Difference between revisions of "STAC co Rutland"

From Waalt
 
(11 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 2: Line 2:
  
 
''' NOTA BENE ''' - These case names are approximate and very likely to be changed.  
 
''' NOTA BENE ''' - These case names are approximate and very likely to be changed.  
 +
 +
''' B ''' Bill of Complaint ''' Dr ''' Demurrer  ''' A ''' Answer ''' Rn ''' Replication ''' Rr ''' Rejoinder
 +
''' C ''' Commission ''' I ''' Interrogatories ''' D ''' Deposition
  
 
''' A '''  
 
''' A '''  
 +
*
 +
''' B '''
  
''' B '''  
+
''' Banes v Galloway '''  
 +
*STAC 5/B39/30 - B A - 20 Eliz - Rutland - John Banes, Jesper Coles, William Maxey v John Galloway, John Judkin, William Heley et al
 +
**The ploughing up of a ground called “The Way to the High Moor” in Empringham co Rutland
 +
*STAC 5/C9/34 -  I D - 21 Eliz - Rutland - Jasper Coles, William Maxey and John Banes v John John Judkyn and William Heley
 +
**see also [[STAC Baines]]
  
 
''' C '''  
 
''' C '''  
  
 
''' Cawdry v Bailey '''  
 
''' Cawdry v Bailey '''  
*Robert Cawdrey, parson of South Luffenham, Rutland v. William Bailie, Nicholas Mattocke, William Dant/Dante, John Bull, William Grimbold/Grymmalde, George Atton, Richard Tampion, James Taylour, John Jacklinge, Thomas Blackborne, Richard Mayles, John Atton, Bridgett Atton & Alyce Munton. Mowing of Rye sown on Glebe lands. (dk) STAC 5/C78/3
 
 
*STAC 5/C78/3 - B A - 32 Eliz - Rutland - Robert Cawdry v William Baillie, Nicholas Mattoke et al
 
*STAC 5/C78/3 - B A - 32 Eliz - Rutland - Robert Cawdry v William Baillie, Nicholas Mattoke et al
 +
**Robert Cawdrey, parson of South Luffenham, Rutland v. William Bailie, Nicholas Mattocke, William Dant/Dante, John Bull, William Grimbold/Grymmalde, George Atton, Richard Tampion, James Taylour, John Jacklinge, Thomas Blackborne, Richard Mayles, John Atton, Bridgett Atton & Alyce Munton. Mowing of Rye sown on Glebe lands. (dk) STAC 5/C78/3
 
*STAC 5/C80/40 - Rn - 32 Eliz - Rutland - Robert Cawdrey v William Baylie, Nicholas Mattocke et al  
 
*STAC 5/C80/40 - Rn - 32 Eliz - Rutland - Robert Cawdrey v William Baylie, Nicholas Mattocke et al  
 
*STAC 5/C28/36 - I D - 32 Eliz - Rutland - Robert Cawdrey v William Baylye, Nicholas Mattocks, William Dante et al  
 
*STAC 5/C28/36 - I D - 32 Eliz - Rutland - Robert Cawdrey v William Baylye, Nicholas Mattocks, William Dante et al  
*see also [[STAC Cawdry]]
+
**see also [[STAC Cawdry]]
 +
 
 +
''' Cromwell v Broom ''' 
 +
*STAC 5/C58/36 - I D - 30 Eliz - Rutland - Lord Crumwell v Andrew Broome, John Wilkinson, Robert Wilkinson et al
 +
**A deerpark. Deponents from Rutland
 +
**see also [[STAC Cromwell]]
  
 
''' D '''  
 
''' D '''  
  
 
''' Dunn v Wymark and Broughton '''   
 
''' Dunn v Wymark and Broughton '''   
*Interr refers suit Abell Dun v William Law at Rutland Assizes & interference with jury.(dk) - STAC 5/D19/19
 
 
*STAC 5/D32/10 - B A - 37 Eliz - Rutland - Abell Donne v Edward Wymerke, Richard Broughton, Robert Allen
 
*STAC 5/D32/10 - B A - 37 Eliz - Rutland - Abell Donne v Edward Wymerke, Richard Broughton, Robert Allen
 
*STAC 5/D29/27 - I D - 27 Eliz - Rutland - Abel Dunne v John Greene et al
 
*STAC 5/D29/27 - I D - 27 Eliz - Rutland - Abel Dunne v John Greene et al
Line 25: Line 38:
 
*STAC 5/D20/31 - I D - 37 Eliz - Rutland - Abell Dunn v Robert Ward, Richard Peck et al
 
*STAC 5/D20/31 - I D - 37 Eliz - Rutland - Abell Dunn v Robert Ward, Richard Peck et al
 
*STAC 5/D19/19 - I D - 37 Eliz - Rutland - Abel Dunn v Richard Broughton, John Presgrave, Thomas Lawe et al
 
*STAC 5/D19/19 - I D - 37 Eliz - Rutland - Abel Dunn v Richard Broughton, John Presgrave, Thomas Lawe et al
*see also [[STAC Donne]]
+
**Interr refers suit Abell Dun v William Law at Rutland Assizes & interference with jury.(dk) - STAC 5/D19/19
 +
**see also [[STAC Donne]]
  
 
''' E '''
 
''' E '''
 
+
*
 
''' F '''  
 
''' F '''  
  
 
''' Flower v Stevens '''
 
''' Flower v Stevens '''
*John Flower of Whitwell in the Co of Rutes. George Markw[hi]th of Normanton in the said Com’ of Rutes. STAC 5/F11/23
 
 
*STAC 5/F11/23 - B A - 20 Eliz - Rutland - John Flower v John Stevens, Jasper Coales et al.
 
*STAC 5/F11/23 - B A - 20 Eliz - Rutland - John Flower v John Stevens, Jasper Coales et al.
 +
**John Flower of Whitwell in the Co of Rutes. George Markw[hi]th of Normanton in the said Com’ of Rutes. STAC 5/F11/23
 
*STAC 5/F4/37 - I D - 21 Eliz - Rutland - John Flower v Jasper Coles, John Stevens, Thomas Burnby et al
 
*STAC 5/F4/37 - I D - 21 Eliz - Rutland - John Flower v Jasper Coles, John Stevens, Thomas Burnby et al
 
*STAC 5/F31/35 - Rn - - Rutland - John Flower v John Stevens, Thomas Burnby et al
 
*STAC 5/F31/35 - Rn - - Rutland - John Flower v John Stevens, Thomas Burnby et al
*see also [[STAC Flower]] for other possible references and see also [[STAC Fowler]]
+
**see also [[STAC Flower]]  
 +
 
 +
''' Flower v Mackwith '''
 +
*STAC 5/F20/8 - B A Rn - 14 Eliz - Rutland - John Flower v George Mackwith, Thomas Stevens et al
 +
*STAC 5/F25/38 - I D - 20 Eliz - Rutland - John Flower v George Mackworth, Thomas Baylie et al
 +
**Normanton Rutland
 +
*STAC 5/F15/33 - I D - 20 Eliz - Rutland - John Flower v George Mackwerth
 +
**see also [[STAC Flower]]
  
 
''' Fowler v Mackworth '''
 
''' Fowler v Mackworth '''
*John Fowler esquire of Whytwell, Rutland. re Land in Normanton, Rutland. STAC 5/F3/2
 
 
*STAC 5/F3/2 - B A - Hil 21 Eliz - Rutland - John Fowler v George Mackworth, Richard Fowler, Thomas Thorp, Francis Robinson.  
 
*STAC 5/F3/2 - B A - Hil 21 Eliz - Rutland - John Fowler v George Mackworth, Richard Fowler, Thomas Thorp, Francis Robinson.  
*STAC 5/F2/26 - B A - 38 Eliz - Rutland - John Fowler v Arthur Player, Richard Breeme, Thomas Harverd, William Brown
+
**John Fowler esquire of Whytwell, Rutland. re Land in Normanton, Rutland. STAC 5/F3/2
*STAC 5/F6/20 - I D - 39 Eliz - Rutland - John Fowler v Anthony Player, Thomas Harforde et al
+
**see also [[STAC Fowler]] and [[STAC Flower]]
*STAC 5/F11/40 - Rn - 40 Eliz - Rutland - John Fowler v Arthur Player, Thomas Hanford
+
 
*see also [[STAC Fowler]] and see also [[STAC Flower]]
+
''' Flower v Norwich '''
 +
*STAC 5/F25/1 - B Dr - 20 Eliz - Rutland - John Flower v Edward Norwich, John Dickenson et al
 +
**Manor of Whitwell, Rutlandshire
 +
*STAC 5/F20/2 - I D - 20 Eliz - Rutland - John Flower v Richard Fowler, Thomas Thorpe et al
 +
*STAC 5/F30/38 - Rn - - Rutland - John Flower v Richard Fowler
 +
**see also [[STAC Flower]] and Norwich v Flower below
  
 
''' G '''  
 
''' G '''  
 +
 +
''' Goodwin, Anthony '''
 +
*STAC 5/G17/15 - B A - 34 Eliz - Rutland - Anthony Goodwin, Richard Ward v Edward Harbottyll
 +
**Anthony Goodwin, Richard Ward of Egleton co Rutland husbandmen. In re tithe of corn and hay in Egleton
 +
*STAC 5/G7/7 - I D - 34 Eliz - Rutland - Anthony Goodwyn, Richard Ward v Edward Harbottel
 +
**see also [[STAC Goodwin]]
  
 
''' H '''  
 
''' H '''  
 +
 +
''' Harrington v Jackson '''
 +
*STAC 5/H50/20 - B A - 32 Eliz - Rutland - Sir James Harrington v Miles Jackson, Robert Purye, Thomas Spensley
 +
*STAC 5/H53/30 - I D - 32 Eliz - Rutland - Sir James Harrington v William Adderley
 +
**Interrogatories to be ministered to William Adderley, Robte Purye, Thomas Meares, Miles Jackson & Thomas Spenseley defts at the suit of Sir James Harrington complt, include: Did you bring, or cause to be brought, any action(s) against the complt for an escape supposed to be made by Richard Pecke out of the custody of the complt, being sheriff of Rutland. Interrogatories to be ministered to Richard Cony & Edmond Cony defts to suit of Sir James Harington complt, include: Did you about 28 or 29 Eliz recover £200 by judgement in Common Pleas against Richard Peck upon an action of debt. Deponent, 10 Feb Anno Anno 32 Eliz, Richard Cony of Kyrton Lincolnshire gentleman. Deponent, 26 Feb 32 Eliz, Thomas Spensley of St Mary ?Bowe, London scrivenor. Deponent, 18 Mar Anno 32 Eliz, William Adderley of Bow Lane, City of London merchant. Deponent, 27 Apr Anno 32 Eliz, Robert Purye of Bucklersbury, City of London grocer (dk) - STAC 5/H53/30
 +
**cited in The House of Commons, 1604-1629: Sir James Harrington by Simon Healy
 +
**see also [[STAC Harrington]]
 +
 +
''' Harrington v Noell '''
 +
*STAC 5/H57/26 - B A Rn - 44 Eliz - Rutland - James Harrington v Sir Andrew Knowell
 +
*STAC 5/H46/9 - I D - 44 Eliz - Rutland - James Harynton v Sir Andrew Knowell
 +
**STAC 5/H57/26; STAC 5/H46/9 cited in The House of Commons, 1604-1629: Sir James Harrington by Simon Healy
 +
**see also [[STAC Harrington]]
 +
 +
''' Harrington v Presgrove '''
 +
*STAC 5/H2/7 - B A - 44 Eliz - Rutland - James Harington v William Presgrove, Thomas Cunnaud, John Barnes, Peter Martyn, Ralph Holland et al
 +
*STAC 5/H9/34 - D - 44 Eliz - Rutland - James Harrington v Walter Nabon, Robert Warde et al
 +
*STAC 5/H11/37 - I - 44 Eliz - Rutland - James Harrington v William Presgrave, John Barnes et al
 +
**STAC 5/H2/7; STAC 5/H9/34; STAC 5/H11/37 cited in The House of Commons, 1604-1629: Sir James Harrington by Simon Healy “Harington served as sheriff of Rutland in 1593-4, and was returned to Parliament as knight of the shire in 1597 on the interest of his eldest brother, Sir John. The latter replaced him in 1601, when Harington, although present at the hustings (as he testified in STAC 5/N1/32, f. 5, though he did not sign the return), was not considered for re-election as Sir Andrew Noell claimed the nomination for the other county seat (Sir John Harington made this point clearly in STAC 5/N1/32). However, Noell, excluded from election as sheriff, created a furore when he attempted to foist his 19-year-old son Edward Noell upon the freeholders, despite Sir John Harington’s objections. To defuse the crisis, Noell returned himself, probably in the expectation that his term of office would be ended by the time the Commons rejected his return (STAC 5/H57/26, 5/H46/9; J.E. Neale ‘Rutland Election of 1601’, EHR, lxi. 29-42). Unfortunately for him, the annual pricking of sheriffs was delayed until 2 December, two weeks after the second election was held. Consequently, Noell revived his son’s candidature, whereupon Sir John Harington asked his brother to stand. Harington later claimed that ‘he did not intend to stand to be a knight of the said Parliament’, (STAC 5/N12/25, dep. of (Sir) James Harington, Q.5.) an assertion may be regarded with some scepticism, but with a new wife and various property transactions claiming his attention, there was perhaps some initial doubt about his candidacy. He only arrived in Rutland on the eve of the election, while in the meantime Sir William Bulstrode, who organized the Haringtons’ electoral interest within the shire, had been promoting William Bodenden of Ryhall (whose wife was a Harington) as a potential substitute (STAC 5/N6/11, dep. of Thomas Exton, Q.7). On election day Harington probably secured a clear majority of voices at the cry and the view, as Sir Andrew Noell felt obliged to proceed to a poll. Following the poll Noel declared his son elected, but Harington filed a suit in Star Chamber, claiming that Noel had intimidated many of his supporters into withdrawing their voices (STAC 5/H2/7; 5/H9/34; 5/H11/37; 5/H57/26. For a list of those whose voices were disallowed by Noell, see STAC 5/H46/9, deposition of Sir Andrew Noell, Q. and A. 24). Noell replied by prosecuting his opponents for soliciting for voices, a practice which, though widespread, was technically illegal (STAC 5/H57/26; 5/N1/32). The hostility engendered by this quarrel poisoned relations within the county for a year (STAC 5/N1/32).”
 +
**see also [[STAC Harrington]] and Noell v Harrington (below)
  
 
''' Hill v Waddington '''
 
''' Hill v Waddington '''
*Thomas Hill of Broome, Warks v John Waddington, Anne Waddington, Thomas Horseley & Henry Whetston all of Edith Weston, Rutland. Assault in Edith Weston, Rutland.(dk) STAC 5/H35/31
 
 
*STAC 5/H35/31 - B - 41 Eliz - Rutland - Thomas Hill v John Waddington et al
 
*STAC 5/H35/31 - B - 41 Eliz - Rutland - Thomas Hill v John Waddington et al
*see also [[STAC Hill]]
+
**Thomas Hill of Broome, Warks v John Waddington, Anne Waddington, Thomas Horseley & Henry Whetston all of Edith Weston, Rutland. Assault in Edith Weston, Rutland.(dk) STAC 5/H35/31
 +
**see also [[STAC Hill]]
  
 
''' I J '''  
 
''' I J '''  
 
+
*
 
''' K '''  
 
''' K '''  
 
+
*
 
''' L '''  
 
''' L '''  
 
+
*
 
''' M '''  
 
''' M '''  
  
 
''' Mackworth v Flower '''
 
''' Mackworth v Flower '''
*George Mackeworthe of Normanton co Rutland esq lawfully seized in his manor of Normanton. STAC 5/M1/30
 
 
*STAC 5/M1/30 - B A Rn Rr - 19 Eliz - Rutland - George Mackworthe v John Flower, Robert Armestronge, Richard Oute, Robert Wilkinson Hugh Tharpe et al  
 
*STAC 5/M1/30 - B A Rn Rr - 19 Eliz - Rutland - George Mackworthe v John Flower, Robert Armestronge, Richard Oute, Robert Wilkinson Hugh Tharpe et al  
 +
**George Mackeworthe of Normanton co Rutland esq lawfully seized in his manor of Normanton. STAC 5/M1/30
 
*STAC 5/M2/9 - B A Rn Rr - 19 Eliz - Rutland - George Mackworth v John Flower, Edward Roas, Marmaduke Glover, Robert Armstrong, Thomas Coye et al
 
*STAC 5/M2/9 - B A Rn Rr - 19 Eliz - Rutland - George Mackworth v John Flower, Edward Roas, Marmaduke Glover, Robert Armstrong, Thomas Coye et al
 
*STAC 5/M42/32 - I D - 20 Eliz - Rutland - George Mackworth v John Flower, Matthew Norton
 
*STAC 5/M42/32 - I D - 20 Eliz - Rutland - George Mackworth v John Flower, Matthew Norton
 
*STAC 5/M22/16 - I D - 19 Eliz - Rutland - George Mackeworthe v Edward Roas, Robert Armstrong et al
 
*STAC 5/M22/16 - I D - 19 Eliz - Rutland - George Mackeworthe v Edward Roas, Robert Armstrong et al
 
*STAC 5/M4/31 - B A - Hil21 Eliz - Rutland - George Mackworthe v John Flower, John Dartnoll, William Smyth, Matthew Norton et al
 
*STAC 5/M4/31 - B A - Hil21 Eliz - Rutland - George Mackworthe v John Flower, John Dartnoll, William Smyth, Matthew Norton et al
*see also [[STAC Mackworth]]
+
**see also [[STAC Mackworth]]
  
 
''' N '''  
 
''' N '''  
  
 
''' Noell v Harrington '''
 
''' Noell v Harrington '''
*See the Rutland constituency article in HOPT Vols 1604-29
+
*STAC 5/N1/32 - B A - Easter 44 Eliz - Rutland - Sir Andrew Noell v Sir John Harrington, James Harrington, Sir William Bowlstredd, Richard Cony, George Butler, Edward Harbottell, Christofer Stacye, John Caldycott, Edward Roffe, Edward Chiselden, Edward Boothe, Robert Crofte, John Bodylie, Thomas Exton, Thomas Houghe alias Woodkeper, Edmond Ledgingham alias Lesringham, Anthony B [  ], and John Campion
*Exercise of the parliamentary writ delivered to him as sheriff. STAC 5/N1/32
+
**Exercise of the parliamentary writ delivered to him as sheriff. STAC 5/N1/32
*STAC 5/N1/32 - B A - Easter 44 Eliz - Rutland - Sir Andrew Noell v Sir John Harrington, James Harrington, Sir William Bowlstredd, Richard Cony, George Butler, Edward Harbottell, Christofer Stacye, John Caldycott, Edward Roffe, Edward Chiselden, Edward Boothe, Robert Crofte, John Bodylie, Thomas Exton, Thomas Houghe alias Woodkeper, Edmond Ledgingham alias Lesringham Anthony B [  ], and John Campion
 
 
*STAC 5/N9/17 - I D - 44 Eliz - Rutland - Sir Andrew Noell v Richard Conye
 
*STAC 5/N9/17 - I D - 44 Eliz - Rutland - Sir Andrew Noell v Richard Conye
 
*STAC 5/N12/25 - I D - 44 Eliz - Rutland - Sir Andrew Noell v James Harryngton
 
*STAC 5/N12/25 - I D - 44 Eliz - Rutland - Sir Andrew Noell v James Harryngton
Line 84: Line 134:
 
*STAC 5/N10/35 - I D - 44 Eliz - Rutland - Sir Andrew Nowell v Edward Chisleden, John Bodelye et al
 
*STAC 5/N10/35 - I D - 44 Eliz - Rutland - Sir Andrew Nowell v Edward Chisleden, John Bodelye et al
 
*STAC 5/N6/11 - I D - 44 Eliz - Rutland - Sir Andrew Noells v Edward Harbottle, George Butler et al
 
*STAC 5/N6/11 - I D - 44 Eliz - Rutland - Sir Andrew Noells v Edward Harbottle, George Butler et al
*see also [[STAC Nowell]]
+
**See the Rutland constituency article in HOPT Vols 1604-29
 +
**see also [[STAC Nowell]] and Harrington v Noell (above)
 +
 
 +
''' Norwich v Flower '''
 +
*STAC 5/N14/36 - B A Rn - 28 Eliz - Rutland - Edward Norwich v John Flower, Roger Palmer et al
 +
*STAC 5/N15/7 - I D - 28 Eliz - Rutland - Edward Norwich v John Flower, Roger Palmer
 +
**see also [[STAC Norwich]] and Flower v Norwich above
  
 
''' O '''  
 
''' O '''  
 
+
*
 
''' P '''  
 
''' P '''  
  
 
''' Parsons v Heron '''
 
''' Parsons v Heron '''
*For a report of this case, see [[STAC 5/P24/17r]]
 
*Case Book BL Harley MS 2143 fo. 58r. Bill amended at the hearing and the proofs to stand without exception. Parsons, plaintiff; Heron et al: for perury and the charge of the bill was that the defendant deposed these or the like words in effect, which the court at the hearing of the cause held to be imperfect and therefore referred the hearing thereof for some ten days and ordered by assent of the defendant’s counsel that the plaintiff should amend his bill in this point and the defendant to plead not guilty and so to proceed upon the same proofs without any exception. Hillary 36 Elizabeth. (kk)
 
 
*STAC 5/P24/17 - B A - 36 Eliz - Rutland - Robert Parsons v Edward Heron
 
*STAC 5/P24/17 - B A - 36 Eliz - Rutland - Robert Parsons v Edward Heron
 +
**Case Book Report [[STAC 5/P24/17r]]
 
*STAC 5/P2/37 - A - 34 Eliz - Rutland - Robert Parsons v Edward Herron et al
 
*STAC 5/P2/37 - A - 34 Eliz - Rutland - Robert Parsons v Edward Herron et al
 
*STAC 5/P14/15 - I D - 35 Eliz - Rutland - Robert Parsons v Edward Heron, Richard Slefford
 
*STAC 5/P14/15 - I D - 35 Eliz - Rutland - Robert Parsons v Edward Heron, Richard Slefford
Line 107: Line 162:
 
*STAC 5/G3/9 - Rn - 35 Eliz - Rutland - Robert Parsons v Richard Heron, Richard Slefford
 
*STAC 5/G3/9 - Rn - 35 Eliz - Rutland - Robert Parsons v Richard Heron, Richard Slefford
 
*STAC 5/P64/27 - I D - 43 Eliz - Rutland - Robert Parsons v Edward Heron, Richard Slefford et al
 
*STAC 5/P64/27 - I D - 43 Eliz - Rutland - Robert Parsons v Edward Heron, Richard Slefford et al
*See also [[STAC Parsons]]  
+
**see also [[STAC Parsons]]  
  
 
''' Q '''  
 
''' Q '''  
 
+
*
 
''' R '''  
 
''' R '''  
 
+
*
 
''' S '''  
 
''' S '''  
 
+
*
 
''' T '''  
 
''' T '''  
 
+
*
 
''' UV '''  
 
''' UV '''  
 +
*
 +
''' W '''
  
''' W '''  
+
''' Sleeford v Harris '''
 +
*STAC 5/S79/3 - B - 34 Eliz - Rutland - Richard Slyfford v Thomas Harris, Edward Wymark et al
 +
*STAC 5/S51/18 - Dr - 35 Eliz - Rutland - Richard Sleford v Thomas Harris, John Leake et al
 +
**see TNA C 2/Eliz/W17/53 Edward Wymark esq. v Ellen Sleaford widow and Abell Donne. To redeem. A capital messuage and lands in North Luffenham and South Luffenham, Rutland and divers other lands in Seaton, Glaston, Preston Wynge [Wing], Thorp-by-the-water n [Thorpe by Water], Bisbrook [Bisbrooke], Liddington, Morcott, Ketton and Pilton, Rutland which the plaintiff had mortgaged to Richard Sleaford deceased. https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C5710500
 +
**see also [[STAC Sleeford]]
  
 
''' XYZ '''  
 
''' XYZ '''  
Line 126: Line 187:
  
 
''' AG v Judkyn '''
 
''' AG v Judkyn '''
*Whereas Erasmus Cortysby? and Matthew Uffington were convicted of Coining and making false monies. STAC 5/A4/11
 
 
*STAC 5/A4/11 - B A - 24 Eliz - Rutland - AG v Thomas Judkyn, Baldwin Barker, William Cooke, Thomas Hunter, John Presgrave, Thomas Sculthorpe
 
*STAC 5/A4/11 - B A - 24 Eliz - Rutland - AG v Thomas Judkyn, Baldwin Barker, William Cooke, Thomas Hunter, John Presgrave, Thomas Sculthorpe
*see also [[STAC Judkin]]
+
**Whereas Erasmus Cortysby? and Matthew Uffington were convicted of Coining and making false monies. STAC 5/A4/11
 +
**see also [[STAC Judkin]]
 +
 
 
<BR>
 
<BR>
 +
''' Palmer's cumulative totals of Star Chamber fines preserved in the E159s ''' (rp)
 
*TNA E159/416 Michaelmas Term, 40-41 Elizabeth. Fine Paid 1598
 
*TNA E159/416 Michaelmas Term, 40-41 Elizabeth. Fine Paid 1598
 
**From Stephen Coe de Ordsall, Notts, cleric: £10.
 
**From Stephen Coe de Ordsall, Notts, cleric: £10.
 
**From Anna Mackworth de Empingham, Rutl: £10.
 
**From Anna Mackworth de Empingham, Rutl: £10.
 
**From Richard Thurgar de Linton, Cambs: £10.
 
**From Richard Thurgar de Linton, Cambs: £10.
 +
 +
 +
''' Possibilities '''
 +
 +
''' Bassett v Sheffield '''
 +
*STAC 5/B78/4 - B A C I D - 43 Eliz - - John Basset v Robert Sheffeld, George Freeman et al
 +
**Complainant is John Basset of Rutland
 +
*STAC 5/B106/12 - I D - 43 Eliz - - John Basset v Clement Courtney, Anthony Manton et al
 +
**see [[STAC Bassett]]

Latest revision as of 14:09, 10 February 2024

Rutland

NOTA BENE - These case names are approximate and very likely to be changed.

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

A

B

Banes v Galloway

  • STAC 5/B39/30 - B A - 20 Eliz - Rutland - John Banes, Jesper Coles, William Maxey v John Galloway, John Judkin, William Heley et al
    • The ploughing up of a ground called “The Way to the High Moor” in Empringham co Rutland
  • STAC 5/C9/34 - I D - 21 Eliz - Rutland - Jasper Coles, William Maxey and John Banes v John John Judkyn and William Heley

C

Cawdry v Bailey

  • STAC 5/C78/3 - B A - 32 Eliz - Rutland - Robert Cawdry v William Baillie, Nicholas Mattoke et al
    • Robert Cawdrey, parson of South Luffenham, Rutland v. William Bailie, Nicholas Mattocke, William Dant/Dante, John Bull, William Grimbold/Grymmalde, George Atton, Richard Tampion, James Taylour, John Jacklinge, Thomas Blackborne, Richard Mayles, John Atton, Bridgett Atton & Alyce Munton. Mowing of Rye sown on Glebe lands. (dk) STAC 5/C78/3
  • STAC 5/C80/40 - Rn - 32 Eliz - Rutland - Robert Cawdrey v William Baylie, Nicholas Mattocke et al
  • STAC 5/C28/36 - I D - 32 Eliz - Rutland - Robert Cawdrey v William Baylye, Nicholas Mattocks, William Dante et al

Cromwell v Broom

  • STAC 5/C58/36 - I D - 30 Eliz - Rutland - Lord Crumwell v Andrew Broome, John Wilkinson, Robert Wilkinson et al

D

Dunn v Wymark and Broughton

  • STAC 5/D32/10 - B A - 37 Eliz - Rutland - Abell Donne v Edward Wymerke, Richard Broughton, Robert Allen
  • STAC 5/D29/27 - I D - 27 Eliz - Rutland - Abel Dunne v John Greene et al
  • STAC 5/D18/16 - I D - 37 Eliz - Rutland - Abell Dunn v Evererd Brittaine, Robert Rudkin, William Brown et al
  • STAC 5/D20/31 - I D - 37 Eliz - Rutland - Abell Dunn v Robert Ward, Richard Peck et al
  • STAC 5/D19/19 - I D - 37 Eliz - Rutland - Abel Dunn v Richard Broughton, John Presgrave, Thomas Lawe et al
    • Interr refers suit Abell Dun v William Law at Rutland Assizes & interference with jury.(dk) - STAC 5/D19/19
    • see also STAC Donne

E

F

Flower v Stevens

  • STAC 5/F11/23 - B A - 20 Eliz - Rutland - John Flower v John Stevens, Jasper Coales et al.
    • John Flower of Whitwell in the Co of Rutes. George Markw[hi]th of Normanton in the said Com’ of Rutes. STAC 5/F11/23
  • STAC 5/F4/37 - I D - 21 Eliz - Rutland - John Flower v Jasper Coles, John Stevens, Thomas Burnby et al
  • STAC 5/F31/35 - Rn - - Rutland - John Flower v John Stevens, Thomas Burnby et al

Flower v Mackwith

  • STAC 5/F20/8 - B A Rn - 14 Eliz - Rutland - John Flower v George Mackwith, Thomas Stevens et al
  • STAC 5/F25/38 - I D - 20 Eliz - Rutland - John Flower v George Mackworth, Thomas Baylie et al
    • Normanton Rutland
  • STAC 5/F15/33 - I D - 20 Eliz - Rutland - John Flower v George Mackwerth

Fowler v Mackworth

  • STAC 5/F3/2 - B A - Hil 21 Eliz - Rutland - John Fowler v George Mackworth, Richard Fowler, Thomas Thorp, Francis Robinson.
    • John Fowler esquire of Whytwell, Rutland. re Land in Normanton, Rutland. STAC 5/F3/2
    • see also STAC Fowler and STAC Flower

Flower v Norwich

  • STAC 5/F25/1 - B Dr - 20 Eliz - Rutland - John Flower v Edward Norwich, John Dickenson et al
    • Manor of Whitwell, Rutlandshire
  • STAC 5/F20/2 - I D - 20 Eliz - Rutland - John Flower v Richard Fowler, Thomas Thorpe et al
  • STAC 5/F30/38 - Rn - - Rutland - John Flower v Richard Fowler

G

Goodwin, Anthony

  • STAC 5/G17/15 - B A - 34 Eliz - Rutland - Anthony Goodwin, Richard Ward v Edward Harbottyll
    • Anthony Goodwin, Richard Ward of Egleton co Rutland husbandmen. In re tithe of corn and hay in Egleton
  • STAC 5/G7/7 - I D - 34 Eliz - Rutland - Anthony Goodwyn, Richard Ward v Edward Harbottel

H

Harrington v Jackson

  • STAC 5/H50/20 - B A - 32 Eliz - Rutland - Sir James Harrington v Miles Jackson, Robert Purye, Thomas Spensley
  • STAC 5/H53/30 - I D - 32 Eliz - Rutland - Sir James Harrington v William Adderley
    • Interrogatories to be ministered to William Adderley, Robte Purye, Thomas Meares, Miles Jackson & Thomas Spenseley defts at the suit of Sir James Harrington complt, include: Did you bring, or cause to be brought, any action(s) against the complt for an escape supposed to be made by Richard Pecke out of the custody of the complt, being sheriff of Rutland. Interrogatories to be ministered to Richard Cony & Edmond Cony defts to suit of Sir James Harington complt, include: Did you about 28 or 29 Eliz recover £200 by judgement in Common Pleas against Richard Peck upon an action of debt. Deponent, 10 Feb Anno Anno 32 Eliz, Richard Cony of Kyrton Lincolnshire gentleman. Deponent, 26 Feb 32 Eliz, Thomas Spensley of St Mary ?Bowe, London scrivenor. Deponent, 18 Mar Anno 32 Eliz, William Adderley of Bow Lane, City of London merchant. Deponent, 27 Apr Anno 32 Eliz, Robert Purye of Bucklersbury, City of London grocer (dk) - STAC 5/H53/30
    • cited in The House of Commons, 1604-1629: Sir James Harrington by Simon Healy
    • see also STAC Harrington

Harrington v Noell

  • STAC 5/H57/26 - B A Rn - 44 Eliz - Rutland - James Harrington v Sir Andrew Knowell
  • STAC 5/H46/9 - I D - 44 Eliz - Rutland - James Harynton v Sir Andrew Knowell
    • STAC 5/H57/26; STAC 5/H46/9 cited in The House of Commons, 1604-1629: Sir James Harrington by Simon Healy
    • see also STAC Harrington

Harrington v Presgrove

  • STAC 5/H2/7 - B A - 44 Eliz - Rutland - James Harington v William Presgrove, Thomas Cunnaud, John Barnes, Peter Martyn, Ralph Holland et al
  • STAC 5/H9/34 - D - 44 Eliz - Rutland - James Harrington v Walter Nabon, Robert Warde et al
  • STAC 5/H11/37 - I - 44 Eliz - Rutland - James Harrington v William Presgrave, John Barnes et al
    • STAC 5/H2/7; STAC 5/H9/34; STAC 5/H11/37 cited in The House of Commons, 1604-1629: Sir James Harrington by Simon Healy “Harington served as sheriff of Rutland in 1593-4, and was returned to Parliament as knight of the shire in 1597 on the interest of his eldest brother, Sir John. The latter replaced him in 1601, when Harington, although present at the hustings (as he testified in STAC 5/N1/32, f. 5, though he did not sign the return), was not considered for re-election as Sir Andrew Noell claimed the nomination for the other county seat (Sir John Harington made this point clearly in STAC 5/N1/32). However, Noell, excluded from election as sheriff, created a furore when he attempted to foist his 19-year-old son Edward Noell upon the freeholders, despite Sir John Harington’s objections. To defuse the crisis, Noell returned himself, probably in the expectation that his term of office would be ended by the time the Commons rejected his return (STAC 5/H57/26, 5/H46/9; J.E. Neale ‘Rutland Election of 1601’, EHR, lxi. 29-42). Unfortunately for him, the annual pricking of sheriffs was delayed until 2 December, two weeks after the second election was held. Consequently, Noell revived his son’s candidature, whereupon Sir John Harington asked his brother to stand. Harington later claimed that ‘he did not intend to stand to be a knight of the said Parliament’, (STAC 5/N12/25, dep. of (Sir) James Harington, Q.5.) an assertion may be regarded with some scepticism, but with a new wife and various property transactions claiming his attention, there was perhaps some initial doubt about his candidacy. He only arrived in Rutland on the eve of the election, while in the meantime Sir William Bulstrode, who organized the Haringtons’ electoral interest within the shire, had been promoting William Bodenden of Ryhall (whose wife was a Harington) as a potential substitute (STAC 5/N6/11, dep. of Thomas Exton, Q.7). On election day Harington probably secured a clear majority of voices at the cry and the view, as Sir Andrew Noell felt obliged to proceed to a poll. Following the poll Noel declared his son elected, but Harington filed a suit in Star Chamber, claiming that Noel had intimidated many of his supporters into withdrawing their voices (STAC 5/H2/7; 5/H9/34; 5/H11/37; 5/H57/26. For a list of those whose voices were disallowed by Noell, see STAC 5/H46/9, deposition of Sir Andrew Noell, Q. and A. 24). Noell replied by prosecuting his opponents for soliciting for voices, a practice which, though widespread, was technically illegal (STAC 5/H57/26; 5/N1/32). The hostility engendered by this quarrel poisoned relations within the county for a year (STAC 5/N1/32).”
    • see also STAC Harrington and Noell v Harrington (below)

Hill v Waddington

  • STAC 5/H35/31 - B - 41 Eliz - Rutland - Thomas Hill v John Waddington et al
    • Thomas Hill of Broome, Warks v John Waddington, Anne Waddington, Thomas Horseley & Henry Whetston all of Edith Weston, Rutland. Assault in Edith Weston, Rutland.(dk) STAC 5/H35/31
    • see also STAC Hill

I J

K

L

M

Mackworth v Flower

  • STAC 5/M1/30 - B A Rn Rr - 19 Eliz - Rutland - George Mackworthe v John Flower, Robert Armestronge, Richard Oute, Robert Wilkinson Hugh Tharpe et al
    • George Mackeworthe of Normanton co Rutland esq lawfully seized in his manor of Normanton. STAC 5/M1/30
  • STAC 5/M2/9 - B A Rn Rr - 19 Eliz - Rutland - George Mackworth v John Flower, Edward Roas, Marmaduke Glover, Robert Armstrong, Thomas Coye et al
  • STAC 5/M42/32 - I D - 20 Eliz - Rutland - George Mackworth v John Flower, Matthew Norton
  • STAC 5/M22/16 - I D - 19 Eliz - Rutland - George Mackeworthe v Edward Roas, Robert Armstrong et al
  • STAC 5/M4/31 - B A - Hil21 Eliz - Rutland - George Mackworthe v John Flower, John Dartnoll, William Smyth, Matthew Norton et al

N

Noell v Harrington

  • STAC 5/N1/32 - B A - Easter 44 Eliz - Rutland - Sir Andrew Noell v Sir John Harrington, James Harrington, Sir William Bowlstredd, Richard Cony, George Butler, Edward Harbottell, Christofer Stacye, John Caldycott, Edward Roffe, Edward Chiselden, Edward Boothe, Robert Crofte, John Bodylie, Thomas Exton, Thomas Houghe alias Woodkeper, Edmond Ledgingham alias Lesringham, Anthony B [ ], and John Campion
    • Exercise of the parliamentary writ delivered to him as sheriff. STAC 5/N1/32
  • STAC 5/N9/17 - I D - 44 Eliz - Rutland - Sir Andrew Noell v Richard Conye
  • STAC 5/N12/25 - I D - 44 Eliz - Rutland - Sir Andrew Noell v James Harryngton
  • STAC 5/N2/26 - I D - 44 Eliz - Rutland - Sir Andrew Noell v Sir John Harrington
  • STAC 5/N13/40 - I D - 44 Eliz - Rutland - Sir Andrew Noell v Sir William Boulstred
  • STAC 5/N10/35 - I D - 44 Eliz - Rutland - Sir Andrew Nowell v Edward Chisleden, John Bodelye et al
  • STAC 5/N6/11 - I D - 44 Eliz - Rutland - Sir Andrew Noells v Edward Harbottle, George Butler et al
    • See the Rutland constituency article in HOPT Vols 1604-29
    • see also STAC Nowell and Harrington v Noell (above)

Norwich v Flower

  • STAC 5/N14/36 - B A Rn - 28 Eliz - Rutland - Edward Norwich v John Flower, Roger Palmer et al
  • STAC 5/N15/7 - I D - 28 Eliz - Rutland - Edward Norwich v John Flower, Roger Palmer

O

P

Parsons v Heron

  • STAC 5/P24/17 - B A - 36 Eliz - Rutland - Robert Parsons v Edward Heron
  • STAC 5/P2/37 - A - 34 Eliz - Rutland - Robert Parsons v Edward Herron et al
  • STAC 5/P14/15 - I D - 35 Eliz - Rutland - Robert Parsons v Edward Heron, Richard Slefford
  • STAC 5/P7/20 - I D - 35 Eliz - Rutland - Robert Parsons v John Nicholas et al
  • STAC 5/P41/19 - I D - 35 Eliz - Rutland - Robert Parsons v Edward Heron, Richard Slesford
  • STAC 5/P8/38 - I D - 35 Eliz - Rutland - Robert Parsons v Edward Herron
  • STAC 5/P40/4 - I D - 35 Eliz - Rutland - Robert Parsons v Edward Heron, Richard Slefford
  • STAC 5/P31/13 - I D - 35 Eliz - Rutland - Robert Parsons v Edward Heron
  • STAC 5/P21/24 - I D - 35 Eliz - Rutland - Robert Parsons v Edward Heron, Richard Slefford et al
  • STAC 5/P67/21 - I D - 35 Eliz - Rutland -[blank] Parsons v Edward Heron, Richard Sleiford
  • STAC 5/P57/32 - A - 34 Eliz - Rutland - Robert Parsons v Richard Stesford et al
  • STAC 5/P64/33 - I D - 34 Eliz - Rutland - Robert Parsons v Richard Sleford
  • STAC 5/G3/9 - Rn - 35 Eliz - Rutland - Robert Parsons v Richard Heron, Richard Slefford
  • STAC 5/P64/27 - I D - 43 Eliz - Rutland - Robert Parsons v Edward Heron, Richard Slefford et al

Q

R

S

T

UV

W

Sleeford v Harris

  • STAC 5/S79/3 - B - 34 Eliz - Rutland - Richard Slyfford v Thomas Harris, Edward Wymark et al
  • STAC 5/S51/18 - Dr - 35 Eliz - Rutland - Richard Sleford v Thomas Harris, John Leake et al
    • see TNA C 2/Eliz/W17/53 Edward Wymark esq. v Ellen Sleaford widow and Abell Donne. To redeem. A capital messuage and lands in North Luffenham and South Luffenham, Rutland and divers other lands in Seaton, Glaston, Preston Wynge [Wing], Thorp-by-the-water n [Thorpe by Water], Bisbrook [Bisbrooke], Liddington, Morcott, Ketton and Pilton, Rutland which the plaintiff had mortgaged to Richard Sleaford deceased. https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C5710500
    • see also STAC Sleeford

XYZ

Attorney General

AG v Judkyn

  • STAC 5/A4/11 - B A - 24 Eliz - Rutland - AG v Thomas Judkyn, Baldwin Barker, William Cooke, Thomas Hunter, John Presgrave, Thomas Sculthorpe
    • Whereas Erasmus Cortysby? and Matthew Uffington were convicted of Coining and making false monies. STAC 5/A4/11
    • see also STAC Judkin


Palmer's cumulative totals of Star Chamber fines preserved in the E159s (rp)

  • TNA E159/416 Michaelmas Term, 40-41 Elizabeth. Fine Paid 1598
    • From Stephen Coe de Ordsall, Notts, cleric: £10.
    • From Anna Mackworth de Empingham, Rutl: £10.
    • From Richard Thurgar de Linton, Cambs: £10.


Possibilities

Bassett v Sheffield

  • STAC 5/B78/4 - B A C I D - 43 Eliz - - John Basset v Robert Sheffeld, George Freeman et al
    • Complainant is John Basset of Rutland
  • STAC 5/B106/12 - I D - 43 Eliz - - John Basset v Clement Courtney, Anthony Manton et al