PF to serve him as groom/servant (garcois') for the twelve years then next following. John Luke says that within this term, in Michaelmas 1424, PF left his service without reasonable cause and entered the service of John Langwith. John Luke says that on the day of the supposed trespass (22/10/1424) he found PF at Salisbury and so took him back etc. as he had good licence to do.

Pleading: John Langwith says that John Luke abducted PF at London with force and arms just as he claimed above and seeks inquiry upon the country, and John Luke seeks likewise. Order to the sheriff of London to make a jury come in Trinity term 1427. Pledges are named for the defendant.

Court of Common Pleas, CP 40/665, rot. 124

Term: Easter 1427
County: Surrey
Writ type: Trespass (force and arms)
Damages claimed: £40
Case type: Taking of goods; Trespass (chattels)

Pleading: John Burgh, William Ryman, Richard Wakehurst, Thomas Hayton, John Payn, William Okhurst and Walter Urry claim that on 06/06/1421John Skirwhit, John Raynold, Robert Raynold, and Thomas Perkyn, together with John Michell, used force and arms, the plaintiffs' private fishery (separali piscaria) at Thames Ditton, Surrey, to take 3,000 roach, 2,000 pike (dentricm'), 1,000 barbel/carp, and 300 trout worth £6. The plaintiffs also says that John Skirwhit, John Raynold, Robert Raynold, and Thomas Perkyn, together with John Michell, fixed stakes and piles across the water-course which runs to their mill at Esher, blocking the ancient water-course so that the mill was not able to run and the plaintiffs were without the mill's profits from the aforesaid 06/06/1421 until Michaelmas 1423 (29/09/1423). Damages are claimed at £40.

Pleading: John Skirwhit , John Raynold, Robert Raynold, and Thomas Perkyn defend and seek licence to imparl as far as the Trinity term 1427, with the assent of the plaintiffs.

Postea text: postea 1 - further licence to imparl as far as Michaelmas term 1427, with the assent of the plaintiffs.

Case notes: related to CP40/660 rot.134

Court of Common Pleas, CP 40/665, rot. 125

Term: Easter 1427
County: Surrey
Writ type: Trespass (force and arms)
Damages claimed: £20
Case type: Arbitration; Assault

Pleading: Agnes D. claims that on 22/06/1424, at Croydon (Surrey), John K. assaulted her. Damages are claimed at £20.

Pleading: Concerning the use of force and arms JK says he is innocent and puts himself upon the country, and AD puts herself likewise. Regarding the remainder of the trespass JK says that after the time of the supposed assault he and AD undertook arbitration at London, on 01/12/1424, before arbitrators Stephen W. and Thomas E., concerning all quarrels between them prior to that time. JK says that the arbitrators ordained that JK ought to pay AD 5s to settle all trespasses, quarrels, lawsuits, and debts between them etc. JK says that he paid AD this 5s and so seeks judgement in this present suit etc.

Pleading: AD, not acknowledging alleged by JK, says that she never had any such arbitration with JK and seeks inquiry upon the country, and JK seeks likewise. Order to the sheriff of London to make a jury come in Trinity term 1427. Pledges are named for the defendant.

Postea text: postea 1 - AD comes by her attorney and JK comes in his own person by the hands aforesaid. And the sheriff does not send the writ. Therefore the case is forwarded as far as Michaelmas term 1427.

Court of Common Pleas, CP 40/665, rot. 125d

Term: Easter 1427
County: Middlesex
Writ type: Detinue
Damages claimed: £40
Damages awarded: 6m
Case type: Detention of goods; Real action / rents / damage to real estate

Pleading: John R. claims that Adam F. seized his chattels, and unjustly detains them contrary to his surety and pledge. JR says that on 06/12/1426 in the parish of St Giles without Cripplegate (Middlesex) in a certain place called 'Russell tenement' in Golden Lane, seized one brass jar, one plate, one basin, one laver, and one dyed linen cloth of JR, which AF unjustly detains contrary to his surety and pledge. Damages are claimed at £40.

Pleading: AF defends and says that as bailiff of the Richard C., prebendary of Finsbury (Middlesex) in the cathedral church of St Paul's, he acknowledges that he seised the aforesaid chattels of JR. AF says that JR is seised of three messuages and three gardens with appurtenances in the parish of Finsbury in his demesne and as of fee, and that JR holds those properties of prebendary RC as part of the manor and prebend of Finsbury for fealty, suit of court at the manor court of RC every three weeks, and an annual rent of 10s payable in equal portions at the feasts of Easter and Michaelmas. Concerning this fealty and suit of court RC was seised per the hands of JR as his true tenant, and of the aforesaid rent; just as RC's predecessor Roger A. was seised of them by right of the aforesaid prebend per the hands of Walter J. and WJ's wife Julia J., lately tenants of the same messuages and gardens, as true tenants by the right of JJ in the same manner JR now has them. However, JR had not paid the aforesaid annual rent to RC for two years prior to the time of the supposed trespass, and so as RC's bailiff, AF made distraint against JR's chattels 'in the place aforesaid etc., as in a parcel of the aforesaid messuages and gardens' in the form aforesaid, within the fee of prebendary RC.

Pleading: JR says that he does not acknowledge that AF seized his chattels for the reason alleged. JR says that the place called 'Russell tenement' is outside the fee and lordship of prebendary RC. Thus, as AF acknowledges seizing his chattels, JR seeks judgement and damages.

Pleading: AF says that the place called 'Russell tenement' is within the fee and lordship of prebendary RC and puts himself upon the country, and JR puts himself likewise. Order to the sheriff of Middlesex to make a jury come in Trinity term 1427.

Postea text: postea 1 - continuance between the parties as far as Michaelmas term 1427.

Postea text: postea 2 - a jury comes and says on oath that the tenement called 'Russell tenement' is outside of the fee and lordship of prebendary RC. Therefore AF is in mercy and JR is to receive damages of 6m.

Court of Common Pleas, CP 40/665, rot. 210d

Term: Easter 1427
County: London
Writ type: Debt (bond)
Damages claimed: 40s
Damages awarded: 6s 8d
Case type: Bond

Pleading: John B. claims that Nicholas C. owes him £4 per a bond. Bond shown in court. And upon this JB says that the bond was made at London etc. Damages are claimed at 40s.

Pleading: NC defends and seeks licence to imparl as far as Trinity term 1427. Pledges are named for the defendant.

Postea text: 4 posteas - all further licences to imparl as far as trinity term 1428.

Postea text: postea 5 - RC does not come and so is in default. Therefore JB is to recover the aforesaid debt plus damages of 6s 8d.

Court of Common Pleas, CP 40/665, rot. 210d

Term: Easter 1427
County: Middlesex
Writ type: Trespass (force and arms)
Damages claimed: £10
Case type: Assault

Pleading: John T. claims that on 09/10/1424 at Islington, Middlesex, John B. assaulted him with force and arms. Damages are claimed at £10.

Pleading: JB says that he is innocent and puts himself upon the country, and JT puts himself likewise. Order to the sheriff of Middlesex to make a jury come in Trinity term 1427. Pledges are named for the defendant.

Court of Common Pleas, CP 40/665, rot. 307

Term: Easter 1427
County: London
Writ type: Detinue
Damages claimed: £100
Case type: Detention of goods

Pleading: Robert Hore and his wife Alice Hore who was the wife of John Askewyth, AH being the executor of the will of JA who was himself lately the executor of (the late) William Soneman (Sen.) citizen and horner of London, are in mercy for many defaults. RH and AH were summoned to respond to William Soneman (jr) in a plea that they unjustly detain a certain chest containing charters, writings, and other muniments. Whence comes William Soneman in his own person, and RH and AH by their attorney, Richard Bruyn. Day given between the parties at the octave of Trinity 1427

Pleading: [continued on CP 40/666, rot 316 - Trinity 1427] William Soneman (Jr.) says that his father and mother, William Soneman (Sen.) and Elena (S.) the wife of William Soneman (Sen.), to whom he is heir, were formerly seised of one messuage, 30 acres of land, and 6 acres of meadow in the parishes of St Andrew Holborn, St Giles in the fields, and St Pancras, Middlesex, in demesne and as of fee tail. William Soneman (Jr.) also says that William Soneman (Sen.) was similarly seised of 7 messuages and 3 acres of lands in St Andrew Holborn in his demesne and as of fee simple. Additionally, William Soneman (Sen.) was in possession of a certain chest containing charters etc. This chest contained, namely: a certain charter by which Matilda G. granted to William Someman (Sen.), his wife ES - ES being the daughter of the same MG - and the heirs of their bodies, the aforesaid 1 messuage, 30 acres of land, and 6 acres of meadow; a certain writing by which the late JA, John C. and Roger P. quitclaimed to William Soneman (Sen.), then possessed of the aforesaid 7 messuages and 3 acres of land, all right and claim they had in those same messuages and land; and other charters, writings, and muniments. Later, ES died and William Soneman (Sen.) granted executry of his will to JA. William Soneman (Sen.) then later died and JA granted executry of his will to his then wife, and present defendant, AH. Thus, the same chest with charters etc. passed into the possession of AH, thereafter a single woman, at London on 22/05/1423. William Soneman (Jr.) says that he often requested to have livery of the said chest with charters whilst AH was a single woman, and after AH's marriage to RH, but has not had livery. Damages are claimed at £100.

Pleading: RH and AH, herself the executor of JA, say that that they do not detain the said chest from William Soneman (jr), nor the said muniments etc., as has been claimed by William Soneman (jr.), and put themselves on the country. William Soneman (jr) puts himself likewise. Concerning the aforesaid charter and writing, RH and AH say that the aforesaid MG was formerly seised of the aforesaid messuage, 30 acres of land and meadow in her demesne as of fee by the name of 'MG who was the wife of GG of Holborn', holding the said property among other properties collectively referred to as all lands, tenements, meadows, etc. with appurtenances 'which the same MG held in the parishes of St Andrew [Holborn], St Giles, St Pancras and in the parish of Shoreditch or elsewhere in Middlesex, excepting three shops in the parish of St Andrew [Holborn] which were lately of John Paternoster', given and granted to her son JH for the term of his life by way of a certain charter enrolled in the chancery of the late lord king of England the second (presumable Richard II). And further, after the death of the same JH, the said MG by her same charter granted the aforesaid one messuage, 30 acres of land and meadow, 'by the name contained in the same charter', with appurtenances, to William Soneman (sr.) and his wife ES the daughter of MG, and the heirs and assigns of William Soneman (sr.) and ES to have and to hold entirely and in perpetuity. By the force of this gift and grant JH was made seised in his demesne as of free tenement. ES afterwards died, and after her death William Soneman (sr.), by way of a certain charter, granted to JC, RP and a certain John Strode, citizens of London, the one messuage, 30 acres of land and meadow, by the name ‘all lands and tenements with meadows, pastures etc., and all his other meadows in the parishes of St Andrew [Holborn], St Giles, St Pancras and in the parish of Shoreditch and elsewhere in the county of Middlesex which the aforesaid JH, also called John Goldbeter, then held for the term of his life by grant of his mother MG formerly wife of GG. JH later died, and the property ought to have remaindered to JC, RP and John Strode, their heirs and assigns in perpetuity. Hence, after the death of JH, the same JC, RP and John Strode entered into the said property. Therefore RH and AH do not detain from William Soneman (jr) any such charter saying that MG gave to William Soneman (sr.) and ES and the heirs of their bodies the aforesaid lands as has been argued by William Soneman (jr) [Essentially, William Soneman jr. says the land was granted to William Soneman sr. and Elena Soneman in fee tail, but the defendants say that it was in fee simple]. They are prepared to verify this and seek judgement if William Soneman (jr) continues his case. And as regards the supposed detention of the aforesaid release, a certain Robert Marchall, clerk, and Isabella who was the wife of Reginald Wenna were lately seised in demesne, as of fee, of five messuages of the aforesaid seven messuages with appurtenances by the name of ‘five shops' and they enfeoffed this property to William Soneman (sr.), JA and their heirs in perpetuity. And, concerning the other two messuages and three acres of land with appurtenances, being another parcel of the aforesaid seven messuages and three acres of land, a certain William Harcourt, citizen of London, and Robert Clerk, chaplain were lately seised of this property in their demesne and as of fee, and being so seised of the said two messuages and three acres of land enfeoffed William Soneman (sr.) and JA, their heirs and assigns, to have and to hold these lands in perpetuity, by the force of which enfeoffment William Soneman (sr.) and JA were seised of this property. William Soneman (sr.) and JA being, by force of the aforesaid enfeoffments, so seised of the said seven messuages and three acres of land, enfeoffed JC, RP and John Strode who were thence seised of this property in their demesne and as of fee, in this manner holding the property for the rest of the life of William Soneman (sr.) and have continued to be of JC, RP and John Stroud, as far as the right [i.e. time of executry] of the said RH and AH. They deny the claim of William Sonman (jr) that they detain from him any such release as William Sonman (jr) claims exists. They seek judgement if William Soneman (jr) maintains his claim that they detain a release.

Pleading: William Sonman (jr.), not acknowledging anything argued by RH and AH, saysthat they detain the aforesaid charter and release. He says that that his action ought not be excluded and seeks inquiry upon the country, and the defendants seek likewise. Order to the sheriff of London to make a jury come in the octave of Michaelmas 1427.

Case notes: Further information and pleadings drawn from CP 40/666, rot 316; note of jury's failure to appear on CP 40/667, rot 493d; related to CP 40/660, rot 306.

Court of Common Pleas, CP 40/665, rot. 308d

Term: Easter 1427
County: London
Writ type: Trespass (force and arms)
Damages claimed: £40
Case type: Taking of goods

Pleading: William W. is in mercy for many defaults. John P. claims that William W. used force and arms to seize and carry off his goods, at London, to the value of 100s. The goods taken were namely one 'mound of Iron called an "anvil" and two copper/brass plates for frying called "frying pans"'. Damages are claimed at £40.

Pleading: WW defends and seeks licence to imparl as far as Trinity term 1427.

Court of Common Pleas, CP 40/665, rot. 309

Term: Easter 1427
County: Middlesex
Writ type: Detinue
Damages claimed: £20
Case type: Detention of goods

Pleading: John A. claims that on 01/11/1426 John L. and Thomas T. seized and unjustly detain one ox hide, one wool-fell and one ham called a 'bacon' of JA, contrary to their surety and pledge. Damages are claimed at £20.

Pleading: JL and TT defend and seek licence to imparl as far as Trinity term 1427.

Pleading: [Further information drawn from CP40/672 rot. 458 - Hilary 1429] JL and TT were summoned to respond to JA in a plea that they seized the chattels of JA and unjustly detain them contrary to their surety and pledge. And in this manner comes JA, by his attorney (John B.), as well as JL and TT by their attorney (William A.). And upon this day is given between the parties in Easter term 1429, without essoin.

Pleading: [Further information drawn from CP40/675 rot.313 - Michaelmas 1429 (photo: 645)] JL and TT come and, as bailiffs of knight Richard S., acknowledge the seizure of the aforesaid goods in the aforesaid place. They say that a certain William P. was long seised of one messuage and one acre of land with appurtenances in Edgware in his demesne and as of fee, including the location of the supposed trespass. JL and TT say that WP held this same messuage and land of a certain knight Roger S., then lord of the manor of Edgware, as of that manor for homage, fealty, and by scutage of the lord king of 40s and 2s annual rents payable to knight Roger S. and his heirs at Michaelmas, as well as suit of court every three weeks at knight Roger's court at Edgware. JL and TT say that knight Roger S. was seised of these lands by the hands of WP as by the hands of his true tenant John P. for all of these aforesaid services etc. when he later died and the manor of Edgware descended to the aforesaid knight Richard S. as the grandson and heir of knight Roger S., namely the son of John S. the son of knight Roger S. Knight Richard S. then entered into the manor of Edgware and was seised of it etc. The aforesaid JP was then held to suit of the court of knight Richard S. held on the first of the month of June next after the death of knight Roger S. and before the aforesaid seizure of goods (namely 01/06/1426) but did not make suit, and concerning the 2s rent due in Michaelmas 1426 fell in arrears. Therefore JL and TT, as bailiffs of knight Richard S., well acknowledge that they seized the goods in the place aforesaid, which was part of the messuage and land aforesaid.

Pleading: JA says that JP is, and long before the day of the seizure of goods was, seized of the aforesaid messuage and land in his demesne and as of fee. And, being so seised long before the day of the seizure of goods, JP demised the same to JA to have for a term of [blank] years, thence taking [blank] year of the reign of the now lord king [blank]. And, just as the same JA says that he has nothing in the same messuage and land aforesaid unless for a term of years in the manner aforesaid through JP, he is not able to answer without JP and seeks JP's help. Upon this JP, present in the court, says with JA that JL and TT, as bailiffs of knight Richard S. ought not have seized the aforesaid goods. JP and JA say that the aforesaid WP held of the late knight Roger S. the aforesaid messuage and tenement, as well as 40 acres of land with appurtenances in the aforesaid vill of Edgware. JP and JA say that for this property WP owed to knight Roger S. fealty and services of 1d and one pound of cumin annually at the feast of Michaelmas, as well as suit of court at Edgware; and not the services contained in the aforesaid cognizance. This they are prepared to verify.

Pleading: JL and TT reiterate that WP was seised of one messuage and one acre from the late knight Roger S. in the manner they have claimed and put themselves upon the country, and JA with JP put themselves likewise. Order to the sheriff of Middlesex to make a jury come in Hilary term 1430.

Postea text: 5 posteas - all further licences to imparl, forwarding the case as far as Hilary term 1429.

Postea text: [Further information drawn from CP40/672 rot.458 - Hilary 1429] 3 posteas - all say that further day is given between the parties, forwarding the case as far as Hilary term 1430.

Postea text: [Further information drawn from CP40/675 rot.311 - Michaelmas 1429] The sheriff of Middlesex did not send the writ and so the case is forwarded as far as Easter term 1430.

Postea text: The sheriff of Middlesex did not send the writ and so the case is forwarded as far as Trinity term 1430.

Case notes: Further information drawn from CP40/672 rot.458

Court of Common Pleas, CP 40/665, rot. 310

Term: Easter 1427
County: London
Writ type: Trespass (force and arms)
Damages claimed: £40
Case type: Sale of goods; Taking of goods

Pleading: John B. and William M. are in mercy for many defaults. Earl John Holland (earl of Huntingdon) and William H. claim that on 28/03/1426 JB and WM used force and arms to seize and carry off both their goods and chattels to the vale of 20m as well as 20m cash money, at London 'in the parish of St Mary Magdalen, Bread Street Ward'. The goods and chattels taken were namely: two bed-covers (coopertoria lectorum), one of which was white and the other of which was green; 4 sheets; one tester; one canopy (silerum) of black buckram; one canvas; one featherbed; one long cushion called a bolster; one mattress; 2 blankets; 4 pillows; two outer garments, one of musterdevillers and furred with 'poleyn grey ', and one of black of lyre and furred with 'rubeo grey'; five outer-garments of diverse liveries, furred with black lamb's wool; two outer-garments of liveries lined with black cloth (duas liberatarum duplicatas cum panno nigro); one green huke lined with green cloth; one yellow cloak/cape (capicia); one black cape/cloak of lyre; 3 pair of hose of black of lyre; 2 dublets of blue worsted; one new dublet of red cloth; 7 pair of shirts and breeches (britches), four quires (quatuor quateria) of which certain (shirts and breeches) have been furred of the tails of martin (furrure caudarum de martyn); one silver bound baselard with a girdle of black silk similarly bound with silver and another girdle of green silk with silver stars, with a silver buckle and pendent of the make of france ('pendencia argenteis de forma facture de Franc''. Damages are claimed at £40.

Pleading: JB and WM defend and seek licence to imparl as far as Trinity term 1427.

Pleading: [Further information drawn from CP40/666 rot.104d.] JB and WM say that they are innocent and seek inquiry upon the country, and plaintiffs WH and earl JH seek likewise. Order to the sheriff of London to make a jury come in Michaelmas term 1427.

Case notes: Further information drawn from CP40/666 rot.104d.

Court of Common Pleas, CP 40/665, rot. 312d

Term: Easter 1427
County: Surrey
Writ type: Trespass (force and arms)
Damages claimed: £20
Case type: Taking of goods

Pleading: Robert H. claims that on 20/10/1425 'Thomas son of Thomas Broun of London', John Stoke, Richard Rolf, John Rolf, Geoffrey H., John Ponke, and John Bruton used force and arms to seize and carry off his goods and chattels to the vale of 20m at Headley, Surrey. The goods taken were namely: one bed-cover; 2 blankets; 2 pair of sheets; a cockshoot net; 6 cart-loads of wheat; 8 cart-loads of barley; 6 cart-loads of rye; 10 cart-loads of oats; and 8 cartloads of peas and beans. Damages are claimed at £20.

Pleading: Thomas son of Thomas Broun, John Stoke, Richard Rolf, John Rolf, Geoffrey H., John Ponke, and chaplain John Bruton defend and seek licence to imparl as far as Trinity term 1427.

Pleading: [Further information drawn from CP40/666 rot.107 - Trinity 1427] Thomas son of Thomas Broun, John Stoke, Richard Rolf, John Rolf, Geoffrey H., John Ponke, and chaplain John Bruton defend. John Rolf and Geoffrey H. say that they are innocent and put themselves upon the country, and RH puts himself likewise. 'Thomas son of Thomas Broun', John Stoke, Richard Rolf, John Duke, John Ponke, and John Burton, protesting that the goods involved were not of as great a value as has been claimed by plaintiff RH, say that RH ought not have his action against them. John Stoke then says that long before the aforesaid 20/10/1425 the goods and chattels in question were the goods and chattels of a certain Robert Broun. Further, they say that long before the aforesaid 20/10/1425 the same Robert Broun sold the same aforesaid goods to 'Thomas Broun of London' (presumably meaning defendant Thomas son of Thomas Broun, but possibly meaning his father?), who by force of that sale was possessed of the said goods, and then later, though still before the aforesaid 20/10/1425, sold them to John Stoke, by force of which latter sale John Stoke was possessed of them. The aforesaid Robert Broun then later sold the same goods and chattels to plaintiff RH, on the pretext of which sale plaintiff RH seized the same goods and chattels. Thereafter, at the time of the supposed trespass of 20/10/1425, John Stoke took the aforesaid goods and chattels from plaintiff RH by right of his own possession of them, as he had good licence to do. All this John Stoke is prepared to verify. 'Thomas son of Thomas (Broun)', John Duke, John Ponke, and John Bruton say that at the time of the supposed trespass they were simply working as the servants of John Stoke and helping to take and remove the aforesaid goods and chattels, as they had good licence to do, and did not intend any other injury.

Pleading: RH says that Robert Broun sold him the aforesaid goods and chattels, by force of which sale he was possessed of them. RH says that 'Thomas son of Thomas (Broun)', John Stoke, Richard Rolf, John Duke, John Ponke, and John Burton, together with etc. used force and arms to take them.

Pleading: 'Thomas son of Thomas (Broun)', John Stoke, Richard Rolf, John Duke, John Ponke, and John Burton reiterate their claim that the goods and chattels were sold by Robert Broun to 'Thomas Broun of London' who then sold them to John Stoke. The defendants put themselves upon the country, and RH puts himself likewise. Order to the sheriff of Surrey to make a jury come in Michaelmas term 1427.

Case notes: further information drawn from CP40/666 rot.107.; one additional defendant 'John Duke' appears on this second entry, but seeks likely to have been an erroneous omission on CP40/665 312d rather than a new writ on CP40/666 rot.117

Court of Common Pleas, CP 40/665, rot. 325

Term: Easter 1427
County: London
Writ type: Debt (bond)
Damages claimed: £50
Case type: Bond; Imprisonment

Pleading: Alan D. and John D. claims that Thomas T. owes them £40 per a bond. Damages are claimed at £50. Bond shown in court.

Pleading: TT says that the force of the bond ought not hold because at the time of its making he was imprisoned by AD, JD, and others of their coven at Cambridge, Cambridgeshire.

Pleading: AD and JD say that TT was a free man at the time of the bond's making and seek inquiry upon the country, and TT seeks similarly. Order to the sheriff of Cambridgeshire to make a jury come in Trinity term 1427. Pledges are named for the defendant.

Postea text: 4 posteas - all say that the sheriff of Cambridgeshire did not send the writ, forwarding the case as far as the octave of the Purification of St Mary 1428 (late in Hilary term 1428).

Postea text: postea 5 - continuance between the parties as far as the quindene of Trinity term 1428.

Postea text: postea 6 - all parties come and TT says that AD and JD ought not have their action against him because after the day of the aforesaid bond's making and the day it was due, the aforesaid AD issued him a release at Clinton, Buckinghamshire, on o1/05/1428. TT presents this release to the court. AD and JD say that the release presented by TT is not of AD's making and seek inquiry upon the country, and TT seeks likewise. Order to the sheriff of Buckinghamshire to make a jury come in Michaelmas term 1428. The release is given to clerk Robert D. for safe keeping.

Court of Common Pleas, CP 40/665, rot. 328d

Term: Easter 1427
County: London
Writ type: Detinue
Damages claimed: 100s
Case type: Detention of goods; Safe keeping

Pleading: Thomas D. claims that in Martinmas 1424 (11/11/1424) he gave Elizabeth S. goods and chattels to the value of £4 for safe and secure keeping, but that ES now refuses to return them. The goods and chattels in question are: one blue gown furred with pote, and one sheet. Damages are claimed at 100s.

Pleading: ES defends and seeks licence to imparl as far as Trinity term 1427. Pledges are named for the defendant.

Court of Common Pleas, CP 40/665, rot. 335

Term: Easter 1427
County: London
Writ type: Debt (account)
Damages claimed: £40
Case type: Contract (service/employment); Reckoning of account

Pleading: William F. claims that on 02/12/1424 at London countess Beatrice F. retained him to act as seneschal of the her household for one year then next following, for the providing and dispensing of bread, wine, ale (cervisiam), wax (ceram), meat (carnes), fish, poultry (altilia), fowl (volatilia), and other victuals, as much with money received from countess BF as with his own money put down and later to be allocated (i.e. reimbursed). WF says that on this pretext he faithfully served countess BF for the aforesaid year. Afterwards, on 21/121425, at London in the parish of St Lawrence Pountney, Candlewick Street Ward, an accounting was held before auditors Thomas W., William O, and John B., auditors of the account of WF concerning his office, hearing for the aforesaid countess. This accounting considered receipts and other sums of money of WF, which WF had laid out in his office, for victuals, on behalf of countess BF. This accounting found that countess BF owed WF £72, which he has often requested but which was not repaid. Damages are claimed at £40.

Pleading: Countess BF defends and seeks licence to imparl as far as trinity term 1427, with the assent of WF.

Pleading: [Further information drawn from CP40/666 rot.128] Countess BF says that she never had any such accounting with WF and puts herself upon the country, and WF puts himself likewise. Order to the sheriff of London to make a jury come in Michaelmas term 1427.

Case notes: Further information drawn from CP40/666 rot.128

Court of Common Pleas, CP 40/665, rot. 377

Term: Easter 1427
County: London
Writ type: Trespass (force and arms)
Damages claimed: 100s
Case type: Housebreaking; Taking of goods

Pleading: Joan W. claims that Thomas M., together with Henry W., used force and arms to break his close and houses at London where they seized and carried off goods and chattels to the value of 100s. The goods and chattels taken were namely one outer-garment (togam), one basin with one laver, and other vessels and utensils. [locationa and date are incomplete, reading ' Monday next before the purification of St Mary year of the reign of the lord king at London in the parish of St Peter in the ward of (blank).] Damages are claimed at 100s.

Pleading: TM says that he is innocent and puts himself upon the country, and JW puts herself likewise. Pledges are named for the defendant. Order to the sheriff of London to make a jury come in trinity term 1427.

Postea text: postea 1 - the sheriff of London did not send the writ and so the case is forwarded as far as Michaelmas term 1427.

Court of Common Pleas, CP 40/665, rot. 377

Term: Easter 1427
County: London
Writ type: Debt (bond)
Damages claimed: 20m
Case type: Bond

Pleading: Alexander F. claims that William B. owes him £36 9s per a bond. Damages are claimed at 20m. Bond shown in court. And upon this AF says that the bond was made at London etc.

Pleading: WB defends and seeks licence to imparl as far as Michaelmas term 1427. Pledges are named for the defendant.

Postea text: 5 posteas - all further licences to imparl, forwarding the case as far as Easter term 1429.

Court of Common Pleas, CP 40/665, rot. 377d

Term: Easter 1427
County: Middlesex
Writ type: Trespass (force and arms)
Damages claimed: 10m
Case type: Taking of goods

Pleading: William P. claims that on 20/05/1426 Andrew S. used force and arms to seize and abduct one horse worth 40s at Highgate (Hegate), Middlesex. Damages are claimed at 10m.

Pleading: AS says that he is innocent and puts himself upon the country, and WP puts himself likewise. Order to the sheriff of Middlesex to make a jury come in Trinity term 1427.

Court of Common Pleas, CP 40/665, rot. 453d

Term: Easter 1427
County: London
Writ type: Detinue
Damages claimed: 100s
Case type: Detention of goods; Safe keeping

Pleading: Elizabeth H. claims that on 01/10/1425 she gave to John L. for safe keeping goods and chattels to the value of 40s, which JL now refuses to return and unjustly detains. Damages are claimed at 100s. The chattels in question are namely: one gilded necklace called a 'lamb of god'; one gold ring; and one gold necklace.

Pleading: LJ says that he does not detain the items aforesaid or any other items belonging to EH and offers his law, to be made in Trinity term 1427. Pledges of law are named.

Court of Common Pleas, CP 40/665, rot. 456d

Term: Easter 1427
County: Middlesex
Writ type: Trespass (force and arms)
Damages claimed: £20
Case type: Assault; Taking of goods

Pleading: John J. claims that on 20/04/1427, in the parish of St Giles outside the bar of Cripplegate, London (i.e. St Giles in the Fields), William C., William D., and William P., used force and arms to seize his goods and chattels to the value of 100s and assault his men and servants so that they feared to go about JJ's business and JJ was without their service from the day of the trespass as far as the day of the making of his original writ on 30/04/1427. The goods and chattels taken were namely: one long cap (longus pilleus); two hoods/hats (capicia); and other linen and woollen cloths. The men and servants assaulted were namely John S. and Arnold R. Damages are claimed at £20.

Pleading: WC, WD, and WP say that they are innocent and put themselves upon the country, and JJ puts himself likewise. Order to the sheriff of Middlesex to make a jury come in Trinity term 1427.

Court of Common Pleas, CP 40/665, rot. 457d

Term: Easter 1427
County: Middlesex
Writ type: Detinue
Damages claimed: £200
Case type: Detention of goods; Safe keeping

Pleading: Henry C. claims that Nicholas A. unjustly detains three bonds which HC gave to NA for safe keeping in the parish of St Clement Danes, Middlesex, on 05/02/1425; which same bonds NA now refuses to return. HC says that: one of these bonds shows that Richard G. is held to HC in £7 for merchandise bought from HC at the staple of Westminster; another of the three bonds shows that the same RG is held to HC in £200; and, the third bond shows that RG is held to HC in £30; all at terms written within the same bonds. Damages are claimed at £200.

Pleading: NA presents these bonds to the court and says that he is prepared to deliver them with the court's decision. However, NA says that the aforesaid bonds were given to him, day an d place aforesaid, with the mutual assent of HC and RG, and that he is only to return them to HC or RG under certain conditions. NA says that he is ignorant, on the part of RG, as to whether or not these conditions have been met. NA seeks that RG be warned etc. Therefore, the decision is that the sheriff of Middlesex, by way of good and honest men, is to warn RG that he is to be at this court in the octave of St John 1427 (late in Trinity term 1427) if he wishes to object to HC having livery of the bonds. Day is given between NA and HC in the same term.

Postea text: postea 1 - MA and HC come in their own persons, and RG comes per his attorney, John H. The sheriff of Middlesex returns that he made it known to RG by way of Robert L. and Richard W. And upon this day is given between all parties in Michaelmas term 1427.