STAC Hoskins

From Rpalmer
Jump to: navigation, search

B Bill of Complaint Dr Demurrer A Answer Rn Replication Rr Rejoinder C Commission I Interrogatories D Deposition

Hoskins, Benedict

  • STAC 5/H72/7 - B - 36 Eliz - Benedict Hoskins v Thomas Penhellacke, Martyn Matthew

Hoskyns, Elizabeth

  • STAC 5/H56/40 - B A Rn Rr - 32 Eliz - Elizabeth Hoskyns, Oliver Hoskyns v John Hoskyns

Hoskin, John

  • STAC 5/H29/25 - B A - 10 Eliz - John Hoskyn v Henry Dyer, Thomas Peake, Richard Pope

Hoskin, John

  • STAC 5/H54/17 - B A - 17 Eliz - John Hoskins v Launcelot Seborne, John Nele, et al
  • STAC 5/H21/21 - C I D - 18 Eliz - John Hoskyns v Lancelot Seabron, Richard Hoskyns et al
  • STAC 5/H45/33 - I D - 18 Eliz - John Hoskins v Launcelot Sebern, Richard Hoskins et al

Hoskin, John

  • STAC 5/H30/35 - B A Rn C I D - 31 Eliz - John Hoskins v Oliver Hoskins, Matthew Bellie, Robert Coxe et al
  • STAC 5/H45/1 - I D - 30 Eliz - John Hoskins v Elizabeth Hoskins
  • STAC 5/H32/23 - I D - 32 Eliz - John Hoskins v Oliver Hoskins et uxor

Hoskin, John

  • STAC 5/H26/17 - B A Rn I D - 39 Eliz - John Hoskin v Richard Marshal, Hugh Wensley et al
  • STAC 5/H32/11 - B A C I D - 39 Eliz - John Hoskin v Richard Marshall et al

Hoskins, Matthew

  • STAC 5/H52/10 - B A C I D - 44 Eliz - Matthew Hoskins, Edmund Hill et al v Agnes Ward, Michael Turner et al

Heskyns, Thomas

  • STAC 5/H53/20 - B A - 21 Eliz - Wiltshire - Thomas Heskyns v Anthony Hart, Alexander Allden
  • STAC 5/H44/34 - I D - 24 Eliz - Wiltshire - Thomas Hestonard v Antony Hort, Alexander Aldon

Hoskins, William

  • STAC 5/H48/19 - B A C I D - 40 Eliz - William Hoskind, William Seaborn v Peter Hoskins, Leonard Snow
  • STAC 5/H13/37 - I D - 39 Eliz - William Hoskins, William Zeborne v Peter Hoskins, Leonard Snowe
  • STAC 5/H14/20 - Rr - 40 Eliz - William Hoskyns, William Leaborne v Peter Hoskyns
  • STAC 5/H79/10 - Rn - 40 Eliz - William Hoskins, William Zeborne v Peter Hoskins


Notes, Additions and Corrections

  • Case Book BL Harley MS 2143 fo. 57v. Apprentices punished for taking away victuals and selling and setting low prices of them and making proclamation thereof of their own authority. Attorney Rex versus Hoskins et al, to the number of 300 apprentices, for gathering themselves together in Southwark on a market day, and there taking away from diverse persons both fish and butter which they disposed of at their pleasure and they took upon them the office of clerk of the market and did abate the price of victuals and set them at lower rates than the owners did usually sell them and they did also cause one Poultry to make open proclamation that no persons should sell any butter at their houses or inns but that they should bring it into the open market by 9 of the clock the next day, to the end they might sell it at such rates as they pleased; for these offences they were committed, whipped, and pilloried and £[3?] fine apiece. Trinity 37 Elizabeth (kk)