Thomas Tarrant v. Robert Chaper/Chaser and Margaret his wife executrix of William Tarrant

     King's Bench error plaintiff's attorney: Richard Heywood

AALT images for Tarrant v. Chaser
0044, 0045

This action of error on a case of debt on a contract surprisingly took only 11 days to go from the initiation of the suit in Wilton to the issuance of the writ of error. The Wilton court did not decide the case on a demurrer but rather sent the case then to a jury on the debt itself. The errors assigned were (1) the lack of citation of the authority for the court and the lack of specification about the name of the judge of the court and (2) enforcement of a parole debt of a decedent against the decedent’s executor against the common law. There was no judgment noted after the enrollment of the record.

The lord king sent to the mayor and bailiffs of his town of Wilton 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 Wilton, 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 Tarrant and Robert Chaper and Margaret his wife executrix of the testament of William Tarrant concerning a debt of 64s11d that the same Thomas exacts from the aforementioned Robert and executrix as it is said manifest error has intervened to the grave damage of the same Robert and the executrix as from their complaint we have accepted, we, wanting that the error if any there was to be corrected in due manner and full and speedy justice to be done to the parties abovesaid in this part, order you that if judgment thereof has been rendered, then send the record and process of the plea abovesaid with all things touching them to us under your seals distinctly and openly, and this writ, so that we have them on the Octaves of St. Hilary wherever then we shall be in England so that, the record and process abovesaid having been inspected, we may do further thereof as of right and according to the law and custom of our realm of England should be done, and you the aforesaid mayor and bailiffs by security to be found before you to answer the said Thomas [as to] what pertains to him in this part if it happen that the abovesaid judgment is affirmed in the meantime supersede the execution of the same judgment completely. Tested me myself at Westminster November 14 in the 30^th year of our reign [November 14, 1538].

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

Pleas taken at Wilton before the mayor there on November 4 in the 30^th year of the reign of King Henry VIII [November 4, 1538].

Thomas Tarrant complains against Robert Chaser and Margaret his wife executrix of the testament of William Tarrant in a plea of debt of £3 4s11d that he unjustly detains from him etc., wherefore the same plaintiff in his proper person says that the said William Tarrant in his life on October 16 in the 29^th year of the reign of King Henry VIII [October 16, 1537] here within the jurisdiction of this court etc., borrowed from the said plaintiff £3 4s11d to be paid to the same plaintiff at the feast of Pentecost then next following, nevertheless the abovesaid William in his life and the said Robert Chaser and Margaret his wife executrix of the testament of the said William after the death of the same William did not pay the said £3 4s11d to the same plaintiff although often asked etc., and the said William and Margaret still refuse to pay the said £3 4s11d and unjustly detain them from the same plaintiff, wherefore the same plaintiff says that he is worse off and has damages to the value of 20s and thereof produces suit. Pledges to prosecute; John Doo and Richard Roo.

And the abovesaid defendants in their proper persons come and defend force and injury when etc., and say that the abovesaid plaintiff ought not to have or maintain his abovesaid action against them, because they say that they have no need nor by the law of the land are bound to answer on a simple contract in the manner and form pleaded, wherefore he seeks judgment if the abovesaid plaintiff ought to have or maintain his abovesaid action against them.

And the abovesaid plaintiff comes in his proper person and says that the declaration of the said plaintiff is sufficient in law to compel the same defendant to answer, and of this he puts himself on the countryside. And the abovesaid defendant similarly. Therefore he should make to come at November 14 etc., at the 9^th hour etc.

The abovesaid jurors come and say on their oath that the abovesaid defendant owes the aforementioned plaintiff the abovesaid £3 4s11d, and they assess the damages at 5s, and for his outlays and costs at 5s. Therefore it is considered by the court that the abovesaid plaintiff recover his abovesaid debt, and for his damages, outlays and costs taxed by the court at 5s, and let happen execution thereof etc.

Afterwards, scilt., on May 19 in this same term before the lord king at Westminster comes the abovesaid Robert Chaser and Margaret his wife by Richard Heywode their attorney, and they say that in the record and process abovesaid and also in the rendering of judgment abovesaid manifestly it is erred for this, viz.,

that in the abovesaid record no mention is made before which judge nor by what authority, viz., whether by prescription or by charter of the now lord king or of some of his progenitors the abovesaid court was held, as it appears above of record.

And further it is erred in the abovesaid record for this that although by the law of the land no complaint or action of debt of any testator deceased is maintainable against any executor or any executrix with an obligatory writing of the testator attesting that debt, nevertheless the abovesaid Thomas Tarrant prosecuted the abovesaid action of debt against the abovesaid Robert Chaser and Margaret his wife executrix of the testament of the abovesaid William Tarrant for the abovesaid debt of the abovesaid testator without any obligatory writing to maintain the abovesaid action, as above appears of record.

And the same Robert Chaser and Margaret seek the lord king’s writ to warn the abovesaid Thomas Tarrant that he be before the lord king on the Octaves of the Holy Trinity wherever etc., to hear the abovesaid record and process if etc., and further etc. The same day is given to the aforementioned Robert Chaser and Margaret etc.

At which day before the lord king at Westminster come the abovesaid Robert Chaser and Margaret by their attorney abovesaid, and the sheriff did not send the writ thereof. Therefore as formerly it is ordered to the sheriff that by prudent etc., he should make it to be known to the aforementioned Thomas Tarrant that he be before the lord king on the Octaves of St. Michael wherever etc., to hear the record and process abovesaid if etc., and further etc. The same day is given to the aforementioned Robert Chaser and Margaret etc.