CALENDAR OF THE EARLY MAYOR'S
COURT ROLLS OF THE CITY OF LONDON
ROLL A
Membrane 1 22 May 1298
Court of H. le Galeys, Mayor of London, Thursday
after the Feast of St Dunstan [19 May] A° 26 Edw.
[1298]
John de Holebourne, Walter de Walebroc and Ralph de
Dowegate, coopers of London, were attached at the instance
of Adam Snow, cooper, to answer the King for contempt, in
having sued the said Adam in the Court Christian (fn. 1) before
the Official of the Archdeacon of London in a plea of covenant
relating to certain ordinances of the Coopers, the cognizance
of which pertained to the King, to the King's damage-£100.
The defendants appeared and admitted that they had sued
Adam on a contract between him and John, a cooper of
London deceased, whose executors they were, and this they
did in the matter of the execution of John's will, and not in
other matters pertaining to the King, and thereon they put
themselves on their country (patria) (fn. 2) . The Serjeant was
ordered to summon a jury for the next Court. Afterwards
on Monday the Vigil of the Nativity of St John the Baptist
[24 June], the jury brought in a verdict that the defendants
impleaded Adam Snow in the Court Christian in a plea
pertaining to the King, against his Proclamation, and to the
damage of the said Adam half a mark. Judgment that the
defendants be committed to prison. Afterwards they came
and paid the damages by the hand of Thomas de Wynton,
Serjeant, and went quit.
John de Holebourne, Walter the cooper of St Nicholas Lane,
William Styward, John le Tanckardmaker, and other coopers
were summoned at the instance of Adam Snow, cooper, for
contempt of the King and Mayor, in that they made an
ordinance that no one should sell a hoop (circulus), formerly
sold at ½d and ¾d, for less than 1d, and so concerning other
hoops, under a penalty, which ordinance was against the
dignity of the Crown and to the grave damage of the Commonalty of the City-£100. The defendants denied that they
made this ordinance, and put themselves on their country.
Afterwards at a Court held on the Vigil of St John the Baptist
[24 June] a jury brought in a verdict that the coopers made
the ordinance, required oaths of obedience, and had observed
it then for a year and more. Judgment that they be committed to gaol (fn. 1) .
6 June 1298
An inquest was held on Friday after the Feast of Holy
Trinity [1 June] before John de Storteford, Sheriff of London,
by good and lawful men of the Wards of William le Mazerer (fn. 2) ,
Nicholas de Farndon (fn. 3) and Walter de Fynchyngfeld (fn. 4) , viz. by
Walter de Anbresbury, goldsmith, William Fitz Laurence,
Robert de Notingham, John de Croydon, William de Notingham, William de Chigewell, Walter de Frenigham, John de
Notingham, William de Asshendon, goldsmith, Henry de
Keyle, Nicholas le Brun, Gerard le Peleter, Walter le
Gardiner, Robert Gauge, William le Chaundeler, Robert de
Donmawe, Richard Daniel, Thomas de Chygewell, William
Alysaundre, Gylottus de Clopham, William de la Heylaund,
John le Geldere and William de Gloucestre, cobbler, as to
the malefactors and disturbers of the peace who came by
night to the house of Master Henry de Derby, clerk, in
Stanig Lane, and assaulted him and his men. The jury found
that Alan, apprentice of Richard de Chigewell, Geoffrey son
of Geoffrey Scot, Robert his brother, Thomas de Bromleye,
John, apprentice of Geoffrey Scot, Richard de London, and
Nicholas, journeyman of Joan de Dyrham, on the 4th June
after vespers came with swords, misericords and knives, and
attacked Master Henry and wounded his servant John Bryon,
breaking his door and threatening him, and that they set a
watch upon his house the night after, until they were driven
away by good men of the neighbourhood. Being asked where
they went afterwards, the jurors answered that they all fled
except the above Alan, who was arrested with his misericord
in his hand by the neighbours and attached by the Sheriff's
clerks, whereupon he and others threatened the lives and
limbs of those who had arrested them. Precept was issued
to the Sheriffs to attach the other malefactors.
6 June 1298
Friday before the Feast of St Barnabas the Apostle
[II June]
Richard Horn was summoned by Thomas de Wynthon,
the Serjeant of the Mayor, to answer Adam de Harewe in
a plea of trespass, but did not appear. He was summoned
again before the Mayor and Aldermen on Wednesday, and
told the Serjeant that he would not come. He afterwards
appeared and defended his contempt against the King and
the Mayor and Aldermen, admitting that he had received
the summons but that he had refused to come because the
Mayor had no cognizance of such trespasses except by default
of the Sheriffs. Afterwards on Thursday following, he admitted
the contempt and found mainpernors, viz. John de Mockyng
and James le Vineter, to submit to the judgment (quod stabit
judicio) of the Mayor and Aldermen when summoned (fn. 1) .
13 June 1298
Friday after the above Feast
Membr. 1 b
Richard Horn was summoned to answer Adam de Harewe
in a plea of trespass, wherein the latter complained that the
defendant seized his cart, with two quarters of sea-coal in it,
and had it driven to the house of Simon de St Martin, as
though he were a bailiff, to the damage of the plaintiff and
in contempt of the King. This cart, the plaintiff declared,
he had himself hired from William le Wallere, servant of
Hugh Curteys of Stibbenheth, to carry to his house in
Bredstrade two loads of coal which he had bought from
Geoffrey le Clerk of Northflete at Retheresgate (fn. 2) , and the
coal had been measured, and the Coal Meter duly paid. The
defendant admitted seizing the coal, but denied that he had
committed any trespass in so doing, and he put himself on
his country. Afterwards on Saturday, a jury of the venue of
Retheresgate brought in a verdict that the two quarters of
coal belonged to the defendant, who had bought them from
Stephen le Chaundeler at Retheresgate, and that the plaintiff
did not buy them from Geoffrey le Clerk, or hire the cart
from William Walere (sic), as he averred. Judgment that the
defendant go quit and the plaintiff be in mercy for a false
claim.
14 June 1298
Saturday after the above Feast
Recognizance by Richard Horn of a debt of 5 marks of
silver, payable to John de Donestaple, former Sheriff of
London.
John le Noreys was summoned to answer John de Donestaple and Adam de Halingebury, former Sheriffs of London,
in a plea of detinue of 20s in arrears of his farm of the
Wardenship of Billingesgate, which he had by lease from
them for £20 during their Shrievalty. The defendant acknowledged 14s in arrears, which he promised to pay within the
Quinzime (fn. 1) . Thereupon the plaintiffs acknowledged satisfaction
for the whole farm for the time when he was their bailiff.
18 June 1298
Wednesday after the above Feast
Information having been received that the Cordwainers and
Cobblers had been guilty of bad work in mixing cordwain (fn. 2)
with bazon (fn. 3) , and bazon with cowhide, Thomas de Derby,
Robert de Frowyk, Roger de Bristoll, Thomas de Norwych,
Thomas de Chygewell, Godwyn le Cordewaner, and John
de Lincoln, cordwainer, were sworn to make a scrutiny
throughout the City and bring the names of offenders, to
gether with fraudulent goods, into Court on the above day.
They presented on oath Roger de St Antolin, John de Becles,
Thomas de Londoneston, Richard Page, John Dissot, Alan
de Cycestre, Robert de Notingham, Ralph de St Edmunds,
Stephen de Strode, Henry de Farnham, John de St Albans,
John de Paris, Richard de Dounegate, William de Nornt
(Northampton?), Roger de Greenwich, Richard de Ely in the
Mercery, Adam de Gilingham, Robert de Assh, Roger de
Bredstrate, Peter de Sauecompe, William de Norht, Richard
de Crepelgate, John de Chobham, Richard de Hereford and
Adam de Guillingham as being accustomed to do this fraudulent work, and they produced in Court such work found
in their possession. The defendants admitted their offence.
Judgment was given that the goods be burnt.
They likewise presented that John de . . . . removed his work
and would not allow them to execute their office at his house,
that Daniel Chyltren and John de Renham broke the sequestration which they placed on three of their chests full of such
work, that Thomas le Coffer would not allow them to view
his work, and that Thomas de Lodelawe broke the sequestration which Thomas Juvenal, the Mayor's Serjeant, placed
on a certain chest, denied them a view of his work and carried
it away forcibly. The defendant Daniel pleaded that the seals
of the sequestration fell off his chests without his touching
them, and that he opened a chest and took away a pair of
boots (heuses). He was ordered to be kept in custody. The
defendant Thomas said he did not know that Thomas de
Derby and the others had orders to view. He was ordered
to receive judgment on his confession. He also pleaded that
when the Serjeant told him of their commission, he submitted, and removed nothing from his house afterwards, and
he put himself on his country. Thomas de Lodelawe admitted that he was not a freeman, but denied the other
offence and put himself on his country. John de Notingham
did likewise. Afterwards a jury found Thomas le Coffer and
the others not guilty, and they were acquitted. Precept was
issued to the Sheriff to bring Thomas de Lodelawe to hear
judgment on his confession that he was a foreigner engaged
in buying and selling.
Membr. 2 19 June 1298
Thursday before the Feast of the Nativity of St John
the Baptist [24 June]
Richard de Hacumby was attached to answer the Lady
Blaunche, Queen of Navarre, executrix of the will of her
husband Lord Edmund, brother of the present King, in a
plea that he render account of the time he was her late
husband's Receiver. She complained by her attorney John
de Dyicton that the defendant received on several occasions
the sum of £1500 and bound himself to render an account
thereof, and that on Friday seven days after Pentecost in the
new Abbey of St Clare near London he undertook to give an
account, but afterwards refused to do so, to her damage £100.
The defendant denied that he was receiver of any of the
moneys of Lord Edmund for which he ought to render account
to the plaintiff, or that he undertook to do so before anyone acting on her behalf, and he put himself on his country. A jury of
the venue of Allegate was summoned against the next Court
20 June 1298
Friday before the above Feast
Geoffrey de Staunton was attached to answer Adam de
Rokesle, Alderman, in a plea of trespass, wherein the latter
complained that he came upon the defendant in Thames
Street by the door of John de Storteford, Sheriff, fighting
with a drawn sword against certain unknown persons, and
as an official of the peace (tanquam minister pacis), he commanded him to surrender to the King's Peace, whereupon
the defendant took him by the throat and tore his clothes
and did other enormities in contempt of the King and the
whole City. The defendant admitted the offence. Judgment
was given that on the morrow he should come from the place
of the offence to Guildhall, with bare head and feet, and
clothed only in his tunic, in charge of two Serjeants, carrying
in his hand an axe (fn. 1) , and in the presence of the Mayor and
Aldermen, hold up the axe with the hand which he had laid
on the alderman, in order to expiate his offence to the
alderman as a Justice and Guardian of the vill (fn. 2) (tamquam
Justic0 & Custodi ville), or else receive judgment according
to the custom of the City in such cases. On the morrow the
defendant did as enjoined, and the plaintiff condoned the
offence so far as he was concerned. The defendant was
amerced for his contempt against the King, his pledges being
John le Clerk, Coroner of the City of London, and Eustace
Malebranche.
23 June 1298
Monday the Vigil of St John the Baptist [24 June]
Richard de Hacumby offered himself against the executors
of Lord Edmund, brother of the King, plaintiffs in a plea of
account, and they did not prosecute. He goes quit and the
executors and their pledges are in mercy.
Membr. 2 b
John Peyure (fn. 1) , who was confined in the prison of Crepelgate
at the suit of Thomas Box for a debt of £18 due on a Statute,
came before the Mayor and Aldermen and said he had paid
the amount and had acquittances from the above Thomas.
The latter was ordered to show cause why the petitioner
should not be released, and did not come. Precept was given
to the Sheriff to release him under security for his appearance
when necessary, and the security was reported as follows:-
Robert de Beregholte, Ralph le Marun, William May,
"peleter" (fn. 2) , Peter Berneval, Simon de Warewyk and others.
21 June 1298
Hospites Flandr' & Braund'
Saturday before the above Feast
The Commonalty of London complained of Alan de
Newebery that he, as a lodging-house keeper, and Keeper of
the Seld of Winchester and weigher of merchandise, acted
as a broker and weighed the goods of foreigners and citizens
both within and without the City, whereas no one ought so
to weigh except the sworn weigher of the King, and was
guilty of forestalling. They also complained that Mabel
Rolaund, John le Haut, Everard de Wylnotht, Margaret Skof,
William Marysone, Rabot de Warloys, Walter Coosyn and
John Symbelpany were foreign (fn. 3) lodging-house keepers and
allowed foreign merchants to trade with other foreign merchants in their houses in all kinds of merchandise, which the
defendants sent out of the City secretly by night, so that
the King lost his customs; and whereas foreign merchants
on departure left with them their unsold goods, which ought
to remain bound up until their return, the defendants sold
those goods for the benefit of the merchants both to citizens
and foreigners, against the Liberty of the City; and further
the defendants acted as brokers both for their own goods as
well as for the goods of foreign merchants, and thus obtained
the profits which the sworn brokers of the City ought to
receive; they also avowed foreign goods, which was against
their oath if they were freemen, and they sold their goods
retail by small weights and measures both to foreigners
and citizens. The defendants Alan de Newebery, William
Marysone, Rabot de Warloys and Walter Coosyn pleaded
that they were citizens and had done nothing which was not
lawful for citizens to do. The others admitted that they were
foreign lodging-house keepers; John Haut and John Shymbelpany confessed that they were not sworn brokers; Margaret
Skof admitted that she allowed foreigners to sell wine in
small measures in her house, and she and Shymbelpany also
admitted selling the goods of foreign merchants after their
departure and after quarantine to any one who would buy.
But all the foreigners pleaded that they did not know that
these things were forbidden in the City, and they denied
committing the other trespasses alleged against them, and
put themselves on their country. Afterwards a jury brought
in a verdict that Alan de Newebery weighed wool and other
goods of foreigners and citizens at Westminster with the
King's Trone both during and outside the Fairs against his
oath, that he was a broker between foreigners and retained
a small profit therefrom, thus defrauding the Sheriff of his
customs, that he forestalled goods whereby trade was disturbed and could not come to the City, that he gave lodging
to foreign merchants and allowed them to trade with each
other in his house and avowed their goods as his own, and
that at the Winchester Seld he acted as a broker between
foreigners and avowed as his own the kind of foreign goods
they use at the Winchester Seld. They found the other
defendants guilty of selling cloth in cords and sending it over
the water by night, whereby the Sheriffs were defrauded of
their customs, and of the other offences with which they
were charged.
Lumbard' & Provincial'
The Commonalty complained that Francis Rotelouth,
Colouth Ballard, Tote de Mounteclare, Reymund de la
Browe, James Betely and William Pynnett were also guilty
of the above offences. The defendant Francis admitted selling
retail, and Friscote (fn. 1) admitted that he had received foreigners,
but all denied the other offences. A jury brought in a verdict
that Francis and Colouth were guilty, that Totte de Monte
Claro and James Betely were foreign lodging-house keepers,
but at present did not sell retail, and that Reymund de la
Browe and William Pynnett were not lodging-house keepers
but lived at the house of Thomas Godard, and did no trade
now because of the war, though four years ago, when they
were lodging with William Servatt, they dealt with foreigners
in their lodgings.
Alemann
The Commonalty complained that John le Rous, Henry
Coupman, Teostardus le Estreys, Ecbryth de Werle, Ralph
de Atterderne, Henry Hoppe, Hardmot, and Hyldebraund,
merchants of Almaine, received foreigners and traded with
them, and although they were free of customs for goods
coming from their own parts in Almaine (fn. 2) , they had become
wholesale merchants (grossores) in "aver de poys," drapers and
woolmen, and had meddled with merchandise belonging to
those trades, without paying custom, and thus the Sheriffs
were defrauded of their customs. The defendants claimed
freedom from tolls on all goods of this kind, whencesoever
they came. A day was given them to argue their claim, and
a jury was summoned on the other charges against them.
Membr. 3
Ralph de Abbehale, draper of London, was attached to
answer John de Boclaund, knight, in a plea of trespass wherein
the latter complained that having bought cloth to the value
of 63s 4d from the defendant, he gave him certain pledges
for payment, viz. one gilded "coylter" (fn. 1) , three garments
(garnamenta), one hood of medley, two supertunics furred
with bys (fn. 2) , one coat and one hood furred with miniver (fn. 3) , six
ells and a quarter of medley cloth, and one serge, value £10,
and the defendant had neither delivered the cloth nor returned the pledges. The latter admitted the sale and pledges,
but pleaded an agreement that if the purchase price was not
paid on a certain date he should retain the pledges, and he
produced an unsealed deed to that effect. The plaintiff denied
any such agreement and declared that the deed was not of his
making, whereupon the defendant offered to produce at his
own risk witnesses, who were present in Tamys Strete at
the handing over of the pledges. A day was given on the
morrow.
Afterwards the parties came to an agreement on terms
that the defendant pay the plaintiff 20s.
Robert le Treyere, Richard Godesname, Robert de
Thorneye, John de Ware, "batour" (fn. 4) , Geoffrey de Cavendyssh, and Ralph Manyman, "ceynturer" (fn. 5) , were acquitted
of harbouring foreigners &c.
Membr. 3 b 5 July 1298
Saturday after the Feast of the Apostles Peter and
Paul [29 June]
Thomas Box agreed that his debtor, John Peper, should
be delivered from prison, on condition that the latter rendered
an account at Guildhall, of the moneys in dispute between
them.
Maykin le Chaundeler was acquitted of a charge of allowing
foreigners to trade in his Seld in Candelwykstrate, thus defrauding the Customs.
Membr. 4 12 July 1298
Saturday before the Feast of St Margaret [13 July]
Alan de Newebery appeared for judgment on the verdict
of a jury against him (fn. 1) . He was deprived of the freedom, but
subsequently was readmitted on paying 60s fine to the
Commonalty, on condition that if he were convicted again
he should lose the freedom for ever.
Mabel Rolaund was amerced for harbouring foreigners &c.,
and John Haut, Margaret Scof and John Shybelpani were
also amerced, and forbidden to act in future as unsworn
brokers between foreigners, under penalty of forfeiture of
all their goods.
The same day William Marysone and Walter Coosyn were
deprived of the freedom, and subsequently readmitted on payment of 40s and 26s 8d respectively. Colouthe Ballard, Reymund de la Browe and Walter Pynett, foreigners, were amerced.
Membr. 4 b 14 July 1298
Monday following
Robert Jordan was attached to answer William de Alegate
in a plea of trespass wherein the latter complained that when,
as an official of the City, he summoned the good and lawful
men of his bailiwick of Portsokne Ward to attend the Court
of Common Pleas (fn. 2) at Guildhall, the defendant assaulted him,
though he was doing what his Alderman commanded, and
wounded him with a knife in the left side of his back to the
depth of four inches-to his damage 100s. The defendant
pleaded that he came quietly into the street within Allegate,
when the plaintiff abused him and took him by the throat,
and if the plaintiff suffered any harm, it was own fault; and
he put himself on his country. A "good" jury was summoned for Wednesday.
On that day the parties came to an agreement by permission of the Court on terms that the defendant pay the
plaintiff 20s and be amerced, and the plaintiff quitclaim all
future actions. As regards the contempt against the King,
the defendant was mainprised by his brother Jordan de
Alegate and Philip Somer to come before the Mayor next day.
Margery, widow of Richard le Fethermongere and Nicholas
Hauteyn, executor of his will, came to an agreement with
John de Oxonford, who complained that they had sued him
in the Court Christian before the Official, in spite of the
fact that the Mayor had sent his Serjeant, John de Wynthon,
to forbid Master Stephen the Official to deal with the case.
The plaintiff quitclaimed the trespass and the Court condoned the amercements.
17 July 1298
Thursday before the Feast of St Margaret (fn. 1)
The Commonalty brought a plaint against Estmer le Bouler
of Candelwykstrate that he had bought and sold with
foreigners, harboured foreigners, and avowed their goods,
against his oath as a freeman. The defendant admitted
buying three bales from foreigners to the use of some merchants of Bristol, because he understood that they were free
of customs. He was fined half-a-mark on condition of his
future good conduct. He denied the charge of harbouring
and avowry, and put himself on a jury, which found him
not guilty.
Membr. 5
Arnald Vylote, a foreigner, was forbidden to sell wine
retail and to act as a lodging-house keeper for foreigners,
unless he received special permission.
Aveswote was attached to answer the Commonalty on
charges of being a foreign lodging-house keeper, buying
Ryns wine from foreigners and selling it retail to foreigners
and citizens, and allowing foreigners in her house to deal in
ginger, woad, cloth and other merchandise, which they sent
over the water by night, thus defrauding the Sheriffs of their
customs. The defendant admitting buying and selling the
wine, but pleaded a licence from Sir Ralph de Sandwych,
then Warden of London, and Elyas Russel, then Sheriff (fn. 2) ,
who gave her leave to do so because there was no Assize of
such wine at the time. She denied harbouring foreigners
except her brother and the son of her uncle, or that she
allowed buying and selling in her house. A jury of the venue
of Ebbegate brought in a verdict that she had bought and
sold wines, as she admitted, and that she harboured many
more foreigners than her brother and her uncle's son, but
whether they were kinsmen the jurors did not know; and also
that she sold foreign woad retail to foreigners in her house.
She was mainprised by Thomas Juvenal and John de
Wengrave to come up for judgment on Wednesday. As the
jurors afterwards repudiated their first verdict that she sold
woad retail, and acquitted her of this charge, judgment was
given that all the jurors be amerced for a false verdict, viz.
William de Paris and his fellows as appears on the panel.
19 July 1298
Saturday before the Feast of St Mary Magdalene
[22 July]
Clays Careman, merchant of Brabant, who was charged
with the above offences, was found guilty by a jury.
Membr. 5 b 23 July 1298
Wednesday after the above Feast
Thomas Box and John Peper (fn. 1) came to an agreement on
terms that the latter bind himself to pay 100s in satisfaction
of all claims against him, and that the former undertake to
acquit the Sheriff for delivering the above John from
Newegate.
John de Trillawe, parson of St Dunstan, Thomas de
Asshewell of St Anthony, and Roger de Appelby, deputed
by the Archbishop of Canterbury to execute the will of
Henry Box, and William Lambyn, Edward de Wycumbe,
parson of St Botulph, Margery widow of Thomas Cros, and
Thomas Cros her son, who were executors of Thomas Cros
senior, an executor of Henry Box, were attached to answer
John Beauflour in a plea of debt wherein he claimed from
them £8 12d, for 1200 boards for the King's galley at 18s
the hundred, a perch (una pertica) value 2s, and 30 boards
value 15s, for which the late Henry Box had paid 54s,
leaving the total above claimed in arrears. The defendants
pleaded that they were not bound to answer because the
plaintiff had produced no tally in Court. The plaintiff then
offered to verify his claim by his corporal oath (fn. 1) at the discretion of the Court, and to this the defendants agreed. On
the day given the plaintiff made his law successfully to the
effect that on the day of his death Henry Box owed the
plaintiff £8 12d, not one penny of which had been paid.
Judgment was given that the plaintiff recover the amount
from Henry's goods and chattels. Afterwards on his own
behalf and that of the executors, the plaintiff presented the
money to the purposes of London Bridge, and also, as a
mark of charity, entered into a recognizance to pay the sum
of 40s to the same.
30 July 1298
Wednesday after the Feast of St James the Apostle
[25 July]
Cristina de Gravesende was attached to answer Richard le
Peleter in a plea of trespass, wherein he complained that when
he went with another of the Mayor's Serjeants to summon
the defendant and other common prostitutes living in the
City to appear before the Mayor and Aldermen at the
Guildhall, she and other unknown persons assaulted him and
struck him on the lip. The defendant denied the charge and
put herself on her country. Afterwards a jury of Garscherch
brought in a verdict that the defendant did not beat the
plaintiff, but was a party to an attack made on him by a certain
Robert de Bonevil her paramour (specialis). Judgment for
40d damages taxed by the jury, and that Cristina be taken
into custody till the damages be paid. A precept to take
the above Robert was issued.
Membr. 6 9 Aug. 1298
Saturday the Vigil of St Laurence [10 Aug.]
Geoffrey de Taleworth was attached to answer John de
Northon in a plea of trespass wherein the latter complained
that the defendant attacked and beat him in the presence of
the Mayor and Aldermen, when he was attending Guildhall,
on business relating to certain trespasses done against him,
in order to receive the judgment of right adjudged to him.
The defendant denied that he was guilty of the trespass.
A jury was summoned forthwith of good and discreet men
then present, and came on the same day, consisting of William
de Trimilingham, Roger de Wytham and others on the panel,
who gave a verdict that the defendant was guilty. Judgment
that he be committed to prison and pay the plaintiff 5s
damages taxed by the jury. The defendant paid this sum
on the Monday, and on Thursday half a mark for the trespass
done against the King.
Richard de Laufare and Isabella his wife, executors of the
will of Edith de Warners, brought a plaint against John de
Storteford, Sheriff, of an error in the latter's Court with
regard to the process and giving of judgment in an action
between the plaintiffs and Henry Fitz Ancher, who was sued
for 40 quarters of corn and 16 quarters of oats in arrear of an
annual rent due to the plaintiffs. The Sheriff was summoned
to appear on the morrow with the record and process to
answer the plaintiffs in the plea of error, together with the
above Henry Fitz Ancher.
11 Aug. 1298
Monday the morrow of the above Feast
Richard Hauteyn in mercy for default against Stephen de
Coventre.
The above Richard was attached to answer Stephen de
Coventre in a plea of trespass wherein the latter complained
that as he was walking peacefully in Chepe on Friday before
the Feast of St Margaret [13 July], the defendant assaulted
him. The latter denied the assault and said that if the
plaintiff received any harm it was due to his own insults,
and he demanded an inquest thereon.
Afterwards a jury of Chepe brought in a verdict that the
defendant was sitting quietly on a seat in the shop of Ralph
Godchep, when the plaintiff came in and would have beaten
him, if a rescue had not been made by Geoffrey le Clerk and
Richard Beaufiz, so that if the plaintiff received any hurt, it
was his own fault. Judgment against the plaintiff, who was
put in mercy for his false plaint.
The Commonalty complained of John le Launterner and
Alice his wife in a plea of trespass, to the effect that the
defendants dwelt in the city as foreigners and bought and
sold merchandise, viz. lanterns, glass cups and mirrors, both
to foreigners and citizens, to the damage of the City &c. 100s.
The defendants admitted that they were foreigners, but
denied such selling, and put themselves on a jury of the
venue of St Augustine, where they dwelt. Afterwards on
Wednesday the jury gave a verdict that the defendants were
foreigners, and that they came into the City with their merchandise, which they offered for sale to the citizens, paying
custom to the King according to the usage of the City, and
that they offered both to foreigners and citizens what remained of their goods. Being asked if they thereby deprived
the King of customs, the jury answered "No." Judgment
was respited.
Membr. 6 b 12 Aug. 1298
Tuesday before the Assumption of the Blessed Mary
[15 Aug.]
John de Holebourne, cooper, and other coopers paid fines,
varying from 5s to 6d for trespass against the King (fn. 1) .
Richard Horn came and pledged to the Mayor and Aldermen 20 casks of wine for a trespass done against them.
Afterwards the latter, by special favour, condoned ten of the
above twenty casks under the following arrangement:-that
of the ten casks nine should be payable if the above Richard
be convicted in future of ill-behaviour against the Mayor
and Aldermen. He was fined 40s for his trespass against the
King, to be paid on the following Thursday.
13 Aug. 1298
Wednesday before the above Feast
Mabel, relict of John de Lodelawe, demanded against John
Gamel a debt of £163 4s. She had already prosecuted before
the Mayor and Aldermen an attachment of 30 sacks of wool,
belonging to the defendant, and sealed with his seal, which
were found in the City of London in the hand and seisin of
Robert Poleyn, the journeyman and trader of the defendant (fn. 1) ,
and had given the Sheriff security that she would prosecute
her claim. Thereupon the Mayor had ordered the Sheriff to
attach all wool and other merchandise belonging to the defendant in whosesoever hands they might be, in accordance
with the custom of the City, and to report thereon to the
Court. This was done, and on the above date Robert Poleyn
appeared and claimed the wool, on the ground that he had
bought it from the defendant at Shrewsbury and had paid
for it, and that it was thus his own, and he said further that
the defendant, on the day of the plaint being levied in the
Mayor's Court and the attachment made, had no property
in the wool, and if it had been lost by land or sea, he alone
would have suffered, and he offered to make whatever proof
was required of him as a foreigner. The plaintiff pleaded
that this testimony ought not to be accepted, because the
defendant had caused the wool to be taken from Shrewsbury
to London at his own expense, under his own seal and at
his own risk in the custody of Robert, who was his journeyman
and trader, and she demanded judgment whether Robert
could make a just claim to the wool. The latter said that the
wool had been carried to London at his (Robert's) expense
and risk. Judgment was given that Robert make his proof,
himself the third hand. He appeared on the day assigned
and failed in his "law," admitting that he had only paid for
£10 worth of the wool, and was under bond to John for the
rest, and he altered his claim accordingly. The Sheriff was
ordered to hold the attachment of the 30 sacks until the
defendant, John Gamel, should be willing to submit himself
to justice to answer the plaintiff for the above debt.
Membr. 7 16 Oct. 1298
Thursday before the Feast of St Luke [18 Oct.]
John de Sabriteswrth, "poleter," complained that Richer
de Refham, Sheriff, in the market against Cordewanerestrate (fn. 1)
took from him and unjustly detained four geese. The Sheriff
defended the seizure on the ground that the plaintiff had
bought the geese in order to sell them to the regrators against
the proclamation of the City. The plaintiff denied that he
bought them for this purpose. Judgment was given that he
wage his law (fn. 2) for the Quinzime. Memorandum that the
plaintiff was also adjudged to make his law for contempt
alleged against him by the Sheriff. He was afterwards pardoned by the Mayor.
7 Nov. 1298
Friday before the Feast of St Martin [11 Nov.]
Roger de Bosco, beadle of Nicholas of Farndon without,
John de Burgo, beadle of the same Nicholas of Farndon
within, John beadle of William le Mazerer, and John le Clerk
of Bredstrate appeared before the Mayor and were sworn
to answer separately by what warrant they summoned the
honest men of their Wards to the Church of the Brothers of
the Sack (fn. 3) on the morrow of All Souls, and whether they
themselves were there. The above Roger said that he was
present, and at the instance of certain neighbours unnamed
he had summoned Robert de Romeseye, John Gerlaund,
Benedict le Sporier and William Ediman, but did not know
the occasion thereof, except that the said men of the Ward
drew up a petition to the Mayor concerning themselves.
John de Burgo admitted that he was present and at the
instance of Roger Hosebond and Roger de Asshendon he
had summoned several brewers of his Ward but did not know
the occasion thereof. John the beadle of William le Mazerer
admitted the same, and said that the summons was at the
instance of Peter de Hungrie. John le Clerk said that at the
instance of John de Burgo he had summoned several holders
of brew-houses viz. Nicholas le Convers, Richard le Barber,
William le Fruter and Stephen de Haregwe. Richard le
Barber of Douuegate did not appear and was summoned for
Wednesday after the Feast of St Martin. The same day was
given to the others.
14 Nov. 1298
Friday after the above Feast
Gocelin le Serjant and Thomas ate Welle, Serjeants of
Richer de Refham, Sheriff, were summoned to answer Peter
de Ratlesdene, baker, in a plea of trespass wherein he complained that the defendants came to his house near Allegate
and, on behalf of the Sheriff, attached his paste (pastum), which
was worked and ready for baking, and carried it away from
his house against his will, the value thereof being 10s for
four quarters of corn. The defendants admitted going to the
plaintiff's house, but denied that they arrested or attached
his bread to hinder his profiting thereby. Richer the Sheriff
also appeared and said that by virtue of his office he sent his
Serjeants, on the ground that the plaintiff sold to regrators,
to carry the bread to the Guyhald to be weighed and judged
by the Aldermen as to whether it was of good weight, and
that he did not take it or carry it away (so as to deprive him
of it). The plaintiff pleaded that he did not sell his bread
to regrators, except as other bakers did, and put himself on
his country. Richer and the Serjeants did the same.
Afterwards an agreement was made, on terms that Peter
released and quitclaimed all actions against the defendants
and Richer, receiving 10s payable within the Quinzime. The
defendants were amerced by the Court.
Membr. 7 b 26 Nov. 1298
Wednesday before the Feast of St Andrew the Apostle
[30 Nov.] A° 27 Edw. [1298]
William de Hereford, armourer, was attached to answer
Thomas Romeyn and Juliana his wife in a plea of trespass,
wherein they complained that the defendant came to Thomas's
house in the Parish of St Mary Aldremarycherche at Vespers
and used abusive words against Juliana, calling her false and
double-tongued. When she ordered him to leave the house,
he refused and took her by the bosom and shouted for the
master (post dominum suum). Thereupon Thomas left his
chamber and demanded the defendant's name and attached
him for breaking the peace, and on this William violently
ejected him and used opprobrious words. The latter now
defended the force and tort, but subsequently admitted the
accusation and put himself on the mercy of the Court.
Damages were taxed by a jury at 20 marks. Judgment was
given for that amount and the defendant was committed to
prison. Afterwards he found pledges for keeping the peace
viz. John de Basing, John de Hereford, Manekin le Armurer,
Roger Brune, Adam le . . . ., Laurence Flambard, Peter de
Waltham, John le Blound son of Walter, Adam le Fourbeur,
William Bray, John de Rippelawe, Walter Hauteyn of Lincoln,
Richard de Meldebourne, William de Gaytone and Richard
Hautein, for the payment of the 20 marks damages in case
of a second offence.