196 EURE V HARRIS Francis Eure of Minster Lovell, co. Oxford, esq v Robert Harris of the same, yeoman October 1639 December 1640

Transcription

1 1 196 EURE V HARRIS Francis Eure of Minster Lovell, co. Oxford, esq v Robert Harris of the same, yeoman October 1639 December 1640 Name index: Bray, Giles, knight Curson, John, knight Eure, Edward, esq (also Ewre, Ewer) Eure, Francis, esq (also Ewre, Ewer) Eure, Margaret (also Ewre, Ewer) Eure, Richard, Mr (also Ewre, Ewer) Gasson, Robert Harris, Robert, yeoman Heath, Thomas, gent Higham, Edward, M.A. Howard, Henry, baron Maltravers Howard, Thomas, earl of Arundel and Surrey Hungerford, Anthony, esq Lenthall, William, esq Lewin, William, lawyer Merrick, William, lawyer Norris, Francis, knight (also Norreys) Palmer, John, M.A. Poore, Francis Power, Francis, esq Power, Margaret Rainshaw, John (also Rainshawe) Standard, John, Professor Talbot, Clere, lawyer Terrick, Humphrey, registrar Watson, John, notary public Webb, Nicholas, gent Wenman, Francis, knight Wilkinson, Thomas, shepherd Place names: Middlesex, New Inn Westminster Oxfordshire, Bletchingdon Bucknell Deddington Minster Lovell Oxford Wadham College

2 2 River Windrush Somerset, Trull Sussex, Etchingham Subject index: allegation of tradesman status calling sirrah denial of gentility giving the lie inns of court sport University of Oxford Abstract Eure complained that in Minster Lovell parish in July 1639, Harris said he was a base lyeing fellowe and noe gentleman, and that he would prove him soe. Harris had raised the floodgates of the mill pool at Minster Lovell, which spoiled the fishing that Eure and other gentlemen were enjoying. Harris claimed that Eure had usurped his authority by shutting the floodgates again by force. He also suggested that Eure s grandfather was merely a blacksmith. Process was granted on 28 October 1639 and the depositions of Eure s four witnesses were taken at the Mitre Inn, Oxford, on 15 February 1640, before a commission consisting of Sir John Curson and Sir Francis Norris. The testimony of Harris s witnesses was sent for by the court in October 1640, and sentence was appointed to be heard on 4 December 1640; however, the result of the case is not known. Documents Initial proceedings Petition to Arundel: 2/146 (28 Oct 1639) Plaintiff s bond: 2/129 (7 Nov 1639) Defendant s bond: 2/152 (27 Nov 1639) Libel: Cur Mil II, fo. 131 (no date) Plaintiff s case Letters commissory for the plaintiff: Cur Mil II, fo. 132 (5 Dec 1639) Defence interrogatories: Cur Mil II, fo. 130 (no date) Plaintiff s depositions: Cur Mil II, fos [15 Feb 1640] Proceedings Proceedings: 1/11, fos. 56r-64v (10 Oct 1640)

3 3 Proceedings: 1/11, fos. 49r-52r (24 Oct 1640) Proceedings before Maltravers: 1/11, fos. 19r-30v (30 Oct 1640) Proceedings: 1/11, fos. 5r-9r (20 Nov 1640) Proceedings before Maltravers: 1/11, fos. 79r-87v (4 Dec 1640) Notes Initial proceedings 2/146, Petition to Arundel In July 1639, Robert Harris did, without anie cause or provocation given him by your petitioner, say that the petitioner was a base lyeing fellowe, and that he would prove him soe and used divers other scandalous speeches to and of your petitioner in the presence and hearing of divers credible persons. Petitioned that Harris being very welthy and your petitioner without remedy be brought to answer. Maltravers granted process on 28 October /129, Plaintiff s bond 7 November 1639 Bound to appear in the Court in the painted Chamber within the Pallace of Westminster. Signed by Francis Ewre. Sealed, subscribed and delivered in the presence of John Rainshawe. 2/152, Defendant s bond 27 November 1639 Bound to appear in the Court in the painted Chamber within the Pallace of Westminster. Signed by Nich. Webb of New Inn, co. Middlesex, gent, on behalf of Harris. Sealed, subscribed and delivered in the presence of Humphrey Terrick. Cur Mil II, fo. 131, Libel [damaged] 1. Eure s family had been ancient gentry for up to 200 years. 2. Between June and September 1639 in Minster Lovell parish, Harris had called Eure a base fellow and that he would prove me so, which words were contemptuous and provocative. Signed by William Lewin. Plaintiff s case

4 4 Cur Mil II, fo. 132, Letters commissory for the plaintiff [damaged] Addressed to commissioners Sir John Curson, Sir Thomas Wenman, Sir Francis Norris, John Standard, Professor of Theology, and also, Sir Giles Bray, Sir Francis Wenman, William Lenthall, esq and Anthony Hungerford, esq, to meet at the Mitre Inn, Oxford on the 15 February Terrick assigned John Watson as notary public. Dated 5 December Signed by Humphrey Terrick, registrar. Cur Mil II, fos. 130, Defence interrogatories [damaged] 1. The witnesses were warned of the penalty for perjury and bearing false witness. What was the witnesses age, occupation and condition of living? 2. Was the witness household servant or retainer of Eure? Did they receive wages? Was the witness a relative of Eure, and if so in what degree? 3. If any witness deposed of the supposed scandalous words, they were to be asked exactly where and when they were spoken, what was spoken and who were present? 4. Had there been any quarrelling over fishing in the flood gate pool at Minster Lovell, a part of the River Windrush? Did Harris have the right to fish there, and did he have the right to draw up and shut down the gates between the floodgate pool and millpond? Did Eure by force of armes against the will of Robert Harris shut down the floodgates? Did Eure abuse Robert Harris either by evil language or unkind acts? Was Harris justly provoked to anger and impatience with Mr Eure? 5. Were Eure and Harris and the witnesses all close together at the time? 6. Did the witness know the Eures paternal grandfather? Where did he live and die, and what was he reputed to be in the degrees of gentilitie, or otherwaies of handicraft as a blacksmith or such like? 7. How long had the witness known Harris? Was Harris a very milde, meeke, humble man in his disposition and carriage and one who would not give ill language of or to any man unless he should be much urged and provoked thereunto? How old was Harris, and was he lame and deaf? 8. Had the Eures intemperate carriage often provoked men to anger? 9. Had the witness had any conference with anyone about how to depose in this cause, and what was it? 10. Had the witness been taught or instructed how to depose, if so, by whom? 11. [Damaged] A question concerning fishing rights. No date Signed by Robert Gasson. Cur Mil II, fos , Plaintiff s depositions fos. 123r-124v (Witness 1), Edward Higham of Wadham College, Oxford, M.A., born at Etchingham, co. Sussex, aged about During one of the months mentioned in the libel, at a water mill near Minster Lovell, he heard Robert Harris tell Mr Eure that he was a base lying fellow and that

5 5 he would prove him so. Mr Thomas Heath, Mr John Palmer, Mr Francis Poore, Mr Richard Ewer and others were present. 1. He was an MA and fellow at Wadham College. 2. Negative. 3. He overheard the words while fishing in the river, and thought the words were spoken in the afternoon. 4. Harris pulled up the floodgate, but [Higham] pushed it down again and kept it shut against Harris s will. He cannot remember if this was before or after the speaking of the words deposed above. Mr Eure replied to Harris: Sirrah, I will make you answer this. Thereafter the witness heard no more abusive language from Harris. The occasion of Harris speaking the words was that he had spoiled the fishing of Mr Eure by pulling up the floodgate. [Higham] was close to Harris and Eure when the words were spoken. 7. At the time of the words, Harris was very violent and passionate, and did grinne and shake his head at Mr Eure. 8. He thought Mr Eure was a quiet and courteous man. 9, 10. Negative. 11. At the time and place of the words, Mr Eure said that he had a right to fish in the mill pond. Signed by Edward Higham, and by the commissioners John Curson, Francis Norreys, and John Standard. fos. 125r-126r (Witness 2), John Palmer of Wadham College, Oxford, M.A., born at Trull, co. Somerset, aged about He had known Eure for a year and had heard he was a gentleman descended of a gentry family. 2. During one of the months mentioned in the libel, near a water mill near Minster Lovell, he heard Robert Harris tell Mr Ewer in an angry and passionate manner, that he was a lying fellow and that he would prove him so. Mr Heath, Mr Higham, Mr Richard Ewer, the plaintiff s wife and sister, and some others were present. 3. The witness was there because he had come to fish. 4. Harris or someone acting for him, pulled up the floodgates. He did not hear Mr Eure give Harris any provoking language. 5. The witness was not far distant from where the words were spoken. 7. He had known Harris for half a year and conceiveth him to be a chollerick, hastie man by reason of the wordes, actions and gestures at the time and place aforesaid Negative. Signed by John Palmer and by the three commissioners. fols.126v-127v (Witness 3), Richard Ewer of Minster Lovell, co. Oxford, gent, lived there for 15 years, born at Casefield, co. Oxford, aged about 29

6 6 2. On a late-june day, near a water mill in Minster Lovell parish, he heard Robert Harris tell Mr Ewer in a hastie, angry and provoking manner, that he was a base lying fellow and that he would prove him so. Mr Thomas Heath, Mr Higham, Mr Francis Poore, Thomas Wilkins and several others were present. 1. He was a gentleman. 2. He was the natural and lawful brother of the plaintiff. 3. The time was about 1 or 2pm and he was fishing there with some gentlemen of Oxford. 4. Harris or someone acting for him, pulled up the floodgates with an intent to spoil [Ewer] and the gentlemen s fishing. He did not hear Mr Eure give Harris any provoking language. Eure did shut the gate down again, but not by violence. 5. The witness was not far distant from where the words were spoken. 7. He had known Harris for 13 or 14 years. 9, 10, 11. Negative. Signed by Richard Ewre and by the three commissioners. fos. 128r-129r (Witness 4), Thomas Wilkinson of Minster Lovell, co. Oxford, shepherd, lived there for 2 years, born at Deddington, co. Oxford, aged about He had known the plaintiff for 12 years, who was reputed a gentleman and lived in that fashion. 2. On a day during last wheat harvest, near a water mill in Minster Lovell parish, he heard Robert Harris tell Mr Ewer, in an angry and railing manner, that he was a base lying fellow and noe gentleman and that he would prove him so. Mr Higham, Mr Palmer, Mr Richard Ewer and several others were present. 1. He was a household servant to the plaintiff. 2. He was Eure s shepherd and received 4 per annum wages. 3. The time was about 1 or 2pm and his master had instructed him to join him fishing there. 4. Harris told his man to pull up the floodgates, but his man refused. 5. The witness was not far distant from where the words were spoken. 6. Negative. 7. He had known Harris for 3 or 4 years. 8. Mr Ewer is a very mild and patient man Negative. Signed by Thomas Wilkinson [his mark] and by the three commissioners. Summary of proceedings Dr Talbot acted as counsel to Eure and Dr Merrick for Harris. The testimony of the witnesses for Harris was sent for in October 1640, and sentence was appointed to be heard on 4 December 1640.

7 7 Notes The plaintiff Francis Eure and his brother Richard, may have been the Francis and Richard Ewer, sons of Edward Ewer of Bucknell, co. Oxford, and Margaret, daughter of Francis Power of Bletchingdon, esq. W. H. Turner (ed.), The Visitations of the County of Oxford, 1566, 1574 and 1634 (Publications of the Harleian Society, 5, 1871), p. 211.