Andrew Calton v. William Adams, court of king’s bench, 1607

This qui tam debt action is based on the perjury statute of 5 Elizabeth and concerned the sworn testimony given in a case of indebitatus assumpsit. That case of indebitatus assumpsit concerned a marriage between the respective natural children of two fathers. The father of the bridge contributed to the couple the reversion of his lands after he died (but thus they would have nothing at present); the father of the groom agreed to house the couple and let them work with him in his trade of tanning. The father of the groom further promised that if he made them live apart from him or separated them from his tanning operation, he would provide them with 300 pounds within three years. After only about six weeks of living together, he made them leave.

They then took up residence with the father of the bride but without any useful occupation, and the son more than three years later died leaving his wife and two children. The father of the groom had already defaulted on his promise for 300 pounds at that time, but any incentive he might have had to perform would have vanished after the death of his son, unless, of course, the relationship between the father and the son was itself at issue. Still, he was unwilling to provide for his daughter-in-law and grandchildren from his natural son. The jury, considering sworn testimony, awarded the full 300 pounds.

The father of the deceased groom then went after the witness, seeking the 20 pound forfeiture provided by the statute for any perjury. The jury in the perjury case, however, was never summoned. One might suspect, although there is no documentation, that the attack on the witness served as the leverage by which the father of the groom negotiated a lower payment on his promise than had been awarded by the indebitatus assumpsit jury, and a lower payment might have been acceptable to the father of the bride because the husband was now dead and to provide some amicable relationship between the families..

[The case Andrew Calton v. William Addams now continues]

London. Memorandum that formerly, scilt., in the term of St. Hilary last past before the lord king at Westminster came Andrew Calton who both for the lord king and for himself follows, by Reginald Basse his attorney and proffers here in the court of the said lord king then there his certain bill against William Addams of Little Parndon in Essex yeoman in custody of the marshal etc., concerning a plea of debt, and there are pledges of prosecution, scilt., John Doo and Richard Roo, which certain bill follows in these words:

[recitation of the perjury statute of 5 Elizabeth providing a qui tam action for perjury]

London. Andrew Calton who both for the lord king and for himself follows complains of William Addams of Little Parndon in Essex yeoman in custody of the marshal of the marshalsea of the lord king being before the king himself concerning a plea that he render to the same lord king and to the aforementioned Andrew 20 pounds which he owes to the same lord king and to the aforementioned Andrew and unjustly detains, for this, viz., that, whereas in a statute enacted and established in the parliament of the Lady Elizabeth late queen of England held at Westminster in Middlesex on January 12 in the fifth year of her reign among other things by that lady queen from the assent of the lords spiritual and temporal and the community in the same parliament then assembled and by the authority of them it was provided that if any person or persons after April 10 then next following either by subornation, illicit procurement, sinister persuasion, or through the medium of some other or by their own act by assent or agreement voluntarily and corruptly should commit any voluntary perjury by his or their deposition in any court of the said lady queen, her heirs or successors of chancery, star chamber, Whitehall, or elsewhere within any of the lordships of England or Wales or the marches of the same where any person or persons have or henceforth shall have authority by virtue of a commission of the said late lady queen, her heirs or successors of letters patent or writ to hold pleas of land or to examine, hear, and determine any title of lands or any matter or witnesses concerning title, right, or interest of any lands, tenements, or hereditaments, or in any court of record of the said late lady queen, her heirs or successors or in any lete, view of frankpledge, or royal court (in English, lawdaye), court of the ancient demesne, court of the hundred, court baron, or stannary court or courts in Devonshire and Cornwall or, being examined at perpetual memory of a thing, that then each person or person thus offending and being thereof duly convicted or attainted by the laws of this realm for his or their said offence, shall lose and forfeit 20 pounds and have imprisonment for the space of 6 months without bail or mainperning, and that the oath of such a person or persons thus offending thenceforth will not be received in any court of record within this realm of England or of Wales or the marches of the same until the judgment rendered against such person or such persons should be reversed by attaint or otherwise, and that on each such reversal the party aggrieved shall recover his damages against all and each such person and all such persons as procured the abovesaid judgment thus reversed, to be rendered against them or some of them by his or their action or actions to be prosecuted on such his case or their case according to the course of the common law of this realm, and if it happen that the same offender or offenders thus offending not have any goods or chattels to the value of 20 pounds, that then he or they will be placed on the pillory in some merchant place within the city or borough where the same offence shall have been committed, by the sheriff or his ministers if it happen to be outside any city or corporate town, and if it happen to have been within any city or corporate town then by the chief officer or officers of such city or corporate town or by his or their ministers and there to have both their ears affixed with nails and thenceforth to be discredited and disabled in perpetuity to be sworn in any abovesaid court of record whatsoever until the judgment should be reversed; and thenceforth to recover their damages in mode and form abovesaid, one half to such person or such persons as shall have been aggrieved, worse off, or molested by reason of any such offence or offences above mentioned who shall want to prosecute for the same by action of debt, bill, plaint, information, or otherwise in any court of record of the said late lady queen, her heirs or successors, in which no wager of law, essoin, protection or injunction shall be allocated, as in the same statute among other things it is more fully clear,

ACCOUNT OF PRIOR ACTION BEGINS

[in the previous case of indebitatus assumpsit Richard Marryon v. Andrew Calton concerning a marriage negotiation between them about a marriage planned between their respective natural children Joan Marryon and Edward Calton]

and whereas also after the editing of that statute, scilt., in Trinity term in the third year of the reign of the lord king now before the lord king himself here at Westminster abovesaid a certain Richard Marryon by John Tanner his attorney came and appeared and then and there in the court of the same lord king proffered his certain bill against the aforementioned Andrew Calton in custody of the marshal of the marshalsea of the same lord king being before the king himself then concerning a plea of trespass on the case, and there were pledges for prosecution, scilt., John Doo and Richard Roo, by which certain bill the same Richard Marryon complained concerning the aforementioned Andrew Calton for this, viz., that whereas the abovesaid Andrew on January 20 in the thirty-ninth year of the reign of the Lady Elizabeth late queen of England at London abovesaid, viz., in the parish of the Blessed Virgin of the Arches in the ward of Cheap, London, in consideration of a certain marriage between a certain Edward Calton then natural son of that Andrew and Joan Marryon then being similarly the natural daughter of that Richard then in the future to be had and solemnized,

[Marryon promised to convey his lands so that the couple would receive a reversion in fee tail in his lands that would become possessory on his death; Calton promised that the couple would live with him and work with him in tannery and that if he made them leave then he would give them 300 pounds]

and in consideration that the abovesaid Richard at the special instance and request of that Andrew would want to convey and assure to the work and use of the aforementioned Edward and Joan and the heirs of those Edward and Joan legitimately procreated between them the reversion of a certain messuage and lands then of that Richard lying and being at Collens Crosse in the parish of Stortford in Hertfordshire when it should accrue by and after the death of the abovesaid Richard, undertook on himself and then and there faithfully promised to the aforementioned Richard that the abovesaid Edward and Joan immediately after the abovesaid marriage between the same Edward and Joan had and solemnized as set out above for the better maintenance and provision to be had for the same Edward and Joan they would have their habitations together with him the aforementioned Andrew in the then mancional house of that Andrew in Stortford abovesaid, and similarly would have the use and benefit of all the stock and trade of tanning (in English, the stocke and trade of tannynge) that that same Andrew then used for a certain small rent to be paid to the same Andrew by the same Edward therefrom during the pleasure of that Andrew, and further that if the abovesaid Andrew at any time then thenceforth after the abovesaid marriage solemnized should displace (in English, displace) the same Edward and Joan from their habitations abovesaid with that Andrew and from the use and benefit of their stock and trade of tanning abovesaid, that then the same Andrew within three years then next following after the said displacement of the abovesaid Edward and Joan from their abovesaid habitations with that Andrew and from the use and benefit of the stock and trade of tanner of that Andrew he from the goods and money of that Andrew would make the same Edward well worth (in English, well worthe) 300 pounds in coined money,

[Richard Marryon, relying on Calton’s promise, conveyed his land in accord with his promise]

and the same Richard in fact said that he the same Richard, relying on the promise and undertaking of that Andrew, afterwards, scilt., on January 24 in the thirty-ninth year abovesaid at Stortford abovesaid by his certain indented writing enfeoffed a certain William Addams of Little Parndon in Essex yeoman and Thomas Barnard of Stortford abovesaid by name of all that messuage or tenement in which the abovesaid Richard then inhabited with all houses, edifices, and barns, apple orchards, and gardens looking or pertaining to the same messuage containing by estimate 3 acres or more or less situated, lying, and being at Collens Cross in the parish of Stortford abovesaid, and also all and singular pieces and crofts of land and meadow looking to the same tenement or occupied then in the tenure of the aforementioned Richard containing by estimate in all 11 acres or more or less, particularly containing, viz., one adjacent croft called Blossoms containing by estimate one and a half acres, another croft called Peake’s Crofte containing by estimate one acre lying near Birchanger Want, another croft or piece of land called Kingebridge Hooke with the meadows adjacent containing at least by estimate three and a half acres and another croft of land called Kyngebridge Crofte containing by estimate two acres abutting on the royal road leading from Stanstead Montfitchett to Hockerell on the east side, to have and to hold the abovesaid messuage and other tenements abovesaid to William Addams and Thomas Barnard and their heirs and assigns to the sole and proper use of the aforementioned Richard Marryon for the term of his natural life and after the death of the aforementioned Richard then to the sole work and use of the abovesaid Edward Calton and of the said Joan the daughter of the aforementioned Richard and the heirs of the body of the same Edward and Joan, and for default of such heirs to remain thereof to the work and use of the heirs and assigns surviving of the same Edward and Joan in perpetuity,

[Edward Calton and Joan Marryon accordingly got married]

and the same Richard further said that afterwards, scilt., on February 20 in the thirty-ninth year abovesaid, the abovesaid marriage was had and solemnized between the same Edward and Joan according to the ecclesiastical laws of this realm of England, viz., at London abovesaid in the parish and ward abovesaid,

          [the couple lived with Andrew Calton only about 6 weeks before Calton made them leave]

and the same Richard similarly said that the abovesaid Edward and Joan immediately after the marriage between the same Edward and Joan as set forth above had and solemnized, scilt., on February 20 in the thirty-ninth year abovesaid, had their habitation together with him the aforementioned Andrew in the abovesaid then mancional house of that Andrew in Stortford abovesaid, and similarly then and there they had the use and benefit of the abovesaid stock and trade of tanning (in English, the stocke and trade of tannynge) which he the same Andrew then used, until March 30 in the abovesaid thirty-ninth year, at which certain March 30 in the abovesaid thirty-ninth year at Stortford abovesaid the abovesaid Andrew displaced (in English, did displace) the same Edward and Joan from their habitations and from the use and benefit of the stock and trade of tanning of that Andrew abovesaid,

[and Andrew Calton then did not perform his promise of giving them 300 pounds]

nevertheless, the abovesaid Andrew, not at all caring for his promise and undertaking [but] scheming and fraudulently intending hotly and craftily to defraud the same Richard and completely to burden the same Richard with the burden of maintaining and sustaining the abovesaid Joan, the same Andrew from his own goods and money of that Andrew within three years next following after the abovesaid displacement of the same Edward and Joan from their habitations together with that Andrew in the abovesaid messuage of that Andrew in Stortford abovesaid and from the abovesaid stock and trade of tanning of that Andrew abovesaid, although often asked etc., did not make the same Edward well worth 300 pounds in coined money according to the promise and undertaking of that Andrew made in that part,

          [and Edward Calton thereafter died, leaving his wife and two children destitute, for all of whom Richard Marryon then had to and would have to provide]

and the same Richard further said that in default of the abovesaid performance in performing the promise of that Andrew on his part in that part as set out above, the abovesaid Edward Calton afterwards, scilt., on October 30 in the forty-forth year of the reign of the said late lady queen, then having two children from the same Joan then his wife legitimately procreated and then not having anything whereby he could live in a reasonable and honest mode at London, viz., in the parish and ward abovesaid, he died, then leaving the abovesaid Joan his wife together with their two children of no value either in goods, lands, or chattels, whereby the abovesaid Richard then being the natural father of the same Joan always after the death of the abovesaid Edward until then was burdenable with the maintenance and sustenance of that Joan and her children abovesaid, and also by the many years then to come was like to be burdened, wherefore he says that he is worse off and has damages to the value of 300 pounds, and thereof he produces suit etc.

          [Andrew Calton denied the undertaking in mode and form as alleged, and a jury was summoned and appeared at the guildhall of London]

And afterwards, scilt., on Wednesday next after the quindene of Easter then next following until which day the abovesaid Andrew had licence to emparl to that bill and then to respond etc., before the lord king at Westminster abovesaid came both the abovesaid Richard by his abovesaid attorney and the abovesaid Andrew by John Raye his attorney, and the same Andrew defends force and injury when etc., and said that he did not undertake on himself in the mode and form as the abovesaid Richard above against him complained, and of this he puts himself on the countryside. And the abovesaid Richard similarly etc. Therefore let come thereof a jury before the lord king at Westminster on the Friday next after the morrow of Holy Trinity and who neither etc., to recognize etc., because both etc. The same day was given to the abovesaid parties there etc. From which day, the abovesaid jurors between the abovesaid parties concerning the abovesaid plea, by juries put in respite between them before the said lord king at Westminster abovesaid until the Tuesday next after the third week of Holy Trinity then next following unless the beloved and faithful councillor of the same lord king John Popham knight chief justice of the said lord king assigned to hold the pleas in the court of that lord king before the king himself at the guildhall of the city of London abovesaid comes before that time on the Monday next after the third week of Holy Trinity by the form of the statute etc., for default of jurors etc. And let the sheriff have the bodies etc. The same day was given to the parties abovesaid there etc. At which certain Monday next after the third week of Holy Trinity at the guildhall of the city of London abovesaid before the aforementioned John Popham knight chief justice of the said lord king assigned to hold the pleas in the court of that lord king before the king himself by form of the statute etc., came both the same Richard Marryen and the abovesaid Andrew Calton who both etc., by their attorneys abovesaid, and the jurors of that jury then exacted, viz., William Chapman, Thomas Breese, John Cason, Libias Swanne, John Pasmore, Richard Calverley, Thomas Robinson, William Clarke, William Lawton, Andrew Bedwell, William Janson, and Thomas Brett came and were sworn in that jury, who were elected, tried, and sworn to tell the truth concerning the premises,

[Marryon produced as witness William Addams, who had been one of this feoffees to uses in the conveyance; Addams under oath recounted the undertakings as Marryon had pleaded; the jury thus awarded Marryon the 300 pounds that had been promised, plus costs]

whereon the abovesaid Richard Marryon to prove that the abovesaid Andrew Calton undertook on himself in the mode and form as the same Richard above complained against him, afterwards, scilt., on the said Monday next after the third week of Holy Trinity at the guildhall of the city of London abovesaid before the aforementioned John Popham knight chief justice of the said lord king assigned to hold the pleas in the court of that lord king before himself proffered the abovesaid William Addams now defendant to testify and prove the abovesaid undertaking and promise, which certain William Addams, not at all pondering the abovesaid statute nor fearing otherwise the penalty contained in the same after the abovesaid April 10 next after the editing of the abovesaid act, scilt., on the Monday next after the third week of Holy Trinity in the abovesaid fourth year at the guildhall abovesaid before the aforementioned John Popham knight chief justice of the said lord king assigned to hold the pleas in the court of that lord king before himself by his own proper act, assent, and agreement, voluntarily, corruptly, and falsely to the jurors of the abovesaid jury empaneled then and there appearing before the aforementioned John Popham as well burdened and sworn on his oath to tell the truth of the issue joined between the abovesaid Richard Marryon and the aforementioned Andrew Calton of the same matter then and there deposed and gave in evidence and swore that the abovesaid Andrew Calton in consideration of the abovesaid marriage between the abovesaid Edward Calton and Joan Marryon to be had and solemnized and in consideration that the abovesaid Richard Marryon at the instance and request of that Andrew would want to convey and assure then and there and [there] the reversion abovesaid of the abovesaid messuage and lands of Richard Marryon lying and being at Collens Crosse abovesaid when it happen by and after the death of the abovesaid Richard to the aforementioned Edward Calton and Joan and the heirs of the bodies of those Edward and Joan legitimately procreated between them, undertook on himself and faithfully promised to the aforementioned Richard Marryon that the abovesaid Edward Calton and Joan immediately after the marriage between the same Edward and Joan had and solemnized as set out above for the better maintenance and provision to be had for the same Edward and Joan, that they would have their habitations together with him the aforementioned Andrew in the abovesaid mancional house of that Andrew in Stortford abovesaid and similarly would have the use and benefit of all the stock and trade of tanning of that Andrew (in English, all the stock & trade of tannynge) which that same Andrew then used for a certain small rent to be paid to the same Andrew by the same Edward therefor during the pleasure of that Andrew, and lastly that (if) the abovesaid Andrew Calton at any time after the abovesaid marriage solemnized and had between the abovesaid Edward and Joan displaced (in English, should displace) the same Edward and Joan from their habitations abovesaid with that Andrew and from the use and benefit of the stock and trade of tannery abovesaid that then the same Andrew within three years then next following after the abovesaid displacement of Edward and Joan from their habitations abovesaid with that Andrew and from the abovesaid use and benefit of the stock and trade of tanning of that Andrew he would make from his own goods and money of that Andrew the same Edward well worth (in English, well worthe) 300 pounds in coined money, whereas in truth no such promise was made by the abovesaid Andrew Calton before the abovesaid marriage between the aforementioned Edward and Joan solemnized or on the conveyance of the messuage and land abovesaid as the abovesaid William to the aforementioned jurors in the form abovesaid deposed on his oath and gave in evidence and swore, whereby the same Richard on the said Monday next after the third week of Holy Trinity in the abovesaid year at the guildhall of the city of London abovesaid before the aforementioned John Popham knight chief justice of the said lord king assigned to hold pleas in the court of that lord king before the king himself voluntarily and corruptly committed perjury voluntarily, by reason of which false and corrupt deposition of the abovesaid William Addams abovesaid in the form abovesaid made, the abovesaid jury gave their verdict against the abovesaid Andrew Calton now plaintiff and assessed damages of the abovesaid Richard Marryon by occasion of the non-performance of the promise and undertaking abovesaid of the abovesaid Andrew Calton beyond his outlays and costs by him on his suit in the part put out at 300 pounds and for those outlays and costs at 53 shillings 4 pence, to the grave damage of that Andrew,

ACCOUNT OF PRIOR ACTION ENDS

[Calton now alleges that Addams has thus committed perjury and under the statute should forfeit 20 pounds, and he is worth at least 20 pounds]

whereby action accrues to the same Andrew Calton being the party aggrieved who both etc., to exact and have from the abovesaid William Addams for the abovesaid lord king then and for himself the abovesaid 20 pounds for the abovesaid perjury by the same William in the abovesaid form voluntarily and corruptly committed, nevertheless, the same William although often asked etc., has still not rendered the abovesaid twenty pounds to the abovesaid lord king and to the same Andrew Calton who both etc., but refused to render them to the same lord king and to the same Andrew who both etc., to this time and still refuses, wherefore he says that he is worse off and has damages to the value of 40 pounds, and thereof he produces suit etc., with this that the same Andrew wants to verify that the abovesaid William Addams at the time of the abovesaid perjury committed and always thence to this time had goods and chattels to the value of 20 pounds, viz., at London abovesaid in the parish and ward abovesaid.

[William Adams pleads that he does not owe; a jury is summoned; no verdict is recorded]

And now at this day scilt., Friday after the morrow of Holy Trinity this same term until which day the abovesaid William Addams had licence to emparl to this bill and then to respond etc., before the lord king at Westminster come both the abovesaid Andrew Calton who both etc., by his abovesaid attorney and the abovesaid William Addams by Simon Spatchurst his attorney, and the same William defends force and injury when etc., and says that he does not owe to the aforementioned lord king and to the aforementioned Andrew who both etc., the abovesaid twenty pounds in the mode and form [as] the abovesaid Andrew above complains against him. And of this he puts himself on the countryside. And the abovesaid Andrew who both etc., similarly etc. Therefore let come thereof a jury before the lord king at Westminster on the Saturday next after the third week of Holy Trinity, and who neither etc., to recognize etc., because both etc. The same day is given to the parties abovesaid there etc.