thing now we would have gratified them with a sight of it in Court where he should have had his full view for my Lady has it still and it is a true Mortgage and for a real Consideration But he says this is released and she did that as is supposed to suppress any Inquiry after it But with Reverence to Sir Charles Cotterell the Fact is otherwise My Lady Salthill pretended to a Debt from my Lady Ivy for Nine Years Diet for Four Persons and the Reckoning being made according to my Lady Ivy's Quality was made so high that it paid off the Mortgage But he has the Deed still L. C. I. But what say you to the Deed of Sale and my Friend Sutton's Notes out of the Lease and the Debt of 96 l. and 4 l. but a little before acknowledged by my Lady Ivy Mr. Sol. Gen. My Lord in answer to that we say he has been pleased to give it a great deal of Garniture and as he is Master of the Ceremonies to adorn the Story with abundance of Flourishes of his own Kindness and Interests L. C. I. Mr. Solicitor you are not to judge of that whether it be Flourish only or Substance the Court and the Jury are the Judges of that and truly I think it very material to the Cause I assure you I do let the Dirt be taken off as it can it sticks very much I must speak my mind Mr. Sol. Gen. When I am over-ruled I acquiesce in the Judgment of the Court. L. C. I. Pray Sir apply your self to answer the Evidence Mr. Sol. Gen. So I do my Lord as well as I can The next Witness is this Gentlewoman Mrs. Duffet she swears that she saw her Husband Mr. Duffett counterfeit many Deeds she does not particularize them And here have been likewise several Letters read that did import a Transaction and Correspondence between my Lady Ivy and him L. C. I. Pray Mr. Sollicitor remember she swears she saw that Lease of Salthills and that called Glover's Lease Mr. Sol. Gen. My Lord this Witness that swears this is not only a Person unfit to be believed but is contradicted by a Record and for that my Lord it stands thus Mr. Iohnson as is well known had his Tryal for the matter about which she now swears For Mr. Iohnson on the behalf of Alderman Ireton undertook to pay 500 l. to Mr. Duffett to procure somebody to swear that the Deed called Glover's Lease to be forged Upon this there was an Information exhibited in this Court against Mr. Iohnson for Subornation and upon full Evidence Iohnson was Convicted for his Endeavour And the Record of that Conviction we have here and desire to have produced and read L. C. I. And I tell you Mr. Solicitor that is no Evidence in this Case Mr. Sol. Gen. Why pray good my Lord Did not they here just now swear her L. C. I. But the Information put in by Mr. Attorney Noy pray remember was not suffered to be read because not against any of the Parties but third Persons Mr. Sol. Gen. But pray my Lord give me leave to apply it to the Objection here made in our Case to the Credit of our Deeds They say it is suspicious because my Lady Ivy used to forge Deeds and particularly Duffett they say did once forge for her Glover's Lease Now to answer that we come to shew that my Lady Ivy did not forge Glover's Lease but there was indeed an Art used to persuade Duffett to swear it forged when indeed it was not for which Trick Iohnson that was the Agent or Instrument was convicted and that Conviction is I think a good Evidence that it was not forged L. C. I. None in the World Mr. Sollicitor and that from the very Evidence that has been given in this Cause this Day For it is plain if you will believe this Woman and I yet see no cause to the contrary that she was coming into the Court to have sworn the Truth which would have perhaps cleared Iohnson but my Lady Ivy would needs keep her away Now if Duffett were so great a Rogue as to forge he would not stick to swear to protect that Forgery and then how easy a thing was it had Iohnson been the greatest Saint in the World to have got him convicted upon what Duffett came to swear against him though had she come then in Duffett would have appeared one not at all fit to be credited Mr. Sol. Gen. My Lord I have then one thing more to offer I cannot tell indeed whether it be material for it seems I have been so unhappy as to offer some things that have not been though material L. C. I. You have so indeed Mr. Solicitor I must speak the Truth there have been several things offered as Evidence which in another cause and Place would not I am sure have been offered Mr. Sol. Gen. My Lord I submit what I offer for my Client to the Judgment of the Court But that which I would say now is this We have here the Husband's Oath concerning this matter that this Woman who now takes upon her to swear these Forgeries and things told him she could have 500 l. if she would swear against my Lady Ivy. L. C. I. Is that Evidence against the Wife Mr. Sollicitor He is now dead it seems but here is his Oath L. C. I. Pray consider with your self could the Husband have been a Witness against the Wife about what she told him upon an Information for that Offence of Subornation Mr. Sol. Gen. No my Lord I think not L. C. I. Could the Wife be an Evidence against the Husband for the Forgery Mr. Sol. Gen. No my Lord she could not and yet she swears it upon him here L. C. I. That is not against him Man he is out of the Case but against my Lady Ivy and how can the Oath of the Husband be Evidence here Mr. Att. Gen. Cryer call Mr. Gibson to give an account of this Gentlewoman Mr. Sol. Gen. Suppose my Lord that both Husband and Wife were brought as Evidence against my Lady Ivy were that good L. C. I. Certainly that were very good Mr. Sol. Gen. Why then my Lord one of them says that she saw such and such things done by Lady Ivy and by him for her and the other says such things were not done but she confessed she could have 500 l. to swear they were done Shall not this Evidence be admitted to contradict the other L. C. I. Why good Lord Gentlemen is the Philosophy of this so witty that it need be so confidently urged is it good Logick that because they both were good Witnesses against my Lady Ivy therefore either of them is a good Witness against the other Shall the Husband's Oath be read against the Wife to fix a Crime upon her Sure you do not intend this should pass for Argument but to spend time Cryer Here is Gibson now Sir Mr. Att. Gen. Swear him Which was
seized upon by my Wife and locked up in her Closet Notwithstanding upon this Report the Maid did not send but came her self to demand her Trunks and I seeing of her in the House began to ask again why she went away and upon what occasion that Searching of her by Men and Women were But her Mistress calling her Queane for acquainting me with it and threatning to strike her for it denied her the Trunks and caused her forthwith to be sent away And the very next day Mrs. Williamson and my Wife gave out in Speeches amongst my Family and Neighbours that they had broke open the Trunks and had found that she had been a Baggage and a notorious Thief and stollen her Goods And thereupon the better to secure the Wench either for complaining of these Abuses or telling me the Truth of her Usage they procured a Warrant from my Lord Chief Justice Roles to apprehend the Maid for her Life having charged her with Felony But finding that the Maid kept in and that by vertue of the said Warrant they could not enter any House to take her forth they entered into a new Project how the Wench might be secured both Tongue and Person and also that they might seize on her wheresoever she was To this end Mr. Pauncefoot was look'd on as a fit Instrument having Relation to the Lord President Bradshaw and was desired to procure them a Warrant from the Council of State upon Pretence that this poor Wench held Correspondency with the Enemies of the Commonwealth beyond Seas and so apprehended her By vertue of which Warrant she was seized on accordingly and kept close Prisoner eighteen days together with great Hardships During this Imprisonment a Gentleman came to this Wench from my Wife advising her to humble her self to her Mistress and to confess her self Guilty and much to that purpose but she being Innocent utterly refused any such Acknowledgment During this Imprisonment many Petitions for to be heard at the Council did she attempt to present but were still kept off by the means of the said Pauncefoot neither could she ever be heard At length my Wife and Mrs. Williamson finding nothing could prevail after Sorrow and Grief in this lamentable Condition had almost killed her they had contrived a meeting for the Wench by the permission of her Keeper in Moor-fields where as soon as my Wife saw her she fell into a deep fit of Weeping to the Wench and told her how dearly she loved her and that she was in perfect Friendship with her and earnestly desired that all things which had passed might be forgotten promising withal that in a very short time she would abundantly express how sensible she had been of her late Sufferings Hereupon my Wife without ever acquainting or procuring their Order for her Freedom only giving the Messenger of the Council of State 20 l. caused the Maid by her own Power by which it seems she stood committed to be set at liberty But very suddenly after Enlargement her Body being quite spent and her Mind almost distracted with Grief and Melancholy she died and in her Death-bed professed solemnly that by reason of those Cruelties which had been practised upon her by Mrs. Williamson and Mrs. Ivie and especially by the Operation of a Potion given her by them which upon the words of a Dying Woman she believed to be Poyson That they had been the cause of her Death and that she doubted not but that the Almighty God would require her Blood at their hands After these things were laid open to the Lords Commissioners for the Great Seal I little expected that Vices should be received for Reasons that such Abominations should have been thought worthy the Protection not to say the Encouragement of such eminent Judges but with Grief of Heart and empty Purse may I say that I found experimentally their Chancery rather a Court of Oppression than good Conscience nay I have this peculiar in my Case that after all Witnesses on both sides were examined they never afforded me that Favour which they omitted to none as to command me and my Wife in Person to attend them and to endeavour a Reconciliation between us This I thought hard measure because I was informed all others had participated of that Civility from them and the more hard in regard my Wife had frequent and private Addresses unto them and I was never admitted any The Consideration of this not only astonished me but gave me a strong Alarm also to be very Circumspect lest I might have as little Justice in their Sentence as I had savour in their Proceedings And that on the other side when I remembred they openly declared before my Council that nothing should be concluded without sending for both Parties and also their Parties and also their Order of the 27 of October 1651. that they had denied her any Expences of the Suit in regard the Merits of the Cause should be speedily heard I could not conclude within my self but that I should be dealt withal according to their own Rules and Practice of all the of England and that a Summons upon a day of hearing should be first sent e'er any Sentence pronounced or Decree made in the Cause But what I often suspected and was intimated unto me by others I had now too much reason to believe For after eight Months having all that while never received any command to wait upon their Lordships when all my Counsel was out of Town Iuly 24. 1652. Her Counsel Mr. Vincent and Lieut. Col. Zanchey her Sollicitor with a Sword by his side presented unto the Lords Commissioners a final Decree ready drawn it not being first perused by Counsel of my side as by the Rules of the Court it ought to have been for no less than 300 l. per Annum a fair Sum and enough to tempt a good Woman to be bad The Draught of the Order is thus Lords Commissioners Saturday 24 of July 1652. Between Theodosia Ivie Plaintiff and Thomas Ivie her Husband Defendant WHereas the Plaintiff having exhibited her Petition against the Defendant her Husband to be relieved for Alimony unto which the Defendant having put in his Answer divers Witnesses were examined by Commission and others were by their Lordships Directions also examined by the Register in the presence of Council on both sides And for the better clearing of the Matters and Satisfaction of their Lordships therein their Lordships were also pleased themselves to examine several Witnesses viva voce And the Cause having taken up many days in hearing after much Debate and Pains spent herein And upon full and deliberate hearing of what could be offered on both sides And upon reading of the said Depositions and of the Indenture made upon the Marriage whereby the Estate of the Plaintiffs Father is settled upon Sir John Brampston Kt. and William Booth Esq to the uses in the said Indenture declared Their Lordships were fully satisfied that there is good cause to
should be brought in the Officers Custody L. C. I. Read it de bene esse let us see what it is Mr. Att. Gen. My Lord I would ask Mr. Sutton was not this produced and read before the the Trial in Michaelmas Term last Sutton It was produced in Court Twelve years ago Mr. Sol. Gen. Was it allowed as Evidence Sutton Yes constantly Mr. Att. Gen. Pray read it Mr. Williams Pray who has had it in keeping all this while Sutton My Lady Ivy brought it to me among her Writings at first L.C.I. Read it Clerk The Verdict and Presentment of us the Jurors as well of all Defects Annoyances within the Limits or Bounds of Wapping and Wapping Marsh from Grash Mill to the Mill at Ratcliff that is to say the 20 th of December Anno Dom. 1572. and in the 14 th year of the Queens Majesties Reign that now is The Names of the Free-holders within Wapping Marsh and the Number of Acres contained within the same Marsh with all the Names of the Occupiers thereof First Iohn Stepkin Gent. Freeholder for a parcel containing Twenty two Acres in the Tenure of Richard Ew Benedict Gent. Mr. Att. Gen. You may skip over a great deal and read only that which conduce to the Question Clerk No one can read it very well I think Reads On the west side of Gravel-lane containing 68 Acres Is that it Mr. Att. Gen. No go to the East side Clerk Reads Freeholders one parcel containing Ten Acres in the Tenure of Iohn Hodges and Iohn Gee Iohn Stepkin Gent. Two Parcels containing 20 Acres in the Tenure of Iohn Cooper and Iohn Harding Iohn Stepkin Gent. One Parcel containing Four Acres in the Tenure of Iohn Stepkin One Parcel Containing Twelve Acres in the Tenure of Iohn Roger Iames Freeholder Two Parcels containing Six Acres Robert Hemmings and Iohn Stepkin One Parcel containing One Acre and an half Richard Roper One Parcel containing Six Acres in the Tenure of Rechard Roper All which Parcels be on the East Part of Gravel-lane containing Sixty Acres Then here is somewhat interlined and struck out again Mr. Williams This doth not concern the Church Mr. Att. Gen. No more it doth not as you say indeed for they cannot claim any of the Marsh. Now we shall shew a Warrant Three Years after from the Commissioners to survey Clerk Reads This is dated the 18th of Iuly in the 17th Year of the most prosperous Reign of our Sovereign Lady Elizabeth by the Grace of God c. And it is directed To our well-beloved John Stepkin and John Osborn Surveyors Whereas The Queen's Majesty by a Commission of Sewers bearing Date the 23th Day of April in the Year of her Reign hath authorized us to survey and view from Buttolphs-Wharf by St. Katharines near the Tower of London unto Ratcliff-mill not only to consider of the Decays and Ruines of the same but also to take order for the speedy repairing as to our Discretions shall seem good We therefore sufficiently informed of your Wisdom and Discretion appoint you Surveyors willing and commanding you by vertue of the said Commission to see whether the Work be accomplished according to such Ordinances and Decrees as we have appointed and from time to time shall make and appoint and to see who we have made Expenditor for such Sums of Money for the Payment of Workmen may by your Warrant be disbursed and payed accordingly and further we give you Power and Authority to give to provide for a competent and Salary at reasonable Prices all Workmen Boats Lighters Carts Carriages Trees Pales as to your good Discretion shall seem meet and for your so doing this shall be your sufficient Warrant Mr. Att. Gen. We shall now go a Step farther as I opened in the beginning and shew that this was mortgaged by Stepkins to the Queen and a fine was levied upon that Mortgage Clerk Reads This Indenture made the 4th Day of Iune in the 15th Year of the Reign of our Sovereign Lady Elizabeth c. Between the Right Honourable Sir William Cecil Knight Lord Burleigh and Lord High Treasurer of England the Right Honourable and one of her Highness's most Honourable privy Council Sir Gilbert Gerard Knight her Majesty's Attorney General for and on the Behalf of the Queen's Majesty and to her use of the one Party and Iohn Stepkin Whereas William Pat one of the Tellers at and upon the Determination of his Account made and ended at the 25th Day of December is indebted in the Summ of 7928 l. 7 s. and 11 d. ob And whereas our said Sovereign Lady the Queen the 16th Day of Iune in the 9th Year of her Reign hath commanded the said Sir Will. Cecil Sir Gilbert Gerard and Sir Thomas Bromley to take order from time to time with so many of the Debts owing or that after should be owing and for the sure Payment and Contentation of the said Summ of 7928 l. 7 s. 11 d. ob Covenanteth with them the said that he the said Iohn Stepkin his Heirs Executors shall and will not only saisfie and pay the said Summ into the Receipt aforesaid but also for the better Settlement shall and will make and cause to be made by one Fine in good Form of Law of and in one Close within the Parish Mannor of Yewel and one great Garden And of and in one Tenement with the Appurtenances in now in the occupation of Iohn Stout and 19 Acres of Meadow in Wapping-marsh Parcel of the said Mannor Richard Roper Mr. Attorn Gen. Where is the Copy of the Fine Sutton Here. Clerk Reads This is the Final Concord c. Mens Mich. 14 Eliz. Mr. Sol. Gen. This was afterwards regranted from the Crown and there is the Regrant Which being under the great Seal and Tested 6 Iulii Anno 7. Iacobi Rex was read Mr. Att. Gen. Part of this Marsh was by our Ancestor conveyed to one East L. C. I. Ay I have the Note of such a Conveyance in my Notes of the last Tryal Mr. Att. Gen. Mr. Sutton is that a true Copy Sutton Yes it is Mr. Williams A Copy of what where did you examine it Sir Sutton At the Roles-Chappel Mr. Att. Gen. It is a Deed enrolled and I hope you do not think the Record is forged Mr. Williams Mr. Williams I know not what you forge or do not forge pray read it let us see what it is The Copy of a Deed enroled dated 27 July 3 Eliz. was read L. C. I. Then the next thing that you produced was a Bond dated the 25th of Ianuary 4 Eliz. wherein Stepkins was bound to Spinola who was Administrator of Vivold and Salvago upon the Recognizance of Hill to them Mr. Att. Gen. We did so my Lord but that we cannot now readily find I think here however is Spinola's Discharge Clerk This is Signed by me Benedict Spinola and Dated the 25th of Feb. 1561. Mr. Att. Gen. Here is the Bond read the Condition of it though it
THE Famous Tryal in B.R. BETWEEN THOMAS NEALE Esq AND THE Late Lady Theadosia Ivy. The 4th of Iune 1684. BEFORE The RIGHT HONOURABLE THE Late Lord Jeffreys Lord Chief Justice of ENGLAND For PART of SHADWELL IN THE County of MIDDLESEX AS ALSO The Title of the Creditors of Sir Anthony Bateman and the Heirs of Whichcott compared with that of the Lady Ivy to certain Lands in WAPPING TOGETHER WITH A Pamphlet heretofore writ and set out by Sir Thomas Ivy her Husband Himself and here now Reprinted again In Perpetuam Rei Memoriam Printed in the Year 1696. TO THE READER THE late Lady Ivy so many Years famous for Wit Beauty and Cunning in Law above any being so Unfortunate in the Year 1684. in a Tryal between Thomas Neale Esq and her Ladyship before the then Lord Chief Justice Ieffryes to have the Deeds by her then produced not believed such of her Heirs and Executors as have not renounced which some of them have the having any thing to do with her Title as well in Vindication of her Ladyships Honour as of the Integrity of such Council and Attorneys as then were imployed in the Cause in Case they should be so again do give out of late that though she and they then were so cruelly baffled they however will try for 't again Now for the Honour of both Judges and Jury before whom that Cause was then tryed and for the Benefit of the Free-holders of Middlesex whose Estates may be possibly subject to be claimed by Deeds left by her Ladyship she having often declared she had Title to many more Houses and Lands than she in her Life time had sued for as also for the Satisfaction of such as are in the least desirous to know the Truth of this Matter The following Tryal is Printed with a Map of the Land then tryed for being about seven Acres in Shadwell in the County of Middlesex of which the Lady Ivy by a Verdict the Michaelmas Term before had got the Possession The State of the Question being whither the said seven Acres was part of the ancient Inheritance of the Dean of St. Pauls London to whom the said Mr. Neale was Lessee and so now the Lessor of the Plaintiff or part of Wapping-Marsh that had been dreined by one Vanderdelf and after sold to the Stepkinses under whom Lady Ivy did claim As likewise is with it reprinted Three or Four Sheets of Paper writ in the Year 1687. comparing the Lady Ivy's Title with that of the Creditors of Sir Anthony Bateman and the Heirs of Witchcutt for Lands in Wapping with a Map thereof as it now lies most plain and exactly agreeing with the Boundaries mentioned in the old Deeds on Record by which alone and no other they claim and now are possest of the same To which also is added a Pamphlet entituled Allimony Arraigned writ by Sir Thomas Ivy her Husband himself Reprinted herewith to make the Book sell the better and to the longer perpetuate so true and diverting a Story The CONTENTS THE Dean of St. Pauls Title from pag. 1 to pag. 4 Lady Ivies Title from pag. 4 to 22 Knowles Examined about finding Deeds for Lady Ivy p. 7 Swears he found out one Deed by what was Writ on the Outside and nothing was Writ on it p. 8 Swears he found another Deed by seeing Marcellus Hall's Name Writ on the Outside which Writing after appeared to be writ by Sutton Lady Ivies Attorney p. 9 The Survey of Stepney produced for and by Lady Ivy but proved otherwise p. 12 Banister Lady Ivyes Rent-gatherer Examined to the finding a Deed in Knowles's House to which he had set his Hand and swears he found it there p. 15 But it proved the Purchase Deed and so that could not be p. 16 Banister and Knowles swear contrary to each other p. 17 A Commission of Sewers produced but not by the proper Officer p. 23 The Overshot-Mill pretended to by Lady Ivyes own Witnesses made appear to be a Tide-Mill p. 26 Mrs. Barefoot a through paced Witness sworn and other Witnesses of Lady Ivyes p. 29 to 32 The Plaintiffs Reply p. 32 Foxes-lane proved the Boundary 'twixt the Deans Land and Wapping-Marsh by Mar and Leyburn the Surveyers proved 130 Acres West of Foxes-Lane p. 37 The Forgery opened and proved by the Style of the Deeds themselves by Styles in the Acts of Parliament and Fines of that time p. 38 Sir Charles Cotterell sworn p. 39 Sir Charles tells the story of Lady Ivyes forging a Mortgage of 1500 l. from Sir William Salkeild and how Mr. Duffett was privy to it and how Mr. Sutton was so concern'd in it that L.C.J. said it smelt rank of a Knave how Lady Ivy did relinquish this Mortgage but afterwards writ Duffett word she would set it up again and that he should have half of what she Recovered p. 40 Lady Ivy frets at Sir Charles Cotterell's Evidence p. 41 Mrs. Duffett Lady Salthills Daughter and Widow to Mr. Duffett who was reputed to forge for Lady Ivy being sworn swears she saw her Husband forge several Deeds for Lady Ivy. 1st a Bond of 1000 l. from Sir Tho. Ivy. 2d Several Letters 3d. She seeing him writing a Parchment she asked him what 't was and was answered he was Counterfeiting one Glovers Lease by which Lady Ivy would get many hundreds of Pounds and that he should get 500 l. 4th the aforesaid 1500 l. Mortgage Lady Ivy and Mr. Duffett agreed to make in my Sight Lady Ivy directing what Ink to use to make it look Old that Mr. Sutton was lett in when Mr. Duffett was counterfeiting for Lady Ivy and how they rub'd the Deeds on dirty Windows and wore them in their Pockets and laid them out in Balconies and shriveled them before the Fire or in the Sun to make them look Old p. 41 200 l. of the Money borrowed of Sir Charles Cotterel at one time given to Mr. Duffett and as much to Mr. Sutton Mrs. Eliz. Riccord Sworn produced Lady Ivy's own Letters left with her by Mr. Duffett to whom they were writ in one of which she tells him she intends to set Sir William Salthill's Mortgages on foot again and as her Husband promised him he should have half and two Bottles of Ink out of which she saw Mr. Duffett write for Lady Ivy what he said was forged and said that with Ink out of these Bottles he could make new writter Writings look old very soon p. 42 Here the Plaintiff ended and then follows Mr. Attorney General 's Arguments to palliate the Forgeries p. 43 Mr. Sollicitor Geneneral endeavours but to no purpose to make them not believed Forged p. 44 Mr. Solicitor General pressing that for Evidence very hard the Lord Chief Iustice would not admit p. 45 Mr. Attorney and Mr. Sollicitor say all they can for Lady Ivy p. 45 Then follows the Lord Chief Iustices Speech wherein he incomparably Summs up the whole Evidence p. 46 His Lordship speaks of the
Pray My Lord give me leave to ask him a question which I hope may clear all this matter for it is plain the Man is mistaken L. C. I. Mistaken Yes I assure you very grosly Ask him what Questions you will but if he should Swear as long as Sir Iohn Falstasse fought I would never believe a word he says Mr. Sol. Gen. Did you look into the middle of any one of the Deeds Knowles Yes I did Mr. Sol. Gen. Can you tell which you looked into the inside of and which you did not Knowles The Lease and some others I did but I cannot particularly tell Mr. Sol. Gen. Then my Lord here is the Case Here are multitudes of Deeds and a Man looks on the Inside of some and the outside of others is it possible for a Man to speak positively to all the particular Deeds without being liable to mistake L. C. I. Mr. Sollicitor you say well if he had said I looked upon the outside of some and the inside of others and where ever I saw either on the outside or in the inside the Name of Stepkins or Marcellus Hall I layd them by and thought they might concern my Lady Ivy that had been something But when he comes to be asked about this particular Deed and he upon his Oath shall declare that to be the Reason why he thought it belonged to Stepkins because of the Name of Marcellus Hall upon the outside and never read any part of the Inside when Sutton swears Marcellus Hall was written by him what would you have a Man say Mr. Sol. Gen. My Lord I have but this to say if there were never a Deed delivered by Knowles to my Lady Ivy or Sutton where Marcellus Hall's name was written on the backside of it but by Mr. Sutton I confess it were a strong Objection But where there are other Deeds and a great many a Man may easily be mistaken It is impossible for any Man in a Multitude of Deeds that he finds among a great Parcel and delivers many of them out to take it upon his Memory particularly which he looked on the inside of and which he looked on the backside or outside of L. C. I. Did not he give it as a particular Reason of his Knowledge that they belonged to my Lady Ivy For wherever he saw Marcellus Hall or Stepkins he thought that belonged to her Mr. Sol. Gen. Wherever he saw those Names that is either in the inside or out side L. C. I. Under Favour Sir he did not say so but positively said he knew it by that Name And you shall never argue me into a belief that it is impossible for a Man to give a true Reason if he have one for his Remembrance of a thing Mr. Sol. Gen. I beg your pardon my Lord as I apprehended him he swore he looked into the inside of some and the outside of others and there were a great many of them L. C. I. And I beg your Pardon Mr. Sollicitor I know what he swore as well as any Body else If indeed he had sworn cautiously and with care it might have been taken for a slip or a mistake Mr. Att. Gen. My Lord we must leave it upon its own Weight but we are not come to our Title yet I have the Deed in my Hand which is a very old one and therefore needs not such exact Proof He is mistaken we do own it and I must appeal to the Court whether a Man may not be mistaken in a great multitude of Deeds L. C. I. Well now after all this is done let him give an account how he came to know this to belong to Stepkins or my Lady Ivy if he can I speak it not to prejudice your Cause but only to have the Truth come out But for the Witness that swears it may affect him I assure you Give him the Deed and let him look upon it Look upon the inside and look upon the outside too Knowles I believe my Lord upon better Consideration I have read this Deed before now L. C. I. Very well and yet you swore the contrary just now Knowles I was in amaze my Lord. L. C. I. I am sure thou sworest wildly Mr. Sol. Gen. Pray what Deed did you take it to be at first Knowles The Lease of 128 Years L. C. I. Pr'ythee read it now to us Knowls Reads This Indenture made the 22th Day of Dec. L. C. I. Between whom Knowls Reads Between Marcellus Hall of Ratcliff Miller of the one part and Iohn Carter Oar-maker of the other part witnesseth that the said Marcellus Hall hath demised granted and to Farm letten to the said Iohn Carter all that Wharf lying in Ratcliff where late a Mill stood called Ratcliff-Mill L. C. I. Can you say you ever read so much before Knowles I believe I did L. C. I. When was it Knowles In Septemb. 1682. L. C. I. Then you read it before you shewed it to my Lady Ivy. Knowles Yes my Lord. L. C. I. And you found what the Contents were by Reading Knowles Yes my Lord. L. C. I. Did you read it through Knowles No I did not I believe L. C. I. How far do you think you read Knowles As far as I have read now L. C. I. Did you find any thing there of the Name of Stepkins Knowles No not in that I did not L. C. I. I would desire to know of you who it was that came to my Lady Ivy to inform her you had such and such Writings Knowles It was one Mr. Vicarer about a Tryal that was to have been two or three Years ago at the Bar of the Court of King's Bench here but the Cause did not then go on after that Mr. Vicarer did tell my Lady that one Knowles had a great Company of Writings that were Winterburn's and she desired him that he would please to talk with me to see If I could do her any Kindness or Service in any of those Deeds The first time that I saw her was the Second of August as near as I can remember and then I told her I was Executor to Winterburn and had a great many Writings said she do you know the Hand of Stepkins if you do and can find any Writings that relate to Stepkins you will do me a great Kindness L. C. I. Did she name any body else to you Knowles She named one Lun and one Barker and one Holder and several others I do not remember all L. C. I. Was there Mention made of one Collett Knowles No. L. C. I. Was there of one Donne Knowles Of one Lun there was L. C. I. Of one Fecknam Knowles No. L. C. I. Of one May Knowles No. L. C. I. Of one Ioan Hall Knowles No. L. C. I. Was there any mention made of any Hall Knowles Yes there was L. C. I. What Hall did she speak of Knowles I am not certain whether any Hall was named or no. Mr. Att. Gen. He says he is sure there
done Mr. Sol. Gen. We are not now my Lord examining what Duffett swore about Forgery or not Forgery but is not this Confession of hers an Argument against the Credit of her Testimony who now says she saw my Lady Ivy do so and so when she has confessed she could have Money to swear against my Lady Ivy. L. C. I. But Mr. Sollicitor if you will not apprehend the Question I cannot help it is it not the Husband that swears against the Wife Mr. Att. Gen. Do you know that Gentlewoman there Gibson Gibson I have heard of her L. C. I. Nay be not angry Mr. Solicitor for if you be we cannot help that neither The Law is the Law for you as well as me Mr. Sol. Gen. My Lord I must take the Rule from you now L. G. I. And so you shall Sir from the Court as long as I sit here and so shall every body else by the Grace of God I assure you I care not whether it please or displease we must not have our time taken up with impertinent things for I must say there have been as many offered in this Cause to day as ever were in any Cause that ever I heard and if all be not as some will have it then they must be in Passion presently The Court gives all due Respects and expects them Mr. Att. Gen. Have you any acquaintance with that Woman Gibson I have seen her a great while ago Mr. Att. Gen. What do you know of her what Reputation is she of Gibson I know nothing of her Reputation I know she was Mr. Duffett's Wife L. C. I. And so do we she tells us so What then Gibson I have seen her abed with Mr. Frogmorton and she told me she had then a Frog in her Belly Mr. Williams It seems then by having this Gentleman so ready they were aware of this too I suppose Mr. Neale brag'd of this too or else the guilty Conscience put them upon preparing for it But yet I think they do us no great harm by it Mr. Att. Gen. You will give our Evidence an Answer I suppose by and by But we will go on to the rest of yours As to the Bill and Answer in the Year 1629. In that of Iohn Stepkins it is said he makes the Bounds Eastward to be Foxes-lane But it is plain he that gives in that Answer was not acquainted with the Transactions of the Estate before his own time And if you consider the time of that Answer there was near Fourscore Years then past since the Lease made and so long it had been out of the Family rendering a Pepper-corn Rent and so the profitable Interest was only the Four Acres surrendered to him by the Tenant before the Licence to Alien And it appears not that he had any Notice of the Reversion But I observe in the Answer there is one Passage remarkable That there was a way time out of Mind that did part his Land and that which was reputed the Dean and Chapters Land Now that doth not tie it up to make Foxes-lane that same way but only says generally there was an old way which must be understood of the way down from Cock-hill to Bell-wharf So that I take it that is no conclusion upon us Nor upon the same Ground is that Lease made 13 Iacobi by Iohn Stepkins where he abutts his Land upon that Wall which is called Wall-marsh-wall and covenants to have the Rent increased if any thing beyond that be recovered For there was near Threescore Years to come then of this Lease and he had no pretence of Title to contest it at that time and so the Verdicts are all answered that way the Lease expired not till the Year 1680. Mr. Sol. Gen. Then my Lord for the Survey that they produce of the late times by Order of the Committee of Parliament for Sale of Church-lands how that should give a Title I do not understand It is the first time I ever heard of a Particular of Dean and Chapters Lands to be an Evidence when at that time there was no Dean and Chapter But that which is a clear Answer to it is this Winterburn who had the Lease from the Church did also claim under Marcellus Hall who had a Lease for Ninety Years That in time expired in the Year 1640. That Interest being then determined he gets these put into the Survey which it was his interest to do as the Inheritance of the Church which would gain him a Fee Simple upon his Purchase he concealing the long Lease and they being so long in Possession whereas otherwise he could only have an Estate for Years and it appears all the Deeds were in his Custody at that time For the other Witnesses that speak to the Wall that we must leave to the Juries Consideration upon the Ballance of the Evidence For with Submission my Lord taking the Evidence as it stands together if that Lease of Marcellus Hall be a good Lease these several Conveyances we produce are supported and do explain that He surrenders four Acres which are the Lands that are afterwards conveyed to Fox which is mentioned in the deed of his Surrender to be the Green Hilly Bank and that was the Boundary of the four Acres but what becomes of the other seven Acres and an half they have given no account of it hitherto But surely my Lord upon that first Survey I take it there is a strong Evidence concurring with our Assertion for that saith the South Boundary of the Dean's Lynches is Wall Marsh now then if there be seven Acres to go forward from thence that just reacheth up to Cock-hill And all the other Bounds plainly concur with ours and upon the perusal of the Survey which it is consented to on both sides the Jury shall have with them I believe they will be satisfied our Bounds and that agree Upon the whole Evidence I submit it for the Defendant We have done my Lord. Mr. Att. Gen. Only I would ask Mr. Sutton a Question whether the Bill and Answer now given in Evidence were not given in in Evidence at the last Tryal Sutton Yes it was Mr. Att. Gen. And yet the Verdict went for us then as I hope it will now L. C. I. Have you all done Gentlemen Will you say any thing for the Plaintiff Mr. Williams No my Lord we leave it to your Lordship and the Jury L. C. I. Then Gentlemen of the Jury This Evidence has been very long I think the Tryal has held us as long as any Cause that ever happened in Westminster-Hall of this Nature I mean except one this many Years I think we met with but one in all our Books that held near so long That indeed was rather something longer the famous Cause of Colt in this Court but besides that I never heard of a Cause of this length before But Gentlemen it is a Cause of Value and a Cause of great Weight and Consideration it hath
Father Iohn Stepkins Esq in his Answer to a Bill preferr'd against him by the â—â—â—ches Lessee about 1629. then in quiet possession of Wall-Marsh-Wall but Claiming some Houses Westward 〈◊〉 Foxes Lane and therein setting out also the Deans Title in Fee to the Mill with its Appurtenances in Ratcliff 〈◊〉 to settle the Boundaries on his Oath had admitted that the Dean of St. Paul's was seized in Fee of the said Water-Mill with its Appurtenances which was this very Land and that Wall-Marsh-Wall did anciently lye between the Mill-Ditch and his Land in Wapping and that the Lands of the Dean and Chapter are divided from 〈◊〉 Land and have been so time out of mind by a common Way or Passage and that was Foxes Lane which 〈◊〉 that the Marsh and so Stepkins's Land ended there and that it was the Dean's Land that lay Eastward of Foxes Lane c. And also Note The aforesaid Answer was perused and Signed by Sir Iohn Brampston deceased Unkle and Trustee to the 〈◊〉 Stepkins and Executor to his Father and who had the Custody of the Writings which concerned that Eâ—â—â—te and is the pretended Witness to the so much talkt off Glovers Lease being the Chief Deed that gives â—olour to the Lady Ivy's Title to the Batemans and Whichcot's Land by her gotten in Wapping and yet never was â—â—ard of till wanted in 1675. and then luckily found where Lost by Lady Ivy herself FINIS The Lady Ivy HAving thought fit some short time before Easter-Term 1687. to cause to be printed and published a Paper intituled An Abstract of the Title to the Lands in Wapping Marsh and other Places near adjoyning belonging to the Mannor of Stepney or Stebonheath called Ewell alias Tile-house thereby making Title in general to more Ground great part of it built than the City of London stands upon but particularly to none of the Lands in question She affirms That the 14th of Iune 1573. 15 Eliz. Iohn Stepkins one of her Ancestors being indebted to the Queen as Surety for William Patent in the 19th of Eliz. Stepkins's Lands were Extended and that therein are exprest most of the Lands mentioned in the Extent of 4. Eliz. taken out against Richard Hill's Lands upon a Statute entred into by him 32 Hen. 8. being 113 Acres and particularly all the Lands now in Dispute which is confidently affirm'd but very untrue for in the Deed from Stepkins to convey all his Lands to the Queens Trustees and in the Extent 19 Eliz. and the Lease from the Queen to Alice Stepkins and the Release from King Iames 7 Iac. to Iohn Stepkins all the particulars of Stepkins's Lands are Enumerated and the Tenants names whereof there was but a few Acres lying in the Marsh mention'd as convey'd to Trustees for the Queen and fifty Acres only Extended being all they had in Wapping-Marsh at that time but not the least part of the Lands in dispute named they being all that time and long before and ever since in other mens possession under whom Sir Anthony Bateman and the Trustees for Rebecca Whichcot purchased And lest the World should by the said Paper be made to believe that the Lands in question were as part of the Land then belonging to Stepkins assigned to the use of the Crown and there remained till 1609 and so must have been Stepkins's Land at that time The Creditors of Sir Anthony Bateman have thought fit to print so much of their Title as remains on Record to Ten Acres of Freehold and Twelve Acres of Copyhold Land as have also the Heirs of Rebecca Whichcot to above Three and not exceeding Four Acres all lying in Wapping-Marsh and desire the Readers to take notice of the Boundaries in the old Deeds by which this Land is described exactly answered by the Lands in dispute And that several of the Sales made on Record of the Freehold and Surrenders also on Record of the Copyhold were made during the time that the Estate of the Stepkinses did remain in the Crown and so cannot be reasonably thought to have been any part of that Land The Creditors Title to Ten Acres of Freehold Land JOhn Nelthorpe and Elizabeth his Wife Daughter and sole Heir of Iohn Starkey conveys by Deed enrolled to Richard Sleford and his Heirs all those Ten Acres of Marsh-ground with its Appurtenances in Wapping-Marsh in the County of Middlesex between the Lands late of Iasper Hill and Gravel-Lane on every part These Lands lye butting on one side on Gravel-Lane and on the Copyhold late Hill's on the other Iasper Hill being the man that last surrendred the same even to one of the Stepkinses but the 4th of Eliz. before as appears by Copy of Court-Roll on Record 5 Eliz. 1563. A Fine by Nelthorpe and his Wife pursuant to the Deed. Richard Sleford sells the same Ten Acres to Henry Tailford but butts it as it did at that time West on Gravel-Lane Eastward on Glascock's and North on Stukeley's Land The Land late Hill's was 23 Eliz. surrendred to Glascock as appears by the Copy and that the North Buttal was on Stukeley's Land appears by the Sale Stukeley made of Land lying North of it 4 Iacobi enrolled There are two Gravel-Lanes one called Old Gravel-Lane the other New Gravel-Lane between which all the Land now in question does lye but that Old Gravel-Lane on which these Lands Abutt West was the Gravel-Lane meant by these Deeds is plain for that New Gravel-Lane was a Rope-Walk long since the memory of many alive and sold by Lady Ivy her self with the Land on each side of it to Brian Harrison Trustee for William Wood by Deed enrolled Dated the first of Iuly 1658. by the Name of Three Acres heretofore used for a Rope-ground and now converted into a Street called New Gravel-Lane Henry Tailford had a Daughter who was his Heir and married Iohn Crosse who so became seized thereof A Recovery per Crosse and his Wife Crosse and his Wife levied a Fine to Bennet Richard Bennet and Lettice his Wife levy a Fine to Richard Glover Richard Glover settles by his Will these Lands among others on his Son Richard who dying about 1646. left a Son whose Name was also Richard Richard Glover the Grandson's Conveyance enrolled to Sir Anthony Bateman and others of the Premisses among other things in Trust to pay Debts and a Lease of five Acres part of the Lands in question from Richard Glover to Aaron Williams for fifty years from 1630 at 20 l. yearly recited in the Schedule to it which Lease Lady Ivy purchased in 1659. for about 2000 l. and so got the possession of it See her Answer to Sir Robert Cotton's Bill put in in 1676. Smith Harrington Anthony Bateman and Richard Glover the Grandson levy a Fine to Tirrill and Harris Trustees for Bateman A Deed enrolled reciting a Deed from the Parties to the aforesaid Fine to Tirrill and Harris the 20th of Iune last
it had been known What is said as an excuse why the Rent was not paid being reserved to the Lessor his Executors and not Heirs is of no weight for it might have been helpt in Chancery Besides had that been the reason why the Rent was not asked nor paid Note Richard Glover who Lady Ivy goes about to prove paid the first six years Rent would never have paid any to her Father Iohn Stepkins he being the Son of that Iohn Stepkins who is supposed to have let this Lease in 1620. and died in 1624. so that way no Rent had been due at all Richard Glover in 1616. died and by his Will gave several of his Children 500 l. apiece and particularly Mary and if the Money was not paid accordingly by Richard Glover his Son who is supposed to have taken this Lease he devises his Wapping Lands over to his said Children and Mary's Portion being not paid George Almony her Husband enters and on payment of the said 500 l. in 1624. resettles by Fine and Deed particularly naming these Lands the same on Richard Glover again whose thus accepting a Fine had been a forfeiting the Lease had he held it by one at that time Lady Ivy's Father's and Grandfather's Wills enumerating all their Lands to very small parcels take no notice at all of this Lease nor of any Land in it comprized but only as a Boundary to their own Note There was a Lease lett by Richard Glover to Aaron Williams of the Five Acres being part of the Twelve Acres of Copyhold Land on which Kingstreet in Wapping is built for Fifty years with License from the Lord of the Mannor to lett for so long from 1630. at 20 l. yearly Rent 't was a building Lease and such part of it as Aaron Williams built not himself he disposed of to others And as 't is something hard to imagine that Richard Glover who was a man of repute if he had but forty six years in it in 1630. should lett it for Fifty years so 't is very much harder to believe that Aaron Williams who was a great Builder in several places and those under him should accept of a Lease and build on it for a longer term than Richard Glover could have lett had he held it by this now produced Lease for Fifty six years from 1620. which if true could not have been but publickly known at that time which very Lease so lett to Aaron Williams as aforesaid Lady Ivy purchased in 1659. and gave about 2000 l. for it and so got the possession of it as she in her own Answer to Sir Robert Cotton's Bill in 1676. does confess and is a great Argument she believed it a good Lease and that 20 l. yearly Rent was paid to Bateman for it is plain if the Answer of one Michael Oldsworth of whom Lady Ivy purchased the said Lease to a Bill put in against him by the Relations of one William Thomas to whom Oldsworth was Executor and so came possest of this Lease for an Account of the Estate of the said William Thomas may be believed as it must in other cases though no Evidence in this because it being in another Cause may not in this be read That in the Account says thus Paid Sir Anthony Bateman Arrears of Rent at Wapping 20 l. per ann 150 l. And the said Lady Ivy being so in possession of the Five Acres on which Kingstreet is built by having got Aaron Williams his Lease into her own hands brought an Ejectment about 1675. against the Creditors of Sir Anthony Bateman who then were possest of the other Seventeen Acres and they claiming under a Bankrupt who refused to assist them and knowing not how to defend their Title and Lady Ivy having the good Fortune to make those Deeds against which so much is said in this Paper and especially the Fifty six years Lease from 1620. to be believed as true Deeds she got a Verdict and Judgment then for the said Seventeen Acres about 1676. and held the same till a Verdict was given against her in Easter-Term 1686. for the whole Twenty two Acres upon the now Creditors Title such Evidence being then given as made this Fifty six years Lease and other Deeds not believed The Deed dated February 1664. setling the Inheritance of the Five Acres of Land on which Kingstreet in Wapping is built on one Edward Burtbee and Edward Temple for the securing 800 l. by 100 l. yearly to Sir Thomas Ivy in which the 56 years Lease is recited seems to have been made for the sake of that very Recital and cannot in reason be true for Note Lady Ivy having purchased Aaron Williams his Lease as aforesaid and that being in December 1664. mortgaged to Ioseph Sabberton and Edward Simonds for 800 l. and Sir Thomas Ivy then offering to lay down that Money so he might have it secured him out of the said Lease the same Lease was made over 26 Decemb. 1664. to Richard and Iohn Estcourt and Thomas Nevil who the 25th of February following assigned the same to Sir Rob. Killigrew Sir William Salkeild and Benjamin Thornburgh now Trustees for that purpose But Sir Thomas not receiving the Rents and his 800 l. remaining unpaid and he differing with his Lady in 1671. put in a Bill against her and Serjeant Brampston about this very business charging the Serjeant with Confederacy with his Wife and setting out the whole matter of the Security made him of that Lease complaining of the ill usage he had had and desires relief and yet says not one word of the Inheritance now pretended to be made over to Burtbee and Temple for him and to which Deed he himself 't is pretended was Party And Lady Ivy in her Answer to the said Bill takes only notice of the Lease by her purchased and so mortgaged to Sabberton and Simonds as aforesaid and not one word of this Inheritance-Deed Nor does a Bill exhibited against Sir Thomas Ivy in Feb. 1669. by Sir Robert Killigrew Sir William Salkield and Benjamin Thornburgh the Trustees by Lady Ivy's direction setting out also this Security thus made of the Lease therein named to be made by Richard Glover to Aaron Williams for Fifty years from 1630. for 800 l. by 100 l. yearly to Sir Thomas Ivy nor Sir Thomas Ivy's Answer to it confessing the Security was so made to him of the Lease say any thing at all of this Inheritance-Deed nor take any notice of Edward Burtbee but as one only who being authorized by the last named Trustees and Lady Ivy to receive the Rents did employ one Edward Temple for some time for that purpose and that afterwards one Perrot was by Lady Ivy authorized and employed to receive those Rents So that 't is sence to believe that Edward Burtbee and Edward Temple were no otherwise with the knowledge of Sir Thomas Ivy concern'd in this matter but as Rent-gatherers only in manner aforesaid and nonsence it is to imagine there could be
such an Inheritance Deed made and assigned in Trust for Sir Thomas to Burtbee and Temple at that time and no notice in that Controversie be taken of it at all considering also that that Lease was at that time within Nine years of expiring and also not worth any thing had the Fifty six years Lease been true And farther to demonstrate that it cannot be with reason believed that the Fifty six years Lease from 1620. could be recited in a Deed made in 1664. that was perused by Serjeant Brampston and he a Witness and Lady Ivy a Party to it Note Serjeant Brampston when examined for Lady Ivy in this Cause in 1675. to perpetuate his Testimony being in the fourth Interrogatory asked When and how long it was since he FIRST law the Counterpart of the Lease explained to be this Fifty six years Lease in the second Interrogatory and where and among whose Evidences Papers and Writings he did FIRST see the same in answer deposeth That having several Boxes and Bags of Writings to him delivered by his Brother Sir Iohn that were in the possession of Sir Iohn Brampston his Father at the time of his death to be by him kept he was desired by one Sir Charles Stepkins about six or seven years since to search among the said Writings for the Counterpart of a Lease made to one Bourne and that upon this Deponents THEN searching he did find a Deed with the name Richard Glover as a Party set to it but saith he did not THEN read the same and that these Bags and Boxes of Writings he after delivered to Lady Ivy and among them she told him she found this Lease Now if Serjeant Brampston swears true that the FIRST time he found which in common Speech is as much as to say he knew not of it before a Deed under Glover's hand which might well be the Lease lett by Richard Glover to Aaron Williams which Lady Ivy had purchased were but six or seven years before 1675. how then was it possible that it could be by him for so Burtbee swore 't was recited in a Deed made in 1664 And had it been so recited as now 't is pretended it was in a Deed made in 1664. to which Lady Ivy was Party it must have been known to her self which in her Answer to Sir Robert Cotton's Bill she swears it was not but that it was by her found in May 1675. in an old Bag of Writings And Serjeant Brampstons Deposition also says That she at that time told him that she did find it so so that it is not hard to believe this Deed never produced till Easter-Term 1686. was made for the purpose aforesaid since to support the Truth of this Deed there is nothing more than barely the Oath of one Edward Burtbee a man well known about Town and that he has been all along employed by the Lady Ivy and so not unlikely to have been in the Secret For the Fine if the Deed of Uses be not true it may be of any other five Acres But Note 't was Levied two years after 1664. Just about the time that Sir Anthony Bateman failed and when Lady Ivy set up to Claim the Inheritance of it nor is without some suspicion of having been unduly levied it may be by passing the Offices without the knowledge of Sir Tho. Ivy and Lord Chief Justice the Roll where the Caption of it to which the Lord Chief Justices Hand should be in the Custos Brevium Office being lost And if that Fine was really levied by Sir Thomas Ivy which is still to be doubted for the reason aforesaid 't is not however to be wondred at much considering that he had covenanted to do any Act with the Land in that Lease his Lady should desire so it might be no prejudice to the payment of his 800 l. as aforesaid And it may be he was made believe at that time that it was her Inheritance by being showed the Deed of the 12 Nov. 5 and 6 Ph. and Mary which was before that time made and if any Deed there was made to Edward Burtbee and Edward Temple to lead the use of this Fine of five Acres 't is plain it could not be a Deed dated in February 1664. reciting this Fifty six years Lease for the reasons aforesaid but must have been some other Deed after that time made and designed as this Fine seems to have been in future times to make out some colourable Title to the Inheritance of this five Acres of Land which Lady Ivy held only by Aaron Williams his Lease that expired at Lady-day 1681. And that 't was privately done is plain for neither the Fine nor the Deed was ever in any Trial produced till Easter-Term 1686. All that is to be said to the Verdict is They were given at times when the Creditors Title and that to Pruson's Island were not well made understood to the Court and Jury and when Lady Ivy's Deeds were believed As for the difficulty of making of Deeds a great many may as well be imagined to be made as one single Deed where the Ingenuity of the Party concerned and the Nature of the Title and Place afford good Materials for it And The Reader is now desired to take Notice That Wapping-Marsh was one Hundred and thirty Acres drowned Land in Henry the 8th's time and undertook to be Drained by one Vanderdelfe and so setled by Parliament that when Drained it should be equally divided 'twixt the Proprietors and Richard Hill who had bought Vanderdelfe's half And That no Division though undoubtedly one there was it may be among themselves made is now to be found on Record And Iasper Hill 3 Eliz. by Fine and Recovery having sold to Macheline and Iohn Stepkins 20 Acres of Land and 100 Acres of Marsh in Stepney that being the first Sale on Record 'T is in the power of Lady Ivy as Heir of Stepkins to Claim any part of the Marsh by alledging 't was part of what her Ancestors purchased if to answer the Possession there can any way a Lease be set up and by her Ladyship's luck only in finding old Leases these long Disputes have been made For the Proprietors no Division appearing being able to make no Title unless to the Copyhold before that purchased by Stepkins 3 Eliz. By such Lease she may claim any parcel she will though the Owners thereof have had it ever since the Draining thereof which could not be done in another place and makes it much easier to have been done than it can be imagined here And to remember That The Title by which the Creditors claim the Ten Acres of Freehold and Twelve Acres of Copyhold Land and whereby the Heirs of Whichcot do claim Pruson's Island and under which those Lands were all quietly held and enjoyed till after Sir Anthony Bateman failed is by Copies of Court Roll and Deeds on Record against the truth of which there has never yet been nor ever can be the least
not be pleased to take this as a sad Farewel from thy London 17 March 1650. Most Affectionate Husband Thomas Ivie And immediately after my Arrival at Malmsbury as soon as I had accommodated my House I sent her this Letter Most dear Heart YOV cannot but be sensible of my sad condition and necessity at London by reason of my Discontents and great sums of Mony which I do owe and have not wherewithal to satisfie my Creditors for had I stayed longer I must of necessity have been carryed to Prison or at least to my Grave For I was so much troubled and grieved in mind as your unkindness and want of Money that I thought my heart would have broken which so transported me that I knew not what I did when I left you Yet notwithstanding your unkindness to me if you can borrow 30 l. of any Friend of ours to supply your present occasions I will see it satisfied if not I shall willingly consent that you pawn some of your Iewels for so much money and when the India ships come home God willing I shall redeem them for you again and when I have paid my Debts you shall command me and my Estate which shall be at your disposure I should rejoyce to see you and my Father Stepkins here Therefore Dear Heart when you have a mind to come unto me advise me and I shall wait upon you to bring you down And when you are weary of my Company and Entertainment in the Country where my self and all that I have shall be at your Disposure I shall when you please return again with you to London and ever remain Malmsbury 24 March 1650. Your most affectionate Husband Thomas Ivie Instead of a Complying Answer which I expected for We cannot easily despair of Things We passionately desire I received this Summons from the Lords Commissioners of the Great Seal to appear before them WHereas Theodosia your Wife hath on this present day preferred her humble Petition unto us the Lords Commissioners of the Great Seal of England thereby praying Allowance of Alimony as by her said Petition remaining with us doth appear we do at her instance give you Notice thereof Requiring you hereby to make your personal appearance before Vs on the thirteenth day of this Instant to speak with Vs about the same Middle Temple the 11 day of April 1651. Richard Keeble John Lisle Immediately laying aside all my Business as fast as Passions and Spurs could quicken I repaired to the Chancery where I found to my great astonishment this false and scandalous Libel under the Title of a Petition for Alimony preferred against me The humble Petition of Theodosia Ivie Plaintiff Wife of Thomas Ivie Defendant THat She being the Daughter of John Stepkins Esq and married to the Defendant who hath without any cause given him not only diserted her Company but left her destitute of all manner of Means for her Livelihood and Subsistence And that during the time she cohabited with him she hath not only been in great Danger of her Life by his Cruel Vsages and unjust contrivances but by some means occasioned by the Defendant she hath been very Weak and Infirm And hath received from him such Infirmities not becoming a Husband to confer on his Wife And that by reason of his said cruelties and the peril of receiving from him Diseases of Dangerous Consequence she could not cohabit with him as his Wife without eminent peril of her Life And the Defendant was not only departed from her but utterly denied to allow her any convenient Support And that for meer necessity she had contracted some small debts And therefore she prayed the speedy Aid of the Court And that They would summon the Defendant before Them that upon hearing her just Complaints she might be relieved and have such fitting Allowance by way of Alimony granted to her as to the Court should seem meet And that for the present she may have some convenient Allowance for Expences in this Suit she being otherwise unable to proceed therein To which having sought Patience from above I returned this Answer That 't is true he Married the Plaintiff and hath ever since used her with the Respects of an affectionate Husband to a loving Wife and neither hath nor did intend to desert her Company but much desires it if he may find respectful carriage from her and is so far from leaving her destitute of all means that since his Marriage which was not then above eighteen Months he had furnished her with Jewels and Pearl to the value of 1200 l. besides Apparel which cost him above 200 l. All which Pearl and Jewels she had in her Possession in March then last past when the Defendant went to his dwelling-house in Wiltshire at which time he not only sollicited her to go and dwell with him but promised her upon the Enjoyment of her in the Country to resign both himself and his Estate to her Commands and Disposal That he hath likewise paid her Father 1000 l. for which he should have setled upon the Defendant some Estate of Inheritance for her Portion which is all the Fortune he ever expected with her whereof he hath not received the value of one penny That he allowed her for Clothes Mony and otherwise for her use above 800 l. And during the time he hath lived with her he hath spent in Housholdstuff House-rent and House-keeping 2870 l. so that in eighteen Months he hath spent with her 6000 l. And this he mentions not as if he repented of his Kindness to her but to evidence to their Lordships that there is no just cause of Complaint against him for not allowing her maintenance That he never acted any thing of Danger or Cruelty or that might occasion any infirmity to her nor was there ever any Disagreement or any Cause why she should separate from him But her desire was to live in London a place neither agreeable to the Defendants health or Estate He having already by reason thereof contracted many Debts And confesseth that having by consent of her Father and her self bought an Estate in Wiltshire situate in a healthful air and a place of much conveniency delight and profit He hath many times by Letters in Person and by Friends earnestly desired her to live with him at his said House in the Country where she shall want for nothing in his power for her use and conveniency and care shall be taken for her accomodation for her Journey wherein he hopes yet to prevail that they may mutually enjoy the Comfort of each other which he much thirsteth after and is not little grieved there should be any Question of it That he took such Order presently after his going into the Country whereby the Plaintiff was supplyed with monies for her present occasions and presumes the foul scandals suggested in the Petition are well known to the Plaintiff to have so little colour of Truth in them as he hopes the same were put
from her Eyes wept passionately as she seemed and breaking into great Passion said Ah Ienny have I loved and entertained thee thus long been as kind to thee and as tender of thy good as if thou went my own Child and canst thou conceal any thing from me Doubtless thou art with Child and therefore come put on your mask for you shall once more to Doctor Trigg who understands these things better than any Midwife and he will prove you to be with Child And that you may not think I have any Plot upon you that Objection was very strong within her put on your mask that the Doctor may not know your face again and fetch your Water and Mrs. Sessions shall go with you The Maid being perplexed in mind and far from any of her Friends knew not what to do in this condition But being urged by her Mistress went again with the Midwife After the Midwife had given Trigg her Water and discourst with him privately he called to Iane Gilbert and bid her go up stairs with him But the poor Wench not knowing which to prefer her Modesty or Innocency refused to go with him until at length being clamour'd at and absolutely forced up to his Chamber she was necessitated to follow him Where Trigg began to acquaint her that her Mistress Mrs. Ivie had told him that she had been too familiar with her Master and therefore he must search her And did thereupon in a most rude and violent manner force his hands under her Coats to her naked Body and did use her in a most abominable way c. And when he had effected his business he told the Midwife that she was with Child though the Maid absolutely and earnestly denyed the same Hereupon they left Trigg and returned to my Wife who having heard the Relation from Mrs. Sessions what had been done being totally unsatisfied caused her to be carryed to another Physician Dr. Hinchley and shewed him the Water and desired him also to search her in like manner But his Verdict was unlike that of the Mountebank Trigg for he peremptorily avouch'd she was not with Child Notwithstanding all this could not satisfie the aim of my Wife and Mrs. Williamson But once more she must expose her Nakedness to the search of another Doctor a Man-midwife Dr. Hinton who in like manner as Dr. Hinchley notwithstanding Mrs. Williamson and my Wife did earnestly sollicite him to attest that she was with Child acquitted her from being with Child and would justifie her to be a Virgin These two Testimonies did no way forward their Design for by this means all the pains in Threatnings and Persuasions to acknowledge her self with Child by me began to undervalued by how much the more the said Iane Gilbert had been acquitted by the two Doctors and Midwife and accused only by that Ignorant Quack Trigg And therefore seeing the Wench was so obstinate that she would not comply with them and least at my return she might discover this unto me a new Project was set on foot so to terrifie the Wench that she might leave London immediately And thereupon they came unto her and told her that Mr. Stepkins my Wifes Father would do her a notorious Mischief if she would not acknowledge her self with Child Mrs. Williamson advised the Maid to go for a while into the Country until Mr. Stepkins's anger was over Upon this account she was sent away to her Father's House in Hertfordshire where immediately after her arrival she received a Letter from my Wife that her Father Stepkins was so incensed against her that he would not suffer her any longer to live with my Wife Notwithstanding the great love she bore she would not leave her destitute of a Service but would provide a convenient Place for her Scarce eight days had passed but down comes Mrs. Williamson to her pretending she had been at Cambridge and came out of her way on purpose to see her Though 't was evident she came directly from London to the said Iane Gilbert Insomuch that the Maid suspected some farther ill towards her having been formerly so abused but parling together about former Passages The Maid asked Mrs. Williamson what Ill she had deserved from her Mistress that she should be so disgraced as she had been and though she found her guiltless she should now be put away Well quoth the Maid by God's help I will be to morrow in London and will endeavour to right my self from these Aspersions Whereupon she found the end of Mrs. Williamson's Journey was to hinder the Maid from coming to London because I was the day before arrived out of the Country lest she should see me and discover what had been done unto her in order to make her confess that I lay with her and that she was with Child by me Mrs. Williamson now perceiving that the said Iane Gilbert was resolved to make a stir in this foul Business returned with all speed to my Wife and wished her to think of a way how to hinder her from speaking with me The next day as soon as the said Iane Gilbert came to my House my Wife met her at the Door and giving her many good words perswaded her to take a Lodging near that place and change her name and that she would pay for it The Maid very much troubled at this usage was very pressing to know what Offence she had ever given her Truly quoth my Wife Sweet Ienny I love thee most dearly But the Truth of all is my Husband and his Friends give out that 't is unfit for me to keep a Gentlewoman to wait upon me besides common Servants and that 't was their Envy towards her and therefore she must be gone But withal assur'd her that she would provide a convenient place for her My Wife now thought that she had by this Trick made the Maid believe me to be the sole cause of her turning away and sufficiently exasperated her against me yet did not despair of a Compliance from her and therefore said For my part I am content you stay this night that she might farther try her and to morrow thou shalt have another Lodging look'd out for thee But my Wife understanding the next Morning that I began to parle with the Maid about the passages aforesaid which indeed were communicated to me in the Country knockt very furiously for her to come up into her Chamber and commanded her immediately to leave the House and would not suffer her to speak any more to me Whereupon she went to one Mr. Price's House a Brother of one of her Fellow-servants and lay there privately as she thought but 't was made known to my Wife who immediately sent a Maid to sound of what Temper she was and how she stood affected towards her And it being return'd that she was full of Disdain and Passion by reason of the aforesaid Practices against her and that she would forthwith send for her Trunks they were immediately
give Allowance for Alimony to the Plaintiff And do Order and Decree that the Plaintiff have paid unto her the Sum of 300 l. by the year which their Lordships intend to be had and raised out of the Plaintiffs Father's Estate so setled in the said Trustrees as aforesaid until farther Order And do therefore Order that the said Defendant and the said Trustees shall authorize or permit and suffer the Plaintiff or whom she shall nominate and appoint from time to time quietly and without Interruption to receive the Rents and Profits of the said Lands And the several Tenants of the Premisses are hereby ordered to pay the same accordingly from our Lady-day last And the said Trustees and the said Tenants in so doing are to be saved harmless by the Decree of the Court But in case the said Lands are in a greater yearly value than the said 300 l. per Annum And that the said Defendant shall at any time signifie so much unto their Lordships And undertake and sufficiently secure the Payment of 300 l. per Annum quarterly unto the said Plaintiff by equal Portions to begin from our Lady-day last then the said Defendant is hereby decreed to pay unto the said Plaintiff the said yearly Sum of 300 l. accordingly until further Order at aforesaid And that the said Trustees are in such Case to permit and suffer the said Defendant and his Assigns to receive and enjoy the Rents and Profits of the said Fathers Estate any thing herein contained to the contrary in any wise notwithstanding Rob. Dod Deput Regist. Being advertized by a Friend of these irregular Proceedings and perceiving what a Considerable part of my Estate was aimed at I addressed my self immediately with this Petition to the Lords Commissioners August 19. To the Right Honourable c. The Humble Petition of Thomas Ivie Defendant Husband to Theodosia Ivie Plaintiff Sheweth THat several Papers have been brought to your Petitioner intituled â—â— Orders from your Lordships but without any Subscription of the Register or his Deputy That at the end of one of the said Papers 't is mentioned that unless cause at the next Privy Seal be shewn to this Court to the contrary by the Defendant That 300 l. per Annum therein mentioned shall be decreed But on what day the next Privy Seal will be or in what place is not expressed in the said Paper Neither can your Petitioner by all possible means and industry find when and where he may attend your Lordships Insomuch that your Petitioner hath just Ground to fear if any such Order be either he may be surprized or a Decree might pass against him without his Knowledge of the time wherein he might make his just Defence especially all his Papers being at present in the Custody of his Sollicitor Mr. Cox who is not in Town In tender Consideration whereof may it please your Honours to declare whether any such Order was made by the Court and at what time and place your Lordships have or will be pleased peremptorily to appoint to hear the Defence of your Petitioner who with all humility and willingness will attend your Lordships Hoping by God's assistance to give a full Demonstration of his Innocency and Integrity and to wipe off all the foul Aspersions whatsoever which have been cast upon him to ruine both his Person and Estate And your Petitioner shall ever pray c. All the Return that I could obtain from the Lords Commissioners unto the said Petition was this Let Mr. Ivie attend us to shew us Cause according to the last Order on Tuesday next 19th of August 1652. B. Whitlock R. Keeble J. Lisle On the Tuesday following I did attend in Person but without any Counsel all being in the Circuits with the Judges And if could have found any it had been almost impossible to have fully instructed them in the Cause there being so many Depositions and those of so great Length Whereupon I renewed my humble and earnest Request unto them with all the Vehemency I could express That they would make no Decree before they heard the merits of the Cause on both sides Notwithstanding I found 't was their Resolution to sign that Irregular Paper and to declare before-hand that they had found just Cause for Alimony The Preamble of the Decree being full of Reflections and containing several Insinuations against me All that they thought fit to add was this Clause Vntil further Order A dear Expression in Chancery and as costly as the other Vnless he shew Cause Now and not before was the Order which they commonly call the Decree having put the Great Seal unto it delivered unto the Register to enter which first ought to have been drawn by him and then perused by Counsel on both sides Had any one but heard what smooth words the Lords Commissioners gave me at this time telling me That it should not be prejudicial unto me and that they would hear my Counsel at any time come when I would and that 't was but a Temporary thing and that they would deal tenderly with me in so tender a Case as between Man and Wife one would have almost been persuaded that it had been my duty to have given my consent also But though there was Honey in their Mouths yet was there too too much Gall in their Ink and Wormwood in their Decree Had they but considered the Deed of Covenant which they professed they had perused 't would have appeared very evident that there was no shadow for so great allowance as 300 l. per Annum When her Father himself and my Wife also made to me a Proposition of giving her the liberty of living where she would and setting out for her fit allowance they themselves did desire no more but 120 l. per Annum Depos l. Besides of the Articles in my custody which they caused to be drawn to the same Purpose But I suppose the Lords Commissioners were so far from considering what they signed that they never read the Deed which they mention nay I think I may safely say They did not or would not consider the Act it self for Alimony For that Act impowers them to give only such Alimony as is proportionable to the Fortune which the Woman brought and that also to be raised out of the Husbands Estate Whereas the truth is she hath not in all her Proofs proved that she had been or in probability could ever be worth a Penny to me And as for that Estate which the Lords Commissioners did decree unto her 't is true I had an equitable Title unto it but it really did belong to the Heir at Law until such time as I had performed some small Covenant Insomuch that Mr. Stepkins his Son and Heir also was injured by these proceedings of the Lords Commissioners for which he hath often made his Complaint as well as his just Title in Law though to little purpose I know full well what shadow the Commissioners put on this dealing
propter Adulterium or will consent to separate it is most reasonable he should allow her convenient maintenance else he should take advantage of his own wrong and humour and Women should be in a worse case and condition than Servants who during their contract must have their Wages which between Husband and Wife ends not till death And it is conceived the Act of Parliament which impowreth the Lords Commissioners of the Great Seal to allow Alimony chiefly and naturally intends Relief where the Husband doth repudiate and not the Wife the words being upon consideration as well of the Portion or Estate that hath been paid or come to the Husband by such Wife as shall pray Relief And therefore in this particular Case it may be very justly insisted even from the Sence and Letter of the Act as also that 't was Mrs. Ivie separated her self from her Husband 't was not her Husband left her Nay after she was gone he used all affectionated and prudential means to bring her home to Cohabit with him neither doth he desist in the prosecution of it but hath several ways attempted it even until this day and doth still declare and protest his willingness to receive her whensoever she will Return and give security for his well Usage of her That she wanted nothing before her departure but was indeed maintained far above her quality is most clear from the Depositions and it is clear also from the Depositions that there was no deserting of her by her Husband but that her departure was absolutely upon Advice and Consideration design'd by her self and her Abettors especially if your Lordships please to remember those unhandsome correspondencies held by her with Gentlemen under feigned names her frequenting and meeting them in scandalous houses in Long-Acre and other places at unseasonable times of the Night under the pretence of withdrawing from her Husband being a Bed to her Devotion Those horrid and detestable plots upon Iane Gilbert even to the losing of her life Her charging her Husband with foul diseases of which he was cleared upon Oath by the President of the College and other learned Physicians And also her Contrivances and Sollicitations to her Brother Iohn Stepkins to murder her Husband which appears by the Oath of the said Stepkins Moreover seeing that there is a Caution in the Act that the allowance to the repudiated Wife ought to be proportionable to the Fortune she brought her Husband May it therefore please your Honours to understand 1. That he never received any penny Portion as yet and hath great reasen to doubt whether ever he shall 2. Because the Estate of her Father is at the present in the aforesaid Trustees and not in the Defendant nay it is so setled on them that unless I can raise and secure 4000 l. more besides 7000 l. already laid out they are not obliged neither will they nor can they convey it to the Defendant as appears by the Indenture of Settlement 3. In case they should convey and settle on the Defendant the said Estate 't is only for his life and no longer for which Estate being only 240 l. per Annum He has disbursed and laid out far more money than it is worth this appears from the Indenture viz. a 1000 l. to Mr. Stepkins in ready money to free the Estate from incumbrances three years since The Interest whereof comes to 200 l. In Jewels Pearls Ambergreeze Bezoar c. to the value of 1200 l. There was also spent in Law to enforce the Trustees who were kept back and hindred by Mr. Stepkins her Father to settle the Estate according to the Covenants and for the Fine and Recovery 200 l. more at least which makes 2600 l. That notwithstanding all the aforesaid Sums of Money have been laid out by the Defendant the Trustees do still refuse to convey the Estate to the Defendant and the Plaintiffs Brother as Heir at Law hath since the Death of his Father got the Possession of the Estate and receives the Rents Issues and Profits thereof Insomuch that the Defendant hath been necessitated to expend great Sums of Money to maintain several Sutes at Law both against the Trustees and Heir at Law in Preservation of his Estate for Life which he has so dearly bought as aforesaid That by the Plaintiffs means there has been consumed and wasted of his Estate 4000 l. viz. 3000 l. since Marriage spent on her 500 l. given in Money 100 l. given to Gentlemen of her Familiar Acquaintance to perswade her to go into the Country 300 l. taken in Silks and Plate from the Defendant whilst that he was at the Court of Aldermen He has also contracted several great Debts to the value of 3000 l. besides 1000 l. spent in this unhappy Sute and must therefore necessarily in case 300 l. per Annum be taken from him be cast into Prison the most part of his Life he having but 632 l. per Annum of his own Estate and that for his Life only both to pay all his Debts aforesaid and to live on beside Excepting the 240 l. per Annum which if it be recovered from the Heir of Stepkins and recovered by the Trustees all which will yield but a scant and bare Maintenance for himself Wife and Family to raise out of it 3000 l. for the Creditors and 4000 l. more according to the Indenture of Settlement unless the Defendant be acquitted and discharged of the said 4000 l. by the last Will and Testament of the Plaintiffs Father in whom the remainder of the Estate was in case the Defendant should have no Issue or not perform the Covenants which he stands obliged to perform in the said Deed And though the Defendant is credibly informed that the said remainder is disposed of to the said Plaintiff and the Defendant is also acquitted from all performance of any Covenants expressed in the said Deed of Settlement Yet so it is that the Plaintiff having got Possession of the said Will and by Combination with Sir Iohn Brampston Kr. c. his Son the sole Executor of it still keeps and detains the said Will from being legally proved Insomuch that the Defendant cannot make any Benefit of the said Estate nor by Law enforce the Plaintiff to produce the Will she being his Wife That this is not a bare Suggestion I doubt not but is very evident to your Lordships she and her Sollicitor Zanchey having often avouch'd in your Lordships presence that both there is such a Will and that your Lordships have seen it This is also very well known unto her Council Mr. Maynard who caused to be delivered unto Sir W. Row a true Copy of the said Will taken from the Original which was long in his Custody But such is the Plaintiffs Malice to the Defendants Person and Estate that she still suppresses and hinders the proving of it which is the sole cause of the Continuance of many great Sutes and vast Expences to the Defendant
might be no industry wanting to persuade her he gave 100 l. to two persons of her familiar Acquaintance to be urgent and sollicitous to endeavour the Accomplishment of his desire But by the Practises of the said Confederates she was seduced to the preferring of a vile scandalous and false Petition to the Lords Commissioners against Mr. Ivie for obtaining Alimony but not one syllable of her suggestions proved against him Nay the contrary proved by Mr. Ivie by the several Testimonies of many Persons of good Quality and Reputation as appears by the Depositions themselves besides his own Oath which he made in answer to the scandalous aspersions cast upon him Notwithstanding this Vindication after two years dependance in the Chancery and the Expences of almost 3000 l. in this unnatural and twelve other Suits at Law which were commenc'd against him by the means of this Suit she obtained from the Lords Commissioners an Order in private for 300 l. per Ann. Alimony Notwithstanding Mr. Ivie was always ready to receive her and use her in all Respects according to her Quality neither Mr. Ivie nor his Counsel being present Notwithstanding they declared That they would send for Mr. Ivie before they would give Judgment in the Case But never as yet did nor ever yet heard the Merits of the Cause which in respect of the proceedings was contrary to the Rules of the Court and in respect of the Allowance in case Mr. Ivie had been guilty of the Complaint contrary to the Act of Parliament Having thus Affliction added to Affliction and being in Debt by the means of his said Wife above 3000 l. And having not wherewithal to sell to pay his Creditors And in regard the Reversion of his Estate is setled on his said Wife he attended almost a year upon the Lords Commissioners for his Relief that they would be pleased but to grant him a fair hearing upon the Merits of the Cause in the presence of both parties with their Counsel which was by their Order accordingly granted and a Day by them appointed But when the Day came and Mr. Ivie had retained to his great charge many great Counsel the Lords Commissioners absolutely refused to hear the said Cause which hath exposed the said Mr. Ivie and his Wife to all manner of Temptations and their Persons and Estates to utter Ruine And although at the same time Mr. Ivie did Request the said Lords Commissioners to recommend any godly Minister whom they themselves should choose to live in house with him and his Wife as an Expedient to a Peace and Reconciliation between them for which he obliged himself to allow any such Minister 50 l. per Annum besides all other fitting Accommodations whatsoever yet was this Proposal slighted by them and laughed at by his said Wife even in the presence of their Lordships And since that time Mr. Ivie having sued those who received her and denyed her unto him and obtained by just proceedings in Law a Judgment and Execution against such Persons the Lords Commissioners have notwithstanding granted their Injunction for their Protection Insomuch that they have now effected an absolute Separation which is contrary to the Law of the Nation and the Act of Parliament for Alimony it self which was declared by my Lord Chief Justice Roles upon Reading the Decree for Alimony FINIS 27 Iuly 10 Eliz 1568. Note 12 Oct. 24 Eliz 1582. Note Note 34 35 Eliz. Trin. 43 Eliz. 1601. Hill 9 Iac. 1611. 5 Aug. 13 Iac. 1615. 14 Aug. 1647. Trin. Term. 1656. 15 Iuly 1656. 5 Ed. 6. 1551. 5 Eliz. 1563. Note 13 Eliz. 1571. 18 Eliz. 1576. 20 Eliz. 1578. 23 Eliz. 1581. 26 Eliz. 1584. 1 Iac. 1603. 1616. 27 Nov. 25 Car. 2. 13 May 26 C. 2. Easter-Term 1686. 25 Eliz. 1583. 20 M. 3 Iac. 1604. 1616. 26 Mar. 1646. 28 Mar. 1646. 16 May 1646. 19 Mar. 1646. 24 Apr. 1649. 25 Apr. 1649. 2. Edw. 6. 23 March 5 Edw. 6. 12 Nov. 5 6 Phil. Mar. 〈…〉 〈…〉 〈…〉 〈…〉 6 Novemb. 13 Nov. 1 Novemb. 1613. 8 Septemb. 1619. 5 August 1620.