Petitions to the House of Lords: 1671

Anthony Hobart, a very poor distressed and undone gentleman. HL/PO/JO/10/1/343/346 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords and peeres in
the High Court of Parliament assembled

The humble peticion of Anthony Hobart a very poore
distressed and undone gentleman.

Sheweth
that your petitioner with one Jane Doe widow, have been lately wrongfully dimissed
out of his majesties High Court of Chancery, without any releife in the matters of complaint,
by them there exhibited, whereof the annexed, is a true state, and so is by ordinary
rules of equity precluded, from haveing releife in the premisses, in the said court.

That your petitioner since the said dismission and very lately hath by his wife, on his behalfe
presented two severall peticions, (with the case of your poore petitioner annexed) to the right honourable
the Lord Keeper of the great seale of England, for redresse in the premisses, in hopes
his lordshipp, might have given your petitioner some releife, touching the matters therein conteined,
the which peticions and case, together with the order of dismission his lordshipp after perusall hath beene
pleased to declare that hee cannot judicially releive the petitioner in ordinary course of justice, in regard
the petitioners bill is dismissed upon hearing before [illegible] lordshipp, and the dismission signed and inrolled.

The petitioner therefore humbly prayes this most honourable house, to take the speedy consider
=ation hereof, into your noble breasts, and upon the whole matter to give him such
releife, as shalbe agreeable to law and justice, and in the meane time to summon the
parties concerned, namely, Francis Ewre and Samuel Trotman and others
interessed, before your honourable lordshipps to answer the premisses, in the peticion and
case annexed, that such proceedings may be had therein, and such releife
may be had, for your petitioner as is usuall to be given to persons whoe are not
elsewhere releiveable, and that your lordshipps wilbe pleased to assigne your
petitioner Master Aylofe of Grayes Inne to be his councell, the petitioner not being
able to give fees in regard of his poverty as by affidavitt annexed appeares.

And your poore petitioner shall daily pray etc.

• Anthony Hobart

Griffith Bowen, gentleman. HL/PO/JO/10/1/343/347 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall and
temporall assembled in the High Court of Parliament

The humble peticion of Griffith Bowen gentleman

Most humbly sheweth
that your petitioner in the yeare 1654 for the summe of 525 pounds purchased of Phillip Jones esquire (a collonel then against
his majesty) several messuages and lands in the county of Pembroke which said messuages and lands hee
alleadged hee had bought in his owne; and other officers names; as crowne lands, warranting them to bee
crowne lands and likewise that your petitioner should have and enjoy them against the said Phillip Jones and
the other purchasers; and all clayming under them

That in the yeare 1657 the Citty of London obtayned order from the then powers for the possession of the
premisses; they having purchased them of the late King of ever most blessed and glorious memory anno 4o regni sui

Whereupon your petitioner addressed himselfe to the said Phillip Jones for releife, who then promised to procure
for your petitioner a reprize to reimburse him the said purchase money and accordingly the said Phillip Jones obteyned
a reprize in his owne name; and received by vertue thereof severall hundreds of pounds, and putt them in his owne
purse, not allowing your petitioner one penny thereof

Your petitioner finding himselfe soe grossly abused preferred his bill in the High Court of Chancery against the
said Phillip Jones, whereunto hee did putt in his answere setting forth many falsityes and untruths therein;
whereby (together with his other unjust and indirect dealings hee procured a dismission of the said bill to the
common law without any costs.

Your petitioner thereupon brought his accion att law against the said Phillip Jones whereunto hee pleaded
non assumpsit and though your petitioner clearly [illegible] promise yet upon a criticall defect in the declaracion
and the [indirect?] practice of the said Phillip Jones [illegible] advised to become nonsuite therein.

After which your petitioner brought another [accion att law against Phillip?] Jones upon the said promise but hee having
delayed your petitioner severall yeares by references; and not [suffering?] the arbitratours to make any end, unless such
as might bee for his advantage as well to keep the reprized money as the purchase money of your petitioner hee
then pleaded the statute of lymittacion of accions alleadging the suite was not brought within 6 yeares
after the cause of action [by?] reason whereof your petitioner is altogether destitute of releife either att law
or in equity, or [elsewhere then before your?] lordshipps in Parliament assembled

Your [petitioner therefore?] humbly prayeth that the said Phillip Jones may bee convented
before your lordshipps [illegible] your petitioner may have his purchase money againe with [interest?]
and such recompence for his damages unjustly susteyned ever since as in your honours
wisdomes shall seeme [meete?] and to that end; that your lordshipps would bee pleased [to?]
hear such proofes as your petitioner can produce for the cleering of the matters here
specifyed and that your lordshipps would assigne him a day for the hearing thereof.

And your petitioner shall dayly pray etc.

• Griffith Bowen

The humble petition of Griffith Bowen gentleman

Griffith Bowen his
peticion
reade 10th January 1670
rejected

Ann Eaton, widow. HL/PO/JO/10/1/343/348 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall and temporall in Parliament assembled

The humble peticion of Ann Eaton the widow of
Gerrard Martin deceased.

Sheweth
that your petitioners cosen Orcher Read of Forrinshingle alias Singland the parish of Saint Patrick in
the province of Munster and liberty of Limbrick in Ireland gentleman by his deed of gift dated the 6th day of July
in the 6th yeare of the raigne of King James and in the yeare of our Lord God 1609 whereby your petitioner was to have all
his lands called Forrinshingle alias Singland and all and singular the edifices and buildings etc to the said land
belonging which lands etc your petitioner was kept from by the fraudulent practices of one Sir Richard Sodwall knight
untill after his decease and then your petitioner did enjoy the same untill the rebellion of Ireland whereby shee was
deprived of all, and in the warrs the then Parliament possessed the said estate, so that in the yeare 1657 his
majestie then at Bruxells was pleased to signifie by the Earle of Bristoll, that as soone as his majestie was
established in his dominions he would give forth such order for your petitioners releife as should be suitable to law
and justice.

Whereupon your petitioner by humble peticion made application to his majestie againe and his majestie at the court at
Whitehall the 14th of August 1660 was graciously pleased to referr the same to the Lord Deputy of Ireland by the
refference under the hand of G: Holles one of his majesties masters of request

That your petitioner making applicacion to the Lord Deputy who said he could do nothing for your petitioners releife without
stronger order and your petitioner being poore and is now most unjustly held out of her estate aforesaid by one
Thomas Sodwell alias Southwell who can shew no right to the same only he pretends he was put into it by the
late tyrant Oliver Cromwell

That your petitioner making her most humble addresse to this honourable Parliament by most humble peticion
which on the 18th day of December 1667 was read and ordered to report to the house that its the opinions of the lords
comittees for peticions that it be recomended unto his majestie and still her most humble and dilligent attendance
is given in hopes to reape benefitt by your justice to be distributed to her in this her distressed and helplesse
estate and the said order being still in the clerks booke of this honourable house;

May it therefore please this most honourable house to grant your petitioner some effectuall
order for her releife in such measure as to your great wisdome shall seeme
meet according to his majesties gracious intentions so long since signified (as by the
annexed may appeare which are affixed to the said recited peticion still in the
custody of your honours clerks.

And your petitioner as in duty bound shall ever
pray

• Ann Eaton.

The peticion of Ann
Eaton widow

10th January 1670
reade and dismissed

Katherin, Lady Mohun, relict of Warwick Lord Mohun. HL/PO/JO/10/1/344/351 (1671)

The peticion of the
Lady Mohun

To the right honourable the lord spirituall and
temporall in Parliament assembled.

The humble peticion of Katherin Lady Mohun
relict of Warwick Lord Mohun deceased.

Sheweth
that Eleanor Burford your petitioners domestique servant was att Lesskard
in the county of Cornwall disgracefully arrested by one Pasco Abraham a
serjeant of the said towne about Palme Sunday last being in the tyme of the
session of Parliament att the suite of one Anne Chapman widow for a debt of
5 pounds 9 shillings 5 pence pretended to be due by your petitioners late husband the Lord Mohun upon [which?]
arrest your petitioners said servant told the said serjeant and the pretended creditor and
soe they well knew that shee was your petitioners servant, and that shee claimed the
benefitt of your petitioners priviledge, and required her discharge upon it, which they
both refused to allow her, and peremtorily answered, that they would [adventure?]
the danger of deteining her, and accordingly they did keepe her till shee gave
security for the debt, and paid the serjeant for the charge of the arrest and the other
charges for the attendance and expences.

That your petitioner conceives it a breach of the priviledge of
Parliament and humbly prayes your lordshipps justice herein,
both in relation of the priviledge of your honours in generall and
of your petitioner in particular, and that the offenders herein may answere
the contempt as to your lordshipps shall thinke meete.

And your petitioner shall pray etc

Katherin Mohun

[read?] 14th January 1670

Katherine Hallywell, wife of Richard Hallywell, tobacco cutter. HL/PO/JO/10/1/344/352 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall
and temporalle in Parliament assembled.

The humble peticion of Katherine Hallywell
wife of Richard Hallywell tobacco cutter.

Humbly sheweth.

That her sayd husband being under suspicion
of the late attempt upon the person of the right noble Duke
of Ormond shee was above six weekes since apprehended and
examined by the Lord Maiour in order to the discovery of the said
horrid attempt (whereof shee praiseth God for it) shee is [illegible]
altogether innocent and hopeth her husband is soe alsoe
s though hee absents himselfe, for what reason shee is utterly
ignorant:

That upon her examinacions shee was committed into a messengers
handes, where shee still continues, and none of those few freinds
shee hath suffred to come to her: and not long since shee was
examined before your lordshipps and it seemes did not demeane
her selfe as shee ought to have donne, for which shee craves
your lordshipps pardon:

And humbly prayes

That your lordshipps will please to call her
once more to bee examined and though
shee cannot discover anything of the
sayd wicked attempt: yet what she knowes
concerneing her husbandes flight, shee
will freely discover: and hopes and beggs
that your lordshipps will then give some order
for her enlargement.

And your peticioner shall [pray?]

The petition of
Katherine Halliwell
presented by James
Soames's wife
January 16 1670

Katherine Hallywell, wife of Richard Hallywell, tobacco cutter. HL/PO/JO/10/1/344/352 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall
and temporall assembled in Parliament

The humble peticion of Katherine Hallywell
wife of Richard Hallywell tobacco cutter.

Humbly sheweth.

That her said husband being under suspicion
of the late attempt upon the person of th right noble Duke of
Ormond, shee was about seaven weekes since apprehended and
examined by the Lord Maiour in order to the discovery of the
said horrid attempt (whereof shee prayseth God for it shee is
altogether ignorant) and shee hopeth her husband is soe alsoe
though hee absents himselfe for what reason shee is utterly
ignorant:

That upon her examinacions shee was comitted into a messengers
hands where shee still continues and none of those fewe freinds
shee hath suffred to come to her and not long after since
shee was examined before your lordshipps and it seemes did not
demesne her selfe as shee ought to have donne for which shee
humbly craves your lordshipps pardon:

And humbly prayes

That your lordshipps will please to call her once more
to bee examined and though shee cannot discover
any thing of the said wicked attempt, yett
what shee knowes concerneing her husbands
flight, shee will freely discover: and shee hopes
and beggs that your lordshipps will then give some
order for her enlargement

And your petitioner shall pray etc.

The petition of Katherin
Halliwell presented
and read 1o February 1670.

John Washwhite. HL/PO/JO/10/1/344/352 (1671)

John Washwhite
peticion

To the right honourable the lords spirituall
and temporall in Parliament assembled.

The humble peticion of John Washwhite.

Sheweth
that whereas your petitioner (by the malice of some persons was apprehended for
speakeing some suspitious words against his grace the Duke of Ormond as
was unjustly alleadged against him and whereof hee is absolutely
guiltless, yett is kept close prissoner in the Gatehouse and his wife not
admitted to bring him any susteynance.

That such as have sworne against him are malitious persons and assosiats
with one whom your petitioner apprehended and caused to bee carried
before Judge Moreton the weeke before his being soe comitted
and doe use all meanes to keepe him in prisson to hinder him
from serveing his majestie and being inocent in the said matter.

Your petitioner most humbly prays your lordshipps in tender consideracion
of the premisses to order that your petitioner may bee called before
your lordshipps to make his defence against his accusars
that hee may not still bee deteyned a close prissoner and
his wife and family thereby perish.

And hee will ever pray etc.

• John Washwhit

John Washwhite. HL/PO/JO/10/1/344/352 (1671)

The humble peticion of
John Washwhite
close prissoner in the Gate House.

To the right honourable the lords spirituall and temporall
in Parliament assembled etc.

The humble peticion of John Washwhite.

Sheweth
that your petitioner is comitted close prissoner upon suspicion of some words spoken
against his grace the Duke of Ormond, without haveing any person to come
neere him, and your lordshipps being sattisfyed hee was taxed only for
mallice were pleased to say that hee should bee putt into some
imploy to finde those persons out and have the liberty to speake with
any body whilst hee was in goale.

But soe it is may it please your lordshipps your petitioners wife is not admitted
to bring him victualls and for want of money the Lady Broughton
hath taken away his cloke and confind him to lye on the boards
and your petitioner being willing to make oath before hee come out
of goale to use his endeavors to finde out Hurst and other
person concerned in the said attempt

And therefore most humbly prays your lordshipps wilbee
pleased to order his discharge to preserve him and
his family from perishing

And your petitioner shall ever pray etc

John Stapilton, esquire, son and heir of Sir Phillip Stapilton. HL/PO/JO/10/1/344/353 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall
and temporall assembled in Parliament.

The humble peticion of John Stapilton esquire sonne
and heire of Sir Phillip Stapilton knight deceased.

Sheweth

That Sir Phillip Stapilton in the 5th yeare of his late majestye King Charles the first purchased the scite
of the priory of Warter in Yorkshire of David Cicill esquire and there was reserved upon the whole priory an yearely
fee farme rent of 121 pounds 1 shilling 6 pence to his majestye.

That the whole priory consists of divers messuages lands and tenements in Yorkshire sold from the scite of the
said priory and amongst the rest one messuage with the appurtenances in Beverley which by meane conveyance is
come to John Heiron esquire.

That in the 33th yeare of our late soveraigne Queene Elizabeth and in the 21th yeare of our late soveraigne
King James there was apporcionments made by virtue of a decree in the Exchequer of the said fee farme
rent that all the messuages lands and tenements belonging to the said priory should pay theire apporcionments
of the said rent as by the decree and apporcionments remayneing upon record doth appeare.

That in the sixth yeare of the raigne of our late soveraigne King Charles the 2d first of blessed memory Sir
Phillipp Stapilton had an order from the Court of Exchequer that the severall owners of the lands and tenements
purchased from the scite of the priory should pay theire apporcionments formerly sett upon them which
they did accordingly.

But after the said Sir Phillipps death your peticioner being an infant and in regard of the late warrs and
troubles your peticioner was forced to pay the whole fee farme rent for severall yeares not knowing of the said
apporcionments.

That about 4 yeares since your peticioner having notice of the said apporcionments exhibited his bill
in his majestyes Court of Exchequer against the said John Heiron and others to have the said aporcionments confirmed
and payment to be made of the said fee farme rent accordingly, and your peticioners inheritance disburthened
as in equity it ought to be.

That in Michaelmas terme in the 20th yeare of his now majestye the said cause came to be heard, and although the
defendants who were ordered by the said court to produce theire conveyances that it might appeare to the court (which
had alsoe plainely appeared to the same court before upon making the said first decree) if the said defendants lands
were by any covenant of your peticioners said predecessours freed from the said fee farme rent or not (which as the
truth is, they are not) and although the said defendants did not produce theire conveyances, nor offered any
colour, against the said decree and the justice of the said apporcionment; which is a thing hath been in that
court decreed in a multitude of cases (as your peticioner is ready to shew) yet your peticioners said suite was
dismist and with 30 pounds costs; which dismission is signed and inrolled, and your peticioner thereby not onely
prohibited to have the benefitt of the said former decree; but barred for ever to be releived upon the said
apporcionment contrary to equity and the course of that court

Wherefore your peticioner humbly appeales from the said dismission unto your
lordshipps and humbly beggs of your lordshipps to heare this cause and that the said
John Heiron may be directed to appeare before your lordshipps and answere the premisses
and your peticioner be releived according to justice; and that in the meane tyme all proceedings
may stay upon the said dismission.

And your peticioner as in duty
bound shall pray etc.

John Stapilton

Master Stapiltons peticion
reade 17o Januarii 1670
[illegible]

John, Lord Lovelace. HL/PO/JO/10/1/344/354 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall and temporall
in Parliament assembled

The humble peticion of John Lord Lovelace

Sheweth

That one John Higden pretending a small summe of money to be due
unto him from one George Batt who is one of your petitioners meniall servants
caused an attachment to be taken out of the castle court of Windsor and
thereupon the ninth of January instant Benjamin Cotton and Richard
Clements two bayliffes came to your petitioners house as they pretended to take
some of the said Batts cattle for satisfaccion of the said debt but in lieu thereof
tooke away three of your petitioners cowes which they were told by your petitioners servant
did belong unto him and not to the said Batts and were also told that the said
Batt was your petitioners servant, and was a privelidged person notwithstanding
all which in violacion of the privelidge of this honourable house and in contempt
of your petitioner they declared they cared not for what was told them but would
deteyne [illegible] and accordingly did carry away the said cattle

Your petitioner most humbly prayes your lordshipps to take the
premisses into consideracion and to send for the said
persons above mencioned to answer their breach
of the privelidge of this honourable house and to
give your petitioner such redress as to your great wisdome
shall seeme meet

And your petitioner shall pray

John Lovelace

Lord Lovelaces petition
read
17o January 1670.

Richard Clements. HL/PO/JO/10/1/344/354 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall
and temporall in Parliament assembled.

The humble peticion of Richard Clements.

Sheweth
that your petitioner hath violated the priviledges of this honourable
house by his unadvised attaching the goods of the right honourable the Lord
Lovelace a member of this honourable house, your petitioner beleeveing they had beene
the goods of one Master Batts whome the attachment was against

That your petitioner is therefore taken in custody by order of this
house where hee continues att vast charges, and hath begged pardon of the
Lord Lovelace, who hath beene pleased to remitte the offence, butt being
committed by order of this house, hee cannot be sett att liberty without your honours
order.

Your petitioner most humbly prayes this high and honourable house,
to order his release and liberty being very sorry for his
transgression, the Lord Lovelace haveing already beene
pleased to remitt and acquitt him for his offence.

And your petitioner shall pray etc

Richard Clements

Richard Clements delinquent
his petition
read 31o January 1670
and ordered.

Rebecca Burrell, widow of Redmaine Burrell. HL/PO/JO/10/1/345/357 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall and temporall in Parlyament assembled.

The humble peticion and appeale of Rebecca Burrell widdow and relict of Redmaine Burrell deceased.

Sheweth
that whereas Redmaine Burrell the petitioners late husband upon a treaty with Sir Thomas Gardiner late recorder of London your petitioners father
of a marriage to be had betweene your petitioner and the said Redmaine he the said Redman for the consideracion of a marriage porcion of 1000 pounds by your petitioners said father to the said
Redmaine did before marriage with your petitioner by indenture dated on or about the 11th day of January 1649 convey and assure a rent charge and annuity of 200 pounds per annum after the death of one Lidia Ward
unto the said Sir Thomas Gardiner and his heires to the use of the said Redmaine dureing his naturall life; and after his decease to the use of your petitioner dureing her naturall life for
her joynture and in full satisfaccion of her dower and after their deceases to the use of the 1st 2d 3d sonne and all other the sonnes of their two bodies [begotten?] in tayle, the remainder
to the right heires of the said Redmaine in fee and after the marriage tooke effect, and the said Lidia Ward is since dead, and the said Redmaine Burrell is since alsoe dead, leaving your petitioner a
widdow with 3 small children who have noething to support them or releive them but the said annuity but since the death of the said Redmaine your petitioner hopeing to receive and have her said
joynture and annuity paid unto her sent 2 persons at the time and to the place where the said annuity or rent charge ought to have beene paid who did then and there demand the same
of the tennants of the mannours which are chargeable therewith but they refused to pay the said rent and annuity to your petitioner alleadging that one William Ellis esquire now sergeant at law had the
inheritance thereof which he had purchased from the said Redmaine Burrell, and that they had paid him the said annuity, and he had given them security to save them harmelesse and your petitioner
therupon destrained on the said mannours for the said rent but the said tennants and the said Sergeant Ellis repleavyed the same, wherupon your petitioner intended to avow for the same rent charge at
the common law, but could not soe doe by reason that she could not come by the originall deed of grant of the said annuity to produce under seale in court as by law she ought to doe to
make out her avowry for that the said Master Sergeant Ellis had gotten the same into his custody, wherupon your petitioner preferred her bill into the Court of Chancery setting out her cause as
aforesaid, and prayed to have releife in the premisses, and to have the said originall deeds delivered up to her that were in Master Sergeant Ellis his hands that she might recover the said annuity and
have her remedy by the law to recover the same, but the said Master Sergeant Ellis refused to answere her bill and putt in a plea therunto, that he on the [30th?] day of May 1654 which was
5 yeares after the petitioners setlement for the consideracion of 2400 pounds did purchase the inheritance of the said annuity of the said Redmaine Burrell after the death of the said Lidia Ward and all
the deeds and writeings which concerned the same, and that he had noe notice of the said conveyance unto your petitioner at the time of his purchase and on heareing of the said cause on
the said plea in Chauncery the plea was allowed good and the plainants bill dismissed, soe that your petitioner is outed of all remedy either in law or equity for the recovery of her just and
undoubted right but by the assistance of your lordshipps justice. Now if it shall please your good lordshipps for that it doth appeare by the very plea that the said Sergeant Ellis purchased
the premisses for 12 yeares purchase vallue and noe more which was well worth 20; soe that in justice it might be imagined that your petitioners estate for life was intended to be allowed out
of the premisses, and it alsoe appeareing by the very plea that the said Sergeant Ellis his purchase was 5 yeares and more after the setlement on your petitioner soe that your petitioner hath the indubitable
right in law and equity to the premisses, but that she cannot recover the same without haveing the custody of the originall deeds to produce in court, and for that Master Sergeant Ellis is a
knowing and able lawyer, and would not be induced on any pretence to purchase land of any person without sight of his setlement on his marriage which he could not be ignorant
of, being a neighbour of his in the same county, and for that your petitioner not long after she heard of Master Sergeant Ellis his purchase of the premisses she did send and give him
notice of her title to the premisses by her owne brother, in the life time of the said Redmaine Burrell, soe that he might have retracted his purchase, or else if any money
was paid he might have procured the same backe againe from the said Redmaine Burrell by sueing in her husbands life time on the covenant now sett out in his said plea
and this defendant did in her answere to Master Sergeant Ellis his bill in Chauncery sett out and discover her estate and title aforesaid to the premisses, yet the said Sergeant Ellis did not take any
care for the recovery of his money but he haveing gotten a great bargaine slighted your petitioner and her title though just and legall, for that he knew her poore, and not able to contest her title
in law with him that had gotten all the deeds and writeings into his hands that concerned the petitioners title, and now detaines the same to your petitioners utter ruine and impoverishing both of herselfe
and poore orphans.

The premisses considered and for that your petitioner hath noe remedy for recovery of her just right but by peticion and appeale to your honours in this cause
your petitioner doth therefore humbly beseech your lordshipps to take into your consideracion this her deplorable condicion, and to releive and assist her in the recovery of her
just right and interest in the said rent charge and premisses, and to cause the said Master Sergeant Ellis to deliver up to your petitioner the said originall grant assignments
and conveyances of the said rent charge and [alsoe?] to cause the said tennants of the said mannours and premisses to pay your petitioner the said annuall rent
charge according to her just right and [illegible] to the same for her joynture and subsistance, and to releive your petitioner in all and singular the
premisses as to your honours shall seeme [meete?] and fitt.

And your petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray etc

Rebecca Burrell

Mistress Rebecca Burrell's
petition read
23o January 1670
11 March 70
dismissed

Rebecca Burrell, relict of Redman Burrell, esquire. HL/PO/JO/10/1/345/357 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall and
temporall in Parliament assembled.

The humble peticion of Rebecca Burrell
relict of Redman Burrell esquire deceased.

Sheweth
that according to your lordshipps order on that behalfe
she hath had a copy of the answere of Serjeant
Ellis to her peticion and appeale now depending in
this honourable house

And therefore humbly beseecheth your
lordshipps to assigne her a short day to be heard
by her councell at your honours barr to make
out the allegacions of her said peticion to
the end she may be releived in such sort
as to your lordshipps justice shall seeme meete,

And (as in duty bound) she
shall ever pray etc

Rebecca Burrell

Mistress Burrells petition
for a hearing is read
16 February 1670.

Dame Elizabeth Harby. HL/PO/JO/10/1/345/359 (1671)

The Lady Harbyes peticion [illegible]
priviledge of the Queenes service

To the right honourable the lords spirituall and
temporall in Parlament assembled

The humble peticon of Dame Elizabeth Harby

Sheweth
that your petitioner being one of the privy chamber to her majestye was neverthe=
=lesse on the 12th of December last arrested upon a meane processe in her
lodgings in Suffolke Streete by William Greene and other Middlesex bayliffes
to the number of 26 persons at the suite of one Thomas Norton [illegible]
they breaking open the said house by vertue of a warrant from the farmers
of the customes upon pretence to search for goods that had not payd
his majestyes customes and afterwards unduely charged her in execucion at the
suites of Thomas Ireton and Matthew Bowcherett [illegible] thereupon carryed
to the Fleete where shee now remaynes

Your petitioner therefore humbly prayeth your lordshipps to grant
unto her his majestyes writt of habeas corpus [illegible] cause
to bring her to the barr of this honourable house [illegible] to
doe such further right to your petitioner as to your lordshipps justice
and wisedome shall seeme meete

And your petitioner shall ever pray etc

Elizabeth Harby

Read 27 January 1670
and ordered

Penelope Staunton, administratrix of Phillip Cage and of Dame Ann Wade. HL/PO/JO/10/1/345/360 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall and temporall in Parliament assembled

The humble peticon of Penelope Staunton widdow the administratrix de bonis non of Phillip Cage
esquire deceased the administrator of Dame Ann Waade deceased grandmother of the petitioner

Sheweth
that in the yeare 1642 the said Lady Waade being possessed for 21 yeares then to come of and in the mannor of Belsis in the county of Middlesex by vertue of a lease thereof
made by the then dean and chapter of Westminster, and being also possessed of severall termes of yeares thereof made from the crowne of and in all that wood called Saint Johns Wood in the said
county of Middlesex and being soe possessed the said Lady Waade in the yeare 1642 for 1500 pounds mortgaged the said mannour of Belsis to John Wild serjant at law and shortly after dyed in testate
after whose death the said Phillip Cage in right of Alice his wife the daughter of the said lady took administration and by vertue thereof was intituled to the equity of redemption
of the said mortgage and also became possessed of the said wood for the remainder of the said severall termes of yeares therein to come and the said Phillip Cage haveing for his loyalty
to his late majesty by a sequestracion and otherwise reduced to a low condicion and not able out of his owne estate to redeeme the said mortgage he the said Phillip Cage did prevaile
with one John Holgate his brother in law to pay of the said Serjant Wild his principall and interest due upon the said mortgage which amounted to 1650 pounds and noe more and to take
an assignement therof under this secret trust that when the said Holgate out of the rents and profitts thereof being at least 400 pounds or otherwise should be paid his said principall
money and intrest that then the said Holgate should stand possessed of the said premisses for the remainder of the terme of yeares therein to come in trust for the said Cage his executors and
assigns and in regard Saint Johns Wood was not then sequestred for the pretended delinquency of the said Phillip Cage the better to protect the same there from the said Phillip Cage also
assigned his remaineing terme in the said woods of the yearly value of above 200 pounds to the said Holgate as further security and upon the trust aforesaid and shortly after the said
Phillip Cage died intestate and administracion of his estate and also administration de bonis non of the said Lady Waade was granted to Thomas Cage son of the said Phillip who being thereby entituled
to the said premisses by the trust aforesaid in the yeare 1661 exhibited his bill in the Court of Exchequer against the said Holgate to call him to an account for the rents and proffitts of all the said premisses by him received
by vertue of the trust aforesaid amounting to 10000 pounds and upwards to which bill the said Holgate answered and expresly denyed the trust and the 23 of June this cause was heard and directed to a tryall
at law whether trust or no trust upon tryall it was found a trust and Holgate thereupon decreed to account before auditours who have found Holgate debtour 5000 pounds besides interest.

That before the said Thomas Cage could reap any fruit of the said decree he dyed intestate and thereupon administracion de bonis non of the said Lady Waade and
also of the said Phillip Cage was granted to your petitioner the sister of the said Thomas and in Michaelmas terme 1669 your petitioner brought her bill of revivor against the said Holgate
in the said court and the cause stood revived and in regard that the said Holgate contrary to his said trust had sold the said woods to one Collins for 200 pounds the said Holgate
put in exceptions to the report and amongst other things excepted for that he haveing sold the said woods to Collins for 200 pounds he ought only to be accomptable for the intrest of
the same and not for the profitts of the said woods and thereupon it was ordred the said auditours should take the accounts distinct and to charge Holgate with the intrest of the 200 pounds and
not for the proffitts in pursuance thereof the auditour makes his other report 29 of June 1669 and certifies due from Holgate 1636 pounds 7 shillings 10 pence all allowances being
made that notwithstanding contrary to the rules and practice of the court Holgate was afterwards admitted to put in new exceptions to the last report
and thereupon it went back to the same auditours who by an other report 24 March 1669 without any sufficient proofes to warrant the same struck
of the said 1636 pounds 7 shillings 10 pence formerly certified to be due and afterwards 23 of Aprill last this cause was heard and upon hearing dismissed without any
satisfaccion for the great breach of trust to your petitioners losse about 3000 pounds although then demanded of the court which dismission is since signed and inrolled
and your petitioner thereby barred of all releife in the ordinary courts at Westminster save before your honours.

That this cause being a case of much oppression and breach of trust and not releivable but before your honours

Your petitioner humbly prayes your honours to take the same into your serious consideracion and to give
her such releife therein as to your honours shall seeme most agreable to justice and equity.

Penelope Stanton

Mistress Penelope Stauntons
peticion.
Read 19th January

Reade 31th January 1670

28 March [71?] heard at the
barr and dismissed.

Robert Turton, William Roper and Richard Greves. HL/PO/JO/10/1/345/361 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall and temporall
in Parliament assembled

The humble peticion and appeale of Robert Turton
William Roper and Richard Greves

Sheweth
that in Hillary tearm 1659 one Samuell While exhibited his bill of complaint in
the Court of Chauncery against your peticioners and one Thomas Greves esquire setting forth
that the said Thomas Greves was indebted unto him 100 pounds and for security thereof and of
such other monyes as he should owe him within two yeeres mortgaged to him 50 acres
of land in Alchurch in the countie of Worcester, and covenanted that his heyres and assignes
should make further assureance and alleadged that your peticioners had noe estate in the landes in
question but in trust for him the said Thomas Greves, and prayed that they might confirme his
estate whereunto your peticioners answered and thereby sett forth that they and many others more
were purchasours of the said Thomas Greves for divers other great quantityes of landes in the answer
mencioned with covenantes that the same were free from incumbrances, and that after [several?]
yeeres quiett enjoyment, severall precedent incumbrances in the answere named by stat and [illegible]
broke out, and that to save the danger of the covenantes and in consideracion of a great somme of [illegible]
the said Thomas Greves did convey the landes in question to your peticioners and their heyres, but [intrusted?]
your peticioners with part of the purchase money to pay precedent debts and discharge [incumbrances?]
and that While and one Thomas Hunt who is alleadged but noe way prooved to be Whiles [trus...?]
disturbed your peticioners by subsequent incumbrances, that they could not performe their trust [illegible]
the said purchasours, and your peticioners further shew, that they exhibited a crosse bill to the effect
of their said answere, whereunto While and Hunt did answere to the effect of Whiles bill, and
both causes came to be heard before the late Lord Chauncellour, on the 16th of November 1666
whereupon your peticioners were decreed to account before a master, who made a report ex parte
whereby your peticioners were to pay While 369 pounds 7 shillings or els confirme both While and Huntes estate
in the landes in question which report was since confirmed by decree although Hunt had
not any bill against your peticioners nor is there any word in Whiles bill relateing to Huntes
estate, and although the said somme be more then the particulers of that account doe amount
unto, and yet many thinges therein charged double, and although it be more then the land
[illegible] debt was subsequent to your peticioners conveyance
[illegible] [...ances?], whereby the purchasours were really damnified
[illegible] [...e?] before he contracted for Huntes pretended estate, and
[illegible] of reveiw and assigned the same for errours amongst
[illegible] [...reunto?] your peticioners humbly referre themselves, yet
[illegible] the said decree, whereby your peticioners must breake
[illegible] [purchasours?], and whereby a subsequent creditour is
[illegible] [...y?] is decreed then appeares in the case to be due,
[illegible] by Whiles bill

Wherefore your peticioners humbly pray your lordshipps
[to?] consider the premisses and reverse the said decree, and
[further?] releive your peticioners against the same as shall
appeare just, and agreeable to right equity and good conscience
and for the effecting thereof that your lordshipps wilbe pleased
to summon the said Samuell While and Thomas Hunt
to answere the premisses, and that all proceedings upon
the said decree may be stayed by your lordshipps order till
your lordshipps shall give further order therein

And your peticioners shall ever pray etc.

• Robert Turton
• William Roper
• Richard Greves

The creditors of Phillipp, late Earl of Pembroke and Mountgomery. HL/PO/JO/10/1/345/362 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords assembled in the High Court of Parliament

The humble peticion of the creditors of Phillipp late
Earle of Pembroke and Mountgomery

Humbly sheweth
that the said late earle being indebted to severall tradesmen in and about London to the value of 3000 pounds and upwards
and being possessed of a personall estate consisting in plate jewells goods and chattells to the value of 9000 pounds and
upwards in his mancion house att Wilton made his last will and testament in writeing and thereby taking
honourable care that his debts should be paid out of his said personall estate and that the surplusage thereof
should be devyded betweene his youngest sonne Sir Phillipp Herbert knight of the bath and the Lady Mary
Herbert now wife of Sir John Sydenham barronet did appoynt his grace George Duke of Buckingham
and the right honourable John Lord Pawlett executours of his sayd will in trust to sell and dispose of all and singuler
his said personall estate for payment of his said debts and to devyde the residue of the money thereby raized
between the said Sir Phillipp Herbert and the said Lady Mary and afterwards dyed att Wilton aforesaid

That the Duke of Buckingham and Lord Pawlett tooke upon them the said trust and proved the
said will,

That after the death of the said late earle, the right honourable William now Earle of Pembroke and
Mountgomery possest himself of the said goods and chattells att Wilton amounting to 9000 pounds as
aforesaid and although his lordshipp did permitt an inventory to be taken and an appraisment
made thereof, yett does deteyne all the said goods and refuseth either to buy the same
or permitt them to be exposed elsewhere to sale by meanes whereof and of the
priviledge and peerage of the said earle the duke is disabled to performe the trust in him
reposed by the said late earles will, or make payment to any of the creditors

Your peticioners humbly pray that your lordshipps in this case of generall concernement
of soe many poore creditors will please to interpose or find some expedient
as to your lordshipps shall seeme meete whereby the said earle may be prevailed with to
permitt the said goods and chattells now deteined by him to be exposed to sale or
otherwise that if the said earle hath any pretence of title thereunto he will please
to wave his priviledge and permitt a legal determinacion thereof that the will of the
said late earle and the trust thereby reposed may be honourably performed

And your peticioners shall pray etc

• Thomas Foorthe
• Joseph Higgs
• Thomas Phillips
• William Hutchinson for Margaret Smith


• Tobell Glinn
• John Davis
• Elizabeth England
• Jeremy Robens
• John Huncombe


• John Eaton
• Edward Trahearne
• Thomas Tyther
• Ann Chapman
• William Watts
• Ralph Box
• [T Deane?]

petition of the
creditors of the
late Earl of Pembroke
read 1o February 1670.

John Harrison of Dunchurch, yeoman. HL/PO/JO/10/1/345/363 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall
and temporall in the High Court of Parliament
assembled.

The humble peticion of John Harrison of
Dunchurch in the county of Warwicke yeoman.

Humbly sheweth

That your peticioner being bayliffe to the right honourable the
Countesse of Northumberland in the said county was lately
arrested at the suit of one John Withybed of Stanerton in
the county of Northampton in reference to the said countesse
service.

That a declaracion at the said Withybeds suit hath been de
livered your peticioner and a plea now required from him
whereby to try the said cause at the next assizes.

May it therefore please your lordships to grant unto your
peticioners such releife herein as to your lordships shall
seem meet.

And your peticioner shall dayly pray etc

The Countesse of Nor=
thumberlands servant John
Harrison arrested.
8 February 1670.

Charles, Lord Mohun, son and heir of Warwicke, Lord Mohun. HL/PO/JO/10/1/345/366 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall
and temporall assembled in Parliament.

The humble peticion of Charles Lord Mohun Baron of
Okehampton sonne and heire of Warwicke late Lord Mohun deceased

Sheweth
that Katharine Lady Mohun your petitioners mother had a joynture setled on her before marriage
with your petitioners said father and an augmentacion of her joynture soone after, both amountinge
to the yearely value of above 1000 pounds which she enjoyes; and your petitioners said father was seized
of diverse other mannours and lands, and dyed soe seized about Aprill 1665 at Saint Martyns
in the Fields in Middlesex duringe his attendance in Parliament (your petitioner being then in
his minority and beyond the seas) your petitioners said mother gott into her hands all the deeds
evidences and writings of your petitioners said father, which now of right belonge to your petitioner as
his heire, the said deeds evidences and writings being then in the studdy of his said father
att his mansion howse of Boconnocke in Cornewall. And the said Lady Mohun takinge
advantage thereof, soone after your petitioners said fathers death brought a writt of dower
and your petitioner for want of the said deeds evidences and writings cannot make the said
joynture to appeare, whereby to defend himselfe against the said writt of dower, soe
that your petitioner after many dutifull applicacions to his said mother, the mediacion of
freinds not prevailinge therein before and since, hath been enforced (though very unwillingly)
to exhibite two severall bills in Chancery against his said mother, for releife in the premisses,
where after many delayes from Hillary terme 1666, when the said bills weare exhibited
untill this tyme, your petitioner is delayed by his said mother and cannot proceed; whereby your
petitioner is not onely disabled to pay the great debts (which he hath a desire to doe) contracted
by his said father by his service and sufferings for his gracious majesty, and for his late royall
father, and to recover his rents and severall other dutyes detayned from him by his tenauntes
for want of the counterpartes of the leases, but is alsoe in very great danger of losinge
some parte of his inheritance by reason of the detayninge of the deeds evidences and
writings as aforesaid; all which said premisses tend to the absolute ruine of your petitioner, unles
your lordshipps graunt some speedy releife

Your petitioner therefore humbly prayes (this being a case betweene peers, and
therefore, as your petitioner humbly conceives, most proper to be determined
before your lordshipps, and the very great extremity of the case on your petitioners
parte considered) that your lordshipps would be pleased to heare and
determine the same, and to order that your petitioners said mother may
appeare before your lordshipps in Parliament to answeare the premisses,
and to give such releife, as to your great wisdomes shall seeme just and
reasonable

And your petitioner shall ever pray etc.

Mohun

The Lord Mohuns peticion
read the 10th of February 70.

Sir John Reresby, baronet. HL/PO/JO/10/1/345/367 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall and temporall
in Parliament assembled.

The humble peticion of Sir John Reresby baronett.

Sheweth
that Sir Thomas Reresby knight your peticioners great grandfather was heretofore seised in his demesne
as of fee of and in the manour of Reresbey in Ashover in the countie of Derby of the value of five hundred pounds per centum to
which the advowson of the church of Reresby did and doth belong and hee the said Sir Thomas Reresbey morgaged the said premisses for
two hundred yeares to Sir Samuell Trion since deceased for eight hundred poundes principall money by him borrowed of the said Sir Samuell and
the said Sir Thomas Reresbey afterwards about the end of the reigne of the late King James or the begininge of the reigne of the late King Charles
being seised in the fee of the mannour of Babington of the yearely value of three hundred poundes, and other landes parcell of Peshalls mannour of the
yearely value of one hundred and fifty poundes all lyeinge in Ashover aforesaid the said Sir Thomas Reresby about the tyme aforesaid did by [some?]
deede graunte the said mannours of Reresby and Babington and the other premisses to Sir Francis Wortley Sir Robert Monson Anthony Monson and Thomas
Lewes esquires for the terme of 2000 yeares in trust to discharge the said debte and to raise fifteene hundred poundes a peece for his two daughters Bridgett
and Mary, which said Bridget afterwardes was married to Isaac Scott and Mary afterwardes was married to Steward and the said Sir Thomas
Rereseby soone after dyeing seised of the said premisses the same discended to Sir George Reresby his sonne and heire against whome the executors
of Trion and the said Scott and Steward commenced some suite or suites in the High Courte of Chancery in or about the yeare of our lord 1629 or [some?]
little tyme before to have the said mannors and landes solde for raiseinge moneyes for the said debte to the said Sir Samuell Trion and the said porcions
for the said Bridgett and Mary whereupon it was decreed that soe much of the said premisses as shoulde bee requisite should bee solde for the purposes
aforesaid and afterwardes the said Sir George Reresbey dyed leaveing Sir John Reresbey your peticioners father his sonne and heire an infant of
tender yeares to whome the inheritance of the said premisses discended and the said Scott and Steward haveing obteined such a decree as aforesaid
and takeing advantage of the infancie of your peticioners said father did combine themselves with severall of the tennants of the said premisses
(who very well understoode the true values thereof) and to make some private gaine thereof to themselves did at under rates and under values
sell all the said premisses to the said severall tennants thereby raiseinge some inconsiderable summes of money not accomptinge in the
whole to above three thousand poundes whereas the said premisses were in truth then worth to bee solde fifteene thousande poundes at the least by
meanes whereof by the combinacion and fraude aforesaid your peticioners said father was not onely deprived of the benefit of all the said
premisses, but was also charged and lefte lyeable to greate partes of the said summes of money which ought to have beene raised and paid out
of the said landes and premisses (and which your peticioner and his father have beene since compelled to pay.) And your peticioners said father
beeing about to seeke releife against the said fraude and practices of the said confederates soone after hee attained his age of 21 yeares was
therein prevented by the late unhappy differences and unnaturall warre in this kingdome duringe which hee was sequestred for his loyalty
to our late soveraigne lord King Charles the first of blessed memorie and before his majesties happy restoracion dyed seised of the inheritance
of the said premisses which by and after his death discended and came to your peticioner his sonne and heire beeing then an infant of tender age
and your peticioner beeinge afterwardes informed of the fraudes aforesaid did soone after his atteyneinge his age of 21 yeares to witt in the
terme of Saint Hillary 1669 exhibited his bill of complaint into the High Courte of Chancery against John Farnesworth John [Lummas?] Master
James Webster William Bower John Stephenson John Cope Joseph Fox Edward Jolly William Townesrowe Mary Wasse John Lower Edward Hodge
=kenson John Marther Master John Billinglye Charles Alsopp Thomas Stone Anthony Prestwich Roger Hollingworth Master Harris Thomas
Milward Robert Milward Master Roger Coates Robert Flint George Croftes Master Hugh Bateman Ralph Antrim Christopher Bower John
Wiltshawe Master Adrian Monday Master Obediah Bourne Mathew Booth Richard Hodgekenson seignior George Kellar George Hodgekenson
Francis Bower Anthony Ragg John Bunting Henry Flower and Master John Buckston the tennants and owners of the said premisses
by the said fraude and combinacion solde as aforesaid thereby setting forth the matters herein before mencioned and praying releife
in the said premisses and against the said fraudes and the said Bourne and other the said defendants beeing served with
proces of the said Courte of Chancery did appeare and pleade to your said peticioners bill, the said conveyances soe to them respectively
made as aforesaid and their possession of the said premisses which in truth was the greate greeveance that your peticioner complained
of and yet soe it is that the said plea was allowed good by the said Courte of Chancery and your peticioners bill is by decree of the
said court dismissed out of the said courte as by the said decree may appeare and your peticioner sheweth that the said decree and
dismission is erronious and ought not to have beene made by the said Courte of Chancery but your peticioner cannot bee releived
against the same in the said Courte of Chancery by reason that the said defendants doe refuse to signe and enrolle the same and yett
[illegible] your peticioners farther suite in the said courte in and concerninge the said premisses.

Now forasmuch as your peticioner cann have noe releife in the said
premisses save onely from your honours beeing the highest and
supreame courte of judicature of this kingdome your peticioner therefore
doth humbly appeale to your honoures from the said decree and prayeth
that the same may bee reveiwed and reversed and that the said
Bourne and other the persons aforesaid may answer the premisses
and that your peticioner may bee therein releived according to right and
justice.

And your peticioner as in dutie bounde shall
pray.

Sir John Reresby his peticion
Reade 6o Decembris 1670

Reade and dismissed 31o January 1670

Sir John Reresby's peticion
reade in the house and dis=
missed upon report
11o February 1670.

Thomas Shirley, physician in ordinary, and Elisabeth his wife. HL/PO/JO/10/1/346/369 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall and temporall assembled
in Parlament

The petition of Thomas Shirley physitian in ordinary to his majesty and of
Elisabeth his wife executrix to the Lady Hyppisly

Humbly sheweth
that the Lady Hyppisly at her death did by her last will in writing make Elisabeth (your petitioners
wife) then Elisabeth Basket her executrix and that Master Thomas Hawles of Salsbury was imployed
by the said lady as her solicitor and receavour of her moneyes who at the time of her death was indebted
to her 400 pounds for the payment of which he gave her his bond of 800 pounds penalty that the right to this mony
came to [illegible] your petitioners wife (then Elisabeth Basket) as being the executrix and the sayd executrix
having often demanded the moneyes of the sayd Hawles he denyed to pay the same except she would
abate an 100 pounds which he pretended he had receaved of one Master Stedman for the ladyes use and for which he sayes
he gave him a note to repay it him againe though Master Stedman did justly ow this 100 pounds to the sayd lady soe that
the sayd executrix was forced to sue the sayd Hawles at law for the 400 pounds to stop which proceedings he got an
injunction out of Chancery and filed his bill against her to cause her to pay this 100 pounds but the court did order the
sayd 100 pounds to be deposited in court which this executrix did take out on security to abide the order of the
court afterwards this executrix did marry your petitioner Thomas Sherley a physitian and Hawles obtained
an order to goe to a tryall at Salsbury assises to try if this 100 pounds were part of the 400 pound bond which order your
petitioner not having the writings in his hands and being told the tryall was not materiall he did nott obey
at that time and afterwards though he offered to pay costs and goe to tryall could not revive the sayd order which
when he saw (being ignorant in these affayres and loath to be diverted from his profession) he inquired noe
more after the proceedings in Chauncery soe that Master Hawles by surprisall got an order that the said 100 pounds
should be taken pro confesso and had costs and use allowed him in all amounting to 300 pounds though against an execu
=trix contrary to the custome of that court as your petitioner is informed and afterwards he got a commission
of rebellion out against your petitioners and then a final decree against them and by vertue of an attachment
made your petitioner prisoner to the Fleet (who was a priviledged person) till your honours were
pleased to release him

Your petitioners pray that considering they have noe remedy at law or
Chauncery to set aside this final decree they may appeale to your honours
and that if your excelent wisdomes shall think fit the decree may be set aside
and made voyde and that your lordships would please to heare and determine
their cause that soe they may be freed from the [malityous?] and unjust
proceedings of the sayd Hawles

And as in duty bound they shall ever pray etc

Thomas Sherley

[illegible]

William, earl of Pembrooke. HL/PO/JO/10/1/346/370 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall and
temporall in this present Parliament assembled

The humble peticion of William Earle of Pembrooke

Sheweth
that your petitioner is seized of an estate of inheritance in the chace and
warrens of Alborne in the county of Wiltshire which is of the yearely value of 300 pounds per
annum but soe it is may it please your lordships that during this sessions of Parliament Oliver
Nicholas esquire Richard Gilbert, William Gilbert John Gilbert, Richard Burford, Henry
Bristowe, John Morley, John Hopkins, Joseph Coplyn, John Coplyn Thomas Brynde, and
James Denby, all of the parish of Aldborne aforesaid husbandmen, by the contrivance and
instigation of Thomas Hawles esquire have taken possession of the said warrens and keepe
possession of the lodges in the said warrens and take the profitts thereof to the use of the
said Master Hawles whereby your petitioner is very much damnified in his estate and a breach in
your petitioners priveledge.

Your petitioner therefore humbly prayeth that your lordships wilbe pleased to grant your order
for the summons of the said Oliver Nicholas, Thomas Hawles, Richard Gilbert
William Gilbert, John Gilbert, Richard Burford, Henry Bristow, John Morley
John Hopkins, Joseph Coplyn, John Coplyn Thomas Brynde, and James Denby to
appeare at the barre of this honourable court to answer the matters above alledged

Petition of
the Earle of Pembroake

The petition of the
Earl of Pembrooke concerning
breach of priviledge
read 17o February 1670
and dismissed.

Sir John Colladon, physician in ordinary to his majesty. HL/PO/JO/10/1/346/371 (1671)

The humble complainte and
peticion of Sir John Colladon
to the lords in Parliament

To the lords spirituall and temporall in [Parliament?] [illegible]

The humble complainte and peticion of Sir [John?]
Colladon knight auncient servant and physicion in [ordinary?]
to his majesty.

Humbly sheweth.

That your petitioner in 1668 att the importunity and for the debt
of Doctor Poleman became bound with him to one Edward
Neltrop in the summe of 80 pounds for the payment of 40 pounds
which bond being (by the neglect of the said Poleman)
forfeited, by combination betwen the said Neltroppe [and?]
Master Coxe, and Poleman to clapp the whole debt upon your petitioner
your petitioner was sued and a judgement entred against him att the
suite of Edward Neltrop in Hylary terme last and an execution
thereupon was made out as of Trinity terme last returnable
in Michaelmas terme last, by vertue of which they tooke your
petitioner in execution the 12th day of August last and made
him pay or leave in depositum 68 pounds in the handes of the
baylie David Rowlands one of the baylies to the [sheriff?]
of Middlesex whoe refused your petitioner his liberty although your [petitioner?]
shewed him under the hand of the right honourable [illegible]
Chamberlain that he was an auncient [servant?] [illegible]
in ordinary to his majesty. All which [being?] [illegible]
the setting of Parliament and against the [pr...?] [illegible]
this honorable house aunciently allowed to his [illegible]
servants in ordinary.

Your petitioner humbly prayeth.

That according to the many presidents of this [illegible]
house in such cases your petitioner may be relieved [illegible]
and the procedings upon this arrest made [void?] [illegible]

And the moneys deposited into the baylies [hands?] [illegible]
with satisfaction for the great charges and [illegible]
putt upon your petitioner.

And that the said Neltrop, Master Coxe, and one [illegible]
whoe appeareth as attorney for Neltrop and [illegible]
the execution to the sheriffe; and refused to [illegible]
to the delivery of your petitioner may be punished [illegible]
your honors shall seeme meete.

And your petitioner shall pray etc.

Colladon

Sir John Colladons petition
read 17 February 1670.

Dame Frances Wortley, widow of Sir Francis Wortley baronet. HL/PO/JO/10/1/346/372 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall and temporall in Parliament assembled.

The humble appeale and peticion of his majesties faithfull and loyall subject Dame Frances Wortley widdowe late wife of Sir Francis Wortley baronett deceased.

Sheweth
that one Edmund Staresmore esquire in Hillary terme 1658 exhibited his bill in the then Court of Exchequer chamber against the said Sir Francis Wortly your petitioner and others to redeeme a mortgage by which bill
he sett forth and acknowledged (upon his owne sheweing) that his father one William Staresmore in 1641 borrowed of one Bridgett Fawnt (who was your petitioners sister) 500 pounds at interest and mortgaged severall of his lands lyeing in Frolesworth
in the county of Leicester for security thereof and that the said Bridgett Fawnt afterwards and videlicet in 1644 dyeing your petitioner tooke out letteres of administration and in 1646 your petitioner (being then sole) lent to the said William Staresmore so much more as made up the said 500 pounds and interest
to 1300 pounds and alsoe assigned over debts to him for 700 pounds more (which your petitioner averreth were then good debts and he accepted them for good) and for security thereof being in all 2000 pounds sterling with interest the said William Staresmore and his trustees by severall indentures
made the 21th of October 1646 mortgaged to your petitioner and in trust for her divers of his lands in Frolesworth aforesaid and alsoe acknowledged a statute of 1000 pounds and further sett forth that the said William Staresmore paid the interest due for the said 2000 pounds and that your petitioner in
November 1646 intermarryeing with the said Sir Francis Wortley the said William Staresmore (as suggested) afterwards paid the said Sir Francis 100 pounds in part of the said debt, but that afterwards (the said Sir Francis being then styled a delinquent) the said debt of
2000 pounds was sequestred, and that severall orders of committees were thereupon made, and that the commissioners for compounding did require the said William Staresmore to pay 1200 pounds of the said debt into the treasurie and 300 pounds more to the said Sir Francis Wortly to be in full discharge
and that the committees by severall orders declaring that Collonel Sydenham and Collonel Bingham should have 900 pounds of the said 1200 pounds and Doctor Staines (who was then commissary generall under the usurpers) should have the other 300 pounds thereof thereupon (as that bill suggested) the said William
Staresmore did convey unto the said Syddenham, Bingham and Staines land worth 1500 pounds in liew of the 1200 pounds to them ordered and that the said William Staresmore after in June 1658 bargained and sold the mortgage premisses to him the said Edmund Staresmore (the [there?]
plaintiffe) and that the equity of redemption of the premisses was vested in him and that he had offered to pay the said Sir Francis and his lady your now petitioner the other 300 pounds with interest which they refused to accept or to allowe of the said 1200 pounds as paid.

To which bill the said Francis put in his severall answers and thereby confessed a conveyance of the mortgaged premisses according to (agreement before marriage) in trust for your petitioners (his then wife) separate use, and that he had nothing to
do therewith and confessed that in part of the said debt and interest he had by your petitioners tolleracion received 100 pounds and denyed all other matters charged upon him by the said bill.

And your petitioner likewise putt in her severall answers and albeit she therein sett forth the truth of the said debt of 2000 pounds to her oweing and the truth of her mortgages and securities for the same and the said agreement before marriage that it
was to goe to her seperate use and soe [conveied?] to John Stafford esquire your petitioners trustee who likewise put in his severall answer and confessed that he was sole trustee for your petitioner.

Yett the said cause comeing to be heard about the 17th of February 1664 before the right honourable the barons of the Exchequer the said barons upon opening the said bill and answers and reading of severall orders of comittees and of severall
peticions reports and certificates made unto the said comittees and of the Act of Indempnity did make a decree against your petitioner against which decree as erronious and misgrounded your petitioner now complaineth and appealeth therefrom to your lordships

For that in and by the said decree (as it is drawne up and inrolled) the inducements thereto and upon which the same is grounded are supposed to be

That it appeared that the said debt of 2000 pounds due to your petitioner was stated by the Committee of Advance at 1600 pounds and that the said Sir Francis had in his answer confessed the receipt of 100 pounds thereof.

Which your petitioner doth complaine of as an ill ground of the said decree and assignes it for errour for that it is evident even by the said bill and by the case stated thereout in the decree itselfe and the truth is soe that the said debt due to your petitioner
in October 1646 for moneyes then truely oweing to her was 2000 pounds and her securities given for soe much with interest and it being likewise admitted by the said decree that there was no part thereof paid to your petitioner and no more paid to
the said Sir Francis Wortly but 100 pounds (which in his said answer is confessed to have bin in part of interest as well as principall) soe there must needs remaine above 1900 pounds principall money besides the groweing interest for
soe many years, and if the said committee or who ever caste it up did so state the same as the said decree supposeth they manifestly miscast it, which takeing it to be but error calculi yett was it an errour and ought not to bind
your petitioner for that it doth compute the debt due to your petitioner to above 300 pounds principall money (besides all the interest for the whole 2000 pounds) lesse then in truth it is.

It is alsoe sett downe as another inducement or ground of the said decree that 1200 pounds more thereof was paid and satisfied by the said William Staresmore to the said Syddenham, Bingham and Staines the first of January 1650 according to the
orders and direccions of the said committees soe that only 300 pounds remained due of the principall money to your petitioner. Which 300 pounds is decreed to be paid to your petitioner with interest from the 18th of Aprill 1650 (being the date of the said committees pretended
order for stating the said debt in discharge of the said mortgage in such manner as by the said decree is decreed.

Against which your petitioner doth alsoe complaine and assignes it for errour wherewith she is greived for that there was no such order of any committee produced at the hearing nor can att all be produced for there was never any [such?]
for him to pay them any at all and therefore it is a manifest errour to decree that only 300 pounds was then remaining of the said principall money for that there was and still is above 1900 pounds principall besides all the interest remaining due to your petitioner
and this appeareth the more cleare for that the said Bingham being examined as a wittnesse in the said cause did upon his oath disowne it and sweare that he did not so much as knowe the said William Staresmore and the said Sydenham was (for
ought appeares) as unknoweing thereof as the said Bingham nor can it be made out that the said William Staresmore did ever pay or satisfy one peny of the said debt to the said Bingham or Syddenham and if any thing was done in their names it was without
their privity and mearly by practice betweene the said William Staresmore and Doctor Staines who all along confederated together to defraud your petitioner of her said just debt under colour of a sequestracion.

It is likewise sett downe as another ground of the said decree and as part thereof that forasmuch as the said Edmund Staresmore the plaintiffe had in his hands a bond dated the 5th of June in the 16th yeare of the raigne of the late King Charles
wherein Valentine Baile esquire Sir John Bale knight and William Roberts the elder esquire were bound unto the said Bridgett Fawnt, (your petitioners said sister) in 400 pounds for payment of 208 on the [6th?] day of December then next which was one of the
debts assigned to the said William Staresmore by the said Lady Wortley (your now petitioner) as is aforesaid the same being not paid to him it is thereupon decreed that the said Edmund Staresmore shall deliver back that bond to your petitioner.

Against which your petitioner doth alsoe complaine as a most notorious fraud of and in the said William Staresmore and Edmund Staresmore and a great errour in the said decree and a great greivance to your petitioner for that when she assigned over that bond
to him which was in October 1646 it was then a very good debt and the said Valentine Bale and William Roberts esquire were then very solvent persons and seised of lands and tenements of great yearly values and especially the said Sir John Bale
was then of ability to have paid the said debt if it had bin twenty times more and to pay his debts did afterwards sell his manour and lands in Carlton for 23000 pounds (18000 pounds whereof was paid by the purchaser to the creditours of the said
Sir John Bale, many of which debts were upon specialties only as is fully proved in the said cause but not so stated in the decree so that the said William Staresmore might then in 1646 have recovered (or put in suite and recovered) the said
debt and levied it at his pleasure and very likely so did receive it and had it (or otherwise it was his owne wilfull default) for otherwise there was no cause at all (except it were out of favour because the said William
Roberts was his wifes father) for him to keepe the bond of such solvent persons unsued if he had not satisfaccion for it especially since he knew they were all solvent persons and accepted it for good and soe much
money and so the bill allowes that it was then good and that the principall debt was 2000 pounds at that time in 1646 and alleadgeth that William Staresmore paid interest for 2000 and it might well be that he [..ed?] the money and might give releases and keepe
the bond by him and now after so many yeares when the said obligours are dead and all their estates sold and gone and nothing now to be had of them (though this doth not appeare in the decree as it is drawne up)
your petitioner humbly appealeth to your lordships justice whether the said William Staresmore (and Edmund Staresmore who is partaker with his father in the said default and fraude) ought not now to keepe the said bond and hopeth her
securities may stand charged for the said whole 2000 pounds due to your petitioner in whome there hath bin no default at all.

And for that as this case is and will (as your petitioner hopeth) so appeare to your lordships there was neither any mony paid to the said Bingham or Syddenham nor any good or firme conveyance of any land in liew of any part of the said
1200 pounds made to the said Bingham, Syddenham and Staines can be produced though the decree takes it as if 900 pounds was paid to Bingham and Syddenham or lands conveied in liew of it whereas in truth neither the saide
Bingham nor Syddenham so much as knew the said William Staresmore or tooke any thing by that pretended conveyance nor ever received one penny of the proffitts of any such lands nor did ever lay
any claime thereunto as is proved in the said cause but yett not sett downe in the said decree and so it is plaine and evident that as to that 900 pounds and all interest for the same it rests (as originally it did)
due to your petitioner and nothing to be alleadged to take it from her and soe there remaines noe more pretence in the case against your petitioner but touching the 300 pounds to Staines and Staines himselfe sweares
that William Staresman was unprovided with money and paid not one penny of it in money but only made the said pretended conveyance of land for it and for that no good or firme conveyance
for the same can be produced and if any were it was colourably only for he tooke not the proffitts but lett the said William and Edmund Staresmore have that land againe for nothing and what the said Doctor
Staines would seeme to depose concerning such conveyance was to sett up his owne fictitious tytle he having bin promised a summe of mony for it if the said Edmund Staresmore prevailed upon
his evidence (as the said Doctor Staines himselfe hath since confessed) soe that it was neither done by any order nor in any sort soe as to bind your petitioner and for that alsoe (as your petitioner hopeth to make
appeare to your lordships) that if the said Edmund Staresmore had any title to the redemption of the mortgage premisses he had before the making of the said decree sold all his right to one Robert
Yarway and soe had no colour of right to any redemption when the said decree was made but this doth not appeare in the said decree.

And for that your petitioner is not releivable by any review in the said Court of Exchequer for that the matter of fact as it is stated in the decree must not be questioned by a bill of reveiw, but must be admitted in that court
whereas the truth of your petitioners case wholly consisteth in varyeing the fact from what is there stated and wherein she may be releived only by your lordships by appeale and no where else.

And therefore and for all the said errours greivances, causes and reasons and such other as in the decree and procedings in the said cause doe or may be made out to appeare and such as upon examination of
witnesses before your lordships shall be proved and to the end to be releived against the same having the fact made out proved and stated according to the truth of the matter and such evidences as are to be read and [witnesses?]
sworne which can be in no other place but only before your lordships in this her appeale your petitioner hath appealed and humbly doth appeale to your lordships against the said decree and humbly prayeth your lordships to admitt her
appeale and call before your lordships the said Edmund Staresmore (who is now in or about Westminster) and assigne him a short day to answere hereunto and that your lordships will according to your lordships well knowne [justice?]
proceede to the hearing of the said cause and whole matter, and finding the said decree upon the whole matter fitt to to be reversed that your lordships will reverse the said decree as erronious and declare the same to be void and of
no force and restore your petitioner to all that she hath bin damnified thereby and give her such releife upon all and singuler the premisses as to your lordshipps shall seeme meete and
humbly prayes that your lordships will please to assigne your petitioner councell in this cause

And your petitioner shall ever pray etc.

• Frances Wortley

Sir Robert Vyner, knight and baronet. HL/PO/JO/10/1/346/372 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall and temporall
in Parliament assembled.

The humble peticion of Sir Robert Vyner knight and barronet

Sheweth
that about one yeare since your petitioner purchased the estate of Edmund Staresmore of and in
certaine lands and tenementes in Frowlesworth in the county Leicester which were formerly
mortgaged to Sir Thomas Hide deceased for 1000 pounds, whose executrix your petitioner married and
soe was entitled alsoe to the said mortgage, and your petitioner hath been in quiett possession
ever since he first entred into his said purchase.

But your petitioner hath lately been acquainted by the said Edmund Staresmore that there is a
peticion preferrd to this honourable house by Dame Francis Wortley in the nature of an appeal
from a decree made in the Court of Exchequer concerning the same lands, in a cause there
depending between the said Edmund Staresmore plainant and the said Lady Wortley defendant, the benefit
of which decree, by your petitioners said purchase is come unto your petitioner and the said defendant by her
peticion to your honours hath assigned many supposed errors in matter of fact, relating to the
proofes and evidences and inducements to the said court to make the said decree.

Now forasmuch as the said Master Staresmore hath absolutly parted with his interest
to your petitioner aswell in the said lands as the said decree in question and is not concerned to
make defence against the said peticion. And alsoe for that the proceedings relateing
to the matters complained of were about fowerteen yeares since transacted, and
the papers evidences proofes and other writings necessary for your petitioners defence, are
very many and not at present in your petitioners custody, soe that he cannot make a
present defence without perusall and advise thereupon.

Your petitioner most humbly praies that he may be admitted before your lordshipps to
defend his right, and that your lordshipps wilbe pleased to grant him some reasonable
time to make his defence before your lordshipps either by plea, or otherwise, as
he shalbe advised.

And your petitioner shall ever etc.

Robert Viner

Sir Robert Viners
petition (concerning
Lady Wortleys appeale)
presented 25 February 70.

Officers' widows who have long attended the Parliament committees. HL/PO/JO/10/1/346/373 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall and temporal
assembled in Parliament.

The humble peticion of diverse comission officers
widdowes who have long attended the Parliament
comittees and persons authorized to give them
releefe.

Sheweth.

Theire inexpressible sufferings by the services and disbursements of
their late husbands in his majesties late warrs and your majesties royall fathers of blessed memory as
by the certificates of persons of much honour approved and allowed before the committee for
indigent officers for whose releefe as for the petitioners the act of the eight of May 1662 was
made not exceeding 20 pounds per annum out of such stocke and surplusage as by the same act
appeareth (not pursued) to the utter impoverishment of your petitioners who are not able to supply the present
wants of them and their children as formerly but must inevitably perish if some seasonable
releefe bee not ordered as may bee thought fitt by this honourable house untill the said act bee taken
into consideration.

And your petitioners shall ever pray etc.

• Katherine Wright
• Magdalen Marbles
• Bridgett Robinsonn
• Dorothy Doncaster
• Mary Reade
• Elizabeth Bradshaw
• Anne Adamson
• Elesabeth Humes


• Mary Moloye
• Sarah Hursom


• Dorothy Nicholls
• Emblem Sessions
• Elizabeth Holloway
• Elizabeth Fights
• Anne Midgley

The widdowes peticion
reade [21o?] Februarii 1670
and referred to the committee
for peticions.

The loyal officers' poor widows. HL/PO/JO/10/1/346/373 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall and
temporall in Parliament assembled.

The humble peticion of the loyall officers
poore widdowes.

Sheweth
that by an act of this present Parlyament passed aboute the month of May 1662 provision was made (amongst others)
for a releif for officers widdowes and orphanes by a weekly collection
to be raised in every parrish throughout the nation which monies were
raised accordingly; and uppon enquiry we finde that there hath
been collected since this act to the time of the fire in the Citty
of London at least 900 pounds per annum the treasurers thereof Master William Hickman
Master Samuell Mann, for the county of Middlesex about the some of 600 pounds
per annum which came to the handes of Sir Reigenald Foster Sir William
Bateman Sir William Bowles and George Walsh esquire for the county of
Surrey about 700 pounds per annum (ever since the act) received by Sir William
Green Master William Mason and Master William Trapps, and for the Citty of
Westminster there is none paid nor we knowe not of any collected
which somes of mony hath not been distributed according to
the act.

Your peticioners most humbly pray your lordships would
be pleased to grant your order for the persons
abovesaid, and all others concerned therein
to appeare before your lordships and give a just
account of all the monies collected and received
by them and that your poore peticioners great
necessities may be speedily releived.

And they shall pray etc.

• Elisabeth Hums
• Mary Mlloy


• Elizabeth Browne
• Elizabeth Bradshaw
• Magdalen Marbles
• Dorthy Wright
• Sarah Harson
• Brigett Robison


• Anne Midgley
• Katherine Wright
• Margritt Morgen


• Anne Smith
• Tempell
• Anne Johnson

The poore widdowes
peticion
reade 16o Martii 1670

The Houses of Lords and Commons. HL/PO/JO/10/1/346/374 (1671)

May it please your most
excellent majestie.

Wee your majesties most humble and loyall subjects
the lords spirituall and temporall
and comons in this present Parliament assembled
being sensible of your majesties constancy to the
protestant religion both at home and abroad, hold
our selves bound in conscience and duty to represent
to your most sacred majestie the causes of the dangerous
growth of popery in these your majesties dominions.
the ill consequences whereof wee heartily desire
may be prevented, and ther fore what wee humbly
conceive to be some present remedyes for the
said growing mischeifes, wee have hereunto
added in our most humble peticions.

Causes of the growth of popery

[1ly?] That there are great numbers of preists and
Jesuites frequenting the cittyes of London and
Westminster and most of the countyes of this kingdome
more then formerly, seducing your majesties good subjects

2ly That there are severall chappells and places used
for saying of masse in the great townes and
many other parts of this kingdome besides those
in embassadours houses, whither great numbers
of your majesties subjects constantly resort and
repaire to without controwle and especially in the
cittyes of London and Westminster contrary to the established
lawes

3ly That there are fraternityes or convents
of English popish preists and Jesuites at [Saint?]
James's and at the Combe in Herefordshire and
others in other partes of the kingdome beside
severall scholes are kept in diverse parts [illegible]
this kingdome for the corrupt educating of [illegible]
in the principles of popery

4ly The common and publique selling of popish
catechismes and other seditious popish bookes even
in the time of Parliament

5ly The generall remisnesse of the [magistra...?] [illegible]
other officers or clerkes of assize and [cler...?] [illegible]
the peace in not convicting of papists [acco...?]
to law

6ly That suspected recusants are free from [illegible]
offices chargable and troublesome and doe [enjoy the?]
advantages of offices and places benificiall executed
either by themselves or by persons entrusted
for them

7ly That the advowsionse of churches and presentacions
to livings are disposed of by popish recusants
or by others intrusted by them as they direct
whereby most of those livings and benifices
are filled with scandalous and unfitt ministers

8ly That many persons take the liberty to send
their children beyond the seas to be educated
in the popish religion; and that severall young
persons are sent beyond seas upon the notion
of their better education under tutors or
guardians whoe are not putt to take the oathes
of allegiance and supremacy and usually corrupt the
youths under their tuition into popery

9ly That there have beene few Exchequer proces
issued forth since the Act of [illegible] Oblivion against the
popish recusants convict, though many have
beene certified thither

10 The great insolencies of the papists in Ireland
where does publiquely appeare archbishopps and bishopps
reputed to be made such by the Pope in opposicion
unto those made under your majesties authority
according to the religione established in England
and Ireland, and the open exercise of masse in
Dublin and other parts of that kingdome is a
further great cause of the present growth
of popery

And that Peter Talbot the reputed Archbishopp of Dublin was
publiquely consecrated soe, at Antwerpe with great and
publique solemnity from whence hee came to London where
he exercised his function and was all along his journey
to Chester treated with the caracter of his grace by the
popish recusants whome he visited and at his landing
in Dublin hee was received with very great solempnity
by those of the popish religion there where alsoe he
exercised his function publiquely, great multitudes
then flocking to him and still continues to doe the same
his present residence is within three miles of Dublin
at his brothers Colonell Richard Talbot who is now
here solliciting your majestie as publique agent on the
behalfe of the Irish papists of that kingdome.

The remedyes against these growing mischifes
wee the lords spirituall and temporall
and commons in this present Parliament assembled doe
in all humility represent to your sacred majestie
in these our peticions following.

1st That your majesty by your proclamacion would be
most gratiously pleased to comand that all popish
preists and Jesuites doe departe this realme and all
other your majesties dominions on or before a short day
to be prefixed at their perills (excepting only such
forreigne preists as attend her majesties person by the
contract of marriage and embassadours according to the
law of nations), and that all judges and justices of
the peace and all other ministers and officers of justice
doe cause the lawes now in force against popish
recusants to be putt in due execucion, and in the
first place, for the speedy conviccion of such popish
recusants; and that all judges and justices aforesaid
doe strictly give the said lawes in charge unto the
juryes at all assizes and sessions under the penalty
of incurring your majesties highest displeasure

2ly That your majestie would be gratiously pleased to
restraine and hinder the great concourse of your native
subjects from hearing of masse and other exercises
of the Romish religion in the houses of forreigne
embassadors or agents and in all other chappells
and places of this kingdome.

3ly That your majestie would be most gratiously pleased out of
your most princly wisdome and pious consideracion to take
care and cause that noe office or employment of publique
authority trust or command in civill or military
affaires be committed to or continued in the hands
of any person being a popish recusant or justly
suspected to be soe

4ly That your majestie would be gratiously pleased to
take notice of all fraternityes and convents of English
and other popish preists Jesuites and friers and schooles
for the educating of youth in the principalls of
popery erected within your majesties dominions and
to cause the same to be abolished and the said
preists Jesuites fryers and schoolemasters to be
duely punished for such their insolencies.

5ly That your majestie would be gratiously pleased
from time to time to require and cause that all
the officers of or relateing to the Exchequer according
to their severall dutyes [illegible] doe proceed in and issue
forth the Exchequer processe effectually upon
popish recusants convict certified thither
and that all every such officers as shall refuse or
neglect to doe his duty as aforesaid be
severely punished for such his [failure?]

6th That your majestie would bee graciously pleased to give
order for apprehending and bringing over into England one
Plumkett who goes under the name of Primate of Ireland
and one Peter Talbot who takes on him the name of Arch
bishopp of Dublin to answer such matters as shall bee
objected against them.

To these our most humble peticions proceeding
from our duty and zeale for the glory of God and good
of your sacred majestie and from the care incumbent on
us for the safety and peace of these your majesties [kingdoms?]

Wee doe in all humility beseech your majestie to
vouchsafe a gratious answere

And wee your majesties most loyall and obedient
subjects the lords spirituall and temporall
and comons in this present Parliament assembled
shall ever pray for your majesties long and happy
reigne over us, and as in conscience wee are
obleidged shall constantly adhere to and assist your
majestie in the maintenance and defence of your
majesties supremacy, and the true protestant
religion now established in your majesties dominions
in opposicion to all forreigne powers and popish
pretensions whatsoever.

George, Lord Eure. HL/PO/JO/10/1/346/375 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall and temporall in
Parliament assembled

The humble peticion of George Lord Eure

Sheweth
that Sir Sampson Eure knight deceased in his life time by deed duly executed setled the manour of Lentall Starks
and Gately Parke in the county of Hereford upon himselfe and Dame Martha his wife and the issue betweene them
begotten and for want of such issue upon the right heires of Sir Sampson

Since the decease of Sir Sampson the said Dame Martha hath granted her estate unto your peticioner beinge
the right heire of Sir Sampson and your peticioner is nowe in possession and nowe sellinge and
fallinge the coppice woods.

That John Carnesewe esquire whoe in right of Susan his wife pretends a title to the premisses after the decease of
the said Dame Martha hath exhibited a bill in Chancery to obstruct the fall of woods.

That your peticioner hath by his sollicitor offered to consent to an injunccion for stoppinge of
wast untill the title bee tryed; but the said Master Carnesewe would not consent thereunto
unles it might extend unto the stoppinge the fall of the said coppice woods.

Your peticioner humbly prayes that all further proceedings upon the said Chancery
bill may bee prohibited during the present session of Parliament.

George Eure

Lord Eures petition to
stay proceedings in Chancery
read 25 February 1670.

Dame Theodosia Prittiman, wife of Sir John Prittiman of Loddington. HL/PO/JO/10/1/346/378 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall and
temporall in Parliament assembled.

The humble peticion of Dame Theodosia Prittiman the wife of Sir John
Prittiman of Loddington in the county of Leicester knight and baronet

Sheweth
that your petitioner in January 1664 being then the wife of the said Sir John Prittiman was by the
practise of one John Marshall, an attorney in the court of Kings Bench taken in execution upon
a judgement of a 100 pounds entered against her for a pretended debt of 50 pounds to the said Marshall when in reality
shee never owd him, and ought not to have been molested for the same being a feme covert, to the
knowledge of the said Marshall. That your petitioner was thereupon kept prisoner in the Fleet till the late
fire; by which shee was discharged; but afterwards videlicet on the 24th of October 1667 she was by the
procurement of the said Marshall assaulted by the servants of the warden of the Fleet as shee was
attending of her businesse in the High Court of Chancery and taken into custody againe upon
the old execucion, without any new processe sued out against her as in that case is directed by the late
act of Parliament for the indemnifying of the warden of the Fleet. That shee was from that
time illegally continued a prisoner in the Fleet, till removed to the Kings Bench; where
shee still remains charged with the said execucion at the suit of the said Marshall who dyed
in December 1668 and left one Moses Burton and John Gabry his executors who keep your
petitioner still a prisoner without suing out the scire facias against her contrary to the law of the land.
For relief whereof shee hath applyed herself to the courts both of Kings Bench and Chancery
but can finde none, because Sir John her husband gives releases to all accions
shee brings both in law and equity

Your petitioner therefore most humbly praies the favour and justice of this
most honourable house, to consider of her sad condicion, great injuries and
the extraordinary charges shee has beene putt to these 6 yeares and
in compassion thereof release her from her illegall confinement
which shee despaires of any other way but by your lordships
equity and wisdome.

And your petitioner shall ever pray etca

• Theodosia Pretyman

Denzell, Lord Holles. HL/PO/JO/10/1/347 (1671)

To the right honorable the lords spirituall
and temporall assembled in Parlament

The humble petition of Denzell
Lord Holles

That by the lawes and constitutions of this realme, no free borne
subject ought to be defamed and reproached, to his disparagement in point
of reputation, or to his prejudice in the way of his calling or of the con-
dicion wherein he lives; and being so, he ought to have reparation upon
the party offending if he have wrongfully and injuriously done it.

And especially the peeres of the realme when they have bene in such
sort wronged, as themselves could not but of all men be the most sen-
sible of it, so hath this honorable house (of which they were members)
bene ever very ready to doe them right upon any complaint thereof
made unto them, and the rather if it have bene done in time of priviledge
of Parlament, which heightens the offense and makes it call the louder
for relief from the justice of this house.

Yet so it is, that your petitioner having the honnor to be a member of
this house, and a privy counsellour to his majesty and in a busines wherein he
had acted meerely by his majestyes command, and employed therein two gentle-
men in pursuance of that command, there being occasion to mention it at the
tryall of some French gentlemen in the Court of Kings Bench in Easter terme
last, who were there most falsely accused of a robbery by foure butchers
whome the Lord Chiefe Justice Keeling did countenance, he the Chiefe
Justice of that court was pleased to say (it being then within the time of
priviledge) that it was a foule contrivance, that those gentlemen who
had bene so employed by your petitioner deserved to be committed for it, and that
it would be enquired into by what authority all this was done; which
was so said by him after your petitioner had declared unto him, that it was
all done by the Kings command: and many other indignities he putt upon him
at that tryall.

Now if your petitioner, being a privy counsellor to his majesty, should be
guilty of any foule contrivance, and much more of engaging his majesty
in it, certainly he were very unworthy of continuing in a place of
so greate honnor and trust about his majesty, or of being still a peere
of the realme, and member of this honorable house; the losse of
all which upon such an occasion would be a greater wound unto him,
then the losse of his whole estate and even of his life upon a good account
and if this charge upon him be not trew, and that he is no wayes
guilty of so high a crime, but that it is a meere slander, and
an injurious imputation laide upon him by that judge, he doth
no wayes doubt, but, as the wisdome of this honorable house will
easily discover it, so if they doe find him innocent, their justice
will then declare him so, and give him that reparation, which shall
be just and fitting, upon the person who hath in such a publick place
so injuriously and undeservedly defamed him.

He therfore humbly beseecheth your lordships that you will
call before you the said Lord Chiefe Justice of the Kings
Bench (who is an assistant to this house, oweth his
attendance unto it, and therfore should have bene more
carefull of doeing any thing so much to the derogation of
it's priviledge, as is the defamation of one of the mem-
bers of it in so high a measure;) and that you will be
pleased to examine the matter of this complaint against
him: and if your petitioner shall be found to have had just
cause to complaine, and to be aggrieved for the injury he
hath received, that then your lordships will give him that
relief and reparation which in your greate wisdomes you
shall judge to be fitt and reasonable,

And he shall dayly pray etc

• Holles

Sir George Prettyman, knight, and Elizabeth his wife. HL/PO/JO/10/1/347 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall
and temporall in Parliament assembled

The humble peticion of Sir George Prettyman knight
and Elizabeth his wife

Sheweth
that your peticioners haveing a right to a third parte of all the lands
of Robert Houghton of the county of Norfolke esquire late husband to the
said Elizabeth, for which there is a decree in the High Court of Chancery
yett your peticioners are informed that att the suite of some of the creditors of
the said Robert Houghton [a?] bill is passed [illegible] House of Commons for the sale
of the greatest parte of the lands of the said Robert Houghton whereby your
peticioners are devested of the said right of dower and a greate somme
in arreare according to the said decree, which bill as your peticioners are
informed are is come up for the concurrence of this honourable house your
peticioners know the justice of this house is soe greate as not to deprive
any of theire right before they are heard to the said cause.

Your peticioners therefore humbly pray your lordshipp would be pleased
to heare them before the passing of the said bill and grant them such
releife as shall be according to your lordships greate wisdome and
justice.

And your peticioners shall pray etc

• George Pretyman
• Elizabeth Prettyman

The petition of Sir George
Prettyman knight and
Elizabeth his wife
against
Master Houghtons bill
referred to the comittee
20o Martii 1670.

A peticion on behalfe of
a minor to be heard, in
Master Houghton's bill;

Elizabeth the wife of Sir George Prettyman and mother of Charles Houghton, an infant. HL/PO/JO/10/1/347 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall and
temporall in Parliament assembled.

The humble peticion of Elizabeth the wife of Sir George
Prettyman and mother to Charles Houghton esquire an infant
and in the behalfe of her selfe and the said Charles Houghton

Sheweth
that your petitioner being informed by her husband of a bill passing this
honourable house for selling the estate of her late husband and settling it in the executors
of her said husband and trustees by them nominated for payment of debts: and the
said bill is brought in by the creditors for this purpose, which if it should passe
would ruine the heire and devest your petitioner of her dower the lands sett out by this
bill to secure the same being all in mortgage, and the heires children that survive
him, if hee happen to have any must starve for it is put into the hands of Master
Tuthill and Master Houghton and two trustees by them named, the said Master Houghton
owing greate debts to the testator which by this bill is remitted, and likewise
if the heire dye before the age of one and twenty yeares though hee hath children
yett the lands unsold by this bill must goe to the daughter of Master Tuthill from the
heires owne issue, and where the will gives but an authority to the executors
this bill gives an interest to them and the trustees by them named without any account
your peticioner lookeing upon her selfe bound in duty and conscience to take care of her
selfe and child, and haveing heitherto beene [illegible] heard by her councell in that
behalfe.

Humbly praies this honourable house would be pleased to heare her
councell on behalfe of her selfe and the said infant att the barre
or this house, or recomitt the said bill, whereby shee may be
heard.

And your petitioner shall pray etc.

Eliza Pretyman

The Lady Prettymans
petition concerning Master
Haughtons bill
read 27o Martii 1671.

Margaret, Marchioness Dowager of Worcester. HL/PO/JO/10/1/347 (1671)

To the right honourable the lord spirituall and
temporall in Parliament assembled

The humble petition of Margaret Marchionesse Dowager
of Worcester

Sheweth
that by the papers annexed it doth appeare that his now majestie
is indebted to Edward late Marquesse of Worcester, your petitioners
late husband in the summe of 91500 pounds, which of right belongs to your
petitioner as administratrix to her said husband

Your petitioner humbly prayes that your lordships
wilbe pleased to consider your petitioners case, and to
make such provision for your petitioner (to enable her
to paie her husbands just debts) as your lordships shall in
your wisdome make for satisfieing of the other creditours
of his now majestie, and your petitioners case to recommend
to his majestie

And your petitioner shall ever pray

Margaret Worcester

The humble petition of
the Marchionesse Dowager
of Worcester

Read 13o Martii and
recomended to his
majesty.

Edward, Marquess of Worcester. HL/PO/JO/10/1/347 (1671)

To the Kings most excellent majestie

The humble petition of Edward Marquesse of Worcester.

Sheweth

That the petitioner and his late father did heretofore lend, to serve his then late
majesties urgent necessities, the sume of two hundred thousand pounds and upwards (neyntie five
thousand pounds whereof appeared under his late majesties hand and seale, and the rest the petitioner,
if permitted, will make appeare, besides other great summes the petitioner imployed in other his majesties service,
by which meanes the petitioners estate was incumbred, and continues incumbred with vast debts in soe much
that to the petitioner and his family there is left but a smale pittance for ameane livelyhood, the
petitioners estate being charged with the debts soe contracted for his late majesties service and your majestie
as aforesaid.

That the petitioner by bond from himselfe and others (his sureties) in 1643, amongst other ingadgements
became bound in six thousand pounds to Henry Hall esquire which bond was sued in his majesties Exchequer
by John Hall esquire, administratour of the said Henry, nott onely against your petitioner, but alsoe against
his sureties the Lady Lingen and Charles Price esquire to whom the petitioner is bound to save harmelesse
great sufferers for theire loyalltie in his late majesties service who thereupon obtained judgement against your petitioner
for six thousand pounds, and as particular receiver of some part of your majesties revenew
hath assigned the same, as debtour unto your majestie, whereupon an extent is in the sheriffes hands (by
the said Master Halls prosecution) to extend your petitioners estate for the use of your majestie whose prero=
=gative intervening, that extent, as your petitioner is advisd by councell) will take place (although sub=
=sequent in time) of all former incombrances, by which meanes not onely your petitioners other cre=
=ditours wilbe defeated of theire respective debts but the smale remainder of your petitioners (once
considerable) now shattered estate, will by your majestie (to paie a debt to your majestie) be swallowed
up, and the petitioner and his other creditours wholy deprived thereof

The petitioner therefore most humbly prayes that in regard your majesties [name?]
is made use of against the petitioner, and since that this debt being subsequent in
time to other incumbrances) could nott affect your petitioners estate but by your
majesties prerogative your majestie wilbe gratiously pleased to supersed the said
Master Halls prosecution, and order him some other satisfaccion (the petitioner being
absolutely disabled by those vast summes in his late and your majesties service
expended as aforesaid.

And your petitioner shall ever pray etc

(Copia vera)

Nathaniell Child, on behalf of the corporation and hospital of Wareham. HL/PO/JO/10/1/347 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall and temporall in Parliament assembled

The humble peticion of Nathaniell Child maior of Wareham on the behalfe of himselfe the
corporacion by prescripcion and hospitall of Warham aforesaid in the county of Dorsett;

Humbly sheweth

That Warham is a corporation by prescripcion, and that your petitioner was the last lawfull maior of Warham according to the laws and statutes of
this realme, and the bylaws of the said towne and is the only lord and surviveing trustee of the same, and that one Sir John Turbervile knight is the only
surviveing trustee for the hospitall the other trustees being all dead.

That your petitioner kept the possession thereof 24 years and hath disbursed in purchaseing two parts of the mannor and borough in trust for the towne
and for copye of the patents records and other things that were lost in time of the late warr, and in suits of law to defend the rights of the said towne the
sume of [482?] pounds 11 shillings 02 pence

That since the late troubles seaven trespassers videlicet Henry Harbin, John Seward, Fardinando Bulleigh, Alexander Fellow, John Fulseman
Henry Stevenson, and George Gillingam, who are no lords nor trustees, have gott into the places of the 14 lords and trustees; that by deeds and
feoffments were made lords and trustees for the said towne and hospitall and that these seven trespassers have converted to their owne private
and particular uses, all the roiall liberties rents revenews and proffitts both of the towne and hospitall, and have with the proffitts belonging to the hospitall
married their daughters and granted estates out of the said hospitall lands to their owne kindred, which were given to eleven poore people whose
labour was done.

That they will give no account for 640 pounds by them received for the use of the towne nor of 1400 pounds by them received for the use of the said hospitall, that since your petitioner discovered their frauds and
deceits they have disfranched your petitioner and all the surviveing members of that old corporation by prescription, that [illegible] your petitioner since the
happy restauration of his majestie was by writt of mandamus restored to his place of senior alderman, and elected maior of the said towne for the yeer 1665.

That John Furseman being next elected, for maior, would not subscribe according to the statute 13o Caroli 2 nor was he a purchaser nor heir nor
assignee nor could he be maior by the said statute or the bylaws of the said towne. Yet the said John Furseman and the other trespassers by the name of
maior and burgesses of Wareham did exhibite a bill against your petitioner to call him to account, to which bill your petitioner made a fair answer, and
by an order of the 12th of February 1667 brought all writings and money remaining in his hands into the said court and upon a comission to examine
witnesses in the said cause did prove that the said plainants were not as they did [illegible] themselves maiors and burgesses nor qualified to beare those offices
being they never did subscribe according to the act of Parliament for [re...eing?] of corporations nor were lords or trustees of the said mannor
and burrough:

That this cause was heard before the master of the rolls in Hillary terme 1668 but no proofes were read for the defendant so that by a
[illegible] they were allowed to be the maior and burgesses of the said [corporation?], and by decree then made your petitioner was to account before a
[master?] for the charitie money and the plainants were to pay the defendant all [his disbursements?], out of the towne stock; whereupon your petitioner did attend
the said master with his councell and clerke who told your petitioner he could [illegible] them that day yet imediately after your petitioner was gone in the same
day he heard councell on the behalfe of the trespassers and made a report [illegible] [...arte?] for your petitioner to pay the said plainants 214 pounds and 52 pounds costs and to
deliver upp all deeds and writings whatsoever concerning the towne and [illegible] did allow [illegible] but 134 pounds 6 shillings 08 pence out of 482 pounds 11 shillings 2 pence by him disbursed for the use
of the towne almost to the ruine of your petitioner and to the disherison of him and [...ht?] ancient corporation and freeholders of the said towne;

That your petitioner hath since peticioned the Lord Keeper and the Master of the [illegible] to reverse or amend this decree so irregularly obtained but can have
no reliefe whereby your petitioner is in feare of a writt of sequestracion [illegible] both body and goods:

Your petitioner therefore [humbly?] prayes, that your lordshipps will be pleased to order the said John Fursman [Henry?] Steevenson Fardinando Burleigh and George Jillingham being the surviveinge parties to appeare
to answer the premisses and [illegible] there may be no further proceedings in the said Court of Chancery
but that your petitioner may have the [...oteccion?] of this most honourable court during his appeale and that the
said decree may be reversed;

And your petitioner shall ever pray etc

Nathaniel Childs

The peticion of
Nathaniell Childe maior
of Wareham.
Reade 16 Martii 1670

Frederick Ixem, executor of Francis Tryon, merchant. HL/PO/JO/10/1/347 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall and temporall in Parliament assembled

The humble petition and appeale of Frederick Ixem executor of the last will and testament of Francis Tryon late of London
merchant deceased.

Sheweth
that the said Francis Tryon being in his lifetime possessed of severall druggs and other goods to a great vallue, and one William Hill being his
apprentice or servant and imployed in the mannagement of his the said Francis Tryons whole estate the said Hill thereby became possessed of the said
Francis Tryons cash and bookes of accompts and tooke upon him to dispose of great part of the said Master Tryons estate to his owne use contrary to the trust in him reposed
and consigned severall goods beyond the seas to persons never factors for the said Tryon and received the produce thereof but the said Hill by his faire and specious
pretences haveing gotten into the good opinion of the said Francis Tryon, the said Tryon resolved to give him the summe of five hundred pounds out of the produce
of the said druggs, whereupon the five and twentith of June in the yeare of our lord, one thousand six hundred sixtie fower, the said Francis Tryon by his last
will and testament in writeing did direct the wares and goods in his warehouse to bee appraized after his death and that the said Hill should have the same
five hundred pounds cheaper then they should bee apprized att and of this will made the right reverend father in God, Henry late Lord Bishopp of Chichester
deceased John Garret and your petitioner executors, and soone after the said Francis Tryon dyed: which will the said executors endeavoured to prove, but being
much opposed in the proofe thereof, by the said Hill they were not able to prove the same untill long after the great and dreadfull fire of London which estate
(after the probat thereof) by vertue of a deed of guift (which the petitioner had from the said Tryon of all the same the debts and legacies in the said will mentioned first
paid) being at the dispose of the petitioner, and the said Hill refuseing to come to any accompt unlesse he might receive the said summe of five hundred pounds
absolutely and without any relation to the said goods although he pretended the said goods and druggs out of which the said legacy was to be raised were burnt
in the said fire, saveing some small part thereof which he promised to discover and all other the estate of the said Tryon which was lodged in severall persons hands
thereupon your petitioner did not only make over the said druggs but impower him the said Hill to receive a debt of five hundred pounds due from Sir
Thomas Allen, and to accompt with the petitioner for the surplus, and some question being whither Sir Thomas Allen did expect some abatement of the said
debt, and the petitioner not knoweing the vallue of the said druggs saved, the said Hill prevailed with your petitioner to give him a bond of one hundred and
sixty pounds for payment of eighty pounds more upon his promise; that if he received the said five hundred pounds either by the said druggs or bond
hee should make noe use of the said bond for the said eighty pounds. But the said Hill haveing soe secured the said legacye refused to give any accompt
of the said druggs or of the said Tryons other estate though hee made himselfe debtor to the same, in the summe of two hundred pounds, and although all or
most of the said goods, to the value of two thousand pounds were saved and not destroyed in the said fire; out of which as aforesaid the said Hill ought to have and
had more then his legacie and was to accompt for the surplus and being soe satisfied ought not to have insisted on the said bond and covenant. Whereupon the
petitioner received part of the said money due from the said Sir Thomas Allen in full of the whole and requested the said Hill to deliver up the letter of attorney
and bond and accompt for the said druggs but the said Hill soone after dyed possessed of an estate of about three thousand pounds, leaveing one John Hill and John Till his
executors, who proveing the said will tooke upon them the execution thereof, but they likewise refuseing to give your petitioner any accompt (as the said Hill their testator had formerly
refused to doe) sued the said petitioner both on the said covenant and bond for eighty pounds. Whereupon your petitioner was forced to flye into the High Court of Chancery setting
forth all the matter as aforesaid for his releife therein and to have an accompt of the said estate from the said executors of the said Hill (which the said Hill ought to have justly given in his life time
whereupon the said Hills executors putting in their answer they did confesse that the legacie given to him the said Hill the testator was to be raised as your petitioner has already sett forth but pretended that the said Hill the
testator by agreement with the said bishop and Garret and also with your peticioner was not onely to have the druggs left unburnt but the said five hundred pounds more due upon the said bond from the said Sir Thomas
Allen, which cause comeing to heareing, and though your peticioner made full proofe of all and singuler the premisses, and alsoe of the said deed of guift, yet the said court was pleased to dismisse your petitioners bill but without costs which
dismission is since signed and inrolled soe that your peticioner is utterly without remedye but by the greate justice and judgment of this honourable house.

From which dismission your peticioner humbly appeales and begs this honourable house would be pleased to summon the said John Hill and John Till before this house stop their proceedings and hear your peticioner and
give such releife therein as to your great justice and judgments shall seeme most meete.

And your petitioner shall pray etc

Frederick Ixem

Frederick Ixem's peticion

Mary Haswell, widow. HL/PO/JO/10/1/347 (1671)

To the right honnourable the lords spirituall
and temporall in Parliament assembled

The humble peticion and appeale of Mary
Haswell widdow.

Sheweth
that about March anno domini 1667. One John Gray did exhibit his bill of complainte in the Courte of Chancery holden before the chancellor of the county palatine of
Durham and Sadberge against your petitioner setting forth thereby that John Gray deceased his late father dyed intestate possessed of and interessed in a personall estate of the value of one thousand five
hundred pounds, and that after his decease Mary Gray his widdow tooke letters of administracion of his goods and entred upon the said personall estate. And that by the custome of the said
province of Yorke there being due unto the said John Gray (the son) a childs parte and proporcion of his said late fathers personall estate the said administratrix afterwards sett out debts, goods and
other personall estate to the value of one thousand pounds for the said porcion and afterwards marryed one George Haswell, who promised to satisfie the said porcion and tooke upon him the
management of the said estate. That afterwards the said Mary dyed and Haswell afterwards married your petitioner. And that Haswell being possessed and interessed of and in certaine
[collieryes?] in Raynton comitatu Dunelm for seaventeen years then to come, he (about January 1666) agreed to assigne over to the said John Gray (the son) one sixth part of the said collieryes
during the said terme in satisfaccion of what was so due from him to the said Gray the son; but that before any assignment accordingly made (to witt about February 1666.) George Haswell
dyed possessed of a greate personall estate, and that after his death your petitioner (being his widdow and relict) tooke letters of administracion thereof and possessed her selfe of the said collieryes
and personall estate late of the said George Haswell and therefore the said John Gray (the son) thereby prayed that your petitioner might performe the said George Haswells agreement by assigning
over the sixth parte of the said colliery and giveing satisfaccion for the profitts thereof since it ought to have beene assigned, and might give him such satisfaccion as should appeare
to be due unto him in respect of the said estate and premisses in your petitioners answer to which bill she sett forth that the said George Haswell (on his death bed) denyed that he ever
made any such promise as in the bill, and that the said colliery will hardly ever be sufficient to satisfie the debts contracted for working it, for which the said colleiry stands engaged
and your petitioner in her answer further setts forth that the said George Haswells creditours (who had obtained judgement against him) sued out execucion thereupon, and that by vertue of
those execucions the sheriffe of Durham seized all the goods of the said George Haswell and sold them, and that Haswells debts upon judgements, statutes merchant and
otherwise amounted to 4500 pounds and upwards being much more then his personall estate amounted unto and your petitioner in her said answer (upon her oath) said that she had
paid more debtes of the said Haswell then she had received of his estate in which suite the parties being at issue witnesses were examined as well on the behalfe of your petitioner
as on the parte and behalfe of the said John Gray the son, and the deposicions of the said witnesses were afterwards published according to the course of the said Courte of
Chancery of Durham and your petitioner further sheweth that afterwards (to witt) the fifth day of Aprill anno domini 1669 and in the one and twentyeth yeare of
the raigne of our soveraigne lord the Kings majestie that now is) the said cause came to be heard before the right honourable the chancellor of the said county palatine, and upon
heareing the said deposicions, and debate of the matter the said courte not being fully satisfied with the proofe of the said pretended agreement yett conceived that the said John Gray
(the son) ought to be relieved upon his bill for such parte of his porcion as came to the hands of the said George Haswell, if your petitioner had assetts of his personall estate, but it not
then appearing certainly by proofes how much of the said porcion the said George Haswell received it was then ordered that a tryall at law should be had between the
said parties upon a feigned accord upon two issues (videlicet) first whether all or any and what parte of the said then complainantes porcion or reasonable parte of his said late fathers
personall estate came to the hands of the said George Haswell, and of what value the same was, and secondly whether or no your petitioner had assetts, and how much assettes out
of the said George Haswells personall estate which tryall at law was accordingly had but the said John Gray (the son) not being able at the said tryall to prove that any porcion
[of?] the said complainant came to the hands of the said George Haswell nor to charge your petitioner with any assetts of the personall estate of the said George Haswell, your petitioner was prevailed with to
[consent?] that a jurour should be withdrawne which was done accordingly. And your petitioner further sheweth that by the deposicions of diverse witnesses examined in the said suite on
[illegible] behalfe of your petitioner it was and is evidently and fully proved that the debtes due and owing by the said George Haswell at the time of his death (being debtes upon record and
[...cured?] by spetialty) doe farr surmount the value of all the personall estate of the said George Haswell, and that your petitioner since the death of the said George Haswell [illegible]
[...th?] fully administred all the goods chattells and personall estate late of the said George Haswell which came to your petitioners hands or disposall. And the said John
[Gray?] the son hath not made any colourable proofe to charge your petitioner with assettes of the personall estate of the said George Haswell save onely by the oath of one witnesse
[who?] deposeth that after the death of the said George Haswell he the said deponent (with another person) estimated certaine coles, shipping, keeles and engyns (by
[illegible] supposed to be parte of the personall estate of the said George Haswell) to 1700 pounds. And the said John Gray (the son) makes some slight proofe concerning the value of the terme and
[illegible] in the said colliery to confront which it was and is fully and evidently proved by diverse witnesses examined in the said suite on the behalfe of your petitioner that in the lifetime
[illegible] the said George Haswell all the said coles were valued and appraised at 605 pounds or therabouts onely and no more, and by vertue of two severall execucions of fieri facias
[sued?] out against the said George Haswell were seized and sold by the sheriffe of the said county of Durham. And that the said coles by the said appraisement were over valued
[and?] over prized and that the said terme in the said colliery is of little or no value, the charges in working the same amounting to as much or near as much as the profitt
[thereof?] nor is it proved that any of the said coles ever came to the hands of your petitioner how be it the chancellor of the said county palatine of Durham and Sadberdge proceeded
[illegible] finall order and decree in the said cause and upon the 26th day of August anno domini 1670. and in the two and twentyeth yeare of his said majesties raigne itt
[illegible] ordered and decreed by the said chancellor that your petitioner should satisfie and pay unto the said John Gray (the son) or into that courte for his use the full and just summe of 514 pounds: 04 shillings: 9 pence
[illegible] manner following (that is to say) the one moiety thereof at or before the 25th of November then next ensueing, and the other moiety thereof at or before the 25th of March next
[illegible] as by the said bill answer deposicions decree, and proceedings remaining in the said Court of Chancery may appere. And since the obtaining of the said decree the said John
[Gray?] (the son) endeavours to enforce your petitioner to a performance thereof. By which decree your petitioner is much grieved, and in danger of being ruined in her estate and cannot obtaine
[reliefe?] in the premisses in any courte of judicature in this kingdome nor elsewhere save onely before your lordshipps in this supreme courte of Parliament.

That your petitioner is and wilbe ready to make out the truth of all the matters aforesaid, and therefore most humbly appeales to your lordshipps justice in the premisses praying that
the said John Gray (the son) may be ordered to appeare before your lordshipps and to put in his answer in writing to the matters aforesaid, and that your petitioners cause
may be heard at the barr of this honourable howse, that the aforesaid decree may be reversed and sett aside, and your petitioner be relieved in all and singular the
premisses according to equity and good conscience and that in the meane time all proceedings upon the aforesaid decree may be stayed.

And your petitioner will ever pray etc.

• Mary Haswell

Mary Haswell. HL/PO/JO/10/1/347 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords sperituall and
temporall in Parliament assembled

The humble peticion of Mary Haswell

Sheweth
that your petitioner exhibited her appeale into this honourable
house about sixe weeks sithence against John Gray gentleman
to be releived against a decree made by the Chancellor
of Durham on behalfe of the said John Gray

That your lordshipps thereupon ordered the said John Graye to put
in his answer in writeing to the said appeale, with which
order the said Graye was duely served and should have
putt in his answer tenn dayes since

That the said John Gray hath benn daylye attending in
the Courte of Requests for this 11 dayes last past, and
hitherto hath refused or neglected to putt in any answers
(contrarye to his severall promises which he made severall
dayes the last weeke to putt in the same.) Notwithstanding
your petitioner offerred him the use of [his?] coppyes of the pleadeings in the
cause, when he pretended he wanted his own coppyes and
offerred to lett him make choyce of what councell he pleased
and your petitioner to bee att the chardge of his fee for draweing his
answer, he pretending that his councell were out of towne.

That the said John Graye his designe is only to delay till the session
growes soe neere a conclusion, as that itt will be impossible
your petitioners cause should be heard, and when the session is up then
to prosecute your petitioner upon the unjust decree made
against her to her utter ruin

The premises considered your petitioner most
humbly imploares your lordshipps favoure
to order all proceedings upon the decree
aforesaid to be stopt till the hearing of
this cause, and otherwise releive your
petitioner according to justice

And as in duty bound she
shall ever praye

Mary Haswell

Mistress Haswells peticion

Alissimon Read, wife of Sir John Read and widow of Francis Pierpoint. HL/PO/JO/10/1/347 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall and temporall in Parliament assembled

The humble peticion and appeale of Alissimon Read now the wife of Sir John Read of Brockett Hall in the county of
Hartford baronette and formerly the widdow and relict of the honourable Francis Pierpoint esquire.

Sheweth
that your petitioner was marryed to the said Sir John Read in the yeare sixty two and brought him an estate to the value of 8000 pounds

That after the said Sir John Read has possessed himselfe thereoff he exercised such cruelty towards your petitioner that shee was
fain to leave his house for preservation of her life, and did afterwards endeavour by mediation of freinds to perswade the
said Sir John Read to allow her some reasonable maintenance, but he refusing to hearken to any advice or perswasion of
that kind your petitioner was forced to have recours to his majesties ecclesiasticall courts to obtayne the same by law. And did
proceed soe farre in cours of law that your petitioner obteyned a sentence for alimony (pendente lite) and hoped to have
had a full releife upon the finall determinacion of the said cause, but the said Sir John Read perceiving that your
petitioner had by her proofes made good her allegations and could not in justice fayl of having sentence for her declyned
his cause by refusing to obey their orders of the court and stands excommunicated for his obstinacy therein, and absconds himselfe and removes
into severall counties soe that your petitioner hath no means to recover the said alimony decreed her by the Court of Deligates or the
arrears thereof to the value of 800 pounds. And your petitioner further shows that the Kings most excellent majestie hath been gratiously
pleased to call the sayd Sir John Read before his majestie and most honourable Privy Councell and to propound to him on your petitioners behalfe
to doe that which in justice honour and christianity he was obliged to, but the said Sir John Read refused to yeild to any
thing whereby your petitioner is become oppressed by her wants and distressed above measure now forasmuch as your petitioner
hath gone through all the ordinary course of law in his majesties ecclesiasticall courts and cannot have releife thereby
because the jurisdiction of those courts cannot reach the estate or lands of the said Sir John Read, and your petitioner must of
necessity starve if some speedy remedy may not be obtayned by your lordshipps order who are the supreame judicature of
this kingdome

Your petitioner therefore most humbly praies your lordshipps would be pleased to consider her most sadd
condicion and to order that your petitioner may have reasonable allowance out of the said Sir John
Reads estate for her future maintenance (and her arrear's for the present inableing of
her to pay such debts which shee has necessarily contracted for her subsistence) either by
vertue of his majesties writt according to antient president or by your lordshipps order to the
sheriffe or to give such other releife as to your lordshipps great wisdomes shall seem meet and just

And your petitioner shall ever pray etc.

[Allisimon?] Read

Lady Reads petition to
the House of Peeres
read 18 March 1670.

Alisimon Read, wife of Sir John Read. HL/PO/JO/10/1/347 (1671)

To the Kings most excellent majestie

The humble peticion of Alisimon Read the wife of Sir John Read baronet

Sheweth

That your peticioner having been above foure yeares since driven from Sir John Read
her husband by his most cruell and severe usage and he denying your petitioner to allow her any maintenance out of his
estate for her subsistence although he had a considerable estate by her marriage your peticioner did endeavour to obteyne
some remedy by the justice of your majesties ecclesiasticall lawes and proceeded soe farr in her suit that she
obteyned a sentence for (alimony pendente lite) and examined and published all her witnesses and hoped to
have a definitive sentence, but the said Sir John Read declyned the justice of your majesties said lawes and stands
excommunicated for contempt to the same and your peticioner since did endeavour by a mediation which your majestie was
most graciously pleased to undertake to have put an end to all her troubles she referring herselfe wholly to your majestie
but the said Sir John Read would not submitt to your majesties determination nor will hee pay or allow to your peticioner
one farthing but gives out that your majesties lawes shall not reach him nor his estate whereby she must be ruined
inevitably unless some speedy releife may be had for her support which your peticioner hopes to obteyne by your
majesties favour if the utmost extent of your majesties justice may afford the same. And your peticioner having found
a president in the like case amongst your majesties records of the Tower of London whereby it appeares that
Sarah the wife of Stephen de Frechinfield 8 Henrici 3 had a writt directed to the sheriffe of Suffolke
commanding him to give her allowance out of her husbands lands, her husband being excommunicated
because he would not treate her as hee ought by the lawes of marriage as doth appeare by the
record a true coppy whereof your peticioner has annexed to this her peticion, according to which
president your petitioner hopes shee may have some maintenance out of her said husbands estate which
is very ample and lyeth in the counties of Hertford and Oxford.

Your peticioner therefore humbly praies your majestie would be pleased to command the
right honourable the Lord Keeper of the Great Seale to issue forth such a writt
as the above mencioned to the sheriffes of Hartford and Oxfordshire or one
of them to give your peticioner reasonable allowance out of the said Sir John
Reads estate and that if it appeares to him to be a case of great difficulty and weight
that he would declare your majesties pleasure to the right honourable the House
of Peeres in Parliament now assembled and receive their directions therein or
what further assistance they shall think fitt for the releife of the peticioner

And your petitioner shall ever pray etc.

Dame Alisimon Read. HL/PO/JO/10/1/347 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall and temporall now in Parliament assembled

The most humble peticion of Dame Alisimon Read wife of Sir John Read baronett

Sheweth
that your petitioner before her inter marriage with the said Sir John Read was the widdow of the late [honourable?]
Francis Pierpoint esquire, and hoping that the said Sir John Read would have treated her, if she married with him, according to
her quality, shee bringing with her a very considerable fortune, she upon the addresse of the said Sir John Read unto her did inter=
=marry with him; but shortly after such her marriage hee not only streightned her contrary to his agreement and covenants of
marriage, in her attendants, in her allowances, in his houskeeping, and in all things belonging to her, and necessary for her, but by
cruell, and severe, and scandalous usage drove her from his house, and into such misery and want, that shee was forced for relief, to comence
suite against him in the ecclesiasticall court, where having alimony decreed her for her mainteinance, and hee grudgingly thinking it too much
made his appeale to the delegates, not from the allowing her alimony, but supposing the alimony allowed to be too high; which
supposed greivance being heard before the judges delegates, and they awarding her such alimony and costs pendente lite as
they found just, hee refused to stand thereto, ran into contempt, and was by reason of his contumacy excomunicated severall
times, and soe published, and persisting obstinately in his contumacy was decreed to be excomunicated, and the writt de excommunicato capi
endo
awarded against him, but hee utterly refused obedience to the court, oft called stood it out, and absconds himself: and
though hee hath woods which hee hath been offered 20000 pounds for, and a great personall estate and about 2000 pounds per annum in reall
estate, yet in contempt of all the course of law hath refused to pay the alimony taxed by virtue of the power of the ecclesiasticall court,
persists in his contumacy of his majesties writts excommunicato capiendo, stands still excomunicate, and hath not for these many yeares
payd the petitioner one farthing of the alimony taxed, which is in arreares to the summe of 1265 pounds, but leaves her ready to sterve for want.
The petitioner for redresse, humbly supplicated his majestie, who was gratiously pleased to cause him to be called before him, and to
endeavour to compose the matter, but the said Sir John Read refused to submitt to his majestie, but declared himself soe obstinate, that
his majestie was pleased to order it in councell to be recommended to this honourable house, to consider how the petitioner might be
releived. This honourable house was pleased to summon him, and heare something of it, but hee declared himself [illegible] obstinate
and the Parliament being to be proroged, the farther hearing was adjourned, whereupon the petitioner was advised in the intervall
to proceed in the Court of Delegates, and accordingly hath proceded, and obteined sentence of seperacion from bedd and boord
and mutuall cohabitacion with the said Sir John Read, and hath him condemned in the said arreares of alimony amounting to
1265 pounds and in 390 pounds per annum for her future alimony, and in the costs of suite. Which sentence being given and signed by 4 noble
earles, one reverend bishop, one lord, one judge of the common law, and six doctors of the civill law in the said cause
a copy thereof is hereunto annexed, but the said Sir John still standeth out all the proceedings of the law, and the petitioner by the
ordinary course of law not being able to proceed further,

Most humbly implores your lordships favour in ayd of justice, and that you wilbe
pleased to consider her helplesse condicion being forsaken by her husband, and to assist her
by such wayes as your lordships shall think meet, soe that the said arreares and future alimony
and costs may be levyed upon the said Sir John Reads estate, by sale of woods, sequestracion
of rents, or otherwise as shalbe requisite for her reliefe.

And your petitioner will ever pray etc

The humble peticion of Dame
Alisimon Read to the lords in
Parliament

Alissimon Read, wife of Sir John Read. HL/PO/JO/10/1/347 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall and temporall assembled in Parliament

The humble peticion of Alissimon Read wife to Sir John Read in the
county of Hertford baronet.

Humbly sheweth
that your petitioner being necessitated to goe downe into Nottinghamshire
having contracted great debts; and not knowing where to borrow more money to mainteine her
in London, it hath pleased God to lay her under such a feverish distemper, that without apparent
danger of her life, she cannot come to London, to attend your lordshipps, to reap the benefit of the annexed
order, whereupon she hath used all fitting diligence, as by the affidavit thereupon may appeare.
And that she is not in a capacity to pay for physick and physitians, or to supply herself
with necessaries for the recovery of her health, she having been forced to apply her present
seperate maintenance to pay the interest of her debts already contracted, and therefore must
in a short time perish, unlesse your lordshipps shall by some speedy course afford her reliefe.

Your petitioner therefore most humbly prays, that in commiseracion of her deplorable
condicion, your lordships would vouchsafe to require Sir John Read upon his appearance
before your lordships to pay the arrearages of the moneys, which he is in a legall manner
by his majesties Court of Delegates condemned in; the merits of her case being then
heard, and sentence of seperacion being then given by the said delegates,
consisting of the right honourable the Lord Privy Seale, the Earle of Bedford, and divers of the
right honourable peers of this house, with severall judges of the common and civill
law: and the petitioner most humbly beseecheth your lordships that the arreares due to her
by the said Sir John Read may be payd to the end your petitioner may be thereby
enabled to pay her said debts contracted for her necessary subsistence during
the continuance of his cruelty and injustice to her; and if the petitioner dye of her
present distemper, the said moneys may be made applicable towards the
payment of her said debts, whereby the lenders thereof may not suffer
for theire piety and charity to support the petitioner, whom they preserved from
ruine and sterving, this repayment being the petitioners greatest worldly desire
which she hath noe meanes to obteine, but by the benefit of your lordships
accustomed justice, whereof your petitioner doth not doubt; and the rather by
reason of the said Sir John's manifest oppression and artifices to defraud her,
and his continued contempt of the laws and publique authority, by reason
of which continued contempt, the petitioner hopes your lordships will not accept of
his answer untill the said arrearages be first satisfied.

And your petitioner shall ever pray etc

• Alissimon Reade

Dame Alissimon Read's peticion
to the House of Lords in Parliament.

William Holdsworth, administrator of John Wood. HL/PO/JO/10/1/348 (1671)

Master William Holdsworthes
peticion.

To the right honourable the lords spirituall and temporall
in Parliament assembled.

The humble peticion of William Holdsworth, sonne in lawe and
administrator (with the will annexed) of the goods and estate of John Wood

Humbly sheweth

That the said John Wood and your petitioner by the unjust dealings of John Lamot deceased, and (since
his decease) of his heire and executours, have been defrauded of an estate of a very considerable value
(notwithstanding their great and continued endeavours by all just and legall wayes to regaine the same)
to their utter undoeing, as by the case hereunto annexed appeares.

And forasmuchas by an unrighteous dismission of the said John Wood his bill in Chancery
in the 22th yeare of the late King Charles (of blessed memory) hee is remediless in lawe and
equity and not else releiveable but by this high and honourable court.

Hee humbly prayes your honours order of summons to bee directed to the Lady Honywood of
Marks=hall neere Coxall in Essex sole surviveing daughter and heire of the said Lamot
and now in possession of the estate soe unjustly with holden from your petitioner requiring her to appeare
before your honours, and to produce such deeds and writings as were made by Edward Aldred
to the said Lamot upon the sale of the said estate, and particulerly the counterparts of the leases
made to the said John Wood, the lease of sixty yeares made the 20th of February 1633 to
the said Lamot and the schedule of debts and incumbrances thereunto annexed, with the
deed of covenants of the 21th of the same February (the originalls of which first mencioned
leases and counterparts of the latter and other writings relating to the case which were in the petitioners
custody have been burnt in the late dreadfull fire) and to give your petitioner such releife
as to your wisedomes shall seeme reasonable.

And your petitioner shall pray etc.

• William Holdsworth

William Holdsworth, administrator of John Wood. HL/PO/JO/10/1/348 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall and
temporall in Parliament assembled.

The humble peticion of William Holdsworth
sonne in and law and administrator (with the will annexed)
of the goods and estate of John Wood deceased.

Humbly sheweing
that the peticioner in your last session, did hum=
bly present to your lordships the peticion and case heereunto annexed.

The which peticion was by your lordships order of the 20th of March 1670
referred to the honourable the committee of peticions, who thereuppon were
pleased on the 4th of April 1671 uppon heareing of councell on
the peticioners part and allsoe the councell of the Lady Honnywood sole
surviveing daughter and heire of the said John Lamott in the said former
peticion named and her answer put in before their lordships to order
that the cause uppon the said peticion and answer should bee reported
to this honourable house as fitt to bee heard at the barre.

And your lordships uppon the said report were most gratiously pleased
the 15th of the same April to order that councell should bee heard
at the barre of this house uppon the said peticion and answer, on the
second Tuesday of the next sitting of the Parliament after the recess
then at hand, as by the said order will appeare.

Your peticioner therefore most humbly praies that
your lordships will please to revive the said order, and heare
the said causes accordingly. And doe therein as to
your lordships great wisedome and justice shall seeme
meet.

And the peticioner shall pray etc

• William Holsdworth

Robert Mercer, merchant. HL/PO/JO/10/1/348 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall and temporall in Parliament assembled.

The humble peticion and appeale of Robert Mercer merchante

Sheweth
that Robert Mercer your peticioners father being seized in fee or of some other estate of inheritance of and in certaine free hold
lands and tenementes in Fazakerley Walton and Liverpoole in the county of Lancaster by indenture dated 8 Junii 1622 in consideracion of a
marriage to bee had and solemnized betweene him the said Robert Mercer and Alice the daughter of James Sorocold of 400 pounds [marriage?]
porcion did give graunt enfeoffe and confirme unto Ralph Sorocold and others and their heires the said lands tenements and premisses
(inter alios) to the use of the said Robert for life and after his decease to the use of every of the sons of the said Robert in tayle
successively as by the said deed (relacion being thereunto had) may more fully and att large appeare.

That possession hath accordingly attended the said deed though by some misfortune that part thereof which your peticioner hath
wanted the formality of indorsement of livery thereuppon

That the said Robert the father being likewise seized in fee of certaine coppy hold landes in Westerdby and Wavertree in the said
county of Lancaster by certaine articles of agreement under his hand and seale dated 7o Junii 1622 in consideracion of the said [marriage?]
to bee had and porcion aforesaid did likewise covenant with the said James Sorocold father of the said Alice that after the death
of Ralph Mercer his father hee would uppon request to [illegible] made by the said Sorocold graunt, surrender settle and assure all his
coppy hold landes in Westderby and Wavertree aforesaid (some closes excepted) to the use of himselfe for life and after his decease
to the first son of the body of him the said Robert lawfully to bee begotten and the heires males of the body of the said first son
and for default of such issue then to the use of every other next and eldest son of the body of the said Robert Mercer lawfully
and successively to bee begotten and of the heires males of the body of every such other next and eldest son of the body of the said
Robert Mercer lawfully and successively to bee begotten with remainder over as by the said articles likewise relacion being
thereunto had may more fully and att large appeare

James Sorocold father of the said Alice dyed within 6 months after entring into the said articles
Ralph Mercer father of the said Robert dyed about 7 yeares after to witt in October 1629.
Robert Mercer had issue by the said Alice, Ralph Mercer John Mercer and your peticioner

That Robert the father after the death of Ralph the grandfather to witt in the yeare 1632 or 1633 as your peticioner hath beene informed did
surrender his coppy hold lands to the uses limited in the articles butt in the time of the late warrs the said manours being sequestred the court
rolls for those yeares and many other yeares were lost and imbezelled so as the said settlements canot appeare.

That thereuppon in or about the yeare 1659 or 1660 Ralph Mercer the plainants eldest brother (knoweing the court rolls to bee lost) required the said Robert his
father to make new settlements of his estate according to the marriage agreement with Sorocold and threatned him that hee would compell him thereunto
if hee carried him to London in a cart with many such other threats as are fully and clearely proved in the said cause:

That thereuppon Robert your peticioners father and Ralph and John his brothers by articles of agreement under their hands dated 22 June [1660?] did
covenant each with other that the said Robert the father should att or before the first of August then next convey and assure all his free [hold?]
and coppyhold lands in Westderby Fazakerly, Walton, Liverpoole Thingwall and Childwall and else where in the county of Lancaster to [feoffees?]
in trust to the use of him the said Robert the father for life and after his decease the lands in Fazakerly already conveyed and the
house called Edge Lane House and the lands thereunto belonging to the use of the said Alice for life and the revercion thereof with severall
other lands and tenements therein named to the use of Ralph Mercer and the heires males of his body and for want of such issue to the heires
males of the body of the said Robert Mercer the father as also by the said articles more att large may appeare

That in pursuance of the said articles Robert the father gave instruccions to one Master John Winstanly to draw deeds and surrenders for
settling the lands both free hold and coppy hold according to the uses declared in the articles but before perfeccion thereof dyed to witt in
1662 about January.

John Mercer your peticioners brother dyed without issue

Ralph Mercer intermarried with Katherine daughter of Richard Blackmore and had issue Alice and Ellen Mercer the
defendants and made a joynture to Katherine his wife in pursuance of the said last articles and did many other things
pursuant to the same butt before the full perfeccion thereof to witt in November 1667 dyed leaving a considerable estate to the said Alice and
Ellen his daughters

The peticioner being the third son of Robert the father and next heire male claimes the premisses under the right abovesaid and to strengthen the deed of
the 8o June 1622 (which as tis said wants livery and seizin) and to discover the settlements of the said free hold and coppy hold lands and to have the severall
articles performed in Michaelmas terme 1668 did exhibit his bill of complaint into his majesties Court of Exchequer att Westminster against the said Alice and
Ellen Mercer infants by the said Richard Blackmore their guardian and in the said cause did clearely prove all and every the matters aforesaid notwithstanding
which the court uppon heareing thereof dismissed your petitioners bill

Now for that att the said heareing the deposicions of many of your peticioners materiall wittnesses were not read

And for that the inducement to the said dismission was a coppy of certaine pretended articles (alleadged to bee made betweene the said Ralph
Mercer your petitioners brother and the said Richard Blackmore in marriage of the said Katherine his daughter) which were started up att the said heareing and
read in court but were neither in pleadings nor prooffes

And for that the defendants did not nor can produce any reall settlements or conveyances whatsoever to or for them or either of them contrary to the said first marriage agreement
and other the matters aforesaid

And for that the perfecting of the articles of agreement and other assurances aforesaid were onely prevented by deaths as your petitioner hath sufficiently proved

And for that the petitioner is heire in tayle under the said agreements and settlements (intended for the preservacion of his name and family) and hath not any other
provision out of the said estate as all other the children of his father and also the defendants have.

And for that no remedy lyes in that or any other court by way of bill of reveiw or otherwise

Your petitioner doth therefore most humbly appeale to your lordshipps from the said dismission and pray that your honours wilbe pleased to
call the said defendants before you and cause them to answer the premisses and to heare the said cause att the barre of this honourable house
and thereuppon to sett aside the said dismission and to make such order and decree for settlement of the said freehold and coppy hold
estate and your peticioner quiet enjoyeing the same as to your lordshipps shall seeme meet and your petitioner humbly prayes that in the
meane time all suites and proceedings relateing to the said estate and differences either in law or equity may by your lordshipps order
bee stayed

And your peticioner shall as in duty bound pray for your lordshipps etc.

• Robert Mercer

Robert Mercer, merchant. HL/PO/JO/10/1/348 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall and temporall
in Parliament assembled

The humble peticion and appeale of Robert Mercer merchant

Most humbly sheweth

That your peticioners father Robert Mercer being seized in fee, or of some other estate of inheritance of and in certaine
coppy hold lands in West Darby and Wavertree in the county of Lancaster, in consideracion of a marriage to bee had and
solemnized betweene him and Alice the daughter of James Sorocold and of 400 pounds marriage portion did by certaine articles of agreement
under his hand and seale, dated the 7o June 1622 [covenant?] with the said James Sorocold that after the death of Ralph Mercer
his father hee would uppon request to him made by the said Sorocold graunt surrender settle and assure all the aforesaid premisses
(some few closes onely excepted) to the use of himselfe for life, remainder, to the first son of the body of him the said Robert
Mercer lawfully to bee begotten, and to the heires male of the body of such first son, and for default of such issue, then to the
use of every other next and eldest son of the body of him the said Robert Mercer lawfully and successively to bee begotten, and the heires
males of the body of every such other next and eldest son of the body of the said Robert lawfully successively to bee begotten, with diverse remainders
over. And being likewise seized in fee of certaine freehold lands in Fazakerly, Walton, and Liverpoole, in the county of Lancaster
hee by indenture dated June 8o 1622 (in consideracion of the marriage and porcion aforesaid) did give, grant, enfeoffe, and confirme unto
Ralph Sorocold and others and their heires, the said lands and tenements (inter alias) to the use of himselfe for life, remainder to the
use of every of the sons of him the said Robert in taile successively. Possession accordinly hath attended the said deed, though
by some misfortune (that part thereof which the appealant claimes by) wanted the formality of indorsement of livery thereuppon.
That James Sorocold father of the said Alice who should have required the performance of the articles dyed in November 1622.
And Ralph Mercer father of the said Robert (after whose death the articles were to bee performed) dyed in October 1629. That
Robert Mercer had issue by the said Alice, Ralph, John, and Robert the appealant. That James Sorocold dyeing att the
time aforesaid and Ralph the eldest son of Robert the appelants father being but a yeare and halfe old when Ralph the grandfather
dyed, there was no person left to require the performance of the aforesaid marriage agreement, but after Ralph came to maturity of age
(to witt in the yeare 1659 or 1660 hee required Robert his father to settle his estate according to the marriage agreement aforesaid and
threatned if hee refused to compell him thereunto whereuppon Robert the father and Ralph and John your petitioners elder
brothers by articles of agreement under their hands dated June 22 1660 did covenant each with other, that the said Robert the
father should att or before the first of August then next ensueing, convey and assure all his free hold and coppy hold lands in
Westerby, Wavertree, Fazakerley, Walton, Liverpool, Thingwall and Childwall, and else where in the county of Lancaster
to feoffees in trust to the use of him the said Robert the father for life; and after his decease the lands in Fazakerley already conveyed, and the
house called Edge Lane House and the lands thereunto belonging to the use of Alice his wife for life remainder together with severall
other lands and tenements therein named to the use of Ralph his eldest son, and the heires males of his body, and for default of such
issue to the heires males of the body of the said Robert the father in pursuance of which articles Robert the father gave
instruccions to Master John Winstanley to draw deeds and surrenders for settling both the free hold and coppy hold lands, according to the
[illegible] declared by the articles but before the conveyances were fully perfected in January 1662 hee dyed and John the appelants second brother
dyed without issue. That Ralph your petitioners eldest brother intermarried with Katherine the daughter of Richard Blackmore, and had issue by her
Alice and Ellen hee after his fathers death made a settlement to Alice his mother, pursuant and in the very expresse words of the last articles made
in 1660 of the Edge Lane House and the lands thereto adjoyning, and settled a jointure on Katherine his wife, pursuant to the said articles.
And in November 1667 dyed leaveing a very good estate to his two daughters that Ralph and John your petitioners two eldest brothers being dead
your petitioner who was the third son of Robert the father became legally intituled unto and claimes a right in the premisses by vertue of the severall
marriage aggreements articles and settlements aforesaid that your peticioner to strengthen that part of the deed of June 8 1662 (which as tis said wants
livery and seizin) and to discover the settlements of the free hold and coppy hold lands, and to have the aforesaid marriage and other articles of
agreement performed did in Michaelmas terme 1668 exhibit his bill of complaint into his majesties Court of Exchequer att Westminster against Alice
and Ellen who answered by Richard Blackmore their guardian your petitioner replyed the cause came to issue, wittnesses examined, publicacion
passed and all the matters aforesaid clearely proved. Notwithstanding uppon heareing the said cause the court dismissed the bill, which dismission
was afterwards signed and inrolled from which your petitioner appealed to this honourable house last session of Parliament the said Alice and Ellen answered
but the time being short the cause could not come to a hearing before the prorogation of Parliament since which your petitioner in Easter terme
1671 brought his bill of reveiw in his majesties said Court of Exchequer to have had the said dismission sett aside and the cause reheard
but the court in their order of dismission having given no reasons wherefore they dismissed the said cause only that they did not thinke fitt
to releive your petitioner and the case not being fully drawne up and stated in the order of dismission the court uppon the said latter heareinge
being tyed up by the strict rules of the law could not enter uppon the merritts of the said cause and thereuppon dismissed the bill of reveiw
but without costs they being so well satisfyed with the equity of your petitioners cause that could they have entred uppon the merritts thereof
they would have given him releife the first dismission was made without full reading your petitioners proofes uppon a coppy only of certaine
pretended articles alleadged to bee made betweene Ralph your petitioners brother and Richard Blackmore on marriage with Katherine his
daughter which coppy was cast in att the heareing of the said cause though not mencioned in the pleadings or proofes nor can the
said Alice or Ellen produce any reall settlements for their or either of their uses contrary to the first marriage agreement, and other the
articles and agreements aforesaid this being the truth of your petitioners case and in as much as the perfecting of the settlements
pursuant to the said articles of agreement was only prevented by death as aforesaid and your petitioner being heire in taile under the
said marriage agreement and other the settlements aforesaid, intended for the preservacion of his name and family

The premisses considered your petitioner most humbly implores your lordships to order the said Alice and Ellen
Mercer by theire guardian att a certaine day for that purpose by your honours to bee appointed to appeare att
the barre of this honourable house and putt in their answer to the premisses in writeing and that a day may bee
appointed to heare your petitioners cause to the end the said dismission may bee sett aside and reversed and your
peticioner receive such other and further releife as to your lordshipps great wisdom's shall seeme agreeable to equity and justice.

And as in duty bound hee shall ever pray

• Robert Mercer

Alice and Ellen Mercer, infants. HL/PO/JO/10/1/348 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall
and temporall in Parliament assembled

The humble petition of Alice and Ellen
Mercer infantes

Sheweth
that Robert Mercer the petitioners unckle hath
multiplyed various suites in severall courtes against
your petitioneres for landes in Lancashire discended to your petitioners
as heires att law to Ralph Mercer theire father
and albeit your petitioners have prevailed in all the
said suites and uppon full heareing reheareing
and bill of reveiwe in the Exchequer your petitioners
title have been decreed for them yett the said
Robert Mercer hath petitioned this high court
to sett aside the said legall proceedings and your petitioners
are summoned to putt theire answeare thereto on
Satterday next

Butt for asmuch as your petitioneres neither
of them being above five yeares old and theire
grandfather and gaurdian being above seaventy
yeares old of age live in Lancashire about one
hundred and fifty miles from London cannott
possibly prepare and answear in soe short
tyme the said proceedinges att law being many
and various

They humbly pray your honours will
please to give them yett a further and
such convenient tyme to give in their
answeare to the many matters conteynd
in the said Robert Mercers petition as
to your lordshipps shall seem meet

And your petitioners shall pray etc

• Richard Blackmore guardian to the peticioners.

Mercers peticion

Alice and Ellen Mercers
peticion for longer time
to answear Robert Mercers
petition.
1 Martii 1672

Richard Blackmore, on behalf of Alice Mercer, an infant. HL/PO/JO/10/1/348 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords sperituall and temporall in
Parliament assembled

The humble peticion of Alice Mercer an infant by Richard
Blackmore her guardian

Sheweth
that there being a cause to bee heard on Satturday next
prosecuted against your petitioner by one Roberte Mercer and your petitioner
liveing farr remote and being unprepared, her councell being
that day to attend att Guild Hall

Your petitioner humbly prays such further day to bee appoynted
as to your honours shall seeme meete

And your petitioner will ever pray etc

Richard Blackmore

Richard Blackmores
petition to put off the
hearing betweene
Mercer and Mercer
12 February 1673

Robert Mercer, gentleman. HL/PO/JO/10/1/348 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall and temporall
in Parliament assembled

The humble peticion of Robert Mercer gentleman

Sheweth
that your petitioner in March 1670 exhibited his appeal into this honourable house from a dismission made in his majestys Court
of Exchequer in favour of Alice and Ellen Mercer to which appeal they the said Ellen and Alice put in their answer in
Aprill 1671 by Richard Blackmore their guardian but the session being neer an end a hearing could not be had
whereupon your petitioner in the yeare 1672 exhibited a second appeal and the said Ellen and Alice by their guardian,
having a moneths tyme for answering elapsed the same and by a mocion gott till the latter end of that session to
answer and the answer comeing in just before the adjournment your lordshipps ordered the cause to be heard the 2d
Wednesday of the then next meeting after the recess then at hand

Before which tyme the respondent Ellen dyed.

That in November 1673 when the said cause was to have been heard the Parliament was prorogued to January
following and on the 17o day of that moneth your lordshipps ordered this cause to be heard on the 14o of February then next
ensueing when your petitioner hoped to have been heard, feed his councell and attended but the respondents [illegible] [three?] dayes
before by a mocion gott the hearing put off unto the 21o of February 1673 upon which day publick buissines being in
debate the buissines was put of to the 24o of February in the afternoone when your petitioner with his councell againe attended
but that very morning the Parliament hapened to be againe prorogued

That your petitioner being in Ireland last session of Parliament could not by reason of contrary windes gett into England
tyme enough to procure a hearing that session but is now come over on purpose to attend his hearing and
receive releiffe from your lordshipps according to the justice of his cause and hopes shall not by the cunning of the
respondent who is in possession of your petitioners estate receive any new delayes

Your petitioner most humbly prayes the favour of this honourable house to appoint some
convenient day for the hearing of this cause and that a day being sett the
respondents may not bee admitted by any excuse to put of the cause from
being heard as formerly she hath donn to your petitioners almost utter ruin

And as in duty bound he shall pray etc

Robert Mercer

Robert Mercers
petition for a
heareing
18 November 1675.

Philadelphia, Lady Wentworth, widow of Thomas Lord Wentworth. HL/PO/JO/10/1/348 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall and temporall in Parliament
assembled.

The humble peticion of Philadelphia Lady Wentworth widow and relict
of the right honourable Thomas Lord Wentworth.

Humbly sheweth
that your petitioner hath had very great troubles in the management of the
unhappy estate of the late Earle of Cleveland, and amongst others, hath been
exceedingly molested by one Richard Holland, and others of Whitechappell, who
have used all arts and meanes imaginable to injure your petitioner and her [children?]

That your petitioner haveing occasions to speake with some tenaunts about
busines of importance one William Leader of Whitechapel, sollicitor to the
said Richard Holland, served her personally with a suppena, and being told by some
of the company that shee was a priviledge person, hee contemptuously answered
hee cared not for her priviledge.

May itt therefore please your lordships to send for the said William
Leader and Richard Holland to answer the said breach
of priviledge.

[And your?] petitioner shall ever pray etc

[Philadelphia Wentworth?]

Lady Wentworths petition
read 1o April 1671.

Lady Wentworths pe-
tition:

Richard, Earl of Dorset. HL/PO/JO/10/1/348 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall and temporall in Parliament
assembled.

The humble peticion of Richard Earle of Dorsett.

Shewing
whereas your petitioner and his ancestors by grants from the crowne and severall
settlements of the mannor capitall messuage or mansion house called Salisbury Court
London with the gardens and other appurtenances have had uninterrupted
possession thereof for above 100 yeares last past, soe it is that the said mannor house
being burned downe in the late dreadfull fire and your petitioner thereupon having
disposed of the premisses to severall tenants to build upon the hospitall of
Bridewell had during this session of Parliament in breach of your petitioners priviledge
laid claime to a parcell of the premisses lying on the East side of the garden
belonging to the said mannor house along the West side of Bridewell which hath
been time out of memory used for a kitchin garden belonging to the said mannour house
and though your petitioner hath sent to Master John Lee who is clerke to the said hospitall
that hee would wave his priviledge and appeare to any accion at law to trye
the title of the premisses yet they decline to give any answere thereunto and
having sued out a commission of charitable uses have by colour thereof at the
prosecution of one John Bevan impannelled a jury, and privately found an
inquisition whereby your petitioners title is disparaged when as the statute of 43 of
Queen Elizabeth whereupon the said commission is grounded doth noe way warrant
the said proceedings there being a speciall provisoe therein that the same
shall not extend to any city or towne corporate or to any the lands or tenements
given to charitable uses within any such city or towne corporate, where there
is a speciall governour or governours appointed to governe or direct what
is given to any such uses nor to any hospitall which hath speciall visitors or
governours or overseers appointed them by their founders and Bridewell
being within the City of London and being granted by King Edward the 6th
in the 7th yeare of his raigne to the mayor comynalty and citizens of the
City of London and their successors they are appointed governours of the said
hospitall and from time to time have appointed speciall governours under them
whereof Sir William Turner is now president who would not have been soe
negligent as to have suffered your petitioner and his ancestors to have had soe long an
uninterrupted possession thereof if they had any colour of right or title thereunto
howsoever by this present disturbance your petitioner and his tenants are discouraged
to proceed in their building upon the premisses and your petitioners priviledge
violated thereby and most of the commissioners are contrary to lawe judges and parties

May it please your lordshipps to require the said Sir William Turner John Lee
and John Bevan to appeare and answere the premisses and to give
your petitioner such releife therein as is agreeable to honour and justice

And your petitioner shall pray etc.

Dorsett

[illegible] of 43o Elizabeth
[illegible] 4o [second?] [illegible]
[illegible]

The Earl of Dorsets petition
against the hospitall of
Bridewell
read 7o April 1671

Merchants, planters and importers of tobacco. HL/PO/JO/10/1/348 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall and
temporall in Parliament assembled.

The humble peticion of divers merchants planters and importers
of tobacco

Sheweth
that the trade of tobacco is of great concernment and advantage to his majesties kingdomes
in exporting great quantities of manufactures perfectly wrought, building and employing greate
shipps breeding of seamen, setting to worke aboundance of poore and advanceing his majesties
revenue of customes equall to (if not beyond) any one forraigne commodity whatsoever.

That (as they humbly conceive) the laying any greater imposition upon tobacco
will be of ill consequence in all particulars aforesaid, as by the reasons in the paper annexed
they doubt not but it will appeare.

They therefore most humbly pray that the said reasons
may be read and considered; and that this honourable house
will be pleased to order therein, soe as may be for the
advantage of his majesty and incouragment and preservation
of this trade and navigation,

And your petitioners shall ever pray etc.

• William Allen
• John Harris
• Henry Meese
• Dormer Sheppard
• George Lee
• William Barrett
• John Miller
• Arthur Bayly


• John Jeffreys
• Richard Booth
• Thomas Griffith
• St: Stanford
• Thomas Sandes
• William Merett

The merchants trading to Brittany. HL/PO/JO/10/1/348 (1671)

To the right honnorable the lords spirrituall and temporall, assembled
in Parliament

The humble petitition, of the marchants trading to
Brittany in France

Sheweth
that your petitioners, being informed; that their is a bill depending, in
this honnorable howse; for an additionall impost, on forraign
commodityes, imported: wheirin their is a great duty set on [illegible]
linnen

Your petitioners humbly pray your lordships would bee pleased, to
grant them, a heering theirupon.

And your petitioners shall ever pray

The Brittiny
merchants peticion
reade

The merchants trading into Flanders. HL/PO/JO/10/1/348 (1671)

To the right honnorable the lords spirituall and
temporall assembled in Parliament.

The humble petition of the marchants trading into
Flanders.

Sheweth
that your petitioners being informed that theire is a
bill depending in this honnorable house for an
additionall impost on forreigne commodities
imported, wherein theire is a great duty sett on
Flanders linnen.

Your petitioners humbly pray your lordships
would be pleased to graunt them a
hearing thereupon.

And petitioners shall ever pray.

• James Pickering


• Peter Jones
• Robert Mason
• [Joas?] Bateman
• William Jarrett
• [illegible] Jones
• John [Crannburgh?]

Flaunders merchants
peticion
reade

Sir Peter Colliton, Henry Drax, Thomas Middleton and Fardinando George. HL/PO/JO/10/1/348 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords
spirituall and temporall in Parliament assembled

The humble peticion of Sir Peter Colliton Henry Drax
Thomas Middleton and Fardinando George on behalfe of them=
selves and the rest of the planters of his majesties sugar plantacions
in America

Sheweth
that your petitioners being informed that there is a bill now depending before your lordshipps whereby
among other things there is a greater imposicion, considering their value layd upon the sugar of the English
plantacions then there is upon forreigne: and four times as much upon whites, as upon
browne the which if by your lordshipps favour not moderated will as appeares by the reasons annex
=ed, which your petitioners are ready to make good; inevitably prevent the further manufacture of sugars in the
said English plantations; occasion the absolute losse of the sugar collonies; prove greatly destruc
tive to navigacion and the trade of this kingdome

Wherefore in all humility your petitioners take leave

The premises considered humbly to beseech your lordships favour to take the case into your
serious consideracion, and give them such releife that the plantations may not be
destroyed, which if they should be; will not only ruine your peticioners and their families
but prove a losse of above eight hundred thousand pounds per annum to this king
dome besides the employment for between three and four hundred saile of shipps and
tenn thousand seamen yearly.

And your peticioners as in duty bound shall praye etc

• Peter Colleton
• Henry Drax

The refiners of sugar in England. HL/PO/JO/10/1/348 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spiritual and temporal
assembled in Parliament.

The humble peticion of the refiners of sugar in England

Humbly sheweth
that whereas it is proposed to rate white sugar at one penny per pownd and browne
sugar at one farthing per pownd, there is alsoe a third sort of sugar betweene the two aforesaid
sorts being a midling clayed sugar, now the intrinsick value of one pownd of white
sugar being equall unto fower and a halfe of browne sugar and the intrinsick value of one
pownd of midling clayed sugar being equall unto three pownds of browne and considering
the browne sugar is the interest of the generallity of the plantacions and that which gives a
great imployment to Englands navigacion and alsoe is the grownd worke of our manufacture
here in England in which many families have there sole imployments and many others have a
great dependance thereon as by the paper [annexed?] which wee humbly offer to your lordshipps appeares.

Your petitioners [therefore humbly?] pray that browne sugars may be rated not
only under one fowerth part of the white, but especially at a lower
rate then the midling clayed sugars.

And your petitioners shall ever pray etc

• Edward [illegible]
• James Vaughan
• Edward [Reyne?]
• Daniel Dorville
• Robert Doxy


• Matthew Sheppard


• John Beard

The merchants trading to Portugal. HL/PO/JO/10/1/348 (1671)

To the right honnorable the lords spirituall
and temporall assembled in Parliament

The humble petition of the merchants tradinge
to Portugall

Sheweth that your petitioners beinge informed
that there is a bill depending before this honnorable house
for an additionall impost on forreigne goods imported

Your petitioners humbly pray your lordships that
they may be heard as to those particulares which may
relate to the Portugall trade

Your petitioners shall ever
pray etca

Portugall merchants
petition
29 March 1671

Read

Several merchants trading into the Levant seas. HL/PO/JO/10/1/348 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spiritual
and temporal assembled in Parliament.

The humble petition of severall merchants
trading into the Levant seas.

Sheweth
that your petitioners are informed of a bill lying
before your lordships whereby an additional duty (to commence the
first of May next) is layd upon severall forreign commodities
wherein the petitioners are concerned; and surprized in point
of time, the comodities having bin bought and at sea
before intimation of any intention to lay thereupon a
greater duty.

The petitioners humbly pray, that they may be
heard as to their said concernments; especially
touching the trade of Zant; the growth
whereof (besides the petitioners surprize) is
charged much beyond the proportion of
and rates set upon the goods of other
places

And the petitioners shall ever pray etc

Petition about Zant trade
29 March 1671.

Reade

The weavers in the City of London. HL/PO/JO/10/1/348 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall and temporall
in Parliament assembled.

The humble peticion of the weavers in and about the Citty of London in behalfe of
themselves and all other weavers in his majesties kingdoms

Sheweth
that the peticioners have through many yeares use and practice attained to great skill and experience in the
weaving and making of silks and stuffs both broad and narrow especially having a great aptitude and
inclination to the making of all sorts of figured flowred brassed stitched and stripe silks and drugetts
[tamereenes?] and estimenes and other stuffs made of wooll whereby with incouragement they will be sufficiently
enabled to furnish this nation therewith at moderate and reasonable rates to the imploying of many thousands
of the English both old and young.

But so it is may it please your honours that by the frequent importacion of forreign wrought silks and
stuffs especially from France most of which are either privately conveyed hither to the deceipt of his majestie
in his customs or are paid for not with manufacture but with English money to the wrong of the kingdome and
ruine of the native artists consisting of many thousands as aforesaid who by meanes thereof are impoverished
and ready to perish.

The peticioners sensible of the wisdome and readines of this honourable house to incourage all English
arts and artists, and for prevention of the mischeifs aforesaid

Do most humbly beseech this honourable house will be pleased to prohibitt
the importacion of the said forreign figured flowred brassed stitched and stripe silk
and drugetts [tamereenes?] and estimenes and other stuffs made of wooll especially from
France as other comodities are in the bill of forreign excise now under your honours consideracion.

And the peticioners shall pray etc.

• Jonathan Raeve
• William James
• John Upcher
• John Adams
• Paul Dobie
• George Heginbothom
• James Du Bois


• Louis Ducleux
• Jean Basin

Wee whose names are hereunder subscribed mercers in and about the Citty of London being very well
satisfied of the skill and experience of the peticioners to the purposes abovesaid and sensible of the great
prejudice damage and wrong happening aswell to his majestie, the peticioners ourselves and the generallity of
his majesties subjects by the frequent importacion of the commodities above expressed do humbly joyn with
them in their abovemencioned requests to your honours.

• [Nathanyell?] Poprell
• John Pawlinge


• Samuell Totton
• Thomas Jenney
• Matthew Smith
• William Berbloke
• Francis Maidston
• George Salter

Weavers of London
petition
29 March 1671

Merchants of London trading to France, Flanders and other parts. HL/PO/JO/10/1/348 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall and
temporall in Parliament assembled.

The humble petition of divers marchants of London trading
to France Flanders and other parts of the narrow seas

Most humbly sheweth
that your peticioners are informed that there is a bill brought
up to your lordshipps from the House of Commons for the imposeing an
addicionall duty of impost upon forraigne commoditys to be
imported into this kingdome in which there are divers clauses
(as we humbly conceive) inconvenient to trade and lessoning his
majestys revenue.

The premises considered your petitioners most humbly
pray your lordships favour that they may be heard to
those clauses and to offer some reasons for the
amendments of some things therein contained that
so the inconveniencys aforesaid may be prevented
and your peticioners in their trade incouraged.

And your peticioners as in duty bound
shall pray.

• [illegible] Warde


• Benjamin Godfrey


• [Joas?] Bateman
• Peter [Kersteman?]


• Peter Joye
• John Farrington
• [illegible]

The peticion of merchants
of London tradeing into
[illegible]

George Blake and partners, farmers of the duties on exported coal. HL/PO/JO/10/1/348 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall and temporall in the High
Court of Parliament assembled

The humble peticion of George Blake on behalf of himself and partners farmers of the severall
duties on coales exported beyond the seas.

Sheweth
that coales exported for Ireland and to English plantations pay 12 shillings the chaldron and for all forraigne ports
8 shillings in English and double in strangers shipps. That the peticioners doe by lease hold 4 shillings per chaldron thereof from the right honourable the Lord
[illegible] and the remainder from the farmers of the grand customs and both at the annuall rent of neare 8000 pounds with about 4000 pounds
advanced for security of performance and have hitherto been at very great charges to lay the principles of good management for a future
improvement that the peticioners have understood (in hope of a great want of the comodity) a bill is sent to this honourable house to abate
the said customs from 8 shillings to [4?] shillings in English and 8 shillings in strangers shipps to commence at Michaelmas next, which will not only render the said duties
[illegible] not worth the charge) but the report thereof will stopp the exportation untill after that time; [depriving the?] peticioners of
[illegible] of the whole yeares receipt (the exports being very small [illegible] Michaelmas last past) and expose them to suites or great [losses?]
[illegible] in regard covenants [illegible] concerning which the peticioners [illegible] have not yet ben
[illegible] that if the peticioners [illegible] honourable house bee permitted to bee heard
[illegible]

That [illegible] the duty was 11 shillings 4 pence in English and 22 shillings 8 pence in [strangers?] [illegible] exports were as much as of late yeares by [illegible]
[illegible] now they pay scarce any custome they export not more coale then when the duty was high [illegible]
[illegible] beyond the seas than at London and the forraigne consumption not great [illegible]
[illegible] but in manufactures for [illegible] have them though [illegible]

[illegible] if it were thought fit to lay a high duty thereon a proportionable advance of rent would bee [illegible]

That [illegible] brought back to [illegible] this nation.

[illegible] little more than 1 shilling per bushell which would not reasonably procure [illegible]
[illegible] people not affecting to [illegible] them

That [illegible] not usually beene [imposed?] on the [illegible] [native comodity?] and 8 shillings and [illegible]
[illegible] of the English navigation [illegible] the same will not give the [stranger?] who
[illegible] navigation [illegible] to [impose upon?] the English [in favour?] of theire owne [illegible] England
[illegible] upon the French [illegible]
[illegible] manifestly [illegible] in hazard a necessary [illegible]
[illegible]the few [coale owners?] suppose hereby to [illegible]
[illegible] English [illegible] whereat [illegible]
[illegible] for one duty or other with the [illegible] would [illegible] for 12 [shillings?] if abated as [illegible]

In consideration of the premisses the peticioners doe most humbly pray that your [lordshipps wilbee?] [illegible]
permitt the peticioners to bee heard at the barr of this honourable house, on behalfe of [illegible]
of the subject and navigation as also of the peticioners intrest and [concernment as aforesaid?]

And the peticioners shall ever pray

George Blake

The petition of John
Blake and others concerning
the bill for additionall
impositions on forreigne
comodityes presented
28 March 1671.

The merchants trading in brandy. HL/PO/JO/10/1/348 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall and temporall
assembled in Parliament

The humble peticion of the merchants traders in brandy

Sheweth
that your petitioners are engaged in brandy which is shipped with other merchandize
on severall vessells, soe that it is impossible to cause them to be unloaden, and
finding the honourable House of Commons have passed a bill wherein they
prohibit the importacion of brandy after the first of May next, and impose
a very greate duty on what shall then be on hands, unles it be exported
before the first of January following. And for as much as the times limitted
for importacion and exportacion of the said commodity is so short, that what
is loaden cannot be brought in by reason of the uncertainty of winds and
weather, and what shall be then on hands cannot be exported, the approaching
summer being a season wherein there is litle or no shipping out of the said comodity

Your petitioners for preventing the ruine and destruccion which
inevitably will fall upon them, humbly pray that your lordshipps will
be pleased graciously to allow a longer time for importacion and
exportacion of the said commodity, and also to lessen the said
imposicion as to your honours shall seeme meete.

And they shall ever pray etc.

• John Dorvile
• John Gelson


• Arnald Beake
• William Bellamy
• Michael Clipsham
• Abraham Jaggard
• Richard Heron
• Durant Jenkinson

Brandy merchantes
petition
29 March 1671.

Samuel Lamot, John Archer, Daniell Van M[...]t and others. HL/PO/JO/10/1/348 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall and temporall
in Parliament assembled.

The humble peticion of

• Samuel Lamot
• John Archer
• Daniell Van [M...t?]
• John Jekyll
• Thomas Jeve
• Thomas Kirke

on behalfe of themselves and many hundreds of citizens and tradesmen in London

Most humbly sheweth

That the peticioners are informed that there is a bill
brought up to your lordshipps from the House of Commons
for the imposing an addicionall duty of impost upon
forraigne commodities to be imported into this
kingdome in which there are divers clauses (as wee
humbly conceive) inconvenient to trade and
lessening his majesties revenue

The premisses considered, the peticioners
most humbly pray your lordshipps favour
that they may be heard to those clauses
and to offer some reasons for the
amendment of some things therein
conceived that soe the
inconveniences aforesaid may be
prevented and the peticioners in their
trade incouraged

And your peticioners as in duty bound
shall pray

• Samuell Lamot
• John Jekyll
• Thomas Jeve

The peticion of the
citizens and tradesmen
of London.

Reade

Samuell Lamott, John Archer, Thomas Jeve and Thomas Kirk. HL/PO/JO/10/1/348 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall and
temporall in Parliament assembled

The humble peticion of Samuell Lamott
John Archer Thomas Jeve Thomas Kirk on
behalfe of themselves and others the merchants
tradesmen and shop keepers in London

Humbly sheweth
that your petitioners are informed there is a bill
depending before your lordshipps sent up from the
House of Commons for laying a higher duty
of imposte upon divers forraigne commodityes
to bee imported from beyond the seas, in which
bill there is a clause conteyned for breakeing
open houses searching for prohibited goods takeing
goods away upon suspition of theire being forraigne
made, and putting the owner upon the proofe
that they are of our English manufacturye
the which will tend greatly to your petitioners disquiett
and to the prejudice and discouradgment of trade
if not the utter distraccion thereof

Your petitioners most humbly pray your
lordshipps favoure before the
passing of the said bill that they may
be heard to offer some reasons
against that parte of the said bill and
that a tyme for that purpose may bee appointed

And as in duty bound they
shall praye

• Samuell Lamott
• Thomas Kirk
• John Archer
• Thomas Jeves

Lamotts peticion

The corporations for the poor in Middlesex and Westminster. HL/PO/JO/10/1/349 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall and temporall in Parliament
assembled

The humble peticion of the president and governor of the corporations for the poore in the county of Middlesex within
the weekly bills of mortallity and of the corporacion of Westminster

Most humbly sheweth
that in pursuance of an act of Parliament made in the 14th yeare of his now majesties
reigne your petitioners of Middlesex were by the justices of peace of the said county in quarter sessions
constituted a corporacion to erect a workehouse, and governe the poore thereof which they
faithfully and with great care and expence to some of them selves performed

That it being fore seene by the said justices that unlesse some of the members of the
said corporacion were justices of the peace to be armed with greater authority then is given
the governors by the said act (the officers of parishes haveing many opportunities to make
gaine by the poore would oppugne by all meanes soe good a worke the late Lord Treasurer
and after him the Earle of Craven were chosen presidents and divers of the nobility and
justices of the peace put in among the governours

And the corporacion of Westminster was constituted by the Lord Chancelor who was
authorized thereunto by the late act and his lordshipp did nominate severall justices of
peace for the said citty and liberty peers and others to be members thereof and the [Erle of Manchester?]
president

That although your petitioners used extraordinary industry and integrity in execution of their
trust and gave account of their proceedings to the quarter sessions according to the said act
yett the stubbornesse and opposition of some parish officers especially of Saint Giles in the Fields
and Covent Garden refuseing to collect their rates or give account of what collected
did much retard our proceedings and yett they have the confedence to exhibite a [clamorous?] peticion to the House of Commons against your petitioners full
of untruths and scandalls whereupon sundry of your petitioners being heard at the barr of the said house
gave such satisfaction and proofe that the whole house being then very numerous passed
the votes hereunto annexed which your petitioners pray your lordshipps to read

All which notwithstanding your petitioners are informed that a bill is since brought up from
the House of Commons to your lordshipps wherein they conceave many things are enacted to
their disrepute [illegible] and otherwise prejudiciall; and that some persons have dispersed scandalous
papers amongst your lordshipps to induce the passeing the said bill:

Wherefore they most humbly pray that before your lordshipps doe further
proceede upon the said bill your lordshipps will be pleased to appoynte your petitioners
to be heard at this barr and that the promoters of the said false and unjust
calumnies may be required to offer what cause they have for such their
dealings: and if found false may receive your lordshipps just reproofe

• W Dolben
• Richard Cooper


• William Pulteney
• Robert Filmer
• [Am: Sandame?]
• Walter Brydall
• S Barrow
• John Leeson


• Francis Lacy


• Edmond Godfrey
• George Greene


• George Walsh
• John Smith
• Jos: Ayloff
• William Barker


• Reginald Forster


• G Beauvoir

Michaell Baker, Anthony Trethewy, gentleman, and several others. HL/PO/JO/10/1/349 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall and temporall
in Parliament assembled.

The humble peticion of Michaell Baker Anthony Trethewy gentl
and severall others

Sheweth
that your petitioners and diverse others inhabitants of severall [illegible] parishes within the county
of Middlesex and liberty of Westminster haveing complained to the honourable the House of
Commons of severall grievances they lay under they retayned Nathaniell Readeing
esquire to be of councell with them therein.

That while the said Master Reading attended the lords committees to whome your lordships had
referred the bill for the reliefe of the said inhabitants Joseph Ayloffe esquire most shamefully
abused the said Master Reading in language and gave him a great blow over the face.

Forasmuch as the said misdemeanours and insolencies have beene committed in
his majestyes royall palace and most of them while severall of your lordships
were sitting upon redresse of the said grievances

Your petitioners humbly pray your lordships examinacion of the premisses and
that such proceedings may be had thereupon as to your lordships in
honour and justice shall thinke fitting to the end all others
may be deterred from the like offences and that his majestyes
loyall and aggrieved subjects attending your lordships for reliefe may
have all due proteccion and encouragement.

And they shall pray etc.

• Michael Baker
• Anthony Trethewy
• Bryon Bateson
• John Morris

John Marshall, one of the creditors of Sir William Clarke. HL/PO/JO/10/1/349 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords sperituall and temporall
in the High Courte of Parliament assembled

The humble peticion of John Marshall one of the
creditors of Sir William Clarke barronett

Humbley sheweth
that Richard Thorne esquire and John Mayfeild gentleman obteyned two
severall judgements against the said Sir William Clarke one in Trinity
terme 1665 and thother in Easter terme 1666 for 100 pounds apeice in trust for the
peticioner

That your said peticioner hath outlawed the said Sir William Clarke
on the said judgements and seized above 400 pounds per annum into the Kings majesties hands by
vertue of theis outlawries

That the said Sir William Clarke is endeavoring to gett an act of Parliament
to pass (which is before your honours) for setling 400 pounds per annum part of his estate on severall
trustees for 11 years towards payment of 3000 pounds debt without notice to your peticioner

And that there is noe provision in the said act whether judgements in
seigniority or bonds or booke debts shalbe first paid although your peticioners debt is
one of the first that by law ought to be paid

Your peticioner humbly beseecheth your honours that hee may be heard
by councell before your honours or the committee to whome the
bill is comitted and your peticioner shall ever pray etc

John Marshall

John Marshalls petition
concerning Sir William Clarkes bill
read 10o April 1671.

The parishioners of Saint Bennett Finck London. HL/PO/JO/10/1/349 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall and
temporall in Parliament assembled.

The humble peticion of the parishioners of the parish of
Saint Bennett Finck London.

Sheweth
that the said parish of Saint Bennett Finck is impropriate in the dean
and chapter of Windsor who [before the late?]
dreadfull fire allowed to the preaching minister there the summe of fourty
eight pounds or thereabouts per annum

That the peticioners being lately advised to make some augmentacion to the
said preaching minister and notwithstanding their great losses by the late plague and
fire, they have agreed to make up the said summe of fourty eight pounds
to the summe of one hundred pounds per annum.

That the peticioners understanding that by the bill now under consideracion for
setling the ministers tithes the said impropriators will be discharged [and the?] petitioners
therefore liable (over and above what they pay to the said impropriators) to pay the
aforesaid summe of fourty eight pounds per annum which they are in no wise able
to bear but will tend to their great discouragement and may ocasion great
animosities and unkindnes between the clergy and people.

The premisses considered the peticioners humbly pray that
this honourable house will be pleased by the aforesaid bill
to provide that the impropriators do continue to allow what
they used or ought to pay to the said preaching ministers,
or that your petitioners may be heard thereunto.

And the petitioners shall ever pray

• John Steventon
• John Spencer
• John Sweeting
• Jos: Towers
• James Holloway
• Nicholas Woodes
• William Hearne
• Thomas Sherrow

The peticion of the
parishioners of Saint Bennet
Finck concerning maintenance

The parishioners of Saint Mary Colechurch London. HL/PO/JO/10/1/349 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall and
temporall in Parliament assembled.

The humble peticion of the parishioners of the parish of
Saint Mary Colechurch London.

Sheweth
that the said parish of Saint Mary Colechurch is impropriate in the wardens
and commonalty of the mistery of the mercers within the said city who before the
late dreadfull fire allowed to the preaching minister there the summe of fifty
pounds or thereabouts per annum.

That the peticioners being lately advised to make some augmentacion to the said
preaching minister and notwithstanding their great losses by the late plague and fire
they have agreed to make up the said summe of 50 pounds (together with 93 pounds of Saint Mildred Poultrey) to the
summe of one hundred and seventy pounds per annum

That the peticioners understanding that by the bill now under consideracion for setling
the ministers tithes the said impropriators will be discharged and the petitioners therefore
liable (over and above what they pay to the said impropriators) to pay towards the aforesaid
summe of one hundred and seventy pounds per annum which they are in no wise able to bear
but will tend to their great discouragement and may occasion great animosities and
unkindness between the clergy and people.

The premisses considered the peticioners humbly pray that this
honourable house will be pleased by the aforesaid bill to
provide that the impropriators do [continue?] to allow what
they used or ought to pay to the [said?] preaching ministers, and
that the petitioners may be heard thereunto. And the petitioners shall every pray etc

• Ralph Box
• Jeremie Bonnet
• William Strong
• Joseph Richardson
• William Empson
• Samuel Jackson
• Thomas Coleman
• Richard Hardmett
• John Newton

The peticion of the
parishioners of Saint Mary
[illegible]

The parishioners of Saint Gregorys London. HL/PO/JO/10/1/349 (1671)

To the right honourable the lords spirituall
and temporall in Parliament assembled.

The humble peticion of the parishioners of Saint Gregorys London.

Sheweth that the tithes of the said parish being impropriate in the
warden and minor cannons of Saint Pauls the [peticioners?] have taken a lease
thereof paying to them in fine rent etc 80 pounds per annum

That the said parish of Saint Gregory by a late act of Parliament was
united to the parish of Saint Magdalen Old Fish Street whose tithes payable
to their minister before the late dreadfull fire were 100 pounds per annum or thereabouts.

That it was lately agreed by the Common Councell of the said city (and
consented to by the ministers deputed by [illegible] Lord Bishopp of London) that there
should be an augmentacion of 20 pounds per annum to the said tithes whereof 10 pounds by
each of the aforesaid parishes.

Forasmuch as the petitioners understand that (notwithstanding the said agreement
and consent) the bill lately sent up to this honourable house for setling ministers
maintenance hath appointed (over and above the payment of the impropriate tithes
by Saint Gregories as aforesaid) that the said 120 pounds per annum shall be equally rated
on both the said parishes which will be to discharg the parishioners of Saint
Magdalen Old Fish Street at least 50 pounds per annum of what they formerly paid
and to charge that 50 pounds together with the whole augmentacion of 20 pounds per
annum on the parishioners of Saint Gregory.

Wherefore the peticioners conceiving their inheritance
(which is very neer and dear to them) will be hereby greatly
prejudiced, most humbly beseech this honourable house will
please before the passing of the said bill to give the peticioners
leave to be heard thereunto.

And they shall ever pray etc.

• William Aylett
• Thomas Tyther
• Robert Hatton
• Theophilus Smith
• Thomas Buckler


• William Turner


• Jos Sheldon
• John [Well?]
• Nicholas Charlton
• Christopher [Pitt?]

The petition of the
parishioners of Saint Gregoryes
concerning ministers maintenance
18 April 1671