Thomas Gyneswore/Guyswore, gentleman v. Henry Bodymere of Kingsthorpe, horsecorser

     Northampton attorney: Thomas Broune

     King's Bench error plaintiff's attorney: George Symcott

The lord king sent to the mayor and bailiffs of his town of Northampton his writ close in these words:

Henry VIII by the grace of God king of England and France, defender of the faith, lord of Ireland, and on earth supreme head of the English church to the mayor and bailiffs of his town of Northampton, greetings. Because in the record and process and also in the rendering of the judgment of a plea that was before you in the court of the abovesaid town without our writ according to the custom of the same town between Thomas Guyswore and Henry Bodymere concerning a debt of £7 that the same Thomas exacts from the aforementioned Henry as it is said manifest error intervened to the grave damage of the same Henry as we have accepted from his complaint, we, wanting the error if any there was to be corrected in due manner and full and speedy justice to be done to the abovesaid parties in this part, order you that, if judgment has been rendered thereof, then distinctly and openly send the record and process of the abovesaid plea with everything touching them to us under your seals, and this so that we have them at three weeks after Michaelmas wherever we shall be then in England so that, the abovesaid record and process having been inspected, we may make to be done further thereof what of right and according to the law and custom of our realm of England should be done. Tested me myself at Westminster August 12 in the 30^th year of our reign [August 12, 1538].

The record and process of which mention was made in the abovesaid writ follow in these words:

The Town of Northampton. The court held at the guildhall within the same town of Northampton on Monday July 1 in the 30^th year of the reign of King Henry VIII by the grace of God king of England and France, defender of the faith, lord of Ireland, and on earth the supreme head of the English church [July 1, 1538] before John Mole mayor of the same town according to the custom of the said town of Northampton used in the same from time whereof the memory of men runs not to the contrary.

At this court comes Thomas Gynsewore gentleman by Thomas Broune his attorney and complains against Henry Bodymer late of Kingesthorpe in Northamptonshire horsecorser concerning a plea of debt on a demand of £7, and he finds pledges to prosecute his complaint abovesaid against the aforementioned Henry, viz., Nicholas Gryce and William Pryce. And he seeks process against the aforementioned Henry to be made thereof for him according to the custom of the abovesaid town. Therefore according to the custom of that town it is ordered to Hugh Bukker serjeant at mace and minister of the abovesaid court abovesaid that he summon by good summoners the abovesaid Henry such that he be here at the next court to be held at the guildhall of the abovesaid town within the town of Northampton abovesaid on Monday next to come to answer the aforementioned Thomas Gynswore concerning the abovesaid plea. The same day is given to the same Thomas here etc.

At which certain next court held here, scilt., at the abovesaid guildhall on the said Monday [July 8, 1538] before the aforementioned mayor comes the abovesaid Thomas by his abovesaid attorney, and he offers himself against the aforementioned Henry concerning the abovesaid plea. And he did not come. And the abovesaid Hugh Bakker serjeant at mace and minister of this court returned that the abovesaid Henry had nothing within the liberty of the abovesaid town where he can be summoned. Therefore according to the custom of the abovesaid town it is ordered to the bailiff there that he take the abovesaid Henry Bodymer by his body if found etc., him safely etc., so that he have his body here at the next court to be held at the town of Northampton abovesaid on Monday then next to come to answer the aforementioned Thomas concerning the abovesaid plea etc. The same day is given to the same Thomas here etc.

At which certain next court held here, scilt., at the town of Northampton abovesaid on the abovesaid Monday then next to come [July 15, 1538] before the aforementioned mayor comes the abovesaid Thomas by his abovesaid attorney. And the abovesaid bailiff returns that he by virtue of the abovesaid precept directed to him took the body of the abovesaid Henry [IMG 0123], the body of whom the same bailiff has here ready as it was ordered to him. At which certain day the same Henry in his proper person appearing according to the custom of the same town of Northampton finds pledges that he will answer the aforementioned Thomas at the abovesaid complaint until the end of the plea etc., viz., John Mulso, Richard Rycherdson yeoman, and John Plomer baker, thereon the same Thomas by this abovesaid attorney by narrating against the aforementioned Henry on the abovesaid complaint says that, whereas the abovesaid Henry on June 5 in the 28^th year of the reign of the abovesaid now lord king [June 5, 1536] here at the town of Northampton within the jurisdiction of this court as well as according to the custom of this town used in the same town from time whereof memory of men does not run to the contrary granted that he would pay to the same Thomas the abovesaid £7 to be paid to the same Thomas when he was asked thereof, nevertheless the abovesaid Henry although often asked has not yet rendered the abovesaid £7 to the same Thomas but refused to this time to render them to him and still refuses, wherefore he says that he is worse off and has damages to the value of £4, and thereof he produces suit etc.

And the abovesaid Henry in his proper person comes and defends force and injury when etc., and says that he does not owe the aforementioned Thomas the abovesaid £7 nor any penny thereof in the form which the same Thomas above narrated against him, and of this he puts himself on the countryside, and the abovesaid Thomas similarly. Therefore according to the custom of the same town of Northampton it is ordered to the bailiff there that he should make to come before the mayor here at the next court to be held here on Monday next to come 12 prudent and lawful men of the same town of Northampton by whom the truth may best be known etc., and who neither etc., to recognize etc., because both etc. The same day is given the abovesaid parties here etc.

At which certain next court held on the same Monday then [July 22, 1538] before the aforementioned mayor come both the abovesaid Thomas and the abovesaid Henry in their proper persons etc. And the abovesaid bailiff returns his precept together with a panel of names of jurors annexed to the same precept in all things served and executed, viz., Ralf Raschyngton baker, Richard Alley weaver, Robert Brafold weaver, Thomas Persevall miller, John Daffron tanner, George Towers tailor, Richard Bukley butcher, William Jakson tailor, Thomas Johannis, Thomas Brafeld weaver, Richard Bylton, and John Harryson, and that each of the abovesaid jurors separately is attached by himself by pledge of Richard Smart and Robert Cole, which certain jurors exacted do not come. Therefore that jury is put in respite before the aforementioned mayor here until the next court to be held here on Monday then next to come by default of the jurors etc. Therefore according to the custom of the abovesaid town let the bailiff have here the bodies of the abovesaid jurors. The same day is given to the parties abovesaid here etc.

At which certain next court held here, scilt., at Northampton abovesaid on Monday then next following [July 29, 1538] according to the custom of the abovesaid town before the aforementioned mayor in the guildhall of the abovesaid town come both the abovesaid Thomas and the aforementioned Henry in their proper persons. And the abovesaid bailiff returns his abovesaid precept of habeas corpus of the abovesaid jurors directed above to him in all things served and executed, viz., that each of the abovesaid jurors separately is attached by himself by pledge of Richard Good and Nicholas Rent, which certain jurors, empaneled, exacted, similarly come, who, chosen, tried, and sworn to tell the truth concerning the premisses, say on their oath that the abovesaid Henry owes to the aforementioned Thomas £6 of the abovesaid £7 in the form in which the same Thomas above narrated [against] him, and they assess the damages of that Thomas by occasion of the detention of the abovesaid debt of £6 beyond his outlays and costs put out by him on his suit in this part at 3s4d, and for those outlays and costs at 3s4d, and further the abovesaid jurors say on their oath that the abovesaid Henry does not owe the aforementioned Thomas 20s residue of the abovesaid £7 as the same Henry alleged above. Therefore it is considered that the abovesaid Thomas recover against the aforementioned Henry his debt of £6 and his damages at 6s8d by the abovesaid jury [IMG 0325] in the form abovesaid assessed, and the same Henry in mercy etc. And similarly the abovesaid Thomas in mercy for his false claim against the aforementioned Henry concerning the abovesaid 20s residue, and the same Henry go thereof quit.

And the lord king by his writ of error directed to the same mayor and bailiffs etc.

Afterwards, scilt., on November 28 this same term before the lord king at Westminster comes the abovesaid Henry Bodymer by George Symcott his attorney and says that in the record and process abovesaid and also in the rendering of the judgment abovesaid it is manifestly erred, viz.,

in this that the abovesaid Thomas Gynswore by Thomas Broune his attorney narrated and prosecuted his complaint abovesaid against the aforementioned Henry Bodymer concerning the abovesaid plea, nevertheless the same Thomas Broune had no warrant before the aforementioned mayor and bailiffs of the abovesaid town whereby it could appear that the same Thomas Broune was the attorney of the abovesaid Thomas Gynswore to prosecute his abovesaid complaint by the name of the same Thomas Gynswore in the abovesaid plea.

And thereon the abovesaid Henry Bodymer seeks a writ of the lord king to the aforementioned mayor and bailiffs of the abovesaid town to certify to the lord king more fully the truth thereof, and it is granted to him etc., whereby it is ordered to the aforementioned mayor and bailiffs of the abovesaid town that they should scrutinize the rolls and other memoranda being under the custody of them or one of them concerning the attorney, and what they should find thereof certify to the lord king on the Octaves of St. Hilary wherever etc., together with the lord king’s writ directed to them thereof etc.

At which day before the lord king at Westminster comes the abovesaid Henry Bodymer by his abovesaid attorney, and the aforementioned mayor and bailiffs did not send the writ thereof, and thereon the same Henry Bodymer seeks another writ of the lord king to the aforementioned mayor and bailiffs to be directed, and it is granted to him. Therefore as before it is sent to the aforementioned mayor and bailiffs that they scrutinize the records of the said lord king concerning an attorney warrant being in their custody and they should find of that warrant in the same they should certify to the lord king at 15 days after Easter wherever etc. The same day is given to the aforementioned Henry etc.

At which day before the lord king at Westminster comes the abovesaid Henry by his abovesaid attorney, and the aforementioned mayor and bailiffs certify to the said lord king that they scrutinized and made to be scrutinized the rolls and other memoranda concerning an attorney warrant being in their custody as the abovesaid writ exacts and requires on them and there they found a certain attorney warrant as verbatim follows, viz.,

The Town of Northampton. Henry Guyswore gentleman puts in his place Thomas Broune against Henry Bodymer of Kingsthorpe in Northamptonshire horsecorser concerning a plea of debt.

And thereon the abovesaid Henry Bodymer seeks a writ to warn the aforementioned Thomas Guyswore to be before the lord king to hear the record and process abovesaid, and it is granted to him etc., whereby it is ordered to the sheriff of Northamptonshire that by prudent etc., he should make it to be known to the aforementioned Thomas Guyswore that he be before the lord king at 5 weeks after Easter wherever etc., to hear the record and process abovesaid if etc., and further etc. The same day is given to the aforementioned Henry etc.

At which day before the lord king at Westminster comes the abovesaid Henry by his abovesaid attorney, and the sheriff did not send the writ thereof. And the abovesaid Thomas Guyswore on the 4^th day of the plea solemnly exacted comes by John Weston his attorney. Thereon the abovesaid Henry Bodymer says that in the record and process abovesaid and also in the rendering of the abovesaid judgment manifestly it was erred by alleging the abovesaid errors alleged by him above, and he seeks that the court of the lord king here proceed to the examination of the record and process abovesaid as well as of the errors abovesaid, and that the abovesaid Thomas Guyswore rejoin to those errors etc. And the abovesaid Thomas Guyswore says that neither in the record and process abovesaid nor in the rendering of the judgment abovesaid in anything was it erred, and seeks that the court of the lord king here proceed both to the examination of the record and process abovesaid and of the abovesaid matters assigned as errors above, and that the judgment abovesaid be in all things affirmed. [IMG 0326]

         And both the record and process abovesaid and the judgment on the same rendered and the abovesaid causes and matters assigned for the abovesaid errors having been seen by the court of the lord king here and diligently examined and fully understood, because it seemed to the court of the lord king that that record is not at all vicious or defective and that in that record it was erred in nothing, it is considered that the abovesaid judgment in all things be affirmed and in all things it should stand in its strength and effect, the said causes and matters assigned above for errors in anything notwithstanding etc. And thereon it is considered by the court of the lord king here that the aforementioned Thomas Guyswore recover against the aforementioned Henry Bodymer 20s adjudicated to the same Thomas Guyswore by his assent by the same court according to the form of the statute there lately published and provided for his outlays, costs, and damages that he sustained by occasion of the delay of his execution concerning the premises by pretext of the prosecution of the said writ of error etc., and that he have thereof execution etc.