View source for Southampton CD E1538 A Tr

The lord king sent to the mayor and bailiffs of his town of Southampton and the bailiffs of the pie powder court and of each of the abovesaid courts:

Henry VIII by the grace of God king of England and of France, defender of the faith, lord of Ireland, and on earth the supreme head of the English church to the mayor and bailiffs of his town of Southampton and the bailiffs of the pie powder court of the same town and each of them, greetings. Because in the record and process and also in the rendering of judgment of a plea that was before you in our court of the abovesaid town without our writ according to the custom of the same town between James Bettes and Henry Huttoft the collectors of our customs and subsidies of the port of the same town abovesaid and John Capon merchant of Florence concerning a debt of £30 18s7d that the same James and Henry exact from the aforementioned John together with 10s6d for his outlays and costs made, had, and adjudicated on his suit thereof as it is said manifest error has intervened to the grave damage of the same John as we have accepted from his complaint, we, wanting the error if any there was to be corrected in due manner and full and swift justice to be done to the abovesaid parties in this part, order you that, if judgment has been rendered thereof, then send the record and process abovesaid with everything touching them under your seals distinctly and openly, and this writ, so that we have them on the morrow of the Ascension of the Lord wherever we shall then be in England, so that, the abovesaid record and process having been inspected, we may make to be done further thereof what of right and according to the law and custom of our realm of England should be done. Tested me myself at Westminster May 8 in the 30th year of our reign [May 8, 1538].

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

The Town of Southampton. The pie powder court of the lord king of the abovesaid town held by reason of the market in the abovesaid town had every day there before Thomas Husse mayor of the said town and Thomas Bory and Thomas Rygges bailiffs of the lord king of the same town in the guildhall at the third hour after noon on Tuesday, scilt., March 12 in the 29th year of the reign of King Henry VIII [March 12 1538] according to the ancient customs of the abovesaid town used in the same town from time whereof memory of men does not run to the contrary.

James Bettes and Henry Huttoft the collectors of customs and subsidies of the lord king of the port of the town of Southampton by their attorney complain against John Capon merchant of Florence concerning a plea of debt on a demand of £30 8s7d. Pledges to prosecute: John Doo and Richard Roo. And they seek process to be made for them according to the custom of the town abovesaid, whereby according to the custom of the same town at the petition of the abovesaid James and Henry it is ordered to Robert Haringdon serjeant at mace of the abovesaid mayor and minister of this court that he attach the abovesaid James Capon if etc., and safely etc., so that he have his body here at the next court, scilt., at the ninth hour before noon of Wednesday, scilt., March 13 next to come [March 13, 1538] before the aforementioned mayor and bailiffs to be held here in the guildhall to respond to the aforementioned James and Henry concerning the abovesaid plea of complaint according to the custom of the abovesaid town etc. The same day and same hour are given to the aforementioned James Bettes and Henry Huttoft here etc.

 

The Town of Southampton. The lord king’s pie powder court of the abovesaid town held by reason of the market had each day in the abovesaid town there before Thomas Husse mayor of the said town and Thomas Bory and Thomas Rygges bailiffs of the lord king of the same town in the guildhall there at the ninth hour before noon of Wednesday, scilt, March 13 in the 29th year of the reign of King Henry VIII according to the ancient custom of the abovesaid town used in the same town from time whereof the memory of men runs not to the contrary.

It was ordered to Robert Haryngdon serjeant at mace of the abovesaid mayor and the minister of this court that according to the custom of the town abovesaid he attach John Capon merchant of Florence if etc., and safely etc., so that he have his body here at this court to respond to James Bettes and Henry Huttoft collectors of the lord king’s customs and subsidies of the port of the town of Southampton concerning a plea of debt on a demand of £30 8s7d, and now here at this court come the abovesaid James and Henry by their attorney, and they offer themselves against the aforementioned John Capon concerning the abovesaid plea. And he, solemnly exacted, did not come. And the aforementioned serjeant at mace and minister of this court now here sends that the abovesaid John Capon is not found. Therefore, according to the customs of the town abovesaid used from time whereof the memory of men runs not to the contrary, it is ordered to the serjeant at mace and minister of this court that he attach the aforementioned John by his goods and chattels that can be found within the liberty of the abovesaid town, so that he be here at the next court to be held, scilt., at the 3rd hour after noon of the same Wednesday before the aforementioned mayor and bailiffs in the guildhall here to answer the aforementioned James and Henry concerning the abovesaid plea of the abovesaid complaint according to the custom of the abovesaid town etc. The same hour is given to the aforementioned James Bettes and Henry Huttoft here etc. [IMG 0131]

 

The Town of Southampton. The lord king’s pie powder court of the abovesaid town held by reason of the market had in the abovesaid town each day there before Thomas Husse mayor of the same town and Thomas Bory and Thomas Rigges the lord king’s bailiffs of the same town in the guildhall there at the 3rd hour after noon of Wednesday, scilt., March 13 in the 29th year of the reign of King Henry VIII [March 13, 1538] according to the ancient custom of the abovesaid town used in the same town from time whereof the memory of men runs not to the contrary.

It was ordered to Robert Haryngdon serjeant at mace of the abovesaid mayor and minister of this court that according to the custom of the town abovesaid he attach John Capon merchant of Florence by his goods and chattels that can be found within the liberty of the abovesaid town so that they [sic] be here at this court to answer James Bettes and Henry Huttoft collectors of the lord king’s customs and subsidies of the port of the town of Southampton concerning a plea of debt on a demand of £30 8s7d. And now here at this court come the abovesaid James and Henry by their attorney and offered themselves against the aforementioned John Capon concerning the abovesaid plea. And he, solemnly exacted, does not come, but makes his first default. And the aforementioned serjeant at mace and minister of this court now here sends that the abovesaid John Capon is attached by his goods and chattels, viz., by 5 pokes of wool weighing 4¼ sacks of wool. Therefore according to the custom of the abovesaid town used from time whereof the memory of men runs not to the contrary day is given to the same John Capon by the court here until the next court to be held before the aforementioned mayor and bailiffs in the guildhall here at the 9th hour before noon on Thursday, scilt, March 14 next to come here to respond to the aforementioned James and Henry concerning the abovesaid plea of the complaint abovesaid. The same day and the same hour are given to the aforementioned James and Henry here etc., and meantime according to the custom of the town abovesaid let there be recorded against the abovesaid John Capon the first default.

 

The Town of Southampton. The lord king’s pie powder court of the abovesaid town held by reason of the market in the abovesaid town had each day in the abovesaid town before Thomas Husse mayor of the said town and Thomas Bory and Thomas Rygges the lord king’s bailiffs of the same town in the guildhall there at the 9th hour before noon on Thursday, scilt., March 14 in the 29th year of the reign of King Henry VIII [March 14, 1538] according to the ancient custom of the abovesaid town used in the same from time whereof the memory of men runs not to the contrary.

James Bettes and Henry Huttoft collectors of the lord king’s customs and subsidies of the port of the town of Southampton by their attorney offer themselves against John Capon merchant of Florence concerning a plea of debt on a demand of £30 8s7d; thereon James Capon at the petition of the abovesaid James and Henry solemnly exacted does not come, but makes his second default etc. Therefore according to the custom of the abovesaid town used from time whereof the memory of men runs not to the contrary day is given to the aforementioned John Capon concerning the abovesaid plea here until the next court to be held before the aforementioned mayor [IMG 0304] and bailiffs in the guildhall here, viz., at the 3rd hour after noon on Friday March 15 next to come to answer the aforementioned James and Henry concerning the abovesaid plea of the abovesaid complaint. The same day and the same hour are given to the aforementioned James and Henry here etc. And meanwhile according to the custom of the abovesaid town let there be recorded against the aforementioned John Capon the second default.

 

The Town of Southampton. The lord king’s pie powder court of the abovesaid town held by reason of the market had in the abovesaid town each day there before Thomas Husse mayor of the said town and Thomas Bory and Thomas Rigges the lord king’s bailiffs of the same town in the guildhall there on the 3rd hour after noon on Friday, scilt., March 15 in the 29th year of the reign of King Henry VIII [March 15, 1538] according to the ancient customs of the abovesaid town used in the same town from time whereof the memory of men runs not to the contrary.

James Bettes and Henry Huttoft collectors of the lord king’s customs and subsidies of the port of the town of Southampton by their attorney offer themselves against John Capon merchant of Florence concerning a plea of debt on a demand of £30 8s7d. Thereon the said John Capon at the petition of the abovesaid James and Henry solemnly exacted does not come, but makes his third default. Therefore according to the custom of the abovesaid town used from time whereof there is no memory of men day is given to the aforementioned John Capon concerning the abovesaid plea by the court until the next court to be held before the aforementioned mayor and bailiffs in the guildhall abovesaid, viz., at the 9th hour before noon of the Saturday March 16 next to come here to answer the aforementioned James and Henry concerning the abovesaid plea of the abovesaid complaint. The same day and the same hour are given to the aforementioned James and Henry here etc. And meantime according to the custom of the abovesaid town let there be recorded against the abovesaid John Capon the third default etc.

 

The Town of Southampton. The lord king’s pie powder court of the abovesaid town held by reason of the market in the abovesaid town had there each day before Thomas Husse mayor of the said town and Thomas Bory and Thomas Rygges the lord king’s bailiffs of the same town in the guildhall there at the 9th hour before noon of the Saturday, scilt., March 16 in the 29th year of the reign of King Henry VIII according to the ancient custom of the abovesaid town used from time whereof the memory of men runs not to the contrary.

James Bettes and Henry Huttoft collectors of the lord king’s customs and subsidies of the port of the town of Southampton put in their place Stephen Omydeux against John Capon merchant of Florence concerning a plea of debt.

James Bettes and Henry Huttoft collectors of the lord king’s customs and subsidies of the port of the town of Southampton by their attorney offer themselves against John Capon merchant of Florence concerning a plea of debt on a demand of £30 8s7d. Thereon the abovesaid John Capon at the petition of the abovesaid James and Henry solemnly exacted does not come, but makes here his fourth default. Therefore that fourth default is recorded by the court here. And thereon those four defaults made by the aforementioned John and recorded by the court here, the abovesaid James and Henry according to the custom of the abovesaid town used in the same from time whereof the memory of men runs not to the contrary by Stephen Omideux their abovesaid attorney say that the abovesaid John Capon owed and does not render to the same James and Henry the abovesaid £30 8s7d, and for this, viz., that, whereas the abovesaid John Capon on August 20 in the 29th year of the reign of the now lord king [August 20, 1537] here, scilt., at the town of Southampton within the jurisdiction of this court accounted with the same James and Henry concerning divers sums of money of the same James and Henry received before that time by the aforementioned John Capon to render account thereof to the same James and Henry when he should be asked thereof, and on that account the abovesaid John was found in arrears toward the same James and Henry in the abovesaid £30 8s7d, whereby action accrued to the same James and Henry to exact and have from the aforementioned John Capon the same £30 8s7d, nevertheless the same John although often asked has not yet rendered those £30 8s7d to the same James and Henry but to this time has refused to render them to them and still refuses, wherefore they say that they are worse off and have damages to the value of 40s, and thereof they produce suit etc.

And thereon according to the custom of the abovesaid town used in the same town from time whereof the memory of men runs not to the contrary, because the abovesaid John Capon at the abovesaid fourth court after the abovesaid goods and chattels were attached did not appear, therefore let the abovesaid goods and chattels be appreciated etc. And nevertheless let those goods and chattels according to the custom abovesaid remain here in care for the 40 days next to come to be guarded here safely to be delivered to both or one of the abovesaid James and Henry or John Capon as by the consideration of this court they ought, viz., to the aforementioned James and Henry if the judgment in the abovesaid plea is rendered for the same James and Henry or to the aforementioned John Capon if he within the abovesaid 40 days should come and prove the abovesaid complaint etc. And Nicholas [IMG 0305] Degra and Maurice Maryne present here in court in their proper persons are assigned by the court here to appreciate the abovesaid goods and chattels according to the true value of the same and they should make it to be established how etc., here at the next court to be held, scilt., at the 9th hour before noon on Monday March 18 next to come [March 18, 1538]. The same day and the same hour are given to the aforementioned James and Henry here etc.

 

At which certain court held before the aforementioned mayor and bailiffs on the same Monday March [manuscript says “May”] 18 at the 9th hour before noon of the same day in the 29th year of the reign of the now lord king come both the abovesaid James and Henry by their abovesaid attorney and the abovesaid Nicholas Degra and Maurice in their proper persons and the same Nicholas and Maurice present here in court appreciate the goods and chattels abovesaid at £40 as by a bill subscribed by their hands certified by them at this court and remaining here in the files more fully appears. Which certain Nicholas Degra afterwards, scilt., at this court according to the custom of the abovesaid town used in the same town from time whereof the memory of men runs not to the contrary seeks the abovesaid goods and chattels to be delivered to him to the use of the abovesaid John Capon for the abovesaid price by the court here, and he undertook on himself for the abovesaid John Capon that the same Nicholas would render to the same James and John the abovesaid sum of £30 8s7d if judgment thereof in the court of the abovesaid town or in any other court of the lord king for abovesaid James and Henry against the aforementioned John Capon by due form of law should be rendered, and of the residue of the price of the abovesaid goods and chattels of the abovesaid John Capon or of the whole price thereof to the same John if he within the 40 days should come and prove the abovesaid complaint etc., would faithfully pay or restore at least those goods and chattels or the whole price of the same as above they are appreciated to the court here. Therefore let the same Nicholas have the abovesaid goods and chattels by the abovesaid undertaking etc.

 

And afterwards, scilt., at the lord king’s pie powder court of the abovesaid town held by reason of the market had in the abovesaid town each day there before Thomas Husse mayor of the said town and Thomas Bory and Thomas Rygges the lord king’s bailiffs of the same town in the guildhall there at the 9th hour before noon of the Wednesday, scilt., May 8 in the 30th year of the reign of King Henry VIII [May 8, 1538] according to the ancient customs of the town abovesaid used in the same town from time whereof the memory of men runs not to the contrary come the abovesaid James Bettes and Henry Huttoft by their abovesaid attorney, and the abovesaid John Capon although solemnly exacted did not come, but defaulted. And thereon James and Henry say that the 40 days have elapsed after the abovesaid four defaults made by the aforementioned John Capon in the abovesaid plea and recorded by the court here. And according to the custom of the abovesaid town used in the same from time whereof the memory of men runs not to the contrary seeks judgment and his abovesaid debt together with damages etc., to be adjudicated to him etc. And because to the court of the lord king here it is sufficiently established and evidently appears that the allegation of the abovesaid James and Henry is true and that the abovesaid John Capon at any court here within the abovesaid 40 days did not at all appear to prove the abovesaid complaint nor did anyone else come within the 40 days after the last abovesaid default of the 4 abovesaid defaults made in the abovesaid form and recorded to claim or prove property in the abovesaid goods and chattels, it is considered by this court that the same James and Henry recover against the aforementioned John Capon his abovesaid debt and his damages by occasion of the detention of that debt adjudicated by the court here at 10s to the same James and Henry by their assent. And the abovesaid John Capon in mercy etc., which certain debt and damages the abovesaid Nicholas Degra present here in court in his proper person by order of the court here according to the custom of the abovesaid town used from time whereof the memory of men runs not to the contrary instantly paid here in court to the aforementioned James and Henry etc.


Afterwards, scilt., on June 3 this same term before the lord king at Westminster comes the abovesaid John Capon by Richard Heywood his attorney, and he says that in the record and process abovesaid and also in the rendering of the abovesaid judgment manifestly it was erred, viz.,

In the first place it was erred in this that it appears by the abovesaid record that it was ordered to Richard Haryngdon serjeant at mace [IMG 0132] of the abovesaid mayor etc., that he attach the abovesaid John Capon if etc., and it appears by the abovesaid record that the abovesaid complaint on which the abovesaid process emanated was and is of a certain debt, where according to the due order of right the precept for summoning the defendant named in the said complaint etc., should emanate first and not the process for taking the body of the abovesaid John Capon, etc.

 

Likewise, it does not appear in the record by which person the said process of attachment of the said John Capon was considered etc., therefore in this it was erred etc., nor at whose petition the abovesaid precept emanated etc.

 

Likewise, it was erred in this that the same serjeant at mace did not return the precept directed to him etc., but generally that the same John Capon is not found etc., and such a return can be made equally well on the summons as on the abovesaid attachment etc.

 

Likewise it was erred in this that it is not declared in the abovesaid record that by the abovesaid court at the petition of the said James Bettes and Henry Huttoft it was ordered to the aforementioned serjeant at mace that according to the custom of the abovesaid town he should attach the abovesaid John Capon by his goods and chattels etc., and it appears by the record abovesaid that after the attachment abovesaid made and four separate defaults recorded, the abovesaid James and Henry obtained their judgment of and on the abovesaid complaint against the aforementioned John Capon etc., and this cannot happen unless by special custom of the abovesaid town etc., and because that custom of the abovesaid town is not declared in the abovesaid record, there it is erred in this etc.

 

Likewise, it is erred in this that it appears by the abovesaid record that the first default was recorded on the said John Capon by the abovesaid court etc., before the attachment abovesaid made etc., but in the record abovesaid it is declared that the same John Capon made four separate defaults at four separate courts held next and immediately following at the abovesaid town, which by no agreement can be verified than that the first default of the said John Capon was recorded before the abovesaid attachment returned etc.

 

Likewise it is erred in this that it is not declared by the abovesaid record that the said serjeant at mace attached the abovesaid John Capon by his goods, but only that the same serjeant at mace returned that the abovesaid John Capon was attached etc.

 

Likewise, it is erred in this that it appears by the abovesaid record that according to the custom of the abovesaid town from time whereof memory does not run day was given by the court to the aforementioned John Capon etc., and thus it appears fully by the abovesaid record that there is no memory of the customs used in the abovesaid town, and on account of the repugnancy of the abovesaid matter, therefore it is erred in this etc.

 

Likewise, it is erred in this that the 9th hour before noon of Thursday, scilt., March 14 in the 29th year of the reign of King Henry VIII day was given until the next court, viz., the 3rd hour after noon on the Friday next following, and because no mention is made in the record that from the court held after the noon of the said Thursday and at each day from the time of the abovesaid complaint raised divers separate courts were held and because no court was held on the said Friday before noon of the same day as on other preceding days, therefore the abovesaid complaint was discontinued etc.

 

Likewise, it is erred in this that it appears by the abovesaid record that at divers separate courts held before March 16 in the 29th year of the reign of King Henry VIII at the said town of Southampton the said James Bettes and Henry Huttoft by their attorney offered themselves against the aforementioned John Capon of and on the abovesaid plea and before the said March 16 in the 29th year abovesaid, no warrant was put in to the said court by the said James Bettes and Henry Huttoft whereby the said James and Henry put in their place Stephen Omydeux etc., therefore in this it is erred etc.

 

Likewise, it is erred in this that it appears by the abovesaid record that on March 16 in the 29th year of the reign of King Henry VIII the said James Bettes and Henry Huttoft put in their place Stephen Omydeux against John Capon merchant of Florence concerning a plea of debt and it is not declared by the abovesaid record concerning a plea of debt [IMG 0133] abovesaid etc nor that they put in their place the abovesaid Stephen against the aforementioned John Capon etc., therefore in this it is erred.

 

Likewise, it is erred in this that it appears by the abovesaid record that the said James and Henry Huttoft declared against the aforementioned John Capon as it appears more fully in the abovesaid record and by the law of England the complaining party is bound not to declare against the party defending before his appearance etc., and because the certitude of the custom of that town is not certified by the abovesaid record at which time the parties complaining declared against the party defending, and moreover the same John Capon says that the abovesaid declaration was made by the said James Bettes and Henry Huttoft on that same day on which the fourth default was recorded and the said James and Henry if any declaration in that case ought to have been made it ought to have been put in to the said court at the next court after the abovesaid fourth default was recorded etc., and not before, therefore in this it is erred etc.

 

Likewise, it is erred in this that it manifestly appears by the abovesaid record that the said declaration of the aforementioned James Bettes and Henry Huttoft made in the manner and form abovesaid is less sufficient in law, because it does not appear by the abovesaid record that the said James Bettes and Henry Huttoft in their proper persons nor by their attorney abovesaid sought against the said John Capon the said £30 8s7d etc., and the certitude is not declared whether the abovesaid John Capon received the said £30 8s7d by the hands of the said James and Henry Huttoft or by the hands of some other person or by the hands of some other persons etc., and because in the said declaration it does not appear whether the abovesaid John Capon accounted together with the aforementioned James Bettes and Henry Huttoft or if the abovesaid account was made before auditors assigned by them or not, therefore the declaration abovesaid is uncertain, and because it is recited by the declaration that the same John Capon “inventus fuisset” in arrears etc., and it does not say in fact that the same John “inventus fuit” in arrears etc., but he could be found in arrears, therefore by the incertitude and insufficiency of the premisses the same John Capon says that the said declaration of the said James and Henry Huttoft made in the manner and form abovesaid is less sufficient in law, therefore it is erred etc.

 

Likewise, it is erred in this that it appears by the abovesaid record that the said declaration of the said James Bettes and Henry Huttoft is without a date on the certain account by the said John Capon supposed to have been made on August 20 in the 29th year of the reign of the now lord king, scilt., at the town of Southampton within the jurisdiction of the abovesaid court with the same James and Henry concerning divers sums of money of the same James and Henry received by the aforementioned John Capon to account thereof to the same James and Henry when he should be asked thereof, whereas that time received [IMG 0306] etc., as of record, these things remaining, it more fully appears [the sense of this clause escapes me], and also it appears by the abovesaid record that the said James and Henry did not affirm the said complaint of the debt on a demand of the abovesaid £30 8s7d against the aforementioned John Capon within the abovesaid town of Southampton if not on March 12 in the 29th year of the reign of the said now lord king and not before, and it well appears by the statute published in 1 Richard III lately de facto and not de jure king of England that no seneschal, under-seneschal, bailiff or commissioner nor any other official or minister of any courts of pie powder looking to any market should hold any plea on any action at the suit of any person or any persons except the plaintiff or plaintiffs or his or their attorney in the presence of the defendant or defendants if he or they or their attorney require that they will swear on the holy gospels of God on the abovesaid declaration that the contract, trespass, or other deed contained in the same declaration was made or committed within that market and at the time of the abovesaid market where the plaintiff took his action and within the limits and jurisdiction of the same market, and although the plaintiff or plaintiffs by their oath not affirm this by their oath, still the defendant or defendants in no way shall be precluded by this but they can answer and plead to the action in the quashing of those complaints to offer this issue that the contract, trespass or other deed contained with that declaration on which such plaintiff and plaintiffs narrate was not done or committed within the time of the abovesaid market and jurisdiction of that market but outside the time of the abovesaid market in some other places outside the jurisdiction of that market according to the truth in that part, and if it is thus tried and either the plaintiff or the plaintiffs or his or their attorneys refuse to swear on the Holy Gospels in the abovesaid form that then the defendant or defendants will be quit, dismissed, and exonerated in this part outside the abovesaid court, but still the plaintiff will take his advantage at the common law or in some other competent place at his pleasure the said ordinance, act, and authority of the said Parliament abovesaid notwithstanding, as the abovesaid act of Parliament among other things contained in the same more fully appears, and the same John Capon says that here it appears of record that the said complaint of debt on which the said James Bettes and Henry Huttoft at the said town of Southampton narrated against the same John Capon was affirmed on March 12 in the 29th year of the reign of the lord king, and on the same complaint the said James and Henry declared on a certain account made on August 20 in the 29th year of the reign of the now lord king at the town of Southampton abovesaid made with the same James and Henry concerning divers sums of money of the same James and Henry by the aforementioned John Capon [received to render] an account thereof [and the enrollment simply ends without more]