Magdalene Clarke of London spinster v. Francis Denwood of Rochester

     Rochester attorneys: Thomas Kitchell, Robert Heath

     Error plaintiff's king's bench attorney: Robert Heath

The lord king sent his writ close in these words:

James by the grace of God king of England, Scotland, France, and Ireland, defender of the faith etc., to the mayor and citizens of his city of Rochester, greetings. Because in the record and process and also in the rendering of judgment of a plea that was before you in our court of the city abovesaid without our writ according to the custom of the same city between Magdalene Clarke and Francis Denwood concerning a certain trespass on the case inflicted on the same Magdalene by the aforementioned Francis as it is said manifest error intervened to the grave damage of the same Francis as we have received from his complaint, we, wanting the error if any there was to be corrected in due form and full and swift justice to be done to the abovesaid parties in this part, order you that if judgment has been rendered thereof you send distinctly and openly the abovesaid record and process together with everything touching them to us under your seal, and this writ, so that we have them on the morrow of Martinmas wherever then we shall be in England, so that, the abovesaid record and process having been inspected, we may make to be done further thereof for the correction of that error what of right and according to the law and custom of our realm of England should be done. Tested me myself at Westminster September 11 in the 5^th year of our reign of England, France, and Ireland and the 41^st of Scotland [September 11, 1607]. Alberye

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

The City of Rochester. Pleas in the lord king’s portmote held in the guildhall of the abovesaid city within the abovesaid city on Monday April 20 in the years of the reigns of Lord James by the grace of God king of England, France, and Ireland the 5^th and of Scotland the 40^th before William Streaton mayor of the abovesaid city and two citizens of that city called to him, viz., Thomas Rocke and Thomas Manley gentlemen according to the use and custom of the same city used and approved in the same from time whereof the memory of men runs not to the contrary and according to the privileges, liberties, and franchises of the abovesaid city granted to the late bailiffs and co-citizens of the abovesaid city and their successors by the charters of divers late kings of England progenitors of the said now lord king and afterwards granted and confirmed to the mayor and citizens of the said city and their successors by the charters of divers late kings of this realm of England progenitors of the said now lord king etc.

The City of Rochester. At this court come Magdalene Clarke in her proper person and complains against Francis Denwood in a plea of trespass on the case and finds pledges to prosecute her abovesaid complaint, scilt., John Doo and Richard Roo. Therefore according to the use and custom of the abovesaid city and according to the privileges, liberties, and franchises abovesaid the abovesaid Magdalene Clarke seeks process to be made for her against the abovesaid Francis Denwood in the abovesaid plea. Therefore according to the use and custom of the abovesaid city and according to the privileges, liberties, and franchises abovesaid it is ordered to John Fisher a serjeant at mace within the liberty of the abovesaid city and minister of the portmote court abovesaid that he put by gage and safe pledges the abovesaid Francis Denwood so that he be at the next portmote court of the said lord king to be held before the aforementioned mayor and two citizens of the abovesaid city called to him in the abovesaid guildhall on Monday May 4 then next following [May 4, 1607] to answer the aforementioned Magdalene concerning the abovesaid plea. Therefore day is given to the same Magdalene here etc.

At which certain next portmote court held, scilt., on the said Monday on May 4 in the abovesaid 5^th year of the reign of the said now lord king etc., [May 4, 1607] before the aforementioned mayor and two citizens of the abovesaid city called to him, viz., John Austen and Stephen Phillippes, in the abovesaid guildhall according to the use and custom of the abovesaid city and according to the privileges, liberties, and franchises abovesaid comes the abovesaid Magdalene in her proper person. And the abovesaid John Fisher serjeant at mace and minister of the portmote court abovesaid returns his precept directed to him in the abovesaid form that Francis Denwood has nothing within the abovesaid city, and according to the privileges, liberties, and franchises abovesaid it is ordered to the aforementioned John Fisher serjeant at mace and minister of the portmote court abovesaid that he take the abovesaid Francis Denwood if etc., and him safely etc., so that he have his body before the aforementioned mayor and the two citizens of the abovesaid city called to him at the next said now lord king’s portmote court to be held in the guildhall of the abovesaid city [IMG 0645] on Monday May 18 then next following to answer the aforementioned Magdalene concerning the abovesaid plea. The same day is given to the aforementioned Magdalene here etc.

At which certain next portmote court held, scilt., on the said Monday May 18 in the abovesaid 5^th year of the reign of the said now king [May 18, 1607] before the aforementioned mayor and two citizens of the abovesaid called to him, viz., Thomas Rocke and Robert Coossen in the abovesaid guildhall comes the abovesaid Magdalene in her proper person and puts in her place Thomas Kitchell against the aforementioned Francis Denwood in the abovesaid plea.

And John Fisher serjeant at mace and minister of the portmote court abovesaid returned his abovesaid precept directed to him in the abovesaid form served and executed in everything, scilt., that he by virtue of the abovesaid precept [directed] to him in the abovesaid form took the body of the said Francis Denwood, whose certain body he had ready then at the same portmote court as it was ordered to him.

Thereon, the abovesaid Francis Denwood, solemnly exacted at the same portmote court, appeared in his proper person to answer the aforementioned Magdalene in the abovesaid plea and puts in his place Robert Heath against the same Magdalene Clarke.

And thereon came Richard Ginsley and Thomas Denwood in their proper persons and mainperned for the abovesaid Francis Denwood that if it happen that the same Francis in the abovesaid plea be convicted that then the same Richard Ginsley and Thomas Denwood grant and each of them for himself grants that all this manner damages, outlays, and costs that would be adjudicated on the aforementioned Francis in this part would be made from the lands and chattels of them and each of them and levied to the use of the abovesaid Magdalene if it happen that the same Francis not at all pay those damages, outlays, and costs to the aforementioned Magdalene or not render himself to the said lord king’s prison then within the abovesaid city by that occasion.

And thereon the abovesaid Magdalene at the same portmote court by her abovesaid attorney [IMG 2164] narrated against the aforementioned Francis Denwood in the abovesaid plea in the manner and form following, viz.,

The City of Rochester. Magdalene Clarke of the city of London spinster complains against Francis Denwood of the city of Rochester abovesaid in a plea of trespass on the case. And the pledges to prosecute are, scilt., John Doo and Richard Roo. And wherefore the same Magdalene by Thomas Kitchell her attorney complains for this, viz., that, whereas the abovesaid Magdalene on August 30 in the 4^th year of the reign of our Lord James now king of England etc., here at the city of Rochester abovesaid within etc., at the special instance and request of the same Francis Denwood and of a certain Stephen Denwood of the city of Rochester abovesaid before the levying of this complaint against the same Francis deceased gave by loan and delivered to the aforementioned Francis and Stephen on the abovesaid day and year here at the city of Rochester abovesaid within etc., £10 of the lawful money of England to the abovesaid Francis and Stephen Denwood; in consideration thereof here at the city of Rochester abovesaid within etc., on the day and year abovesaid they undertook on themselves and faithfully promised then and there that they the same Francis and Stephen would make and seal and as their deed would deliver to the aforementioned Magdalene an obligatory writing whereby the same Francis and Stephen would obligate themselves, their heirs, executors, and assigns in the sum of £20 under the condition specified in the abovesaid writing for payment to the aforementioned Magdalene of the sum of £11 of the lawful money of England at or on the feast of St. Bartholomew the Apostle then next following at the then mansion house of Thomas Ivett situated in the city of Rochester within etc., nevertheless, the abovesaid Francis and Stephen, not at all pondering their abovesaid undertaking and promise but scheming and fraudulently intending hotly and deceitfully to deceive and defraud the abovesaid Magdalene of the abovesaid £11 have not made nor did the abovesaid Francis make their abovesaid obligatory writing although often asked according to their promise and undertaking abovesaid, whereby the abovesaid Magdalene is worse off in many ways and has damages to the value of £20. And thereof he produces suit etc.

And the abovesaid Francis by his abovesaid attorney seeks thereof license to emparl etc., until the next said lord king’s portmote court to be held here, scilt., on Monday June 1 then next following before the aforementioned mayor and two citizens of the abovesaid citizen called to him in the guildhall of the abovesaid city. And he has it etc. The same day is given to the aforementioned Magdalene here etc.

At which certain next portmote court, scilt., on the said Monday June 1 in the abovesaid 5^th year of the reign of the now lord king etc., [June 1, 1607] before the aforementioned mayor and two citizens of the abovesaid city called to him, viz., James Bewlye and Robert Some, come the abovesaid Francis Denwood by his abovesaid attorney and the abovesaid Magdalene by her abovesaid attorney. And the abovesaid Francis by his abovesaid attorney according to the use and custom of the city abovesaid and according to the privileges, liberties, and franchises abovesaid seeks further license to emparl thereof until the next said lord king’s portmote court to be held before the aforementioned mayor and two citizens of the abovesaid city called to him in the abovesaid guildhall on Monday June 15 then next following [June 15, 1607]. And he has etc. The same day it is given to the aforementioned Magdalene here etc.

At which certain next portmote court held, scilt., on the said Monday June 15 before the aforementioned mayor and two citizens of the abovesaid city called to him, viz., Thomas Rocke and William Hartridge in the guildhall of the abovesaid city come both the abovesaid Francis Denwood by his abovesaid attorney and the aforementioned Magdalene by her abovesaid attorney. And the abovesaid Francis Denwood by his abovesaid attorney and the abovesaid defendant defends force and injury when etc. And he says that he did not undertake on himself in the manner and form as the abovesaid Magdalene against him complains. And of this he puts himself on the countryside. And the abovesaid Magdalene similarly. [IMG 2165]

Therefore according to the use and custom of the abovesaid city and according to the privileges, liberties, and franchises abovesaid it is ordered to Robert Acton serjeant at mace and minister of the portmote court abovesaid that he make to come before the aforementioned mayor and the two citizens of the abovesaid city called to him at the next said lord king’s portmote court to be held in the guildhall of the abovesaid city on Monday June 29 there 12 etc., by whom etc., and who neither etc., to recognize etc., because both etc., to make the jury of the countryside between the abovesaid parties in the abovesaid plea. The same day is given to the abovesaid parties here etc.

At which certain next portmote court held, scilt., on Monday June 29 abovesaid in the abovesaid 5^th year of the reign of the said now lord king before the aforementioned mayor and the two citizens of the abovesaid city called to him, viz., Stephen Phillippes and Robert Coossen, in the guildhall of the abovesaid city come both the abovesaid Magdalene Clarke by her abovesaid attorney and the aforementioned Francis Denwood by his abovesaid attorney. And the abovesaid Richard Acton serjeant at mace abovesaid and minister of the abovesaid court returned his abovesaid precept served and executed in everything together with the panel of the names of the abovesaid jurors annexed to that precept, whose names follow, viz., George Buckmer, John Cobham, Francis Cadman, John Eurr, Abraham Marleton, Reignold Pallant, Thomas Jenkyn, Edward Revington, Edward Barker, Richard Jennawaye, Thomas Mason, Thomas Browne, Morgan Davis, John Aldriche, Richard Jones, John Curle, John Wager, Thomas Yonge, James Barlowe, John Hammon, William Cadman, jr., Arthur Edmondes, John Goddyn, Thomas Jones, of whom none came. Therefore at the petition of the said Magdalene according to the use and custom of the abovesaid city and according to the privileges, liberties, and franchises abovesaid, it is ordered to the aforementioned Richard Acton serjeant at mace and minister of the abovesaid court that he have the bodies of the abovesaid jurors before the aforementioned mayor and the two citizens of the abovesaid city at the next said lord king’s portmote court to be held in the guildhall of the abovesaid city on Monday July 13 then next following to make the jury abovesaid. The same day is given to the abovesaid parties here etc.

At which certain next portmote court held, scilt., on the said Monday July 13 in the abovesaid 5^th year of the reign of the said now lord king [July 13, 1607][IMG 0646] before the aforementioned mayor and the two citizens of the abovesaid city called to him, viz., Thomas Rocke and Stephen Phillippes in the guildhall of the abovesaid city come both the aforementioned Magdalene Clarke by here abovesaid attorney and the abovesaid Francis Denwood by his abovesaid attorney. And the abovesaid Richard Acton serjeant at mace and minister of the portmote court abovesaid did not send the precept. Therefore according to the use and custom of the abovesaid city and according to the privileges, liberties, and franchises abovesaid as before it is ordered to the aforementioned Richard Acton serjeant at mace and minister of the portmote court abovesaid that he have the bodies of the abovesaid jury before the aforementioned mayor and the two citizens of the abovesaid city at the next portmote court of the said lord king to be held in the guildhall of the abovesaid city on Monday July 27 [July 27, 1607] to make the abovesaid jury. The same day is given to the abovesaid parties here etc.

At which certain next portmote court, scilt., on the said Monday July 27 in the abovesaid 5^th year of the reign of the said now lord king etc., before the aforementioned mayor and two citizens of the abovesaid city called to him, viz., Thomas Manley and Stephen Phillippes in the guildhall of the abovesaid city came both the abovesaid Magdalene by her abovesaid attorney and the abovesaid Francis Denwood by his abovesaid attorney. And the abovesaid Richard Acton serjeant at mace and minister of the abovesaid portmote court returned his abovesaid precept directed to him in the abovesaid form served and executed in everything. Thereon the abovesaid jury, exacted, 12 of them, scilt., George Buckmer, John Eurr, Thomas Jenkyn, Edward Revington, Edward Barkere, John Aldriche, Richard Jones, John Curle, James Barlowe, John Hammon, William Cadman, jr., Arthur Edmondes came, who, chosen, tried, and sworn to tell the truth concerning the premisses, on their oath say that at the time of the abovesaid loan of the sum of £10 abovesaid the plaintiff was within the age of 21 years, scilt., 20 years old, and that the mother of the said plaintiff by loan gave to the aforementioned defendant and the aforementioned Stephen Denwood the abovesaid £10 for the abovesaid plaintiff and in the name of the said plaintiff and by her mandate in the absence of the said plaintiff, but if on the whole material abovesaid found by the same jurors in the abovesaid form the loan of the mother of the said plaintiff for the plaintiff and by her mandate is in law the loan of the abovesaid plaintiff, the same jurors are completely ignorant. And thereof they seek the advisement and consideration of the court here etc. [IMG 0647] And if on the whole abovesaid matter found in the abovesaid form it shall seem to the court here that the abovesaid Francis Denwood undertook on himself in the manner and form abovesaid specified within in the abovesaid narration, then the same jurors say on their oath abovesaid that the abovesaid Francis Denwood undertook on himself in the manner and form as the abovesaid Magdalene above complains against him, and then they assess the damages of the same Magdalene by occasion of the non-performance of the abovesaid promise and undertaking beyond her outlays and costs put out on her suit in this part at £11 and for those outlays and costs at 2s. And if on the whole abovesaid matter found by the same jurors in the abovesaid form it shall seem to the court here that the abovesaid Francis Denwood did not undertake on himself in the manner and form specified in the abovesaid narration, then the same jurors say on their oath abovesaid that the abovesaid Francis did not undertake on himself in the manner and form as the same Magdalene above alleged. And because the aforementioned mayor and two citizens of the abovesaid city want to advise themselves of and on the premisses before rendering judgment thereof, day is given to the abovesaid parties before the aforementioned mayor and two citizens of the abovesaid city called to him at the next court to be held in the abovesaid guildhall of the abovesaid city, viz., on Monday August 10 then next following to hear their judgment thereof, because the same mayor and two citizens here thereon not yet etc.

At which certain next portmote court held, scilt., on the said Monday August 10 in the abovesaid 5^th year of the reign of the said now lord king etc., [August 10, 1607] before the aforementioned mayor and two citizens of the abovesaid city called to him, viz., Thomas Rocke and William Hartridge, in the guildhall of the abovesaid city came both the abovesaid Magdalene Clarke by her abovesaid attorney and the abovesaid Francis Denwood by his abovesaid attorney. And because the abovesaid mayor and two citizens of the abovesaid city are not yet advised of and on the premisses, the same day is given to the abovesaid parties before the aforementioned mayor and two citizens of the abovesaid city called to him at the next portmote court to be held in the guildhall of the abovesaid city, viz., on Monday August 24 then next following to hear their abovesaid judgment here etc.

At which certain next portmote court held, scilt., the said Monday August 24 of the abovesaid 5^th year of the reign of the said now lord king etc., [August 24, 1607] before the aforementioned mayor and two citizens of the abovesaid city called to him, viz., John Austen and Robert Some in the guildhall of the abovesaid city came both the abovesaid Magdalene Clarke by her abovesaid attorney and the abovesaid Francis Denwood by his abovesaid attorney.

Thereon, all and singular the premisses having been seen and by the said lord king’s court here more fully understood and mature deliberation having been had thereof, because it seems to the court of the said lord king here that the abovesaid Francis Denwood undertook on himself in the manner and form abovesaid as the abovesaid Magdalene above complains against him, therefore it is considered that the abovesaid Magdalene recover against the aforementioned Francis Denwood her abovesaid damages assessed by the abovesaid jury in the abovesaid form as well as £3 15s for her abovesaid outlays and costs adjudged to the same Magdalene by the court of the lord king here by her assent by way of increment, which certain damages in all amount to £14 17s, and the abovesaid Francis in mercy etc.

Afterwards, scilt., on Wednesday next after the quindene of Easter then next following before the lord king at Westminster comes the abovesaid Francis Denwood by Robert Heath his attorney and says that in the abovesaid record and process and also in the rendering of the abovesaid manifestly it was erred, viz,

in this that in the abovesaid record and process it does not appear of what estate, grade, quality or dignity the abovesaid Magdalene was at the time of the levying of the complaint abovesaid nor is the same Magdalene in the same complaint named in certain in which town, hamlet or known place outside a town or hamlet she is or then was residing or conversing according to the form [IMG 2166] of the statute in this manner case lately published and provided thereof.

Likewise in this that by the abovesaid narration it does not appear that the abovesaid Francis and Stephen or either of them made the abovesaid obligatory writing to the aforementioned Magdalene according to her promise and undertaking abovesaid etc.

Likewise in this that by the abovesaid record it does not appear that the abovesaid Francis Denwood at the abovesaid court of the said now lord king held in the guildhall of the abovesaid city on Monday June 15 in the abovesaid 5^th year appeared as defendant named in the abovesaid complaint etc.

Likewise in this that by the abovesaid record it does not appear in which county within this realm abovesaid the city of Rochester abovesaid lies or is, so that if any issue between the abovesaid parties should be joined in the abovesaid plea by that record it cannot appear from what vicinity the jurors impaneled between them should come or be returned etc.

Likewise in this that by the abovesaid record it appears manifestly that the whole abovesaid process was continued and judgment thereon rendered by the abovesaid William Streaton mayor of the abovesaid city, whereas in truth the same William long before the abovesaid judgment rendered in the abovesaid form, scilt., on October 5 in the abovesaid 5^th year of the reign of the said now lord king at the city of Rochester abovesaid in the abovesaid county of Kent was removed from the office of mayor of that city in due manner, and a certain Thomas Rocke afterwards and before the abovesaid judgment rendered, scilt., on the same day and year at the city of Rochester abovesaid was duly elected and installed into the office of mayor of that city, and the same Thomas Rocke remained and was the mayor of that city at the time of the abovesaid judgment rendered.

And he seeks that the abovesaid judgment on account of the abovesaid errors and others being in the abovesaid record and process be revoked, annulled, and had for nothing and that he be restored to everything that he lost by occasion of the abovesaid false judgment, and he seeks also a writ of the lord king to warn the abovesaid Magdalene Clarke to be before the said lord king to hear the record and process abovesaid. And it is granted to him etc., whereby it is ordered to the sheriff of Kent that by prudent and lawful men of his bailiwick he should make known to the aforementioned Magdalene that she be before the lord king on the morrow of Holy Trinity wherever etc., to hear the abovesaid record and process if etc., and further etc. The same day is given to the aforementioned Francis Denwood etc.

At which day before the lord king at Westminster come both the abovesaid Francis Denwood by his abovesaid attorney and the abovesaid Magdalene Clarke by Ralph Radcliffe her attorney. And the abovesaid sheriff did not send the writ thereof. Thereon the abovesaid Francis as before says that in the abovesaid record and process and also in the rendering of the abovesaid judgment it was manifestly erred by alleging the abovesaid matters assigned above by him for errors, and he seeks that the abovesaid judgment on account of those errors and others being in the abovesaid record and process be revoked, annulled, and completely had for nothing, and that he be restored to everything that he lost by occasion of the abovesaid judgment etc., and that the abovesaid Magdalene rejoin to the abovesaid errors and that the court of the lord king here proceed to the examination both of the abovesaid record and of the abovesaid matters above assigned by him as errors.

         And the abovesaid Magdalene says that neither in the record and process abovesaid nor in the rendering of the abovesaid judgment [nothing further appears in the enrollment.]