Pas. 7 Car.
Weston Kt. & al. versus Pargiter Arm.
The Defendant was charged with the Publication of an Instrument, termed an Innotescimus, contrived, and obtained by undue practice, bearing Test in February, 16 Eliz. under the Great Seal, containing an Indenture pretended to be dated 9 Eliz. and made between Jo. Vaughan Esquire, Dame Ann Knevet, and Thomas Knevet on the one part, and Edward, then Lord Windsor, on the other part, of the Mannor of Greatworth in Northamptonshire, and other Lands, and for justifying that Innotescimus to be a true and lawful Instrument, and a true Testimony of the Deed contained therein; but upon the hearing the Defendant was cleared a Paena, & Culpa; yet for that it did appear that this Instrument was not Inroll'd in the Rolls, as it ought to have been; and for that this Instrument differs in Form from all other like Instruments of Innotescimus, the Deed exemplified being testified in this manner: Cujus Tenor, ut dicitur, sequitur in haec verba; the words ut dicitur, in all other such Instruments preceding the words, Cujus Tenor, so as this doth not import any certain Affirmation, or Testimony of the Deed to be then seen, but
is rather a Testimony of a Report only of such a Deed; and for that no Warrant can be found, or is produced from the Lord Chancellor, Lord Keeper, or Master of the Rolls, for the passing thereof, nor any Account made for the same in the Hanaper; the Court adjudged the Innotescimus worthy of no Credit, and fit to be damn'd and made void: and therefore did decree, that neither the Defendant, nor any claiming under him, should ever give the same in Evidence; but would not absolutely damn it, because it was also the Evidence of a third Person, no Party to this Suit; and left the final damage thereof till the other be made a Party.
Moor Arm. versus Norris Kt. & al.; Assaulting a Justice.; Libels.
The Defendant being discontented, as it should seem, at the Plaintiff about matter of Presentments delivered in by the Church-wardens of his Parish, told the Plaintiff he had been too precise in examining the Church-wardens touching his the said Sir William's not coming to Church, and that it was Ungentleman-like dealing: and the Plaintiff answering him, that he was too credulous of the Speeches of the Churchwardens concerning him the said Complainant, and did therein wrong him; the Defendant Sir William thereupon gave the Plaintiff the Lye, and he returning it in his Throat, the said Defendant drew his Sword, and struck the Plaintiff twice therewith, being then a Justice of the Peace. And the Defendant Mercer framed and published two scurrilous and infamous Libels against the Plaintiff, his Wife and Daughter. And Bryers also published one of the Libels at several times and places. And for these Offences Mercer was committed to the Fleet, fined 1000 l. bound to his good Behaviour during Life, and disabled ever to practise as an Attorney in any Court; and if he were then an Attorney, to be thrown over the Bar, and to stand on the Pillory at Westminster and at Lancaster Assizes, with a Paper on his Head declaring his Offence; and then to make an Acknowledgment, and ask the Plaintiff Forgiveness: Bryers committed, and fined 200 l. and Sir William Norris committed, fined 1000 l. and to pay the Plaintiff 50 l. damage; Mercer to pay 100 l. damage, and Bryers 20 l. damage to the Plaintiff; and in case Mercer be not able to pay his 100 l. then Bryers to pay that, and be freed of the 20 l. and the Decree to be read at the Assizes at Lancaster.
Caston Gent. vers. Hitcham Mil. Servient. ad Legem. Publishing of libellous Articles against the Plaintiff.; Reviling Jurors.
The Defendant the morning before he went to the Sessions, being a Justice of the Peace, received scandalous and libellous Articles against the Plaintiff, carried them to the Sessions in his Pocket; and in open Court, in disgrace of the Plaintiff, pulled them out, and said, You shall see what a lewd Fellow this is, and not fit to speak in this place: And then caused the said libellous Articles to be read in the publick Sessions; and the Plaintiff then desiring a Copy of them, and to be tryed upon them, the Witnesses to prove them being noted in the Margin, the Defendant did not suffer him to have a Copy, or to be tried thereupon, nor took any Course, that he might at the next Sessions, or at any time after, be questioned for them, but took the Articles again out of the Sessions, and carried them away; and after, farther to disgrace the Plaintiff in his Practice (being an Attorney) sent the said Articles to Mr. Justice Harvey, at the Reference of a Cause to him, which Caston attended; and a Jury having given a Verdict against the Defendant, he sent for the Jurors, and questioned them about their Verdict, and told them they were
a company of Fools, and that if there had been but one wife Man among them, their Verdict had not been so. And for these Offences he was committed to the Fleet, and fined 200 l.
In this Decree the getting of Juror's Hands to a Note to impeach a Verdict, was held to be an Offence here punishable.
In this Cause the Defendant would have had Witnesses to prove the Matters of the said scandalous Articles to be true; but that was disallowed by the Court.
Attorn. Regis versus Ewer Arm. Slander of the Earl of Danby.; 1000 l. damage.
The Defendant at several times, in several places, and to several persons, did, in scorn, disgrace, and contempt of the Earl of Danby, use these Words: My Lord of Danby, my Lord of Danturd; he is a base cheating Lord, and a cozening Lord, and a base Fellow, and I care not so much for him as I do for a Fart of my Arse, I am a better Mass than he: He hath cozened the Country People in taking away their Common, so as he hath daily the Curses of thousands. And for this he was committed to the Fleet during his Majesty's Pleasure, bound to his good Behaviour during Life, fined 1000 l. pay 1000 l. damage, and at the Bar of this Court, and at the Assizes at Oxon, to acknowledge his Offence, and ask the said Earl Forgiveness.
Faulkland Dominus versus Savage Mil. & al.; Misdemeanor in a Sheriff.; Slander of the Lord Viscount Faulkland.; 3000 l. damage.
One Philip Bushen being accused of High Treason within the Kingdom of Ireland, for murdering of his Wife, the Plaintiff being then Lord Deputy, required the Defendant Welden, being then High Sheriff of the County, to sequester his Goods and Chattels into sure Hands, (an Appraisement or Inventory thereof being first taken) until the said Bushen was tried, which he did, but appraised the Goods under value; and the Defendant, Sir Arthur Savage, by colour of an Agreement between him and Welden, possessed himself of Bushen's Castle. And the Plaintiff afterward, for good Cause, directing a Commission under the Great Seal of Ireland, to authorize certain Commissioners to enquire of, take and seize all the Lands, Tenements, Goods and Chattels of the said Bushen, being then convicted of the said Treason, and to enquire of the Values of them, and to prohibit all other Officers to intermeddle therein; the Defendant Sir Arthur, would not deliver the possession of the said Castle to the Commissioners and Welden, claiming the Goods as Escheats and Perquisites of his Office refused also to deliver them until a second Commission was awarded by the Lord Deputy for that purpose; and then the said Welden did not make a true delivery of the proper Goods of the said Bushen, but kept one hundred and twenty of Bushen's best Sheep, and deliver'd the like number of other Sheep; some marked with his own Mark, and some with Sir Arthur Savage's Mark, and some with Clark's Mark; and sent twenty of his Sheep to Sir Arthur Savage, and kept and sent away divers of Bushen's Goods unappraised, to his own use, and without any account to his Majesty; and the Defendants being discontented that the Goods were taken from them, a rumour was then raised that Bushen had Injustice and hard Measure done him in his Tryal by the practice of the Plaintiff, and the Lord Sarsfield, the Judge before whom he was try'd. And the Defendant Bushen then falsly and maliciously reported, that Sir Terence Dempsie, one of the Commissioners, should be paid his Grand-child's Wife's Portion out of Bushen's Estate; and produced a Paper falsly containing that the
Plaintiff procured the lord Sarsfield to go that Circuit of purpose that Bushen might be convicte Land that the Plaintiff caused his Goods to be delivered to Sir Terence Dempsie, as part of the Plaintiff's Daughter's Marriage-Portion. And after these Rumours Reports were spread in Ireland, then Bushen the Son came into England, and procured a Petition to be presented to his Majesty, containing divers Grievances touching the Execution of the said Bushen his Father; and that not succeeding, intended to present his said Grievance to the Commons House of Parliament then assembled, but was diverted from that Course by Sir Arthur Savage, who advised him to alter the direction of his Petition, and to present it to the Duke of Buckingham, and subtilely to traduce the Plaintiff and his Government, advised him to pray a Commission to examine the supposed Practice: Which Advice Bushen pursued, and the Duke having receiv'd his Petition, acquainted Sir Arthur therewith, and asked his Advice, who, contrary to his own Direction, and cunningly to entrap the Plaintiff, dissuaded the course of a Commission, and persuaded the Duke, in respect the Business was soul, to write his Letter to the Plaintiff to cause some Relief to be given to Bushen's Wife and Children, and so to stop their Mouths; which if the Plaintiff had given way to, it would have argued him foully guilty: and the Duke directing his Secretary to prepare a Letter to that purpose, Sir Arthur dictated the same unto him, and then affirmed the Contents of the Petition to be true, tho he knew them to be false: and the Letter heing written, it was deliver'd to the Defendant Bushen to give unto the Plaintiff, who undertook so to do, but never deliver'd it. Yet after the Duke's death he open'd the Letter, and annexed it to another like scandalous Petition, and presented it to the Commons House of Parliament, where it was publickly divulged to the Dishonour of the Plaintiff; and Sir Arthur gave out Speeches, both in England and Ireland, that if ever the Plaintiff was questioned about the Matter of Bushen, he would be found faulty; and that he sent the Lord Sarsfield that Circuit, only to execute the said Bushen: and for these Offences Welden was committed, and fined 1000 l. Savage Kt. committed, fined 2000 l. to the King, and 3000 l. damage to the Plaintiff; and Bushen committed, and fined 500 l. and both he, and Sir Arthur Savage to acknowledge their Offences at the Bar of this Court, and ask the Plaintiff forgiveness: Sir Arthur Savage to make the like Acknowledgment and Submission at the Council-Board in Ireland, and Bushen at Kildare Assizes in Ireland: And this Decree to be there read, and then recorded, and entred among the Records and Entries of the Castle-Chamber in that Kingdom.
Trin. 7 Car.
Cooper Cler. & al. versus Crokey & al.; Contriving, printing and publishing libellous Books.
There having long been Suits between the Defendants Crokey and Wright, and the Plaintiff Smith, touching certain Lands belonging to the School of Wootton-Underedge in the County of Glocester; and the same being at last decreed into the Court of Chancery against the Defendants, and a Lease thereof granted by the School to the Plaintiff Smith; the Defendant Crokey maliciously contrived and caused to be printed a great number of libellous Books, and many of them to be exhibited to
the Lords and others then assembled in Parliament, and others, to be published in divers other places; and the Defendant Wright also published many of them, which Book contained much Matter scandalous to the Plaintiff Smith, and to the Courts of Justice, where their Suits had depended. And for this malicious Libel the Defendants were both committed to the Fleet; Crokey fined 200 l. and Wright 100 l. the Decree to be read at the Assizes to clear Smith's Reputation, and Crokey then to acknowledge his Offence and ask him Forgiveness, and the Books to be there publickly burnt.
Waterhouse Gent. versus Ingram Mil.; Fine and damage on the Plaintiff pro falsa clamore.
The Plaintiff by his Bill charged the Defendant with several Forgeries, and other foul Offences, whereof he was able to make no man ner of Proof, but the Defendant gave clear and full Satisfaction to the Court of his Innocence. And therefore the Court fined the Plaintiff 500 l. and gave the Defendant 500 l. damage, and order'd the Plaintiff to make a Submission and Acknowledgment to the Defendant in the Court, and at the Assizes at York, and there this Decree to be publickly read; and after to make the like Acknowledgment and Submission at the Block at Hallifax.
Attorn. Regis org tenus vers. Archer. Hoarding of Corn to enhance the Price.
The Defendant contrary to Law, and in contempt of certain Ordinances set forth by his Majesty, and of his Highness his Proclamation, and Directions of the Lords of the Council, did engross and buy much Seed, Wheat and Rye out of the Market, he having about eight Seams or Quarters of Wheat, and about sixty one Seams or Quarters of Rye, of his own growing that year; and having only six persons in Family, did forbear to bring any of his own Corn to the Market until about the latter end of July, after he was presented by the Grand Jurors in Essex, for that the Overseers of his Parish having bought of him five Quarters of Rye for relief of the Poor at 7 s. 3 d. the Bushel, he refused to deliver the same, unless they would give him 9 s. the Bushel; but kept in his Corn, and had then at least thirty Quarters of Wheat and Rye in his House. And for this he was committed to the Fleet, fined 100 Marks, and 33 l. to be divided among the Poor of his own Parish, and the Poor of other Parishes in that Hundred, at the Discretion of the two next Justices of the Peace, and to stand on the Pillory with a Paper on his Head declaring his Offence, at Westminster, Newgate Marget, Leaden-Hall Market, and Chelmsford in Essex.
Morgan Arm. versus Welch & al.; Riotous Rescae.
Welch, Defendant, being arrested upon an Attachment out of the Court of Chancery, for non-payment of 10 l. Costs to Morgan the Plaintiff, gave the Bailiff a blow on the Face, and immediately thereupon, being assisted by three other of the Defendants, rescued himself, reviled the Bailiffs, and bid them fly or he would cut off their Legs. And for this riotous Rescue they were committed to the Fleet, Welch fined 100 l. and the other three 20 l. apiece.
Ferreby versus Houlding & e contra.; Cross. Riots.
The Defendants to Ferreby's Bill riotously assaulted, beat and wounded the Plaintiff and one Mullan, and with their Weapons pursued them, and gave them divers Wounds in their Heads, and other parts of their Bodies; and Houlding, the Plaintiff in the other Cause, was stricken to the Ground, and two of the Defendants lay upon him, and bit out a piece of his Cheek, and one of them with a Sword drawn
gave the Plaintiff divers Blows on several Parts of his Body. And for these Riots committed at one and the same time, four of the Defendants, in the first Cause, were committed to the Fleet, two of them fined 50 l. apiece, one 40 l. and the other but 20 l. in respect a Piece of his Check was bitten out: And two of the Defendants, in the other Cause, were committed to the Fleet, and fined 40 l. a-piece.
Allen versus Watson.; Falsifying the Records of the Court of Star-Chamber.
Several Causes were published in this Court, wherein Witnesses had been examined by Commission in the Country; one wherein Watson and his Wife were Plaintiffs against the now Plaintiff Allen, and others; and the said Watson perceiving, that his Witnesses had not so deposed, as would serve his Turn, to convict the Defendants, did, upon pretence of examining his Copies, obtain the Custody of the Records in his Attorney's Chamber; and then to work his own Ends, and to mislead the Court in their Judgment, did at the Hearing raze, interline, and alter the Depositions of divers Witnesses examined on his part, and made such of them positive and affirmative for him, which were before negative and against him. And for this he was committed to the Fleet, never to be enlarged, unless his Majesty please to grant him a special Pardon, and if ever he be enlarged, then to be bound to his good Behaviour during Life; fined 1000 l. be set on the Pillory at Westminster, and then branded on the Forehead with the Letter F; and after to be in like sort set on the Pillory at Stafford; and both the Causes, wherein the Commissions were falsified, dismissed out of the Court.
Mich. 7 Car.
Attorn. Regis per Rel. Vermuy den versus Forkesey & al.; Riotous opposing and destroying the Drain-works in Lincoln-Shire.; 2000 Marks damage to the Relator.
His Majesty out of his Princely Care and Providence, to increase the Profits and Revenue of his Crown, and for the Good of the Commonwealth, did, with the Consent and Advice of his Privy Council, Article under his Hand, and Great Seal with the Relator to drain and make dry divers surrounded Grounds and Commons in the Counties of Lincoln, Nottingham, and York, which before yielded no Benefit at all, but were oftentimes very prejudicial to the Inhabitants thereabouts by Inundations; and withal granted some Part of the Grounds so to be drained and recovered by the Relator's Industry, and at his Charge, to the said Relator, reserving a good Fee-Farm-Rent for the same; and the Relator was bound to drain and lay dry the said Grounds. And his Workmen being at work thereabout, the Defendants and others, at several times, came unto the Workmen, and beat and terrified them, threatning to kill them, if they would not leave their Work, threw some of them into the River, and kept them under Water with long Poles: And at several other times, upon the knelling of a Bell, came to the said Works in riotous and warlike manner, divided themselves into Companies to take the Workmen, and filled up the Ditches and Drains made to carry away the Water, burned up the Working-Tools, and other Materials of the Relator and his Workmen, and set up Poles in the form of Gallows to terrify the Workmen withal; and threatned to break their Arms and Legs, and beat, and hurt many of them, and made others flee away, whom they pursued to a Town with such Terror and Threats, that they were forced to guard the Town. And for these out-
rageous Riots, whereby the Relator was damnified 2000 l. the Defendants were all committed to the Fleet, bound to their good Behaviour; three of them fined 1000 l. a-piece, one 500 l. and nine others 500 Marks a-piece; all of them at the next Assizes, after their Apprehension, to acknowledge their Offences, the Judge sitting, and pay 2000 Marks Damage to the Relator.
Leech Mil. versus Waddington Cler & al.; Champartie.; Maintenance.; Riotous taking away of Tythcorn.
There being Difference between the Plaintiff and the Defendant Waddington, Vicar of Chesterfield, touching the Tythes there; which the Plaintiff claimed as Lessee to the Dean of Lincoln; the Defendant Fuliamb, being a Person of great Power in the County, took a Lease for three Years of the said Tythes from Waddington, at the Rent of 20 l. per ann. when as the said Waddington was never in Possession of the said Tythes, though he claimed them as belonging to his Vicarage, nor was in truth to receive any of the Rent reserved on the said Lease, which the Court held to be Campartie in them both. According to that Lease Fuliambe's Servants took part of the Tythes, and the Plaintiff brought several Actions at Law for them, the Charges of which Suits, Sir Francis, by way of unlawful Maintenance, did bear; yet a Verdict passed against Waddington's Title. Nevertheless, the other Defendants with others, by the Abetment of Sir Francis and Waddington, riotously beat the Plaintiffs Work-folks, and carried away part of the said tythed Corn to the use of Sir Francis: And afterward, at several other times, *** Defendants, and others Nick-named, took away Tythes from the Plaintiffs Servants, trod some under foot, and threw some into the Water, carried some away to Fuliamb's Use, and wished the Right might be tried by force, and therewith cry'd, A Fuliamb, A Fuliamb, and Waddington's Servant and Horse helped to carry part of the said Tythes for Fuliamb's Use; and for these Offences they were all committed to the Fleet, Sir Francis Fuliamb fined 500 l. Waddington 50 l. two of the Rioters 200 Marks a-piece, and two others of them 100 l. a-piece.
Dalton Cler. versus Beck & al.; Libellous Words against a Minister.; 50 l. damage.
The Defendant Eleanor Beck did falsisy, and did libellously publish, and give out Speeches at several times, and to several Persons that the Plaintiff had got her with Child, and falsly named the Time and Place when and where it should be done, and Richard Beck, her Husband, said his Wives Report was true; although they now both swear they believe the Plaintiff to be innocent of any such Crime: And Heyton, another of the Defendants, out of Malice to the Plaintiff, published and said, that the Plaintiff lived in Adultery with the Pedler's Wife; and that a Priest had gotten a Pedlar's Wife with Child, meaning the Plaintiff and the Defendant Eleanor Beck; and for this, Beck and his Wife were committed to the House of Correction, to be set at work three Months, and be well whipped, and fined 40 l. a-piece; Heyton committed, and fined 100 Marks; all of them to ask the Plaintiff Forgiveness in his Parish-Church, and at the Assizes where the Decree shall be read; and also pay the Plaintiff 50 l. Damage.
Attorn. Regis versus Rogers & al.
The Defendant Rogers, being of mean Estate, and knowing one Jane Cockaine to be under the Age of eleven Years, and his Majesty's Ward, and that an Estate of 300 l. per ann. descended to her upon the Death of her Father, practised with the other Defendant Mary Partridge, who attended the said Ward, to procure the said Ward without the Consent
Practice to contract for Matrimony with a Ward but 11 years old.
or privity of her Mother, to whom the Custody of her was committed, to contract her self for Marriage with the said Rogers, which they effected by the said Partridge her admittance of the said Rogers privately into the said Ward's Mother's House by night, and bringing the said Ward, being in Bed, down in her Arms to the said Rogers, and there caused her to subscribe to a Writing, purporting a Contract, in the presence of one whom they caused to swear not to reveal it; and then they procured one Dunsterfield to swear that the said Ward was sixteen years of Age, and had the Consent of her Mother to marry the said Rogers, and upon that false Oath procured a License for their Marriage, and after endeavoured to have married her without her Mother's privity in Greenwich-Park; but being prevented, they procured her again to use words of contracting her self with the Defendant Rogers. And for this they were committed to the Fleet; Rogers fined 2000 l. and Partridge, in respect of her penitency, but 40 l. and Rogers not to be enlarged of his Imprisonment until the said Ward shuld by legal Course and Sentence in the Ecclesiastical Court be freed of the said Contract.
Attor. Regis ore tenus vers. Hammond & al; Counterfeiting false Farthing Tokens.
The Defendant Owen ap Richard in contempt, and contrary to his Majesty's Proclamation, and Letters Patents prohibiting the making or using of any other Farthings than those which were made by his Highness Patentees, and prohibiting the counterfeiting the said Farthings, or making any Engines wherewith to counterfeit the same, did make so many counterfeit Farthings of Copper, as came to 5 l. in Money, and spent and vented them for his own use; and the Defendant Hammond lent other Counterfeiters of Farthings Money to buy Tools wherewith to counterfeit the same, and provided them a Working-place, and bought them Copper to make Farthings withal, where they did work, and make Farthings, and gave him part thereof, allowing 25 s. in Farthings for 20 s. Sterling; and those Farthings Hammond spent and disbursed as good Farthings, knowing them to be counterfeit. And for these Contempts and Deceits they were committed to the Fleet, and fined 500 l. apiece, be set on the Pillory in Cheapside, and then be carried to Bridewell, there to be set and kept to work during his Majesty's Pleasure; and not be thence enlarged but by a Signification of his Highness's Pleasure under his Hand and Seal.
Attorn. Regis ore tenus vers. Taylor & al; Hoarders of Corn to enhance the Price. Buying and selling out of the Market.
The Defendant Taylor bought 20 Quarters of Barley in the Market, but the Corn was never brought to the Market, and did not bring any Corn of his own that Year to the Market, nor sell any, altho he had 100 Quarters of Barley, 10 Quarters of Wheat, and 10 Quarters of Rye of his own growing that Year, and had but fifteen Persons in Houshold. And all the other Defendants, being six in number, did in like sort buy much Corn out of the Market, and brought none of their own to the Markets that Year, altho they had great quantities growing; but some of them sold divers quantities out of the Markets, altho they did know of his Majesty's Proclamation and the Book of Orders set forth that Year for serving the Markets with Corn, to the end the Price might not be enhanced. And for these Offences, which the Court adjudged to be Offences, as well against the Common Law, as his Majesty's Proclamation and the Book of Orders set forth by the Lords of the Council, the Defendants were all committed to the Fleet, fined 100 l. apiece, and at the Assizes for Norfolk publickly to acknowledge
their Offences in the face of the Court, the Judges and Justices sitting, and the Court did forbear putting ignominious Punishment on them, because that they alleged in their excuse that the Justices, after their Poor were provided for, gave them License to dispose of the rest of their Corn as they pleased. This License the Court held did extenuate, but not excuse them; and declared it to be a great Offence in the Justices to give them such License.
Attorn. Regis versus Carrier Cler. & al; Riotous taking the Guister Ore.
The Defendant Carrier, taking upon him the Office of Bar-Master, wherewith he had nothing to do, appointed the other Defendants to be Deputy-Bar-Masters within the Wapentake of Wirkesworth; and the said Deputy-Bar-Masters, by the abetment and encouragement of the said Carrier, and his Wife, did, at several times, demand, exact, and take by force and strong hands Guister Ore from divers of the Miners there, alledging it to be their due: And Carrier said, they should not measure their Ore, unless they would pay Guister Ore, and said, the Bar-Masters might take what they pleased, and he would bear them out in it. And all the Defendants, at several times, repaired to one Buxton's Grove, or Cove, and at one time brake open the Cove, and took away one Dish of Guister Ore by force and violence; and another time Noton by Carrier's Wives Procurement took from them one other Dish of Guister Ore; and another time from one Hill, as much Guister Ore, by colour of the said Office. And at another time they all came in forcibly and riotous manner to Buxton's Grove; and there by force offered to take away six Load of Ore; and being resisted, Carrier said, he was Bar-Master, Judge, Justice, and Lord of the Mine, and whosoever resisted, he would set them in the Stocks by the Neck, Middle, or Legs; and Carrier's Wife drew forth a long Knife, and said, she would take a shorter Course with them: And being desired to put up her Knife, she said, it was but a hanging matter if she killed one of them. And for these Riots, and forcible taking away of Guister Ore (pendente Lite in the Dutchy) they were all committed to the Fleet. Carrier fined 500 l. his Wife 100 l. Noton 100 Marks, Wright 50 l. and two others 20 l. apiece; Carrier disabled, and made incapable to have, or to deal or intermeddle in the Execution of the Office of Bar-Master, or to hold, or execute any Temporal Office of Judicature; and referred to the Lord Keeper's Consideration, whether he be fit to be a Justice of Peace any longer.
The Defendant Carrier appeared to be guilty of several other Offences committed with a high Hand, by colour of the Office of Bar-Master, both in the Bar-Moot-Court, upon Trial of Causes, in Managing, Countenancing, and Directing the Suits, or Matters there Depending, and the Jurors what to find, and of divers Examinations, and Extortions; yet the Court would not Sentence him for them, because they were complained of only in a general Charge of Oppression, and Extortion, not naming any Particulars thereof, in what Causes, or between what Persons, or of whom the said Extortious Fees were exacted, taken, and received. And for other Offences, proved but by one single Witness, he was referred to the High-Commission-Court.
Hil. 7 Car.
Attor. Regis versus Greenvile Bar. Slander of the Earl of Suffolk; 4000 l. damage.
The Defendant upon Conference with one Taylor touching the Earl of Suffolk, did in the presence of two or three others, malitiously and disgracefully say, and affirm, that the said Earl of Suffolk was a base Lord, and had dealt basely with him; and that he would make him repent it, and shortly after wished Taylor to tell him so; and afterward told one Brabant what he said to Taylor of the said Earl, that he was a base ignoble Lord, and had dealt basely with him, and that he had wished Taylor to tell him so: And for this he was committed to the Fleet during his Majesty's Pleasure, fined 4000 l. to make an humble Acknowledgment and Submission to the said Earl in this Court, as this Court should direct, and pay him 4000 l. damages.
Bacon Arm. vers. Carter & al. Killing his Majesty's Deer.
The Defendants Carter and Nicholas did, at several times by night, hunt, shoot, and kill divers of his Majesty's Red and Fallow Deer in New-Forest, and the Purlues thereof within the Plaintiff's Walk, and carried the same away, and disposed thereof: and for this they were committed to the Fleet, and fined 100 l. apiece; and after they have been Prisoners awhile in the Fleet, then to be sent into the Country, and committed to the House of Correction, until they shall give Security to the Justices in Eyre to be of good Behaviour ever after toward his Majesty and his Game there; and Whitmershe, one other of the Defendants, whose Offence stood proved but by one Witness, so as the Court could not fine him, was ordered to be also bound to his good Behaviour before the Justices in Eyre, as the others were.
Bayneham versus Grymes & al.
Grymes using the Trade of making and selling of Hat-bands, made seven or nine Hat-bands of Silver intermingled with Copper Thred, and made twelve dozen of Silver and Gold Hat-bands mixt with Purl and Oes of Copper double gilt, and sold them all for good and perfect Ware, made of good Gold and Silver; and Wood being a Spinner of Gold Thred, and Maker and Seller of Gold and Silver Hat-bands, did deceitfully make and cause to be made three or four dozen of Hat-bands trimm'd with Copper Oes, and sold the same; and Knight using the Trade of making and selling of Gold and Silver Hat-bands, did in the making up of twenty dozen of Hat-bands, use and work half an Ounce of Copper Oes and Purl, and sold them for all perfect Gold and Silver: and for these Deceits and Abuses they were committed to the Fleet; Grymes fined 50 l. Wood and Knight 20 l. apiece, and all to be bound with good Sureties never to offend in the like kind hereafter. The Decree to be read at the Guild-hall, London, at the next General Meeting of the Lord Mayor and Liveries there; and then the said Defendants to make a publick Acknowledgment of their Offences, and the Lord Mayor required to make search for all such deceitful Ware, and to see it destroy'd.
Knight was fined for Matter not charged in the Bill, but confest by him on his Examination.