Defamation
7a. Maud Langford defames Eleanor verch Howell
Examinations of witnesses concerning a cause of defamation arising from a conflict between Eleanor verch Howell and Maude (Matilda) Langford, in which Eleanor accuses Maud of sending her husband to kill Eleanor's master, and Maude using colourful language that reflects some tension between the Welsh and English, comments publicly on Eleanor's unchaste comportment.
People
f. 308r
[Beginning mid page]
19 January 1599
Francis Beuans
On the part of verch Howell[1] against Langford concerning the libel.
John Hurt, husbandman, of the parish of Leominster in the county of Hereford where he has lived for the space of one year now passed and before that born in the parish of Almeley in the aforesaid county, aged twenty-one years or thereabouts. The witness, produced, sworn, and examined, says and deposes as follows.
To the first article he says the same is true.
To the second and third articles, he says that the said articles contain in themselves the truth referring in addition to the same articulate laws.
To the third article he says and deposes that on the morrow next after the Feast of Saint Peter the Apostle last past, this examinate going in the company of the articulate Maude Langford the defendant, into a field near adjoining to Brierley in the parish of Leominster aforesaid did there by chance meet with the plaintiff, Elinor verch Howell, which Elinor then demanded of the said Maude Langford whether she, the said Maude, had sent her husband to
[1] verch Howell = daughter of Howell
Transcript
[Beginning mid page]
xix Ianuarij
1599
ffranciscus Beuans
Ex parte verch howell contra langford
super libello.
Iohannes hurte parochie de leompster
in Comitatu hereford husbandman vbi moram
fecit per spatium vnius anni iam \vltimo/ elapsum
et vltra natus in parochia de Almely in Comitatu predicti ætatis xxj annorum aut eo circiter
testis productus iuratus et examinatus dicit et
deponit vt sequitur.
1 Ad primum articulum dicit eundem esse verum.
Ad secundum et tertium articulos, dicit quod credit dictos
articulos continuere in se veritatem referendo se insuper
ad easdem leges articulatas.
Ad tertium articulum dicit et deponit That one the morowe
next after the feast of saint peeter the apostell last past
This Examinate going in the compane of the articulate
maudle langford the defendant, into a field nere adioyning
to Brierley in the parishe of leompster aforesaid did
there by chance meete with the plaintiff Eliner verch howell
which Elianer then demaunded of he said maude langford
whether she the said maude had sent her husband to
f. 308v
kill her, the said Elinor’s master. And the said Maude Langford replied and answered in these words (speaking to the said Elinor verch Howell) “thou lies like a Welsh whore.” None being present but this examinate and the said parties. And otherwise he knows nothing to depose.
To the fourth he says that he believes the same is true.
To the last he says that his depositions made above were and are true.
Signed [by] John Hurt
Transcript
kill her the said Elianors mayster. And the said maude
Langford replied and answered in these wordes
(speaking to the said Elianor verch howell) thow liest like
a welsh hoore with none being present but this
Examinate and the said parties Et aliter nescit deponere.
Ad quintum dicit quod credit eundem esse verum
Ad vltimum dicit predeposita sua fuisse et esse
vera etc.
Signatum Iohannis hurte.
9. Elizabeth Smith defames Eleanor Thomas
Examinations of witnesses concerning a cause of defamation brought by Eleanor wife of Philip ap Thomas against Elizabeth Smith who impugned Eleanor's chaste character using very abusive language, including anti-Welsh sentiment. Elizabeth Smith curses Eleanor publicly, calling down God's vengeance on her neighbour.
People
f. 372r
27th day of November 1600
Examinations of the witness on the part and behalf of Eleanor, wife of Philip ap Thomas, against Elizabeth Smith in a cause of defamation or insult follow.
Christina Cowsie, spinster, of the parish of Leominster in the county of Hereford, aged twenty years or thereabouts. The witness, produced, sworn, and examined says and deposes as follows.
To the first article she says the same is true.
To the second article she says that she refers to the articulate laws.
To the third article he says and deposes that within this twelvemonth last past the precise time she does not otherwise recall, the plaintiff Eleanor, the wife of Philip ap Thomas, being in her garden in Leominster articulate. And the articulate, Elizabeth Smith, being in a back side of her husband’s house next adjoining to the said garden, did maliciously (as she thinks) slander the said plaintiff with words of scandal and defame in effect as follows namely: “you" (speaking to the said plaintiff) "are a whore and an arrand whore, I will say it and stand to it.” And then kneeled on her knees and cursed the said Eleanor, the plaintiff, in this manner namely: “a plague of God light on thee, all the world wonder on thee, for I and my children will curse thee every evening and morning,” which words she spoke in the hearing of this examinate and one Anne Street and Catherine Street. And otherwise she knows nothing to depose.
To the fourth she says that he knows nothing to depose.
To the fifth she says that her depositions made above are true, etc.
X
Signed Christina Cowsie
Anna Street, spinster, of the parish of Leominster in the county of Hereford, aged twenty years or thereabouts. The witness, produced, sworn, and examined, says and deposes as follows.
To the first article she says the same is true.
Transcript
xxvij die
Novembris
1600
Examinaciones testium ex parte et per partem Elinore
vxor Philipi ap Thomas contra Elizabeth Smith
in Causa diffamacionis siue Convicij sequ[u]ntur etc.
Christiana Cowsie, parochie de leompster in comitatu
hereford spinster ætatis xx annorum aut eo circiter
testis producta iurata et examinata dicit et deponit vt
sequitur.
1 Ad primum articulum dicit eundem esse verum.
2. Ad 2 articulum dicit quod refert se ad leges articulatas
3 Ad 3 articulum dicit et deponit that within this
twelve moneth last past tempus certum aliter non recolit
the plaintiff Elinor the wief of Phillipp ap Thomas being
in her garden in leominster articulate, and the articulate Elizabeth Smith
being in a back side of her sh husbandes howse next
adioyning to the said garden, did malitiouslie (as she
thincketh) sclaunder the said plaintiff with words of scandale
and defame in effect as followeth videlicet thowe (speaking
to the said plaintiff) arte a hoore and an arrand hoore
I will saie it and stand to it. And then knealed one her
knewes and cursed the said Elinor the plaintiff in this manner
videlicet. a plague of god light one thee, all the world
wonder one the, for I and my children will curse thee
euerie evening and morning, which wordes she speake in the
hearing of this examinate and one Anne Streete and
Catherin Streete Et aliter nescit deponere.
4 Ad 4 dicit quod nescit deponere
5 Ad quintum dicit quod predeposita sua sunt vera etc.
X
signatum christiane Cowsie
Anna Streete parochie de leompster in comitatu hereford
spinster, ætatis xx annorum aut eo circiter testis producta
iurata et examinata dicit et deponit vt sequitur.
1 Ad primum articulum dicit eundem esse verum.
f. 372v
To the second article she says that she refers to the articulate laws.
To the third article she says and deposes that upon the Wednesday next before the Feast of Saint Peter the Apostle last past, the articulate Eleanor, the wife of Philip ap Thomas, being in her garden in Leominster articulate. And the defendant, Elizabeth Smith, being in a backside of her husband’s near adjoining to the said garden, she the said defendant Elizabeth Smith did utter and speak certain slanderous and opprobrious speeches of and concerning the plaintiff, Eleanor the said wife of Philip ap Thomas namely: speaking to the said Eleanor, said “thou art a whore and an arrand whore and I will prove thee a whore.” And then kneeling down on her knees said, “a plague of God light upon thee and all the world wonder on thee, and I and my children will curse thee morning and evening.” Which words were spoken in the hearing of this examinate, Christina Cowsie, and one Catherine Street and some others. And otherwise she knows nothing to depose.
To the fourth article she says the same is true.
To the last she says that what her depositions made above were and are true, etc.
[Signature mark]
Catherine Street, spinster, of the parish of Leominster in the county of Hereford, aged eighteen years of thereabouts. The witness, produced, sworn, and examined, says and deposes as follows.
To the first article she says and deposes the same is true.
To the second article she says that she refers to the articulate laws set forth in that behalf.
To the third article she says and deposes that on the Wednesday next before the Feast of Saint Peter the Apostle last past, this examinate going to bed, and shutting the windows,
Transcript
Ad 2 articulum dicit quod refert se ad leges in ea
parte editas.
Ad 3 articulum dicit et deponit that vpon the
wensdaie next before the feast of saint Peeter
the appostell last past the articulate Elinor the wief
of Phillipp ap Thomas being in her garden in
Leompster articulate, and \the/ defendant Elizabeth Smith
being in a backside of her husbandes neere
adioyning to the said garden she the said
defendant Elizabeth Smithe did vtter and speake
certaine sclaunderouse and opprobrious speeches
of and concerning the plaintiff Elianor the wief of Philippe
ap Thomas, videlicet speaking to the said Elianor
said thowe arte a hoore and an arrand hoore and
I will prove thee a hoore And then kneeling
downe one her knees said a plague of god
lighte vpon thee and all the worlde wonder
one thee, and I and my children will curse
thee morning and evening, which wordes were
spoken in the hearing of this examinate christiana
Cowsie, and one Catherine streete and
somme others Et aliter nescit deponere.
4 Ad quartum eundem esse verum
Ad vltimum dicit predeposita sua fuisse et esse vera etc.
[Mark in lieu of signature]
Catherina Streete parochie de leompster spinster,
ætatis xvij annorum aut eo circiter
testis producta iurata et examinata dicit et deponit
vt sequitur.
1 Ad primum articulum dicit et deponit eundem esse verum.
2. Ad 2. articulum dicit quod refert se ad leges in ea parte editas.
3. Ad 3 articulum dicit et deponit
That one the wensdaie[1] next before the feast of saint
Peeter thappostell last past this examinate
going to bed, and shutting the windowes
[1] Last letter unclear.
f. 373r
heard great talking near unto the same place. And as she thinks it was the plaintiff Mistress Eleanor Thomas and the defendant Elizabeth Smith but did not see them. Nevertheless, she heard one of them say to the other, “thou arte an arrand whore and I will prove it.” And said that it was the said Elizabeth Smith that said so, because she did speak like the said Elizabeth Smith. Spoken in the hearing of Lucy Drayton, John Suche, and others. And otherwise she knows nothing to depose.
To the fourth she says that she knows nothing to depose.
To the last she says that her depositions made above were and are true, etc.
Signed [by] Catherine Street
28 November 1600
John Suche, nailer, of the parish of Leominster in the county of Hereford, aged thirty years or thereabouts. The witness, produced, sworn, and examined, says and deposes as follows.
To the first article he says the same is true.
To the second article he refers to the articulate laws in that behalf.
To the third he says and deposes that within this twelvemonth last past, this examinate being in a back field of the defendant’s husband, John Smith, in Leominster articulate, did hear the said defendant, Elizabeth Smith, speaking to the said plaintiff Eleanor, the wife of Philip ap Thomas, say “if thou dost say that I am not an honest woman, thou art a whore” or such like words tending to the same affect. And otherwise he knows nothing to depose.
To the fourth he says that he knows nothing to depose.
To the last he says that his depositions made above were and are true, etc.
John Suche
Transcript
heard greate talking in the neere vnto the same
place And as she thinnketh it was the plaintiff mistres
Elinor Thomas and the defendant Elizabeth Smithe, but did
not see them : Neverthelesse she heard one \of them/ saie to the
other thowe arte an arrand hoore and I will prove
it, and thincketh that \saieth that/ it was the said Elizabeth
Smithe that said soe, because she did speake
like the said Elizabeth Smith. spoken in the
hearing of lucy drayton Iohn suche and others Et
aliter nescit deponere.
Ad 4 dicit quod nescit deponere.
Ad vltimum dicit predeposita sua fuisse et esse
vera etc.
[Mark in lieu of signature]
signatum Catherine streete
xxviij Novembris
1600
Iohannes Suche parochie de leompster in Comitatu hereford nayler ætatis xxx annorum
aut eo circiter testis productus iuratus et examinatus
dicit et deponit vt sequitur.
1 Ad 1 articulum dicit eundem esse verum.
2. Ad 2. articulum refert se ad leges in ea parte
Ad 3 articulum dicit et deponit quod nescit deponere
that within this twelve moneth last past this examinate
being in a backe field of the defendantes husband
Iohn Smith in leompster articulate, did heare the said
defendant Elianor S Elizabeth Smith speaking to the plaintiff
Elinor the wief of Phillippe ap Thomas, saie if thowe
doest saie that I am not an honest wooman thowe
arte a hoore or such like wordes tending to the same
affect. Et aliter nescit deponere.
4 Ad quartum dicit quod nescit deponere
Ad vltimum dicit predeposita sua esse vera etc.
Iohn such
f. 373v
Luna Drayton of the parish of Leominster in the county of Hereford, aged forty years and more or thereabouts. The witness, produced, sworn, and examined, says and deposes as follows.
To the first article she says the same is true.
To the second she says that she refers to the laws articulate.
To the third article she says and deposes that about midsummer last past, she this examinate dwelling then and now in Leominster and coming of an errand to a neighbour’s house did hear the defendant, Elizabeth Smith, say that she and her children would curse the plaintiff, Eleanor the wife of Philip ap Thomas, or such like words. Which speeches were so uttered in the hearing also of the wife of Thomas Green and Anne Symons. And further she says that she this examinate did then hear the said Elizabeth say, “whosoever doth say that I am not an honest woman is a whore,” but to whom she spoke the words she is ignorant. And otherwise she knows nothing to depose.
To the fourth she knows nothing to depose.
To the last she says that her depositions made above were and are true, etc.
L
Anna Trumper of the parish of Leominster in the county of Hereford, aged thirty years and more. The witness, produced, sworn, and examined, says and deposes as follows.
To the first article she says the same to be true.
To the second article she refers to the laws.
Transcript
Luna drayton parochie de leominster in Comitatu
hereford ætatis xl annorum et vltra testis
producta iurata et examinata dicit et deponit
vt sequitur.
1 Ad primum articulum dicit eundem esse verum.
2. Ad 2 dicit quod refert se ad leges
articulatas.
3 Ad 3 articulum dicit et deponit That aboutes half midsomer last past she this examinate
dwelling then and nowe in leominster didarticulate, and comming vf an arrand to a
neighboures howse did heare the defendant
Elizabeth smithe saie that she and her children
wold curse the plaintiff Elinor thee wief of
Phillippe ap Thomas or such like wordes, which
speaches were soe vttered in the hering allsoe
of the wief of Thomas greene, and
Anne Symons and this Et aliter nescit deponere Et vlterius dicit that she this examinate did
then here the said Elizabeth saie that whosoeuer doeth
saie that I am not an honest wooman is a hoore, but
to whom she spake those wordes she is ignorat
Et aliter nescit deponere.
4. Ad 4 dicit quod nescit deponere
Ad vltimum dicit sua predeposita fuisse et esse
vera etc.
L
Anna Trumper parochie de leompster
in Comitatu hereford, ætatis xxx annorum
et vltra testis producta iurata et examinata
dicit et deponit vt sequitur.
1. Ad primum articulum dicit eundem esse verum.
2. Ad 2 articulum dicit quod refert se ad
leges
f. 374r
To the third article she says and deposes that upon a Wednesday about a quarter of a year last past, she this examinate being in her own house in Leominster articulate, did hear the parties litigants at words, but did not see them, yet does believe that they were the same parties for that she, this examinate, did know their tongues. Where and when she, this deponent, did hear the defendant Elizabeth Smith says amongst other speeches “whosoever doth say that I am not an honest woman, I say she is a whore,” but whether she did speak those words to the plaintiff Eleanor, the wife of Philip ap Thomas, or not she is ignorant, but does believe that she, the said Elizabeth Smith, did speak the words to the said Eleanor Thomas for that she did hear others report it so afterwards. And otherwise she knows nothing to depose.
To the fourth she says that she knows nothing to depose.
To the last she says that her deposition made above was and is true, etc.
[Mark in lieu of signature]
Joan Caldowe, spinster, of the parish of Leominster in the county of Hereford, aged seventeen years or thereabouts. The witness, produced, sworn, and examined, says and deposes as follows.
To the first article she says the same is true.
To the second article she refers to the laws.
To the third article she says and deposes that upon the Wednesday next before the Feast of Saint Peter the Apostle last past, this examinate being in her
Transcript
Ad 3 articulum dicit et deponit that vpon a wensdaie
aboutes a quarter of a yeare \last/ past she this extaminate
being in her owne howse in Leompster articulate
did heare the parties litigantes at wordes, but did
not see them, yet doeth beleave that they were
the same parties for that she this examinate did
knowe theire tongues. where and when she
this deponent did heare the defendant Elizabeth
Smith saie amongst other speeches thowe arte no if thowe whoesoeuer doeth saie that I am not
an honest wooman I saie she is a hoore, but
whether she did speake those wordes to the plaintiff
Elinor the wief of Phillippe ap Thomas or not she
is ignorant, but doeth beleave that she the
said Elizabeth Smith did speake those wordes
to the said Elinor Thomas for that she did heare
others reporte it soe afterwardes. Et aliter nescit
deponere.
4. Ad 4 dicit quod nescit deponere.
Ad vltimum dicit predeposita sua fuisse et esse vera
etc.
[Mark in lieu of signature ]
Iohanna Caldowe parochie de leompster in comitatu
hereford spinster ætatis xvij annorum aut eo
circiter testis producta iurata et examinata dicit et
deponit vt sequitur.
1 Ad primum articulum dicit eundem esse verum.
2. Ad 2 articulum refert se ad leges
3. Ad 3 articulum dicit et deponit That vpon the
wensdaie next before the feast of saint Peeter
the appostell last past this eximinate being in her
f. 374v
Master his garden in Leominster articulate, at what time Eleanor Thomas the plaintiff was walking in her garden which was not far off and the defendant, Elizabeth Smith, was in her back side very near unto the same place. But she, this deponent, did not then see the said Elizabeth Smith by reason of a high wall between them. Nevertheless, she did know her by her voice. And she, this deponent, did then hear the said Elizabeth Smith say unto the aforesaid Elinor Thomas, “thou art an arrand whore,” which words (as it did seem unto this examinate) proceeded upon occasion of some speeches formerly passed between the said parties. And further she says that there were none present with her, this examinate, at the speaking of the said words, but she did see one Humphrey Rea, Christina Cowsie, and some others then in the garden with the said Elinor Thomas. And otherwise she knows nothing to depose.
To the fourth she says that she knows nothing to depose.
To the last she says that her depositions made above were and are true, etc.
9th day of January 1600
Matthew Lowe of the parish of Leominster in the county of Hereford, aged eighteen years or more. The witness, produced, sworn, and examined, says and deposes as follows.
To the first article he says the same is true.
To the second he refers to the laws set forth in that behalf.
Transcript
master his garden in leompster articulate did hearethe articulate the articulate Elizabeth Smith, at what time
Elinor Thomas the plaintiff was walking in her garden
which was not farre of and the \defendant/ Elizabeth
Smith was in her backe side verie neere
vnto the same place, but she this deponent
did not then see the said Elizabeth Smithe
by reason of a hie wall betwixt them Nevertheles
she did knowe her by her voice, And then shedid \this/ deponent did then heare the said
Elizabeth Smith saie vnto the foresaid
Elinor Thomas thowe arte an arrand hoore
which wordes ((as it did seeme vnto this examinate)w proceeded vpon occasion of sume so speeches
formerly passed betwixt the said parties.
Et vlterius dicit that there were none present
with her this examinate at the speaking of the
said wordes But she did see one humfrey
Rea, Christiana Cowsie and somme others in then
in the garden with the said Elinor Thomas
Et aliter nescit deponere.
4 Ad quartum dicit eundem esse verum
Ad vltimum dicit predeposita sua fuisse et esse
vera etc.
9 die
Ianuarij
1600
matheus lowe parochie de leominster in
Comitatu hereford ætatis xviij annorum
et vltra testis productus iuratus et
examinatus dicit et deponit vt sequitur.
1. Ad 1 articulum dicit eundem esse verum.
2 Ad secund[um] refert se ad leges in
ea parte editas.
f. 375r
To the third article he says and deposes that upon the Wednesday next before the Feast of Saint Peter the Apostle last past, this examinate in his master his back side in Leominster articulate, did hear the defendant, Elizabeth Smith, call the plaintiff, Elinor Thomas, arrand whore, saying that she, the said Elinor, did go to bed with her master. Spoken in the presence of diverse persons and namely one Christina Cowsie, Anne Street, Catherine Street. And otherwise he knows nothing to depose.
To the fourth he says that by reason of the premises, the plaintiff is put to charges and expenses. And otherwise he knows nothing to depose.
To the last he says his depositions made above were and are true, etc.
Matthew Lowe
Transcript
Ad 3 articulum dicit et deponit that vpon the
wensdaie next before the feast of saint
Peeter the appostell last past This examinate
in his master his back side in Leompster
articulate did heare the defendant Elizabeth
Smithe call the plaintiff Elinor Thomas arrand
hoore saieng that she the said Elianor did
goe to bed with her maister, spoken in the
presence of this of diuers persons and namelie
one Christiana Cowsie Anne streete Catherin
streete Et aliter nescit deponere.
Ad quartum dicit that by reason of the
premisses the plaintiff is putto chardges and
Expences Et aliter nescit deponere
Ad vltimum dicit sua predeposita fuisse et esse vera etc.
Mathew Lowe
8. Richard Gwillym defames Alice Hankins
Examinations of witnesses concerning a cause of defamation made by Alice Hankins against Richard Gwillym, who claimed to have had sexual relations with Alice and impugned her character publicly.
People
f. 308vb
22 January 1599
Jacob l. r. feod
Examinations of the witnesses on the part and behalf of Alice Hanckins against Richard Gwillym in a cause of defamation or insult, upon the libel following, namely:
John Gundy, labourer, of the parish of Aylton in the county of Hereford where has lived for three years now fully elapsed, born in the parish of Little Marcle in the aforesaid county, aged forty years or thereabouts. The witness, produced, sworn, and examined, says and deposes as follows.
To the first article he says the same is true.
To the second article, he says that he believes the same to be true, referring moreover to the laws articulate.
To the third article he says and deposes that within a fortnight after the Feast of Saint Michael the Archangel in the current year of our Lord 1599, this examinate being in the house of the articulate, Richard Gwillym, the defendant situate in Aylton aforesaid, upon occasion of conference and speeches there passed touching the plaintiff Alice Hankins, the said Richard Gwillym uttered these words following, speaking then of the said Alice namely: “she is a whore and an arrand whore, and she is my whore, and I have had the use of her body.” Which words were so spoken and uttered in the presence of this examinate and Joan Gundy his wife. And also he said that
Transcript
[starting mid page]
xxij Ianuarij
1599
Iacob l: r: feod
Examinaciones testium ex parte et per partem
Alice hanckins contra Richardum gwillym in Causa
diffamacionis siue Convicij super libello sequ[u]ntur
videlicet
Iohannes Gundy parochie de Aylton in Comitatu
hereford laborer vbi moram fecit per 3
annos iam vltimo elapsos natus in parochia
de marcle parwa in comitatu predicte ætatis lxta
annorum aut eo circiter testis productus iuratus et
examinatus dicit et deponit vt sequitur.
Ad primum articulum dicit eundem esse verum.
Ad secundum articulum dicit quod credit eundem articulum esse
verum referendo se insuper ad leges articulatas.
Ad tertium articulum dicit et deponit That abo within
a fortnight after the feast of saint Michael the Archangell
in Anno domini 1599 iam currente This Examinate being in
the howse of the articulate Richard gwillym the defendant scituate
in Aylton a foresaid, vpon occasion vf conference and speeches
there passed touching the plaintiff Alice hankins the said
Richard gwillym vttered these wordes following speaking
then of the said Alice videlicet she is a hoore and an
arrand hoore, and she is my hoore, and I have
had the vse of her bodie, which wordes were soe
f. 309r
he, the said Richard Gwillym did utter the like speeches at another time afterwards in the parish of Aylton in the presence of this examinate, John Loue, and Elizabeth Gwillym. And otherwise he knows nothing to depose.
To the fourth he says that he believes the same is true.
To the last he says that his depositions made above were and are true.
X [Mark in lieu of signature]
Joan Gundy, wife of John Gundy of Aylton, in the county of Hereford aged forty years or thereabouts. The witness, produced, sworn, and examined, says and deposes as follows.
To the first article she says the same to be true.
To the second article she says that she believes the same article is true, referring moreover to the law articulate.
To the third article she says and deposes that within a fortnight after Michaelmas last past in the year of our Lord 1599 the precise time she does not otherwise recall, this examinate being in the house of the articulate, Richard Gwillym, the defendant situated in Aylton articulate. It fortuned that the said defendant Richard Gwillym entered into speech and conference touching the plaintiff Alice Hankins. Among which speeches this deponent did hear him, the said Richard Gwillym, utter, declare, and give out these words following speaking of the said plaintiff, Alice Hankins, namely: “she is a whore and an arrand whore, and she is my whore and I have had the use of her body.” Which words were spoken in the presence of this examinate and John Gundy, her husband. And otherwise she knows nothing to depose saving that he spoke the said words afterwards to this examinate and one Elizabeth Gwillym.
To the fourth she says the same is true.
To the last she says that her depositions above were and are true, etc.
X [Mark in lieu of signature]
Transcript
he the said Richard gwillim did vtter the like speeches
at another tyme afterwardes, in the parishe of Aylton in
the presence of this examinate Iohn loue and Elizabeth
gwillym Et aliter nescit deponere.
Ad quartum dicit eundem esse verum.
Ad vltimum dicit predeposita sua fuisse et esse vera etc.
X
Iohanna Gundie vxor Iohannes Gundie de aylton in
Comitatu hereford, ætatis lxta annorum aut eo circiter
testis producta iurata et examinata dicit et deponit vt
sequitur.
1 Ad primum articulum dicit eundem esse verum.
2 Ad secundum articulum dicit quod credit eundem articulum esse
verum referendo se insuper ad leges articulatas in ea parte editas.
3. Ad tertium articulum dicit et deponit That within a fortnight
after Michellmas last past in Anno domini 1599 articulate tempus
certum aliter non recolit This Examinate being in the
howse of the articulate Richard gwillym the defendant scituate in
Aylton articulate. It fortuned that the said defendant Richard
gwillim entered into speech and conference touching the plaintiff
Alyce hanckins Among which which speeches this deponent
did heare him the said Richard gwillym vtter declare
and giue out these speeches f wordes following speaking
of the said plaintiff Alice hanckins videlicet she is a hoore and
an arrand hoore, and shee is my hoore and I haue had
the vse of her body which wordes were spoken in the
presence of this Examinate and Iohn Gundy her husband
Et aliter nescit deponere saving that he speake the said
wordes afterwardes to this examinate and one Elizabeth gwillym
Ad quartum dicit eundem esse verum.
Ad vltimum dicit predeposita sua fuisse et esse vera etc.
X
7b. Eleanor verch Howell defames Maud Langford (countersuit)
Examinations of witnesses concerning a counter cause of defamation arising from a conflict between Eleanor verch Howell and Maude (Matilda) Langford. It provides more evidence on the events in which Eleanor accuses Maud of sending her husband to kill Eleanor's master. It also adds accounts of events at the well in Brierly where the two women were doing laundry.
People
f. 310v
16th day of February 1599
Francis Beuans
Examinations of the witness on the part and behalf of Maud[1] Langford against Elinore verch Howell in a cause of defamation, upon the libel.
John Hurt, husbandman, of the parish of Hope Under Dinmore in the county of Hereford, aged twenty years or thereabouts. The witness, produced, sworn, and examined, says and deposes as follows.
[1]Matilda is commonly shortened to Maud. It is clear from what follows that this is Maud Langford.
Transcript
[Beginning near bottom of page]
xvj die
ffebruarij 1599
ffranciscus Beuans
Examinaciones testium ex parte et
per partem Matilde langford
contra Elinoram verch howell in Causa
diffamacionis super libello.
Iohannes Hurte parochie de hope subter dynmor in
Comitatu hereford husbandman ætatis xx annorum
aut eo circiter testis productusiuratus et
examinatus dicit et deponit vt sequitur.
f. 311r
To the first article he says the same is true.
To the second article he says that he believes the same is true.
To the fourth article he says and deposes that upon the morrow next after the Feast of Saint Peter the Apostle last past in the current year of our Lord 1599, this examinate going with the plaintiff, Maude Langford, into a field near Brierly in Leominster parish articulate, met with the articulate Elinor verch Howell the defendant with Elinor verch Howell upon her approach unto the said Maude Langford and the examinate, did say unto the said Maude Langford as follows namely: “did you send your husband forth to kill my master,” and then the said Maude replied “thou liest like a Welsh whore, I sent not my husband to kill your master.” Whereupon the said Elinor verch Howell immediately answered and spoke to the said Maude Langford as follows: “If I am a Welsh whore, you are an English whore.” Which words were so spoken nobody being by but this examinate. And otherwise he knows nothing to depose.
To the last he says his depositions made above were and are true.
H
Francis Beuans
Joan Emonds, spinster, of the parish of Leominster in the county of Hereford, aged twenty years or thereabouts. The witness, produced, sworn, and examined, says and deposes as follows.
To the first article she says the same is true.
To the second article she says she refers to the laws articulate in that behalf.
To the third article she says and deposes that abouts harvest last past, the plaintiff, Maude Langford,
Transcript
Ad primum articulum dicit eundem esse verum.
Ad secundum articulum dicit quod credit eundem esse verum.
Ad quartum articulum dicit et deponit That vpon
the morowe next after the feast of saint
Peeter Thappostell last past in Anno domini
1599 iam currente This examinate happen going
with the plaintiff maude langford from into a field
neere brierly in leompster parishe articulate, met with
the articulate Elinor verch howell the defendant, wherevpon theire with Elinor verch howell vpon her
approche vnto the said maud langford and the
Examinate, did saie vnto the said maud langford
as followeth videlicet did you send your husbande
forth to kill my master, and then the said maude
replied thowe liest like a welshe hoore I
sent not my husband to kill thy master, And
wherevpon the said Elinor verch howell ymediatly
answered and spake to the said maude langford
as followeth if I am a welshe hoore you
are an englishe hoore. which wordes were soe
spoken noe body being by but this examinate
Et aliter nescit deponere.
Ad quartum dicit quod descit deponere.
Ad vltimum dicit predisposita sua fuisse et esse
vera etc.
H[1]
ffranciscus Beuans
Iohanna Emondes parochie de leompster
in Comitatu hereford spinster ætatis xx
annorum aut eo circiter testis producta iurata
et examinata dicit et deponit vt sequitur.
1. Ad primum articulum dicit eundem esse verum.
2. Ad secundum articulum dicit quod refert se ad
leges in ea parte articulatas.
3 Ad tertium articulum dicit et deponit That aboutes \harvest last past/xij weekes last past Thes plaintiff maude langford
[1] We read this signature mark optimistically as H for Hurt.
f. 311v
and this examinate being washing of clothes at a well in Brierley within the parish of Leominster articulate. The articulate, Elinor verch Howell, came unto them and upon occasion of some words passed between the said plaintiff and defendant, the said Elinor verch Howell did call the said Maude Langford whore, which words were so spoken in the presence of this examine and one Winifred Price. And otherwise she knows nothing to depose.
To the fourth she says that she believes that same is true.
To the last she says that her depositions made above were and are true.
X
Signed [by] Joan Emonds
20 February 1599
Winifred Price, spinster, of the parish of Leominster in the county of Hereford, aged forty years or thereabouts. The witness, produced, sworn, and examined, says and deposes as follows.
To the first article she says the same is true.
To the second article she says and deposes that she is verily persuaded that all those which do slander their neighbours maliciously are to be punished by the laws of the realm. And otherwise she knows nothing to depose.
To the third article she says and deposes that in the later end of harvest last past, the articulate Maude Langford and Elinor verch Howell, being washing at a well in Brierley
Transcript
and this Examinate being washing of
Clothes at a well in Brierley
within the parishe of leompster articulate
The articulate Elianor verch howell cam vnto
them, and offered to washe the displacthrust vpon occasion of some wordes
passed betwixt the said plaintiff and
defendant the said Elianor verch howell
did call the said maude langford hoore
which wordes were soe spoken in the presence
of this examinate and one wenefred
Price Et aliter nescit deponere.
Ad quartum dicit quod credit eundem
esse verum.
Ad vltimum dicit predeposita sua fuisse
et esse vera etc.
signatum Iohanne X Emonds[1]
xx ffebruarij
1599
wenefreda Price parochie de
Leompster in Comitatu hereford spinster
ætatis xl annorum aut eo circiter
testis producta iurata et examinata
dicit et deponit vt sequitur.
1 Ad primum articulum dicit eundem esse verum.
2 Ad secundum articulum dicit et deponit that
she is verely perswaded that all those which
doe sclaunder theire neighboures
malisiously are to be punished by the lawes
of the Realme. Et aliter nescit deponere.
Ad tertium articulum dicit et deponit That in the
later end of harvest last past The articulate
Maude langford and Elinor verch howell
being washing at a well in Brierley
[1] Evidently the X is the signature.
f. 312r
within the parish of Leominster articulate. It happened that the articulate Elinor verch Howell came there to wash where they both did fall out in words striving for the washing place, upon occasion whereof the said Maude Langford, speaking to the said Elinor verch Howell, uttered these words following that is: “it does not become thee like a Welsh jade to thou[1] me.” And then presently the said Elinor spoke as follows that is: “loose me the bucket, scurvy Welsh lady and a whore to then.” But this examinate says that she knows not whether she spoke these words of the said Maude Langford or her servant maid that then had hold of the bucket. All which words were spoken in the presence of this examinate [and] Joan Emonds. And otherwise she knows nothing to depose.
To the fourth she says she knows nothing to depose.
To the last she says that depositions made above were and are true etc.
[1] speak to me familiarly
Transcript
within the parishe of leompster articulate It happened
that the articulate Elinor verch howell cam thether
to washe where they bothe did fall out in wordes
striving for the washing place, vpon occacion whereof
the said maude langford speaking to the said
Elinor verch howell vttered these wordes following videlicet
it doeth not becom thee like a welshe Iade to
thowe[1] me. And then presently the said Elianer
spake as followeth videlicet loose me the Bucket
scurvie welshe Iade and a hoore to then
But this examinate saieth that she knoweth
not whether she spake these wordes of the
said maude langford or her servant maid
that then had hould of the Bucket. All which
wordes were spoken in the presence of this examinate
Iohan Emondes and somme Et aliter nescit deponere.
Ad quartum dicit quod nescit deponere.
Ad vltimum dicit predeposita fuisse et esse vera etc.
[1] cf. thouten: to adress sombody as "thou". Middle English Dictionary s.v. thouten.
5. Joan Davies defames Sybil Smith
Examinations of witnesses concerning a cause of defamation arising from allegations made by Joan Davies that Sybil Smith had given birth to an illegitimate child.
People
f. 262v
The last day of June 1599
Jacob Ballard
Examinations of the witnesses on and for the part of Sybil Smith against Joan Davies alias Pynner in a cause of defamation or insult follow.
John Geynes, husbandman, of the parish of Holme Lacy in the county of Hereford where he has lived and made his home for eleven years of thereabouts. The witness, produced, sworn, and examined, says and deposes as follows.
To the first article he says the same is true.
To the second article he says that he refers to the laws in that behalf.
To the third article he says and deposes that upon the Friday in the cleansing week, being the Friday next after Shrove Sunday last past, this examinate happening to be in the house of John Pynner alias Smith, within the parish of Holme Lacy articulate. And having conference with Joan Davies alias Pynner, the wife of the said John Pynner alias Smith, concerning the plaintiff Sybil Smith. The said Joan, the defendant, said to this examinate that she would tell him a thing if he would not utter it again, and this examinate answered her that he would not disclose it if it did not concern a friend of his, and she said it did not, and thereupon she said that Sybil Smith, the plaintiff, was delivered of a child at Henry Phellpotes’ house at the boot of Byford, and that it was she, the said Sybil, that was there delivered of a child and who should it be but she. And otherwise he knows nothing depose.
Transcript
Vltimo die Iunij
1599
Iacobus Ballard
Exaiat Examinaciones testium
ex parte et [pro] partem Sibille
Smith contra Iohannam davies
alias Pynner in Causa diffamacionis siue
Convitij sequu[n]tur.
Iohannes Geynes parochie de homlacy in
Comitatu hereford husbandman Vbi moram
fecit et domicilium fovit per vndecim annos
Annos aut eo circiter testis productus iuratus
et examinatus dicit et deponit vt sequitur.
1 Ad primum articulum dicit eundem esse verum.
2 Ad secundum articulum dicit et quod
refert se ad leges in ea parte.
Ad tertium articulum dicit et deponit that
vpon the fridaie in the Clensing weeke being
the fridaie next after Shrove sundaie last
past this examinate hapening to be in the howse
of Iohn Pynner alias Smithe within the how
parishe of homlacie articulate h And having
conference aboutes the plaintiffe Sible Smithshe the said , with Iohan davies alias Pynner
the wief of the said Iohn Pynner alias Smith
concerning the plaintiffe Sible Smith
the said Iohan the defendant said to this examinate that
she would tell him a thing it he wold not
vtter it againe, and this examinate answered her
that he wold not disclose it if it did not
concerne a frend of his, and therevpon
she said it did not, and therevpon she said
that Sible Smithe the plaintiff was deliuered
of a Child at henrie Phellpotes howse at
the boote of Biford, and that it was
she that the said Sible that was there
delivered of a Child and whoe should it be but
shee Et aliter nescit deponere.
f. 263r
To the fourth he says it is true.
To the fifth he says that he knows nothing to depose.
To the sixth he says that the articulate Sybil Smith is put to charges and expenses by reason of this suite. And otherwise he knows nothing to depose.
To the last he says that his depositions made above were and are true.
John Geynes
Jacob Ballard
William Woodward, husbandman, of the parish of Holme Lacy in the county of Hereford where he has lived from the cradle, aged about twenty-four years or thereabouts. The witness, produced, sworn, and examined, says and deposes as follows.
To the first article he says the same is true.
To the second article he says that he refers it to the laws in that behalf.
To the fourth article he says and deposes that somewhat above a month last past, it was this examinate's chance to meet with the articulate, Joan Pynner alias Davies, the defendant within the parish of Holme Lacy articulate, where she the said defendant Joan Pynner alias Davies, told this examinate that she had imparted to John Gines this examinate’s master that Sybil Smith, the plaintiff in this cause, was delievered of a child at Phellpotes’ house at the boot of Byford and that he the said Gines promised her not to discover the same again, and yet he had uttered it. And otherwise he knows nothing to depose.
Transcript
Ad quartum dicit eundem esse verum.
Ad quart quintum dicit quod nescit deponere
Ad sextum dicit that the articulate Sible
Smith is put to chardges and
expences by reason of this suite Et aliter
nescit deponere.
Ad vltimum dicit sua predeposita fuisse et esse vera etc.
Iohn gines
Iacobus Ballard
Willelmus woodward parochie de
homlacie in Comitatu hereford husbandman
vbi moram fecit a Cunabulis ætatis
xxiiij annorum aut eo circiter testis productus
iuratus et examinatus dicit et deponit vt sequitur
1 Ad primum articulum dicit eundem esse verum.
2 Ad secundum articulum dicit quod refert se ad
Leges in ea parte
4. Ad quartum articulum dicit et deponit that some
what above a moneth last past, it was this
examinates chaunce to meate with the articulate
Iohanne Pynner alias davies the defendant within the
parishe of homlacie articulate, where she the said
defendant Iohan Pynner alias davies tould this
examinate that she had imparted to Iohn Gines[1]
this examinates maister that Sible Smith the plaintiff
in this Cause was deliuered of a Child at Phellpotes
howse at the boote of Biford and that he the
said Gines promised her not to discouer her the Counsaile same againe, and yet he haid vttered
it. Et aliter nescit deponere.
[1] It is possible that this is Gunds but it seems this is the same person named four lines below and in the previous deposition.
f. 263v
To the fourth article he says it is true.
To the fifth he says that he refers to the depositions he has made.
To the sixth he says that he this examinate does think that by reason of the prolation of these words the articulate, Sybil Smith, her good name is much impaired and hurt and that she is put to expenses and charges. And otherwise he knows nothing to depose.
To the last he says his depositions made above were and are true.
Signed [by] William Woodward
Jacob Ballard
John Smith of the parish of Holme Lacy in the county of Hereford, where he has lived from the cradle, aged sixty-six years or thereabouts. The witness, produced, sworn, and examined, says and deposes as follows.
To the first article, he says the same is true.
To the second article he says that he refers to the laws in that behalf.
To the third article he says and deposes that upon the Sunday next after the feast of Easter last past or thereabouts, this examinate, John Hooper, and John Owen upon request made did go into the house of the articulate, Joan Pynner alias Davies, to see whether she would justify some words of slander supposed to be spoken by her against Sybil Smith, the plaintiff, and when they came thither called her out of her house, and went all together
Transcript
Ad 4 articulum dicit eundem esse verum.
Ad quintum dicit quod refert se ad predeposita.
Ad sextum dicit that by he this
examinate doeth thincke that by reason
of the prolacion of these wordes the articulate
Sible Smithe her good name is much
impaired and hurte and that she is
puto expences and Chardges. Et aliter nescit
deponere.
Ad vltimum dicit predeposita sua fuisse
et esse vera etc.
signatum + [Mark in lieu of signature] willelmi woodward
Iacobus Ballard
Iohannes Smithe parochie de homlacy in
Comitatu hereford Smithe vbi moram fecit
a Cunabulis ætatis lxvj annorum aut eo
circiter testis productus iuratus et examinatus
dicit et deponit vt sequitur.
Ad primum articulum dicit eundem esse verum.
2. Ad secundum articulum dicit quod refert se ad
leges in ea parte.
3 Ad tertium articulum dicit et deponit that
vpon the Sundaie next after the ffeast of
Easter last past or thereaboutes this examinate
Iohn hooper and Iohn owen vpon request made
did goe vnto the howse of the articulate Iohan
Pynner alias davies, to see whether she wold
iustifie somme wordes of sclaunder supposed
to be spoken by her against Sible Smith
the plaintiff and when they cam thether called her
out of her howse, and went all together
f. 264r
unto a stile hard by. And then the said John Hooper demanded of her, the said Joan, whether she did say that the said Sybil Smith was delivered of a child at Byford and she, the said Joan, did confess that she had said so, but she thought no harm and desired that she might be forgiven for it. All this was done in the presence of this examinate, John Hooper, and John Owen. And otherwise he knows nothing to depose.
To the fourth he says it is true.
To the fifth he says that he refers it to the depositions he has made.
To the sixth he says that he thinks that the said Sybil Smith is put to charges and expenses by reason of the speaking of the said words. And otherwise he knows nothing to depose.
To the last he says his depositions made above were and are true etc.
John Smith
Jacob Ballard
John Owen, tailor, of the parish of Holme Lacy in the county of Hereford, aged thirty-one years or thereabouts. The witness, produced, sworn, and examined, says and deposes as follows.
To the first article he says the same is true.
To the second article he says that he refers to the laws set forth in that behalf.
To the fourth article he says and deposes that between Easter and Whitsuntide last past, this examinate was entreated to go with one John Hooper and John Smith, his precontest,[1] to the
[1] = A former or previous fellow witness. Oxford English Dictionary, s.v. “precontest (n.),” July 2023, https://doi.org/10.1093/OED/1048985335.
Transcript
vnto a stile hard by. And then the said Iohn
hooper demaunded of her the said Iohan whether
she did saie that the said Sible Smith
was deliuered of a Child at Biford \and she the said/ she did
\Iohan did/ confesse that she did saie soe, but she
thought noe harme, and desired that
she the said might be forgiuen for it Et aliter all this was donne in the presence
of this examinate and Iohn hooper and Iohn owen
Et aliter nescit deponere.
Ad quartum dicit eundem esse verum.
Ad quintum dicit quod refert se ad predeposita
Ad quintum sextum dicit that he thincketh
that the said Sible Smith is put
to chardges and expences by reason of the
speaking of the said wordes Et aliter nescit
deponere.
Ad vltimum dicit predeposita sua fuisse et esse
vera etc.
Iohn Smythe
Iacobus Ballard
Iohannes owen parochie de homlacie in Comitatu
hereford Tailer ætatis xxxj annorum aut
eo circiter testis productus iuratus et examinatus dicit et deponit vt sequitur
1 Ad primum articulum dicit eundem esse verum.
2. Ad secundum articulum dicit eundem quod refert se
ad leges in ea parte editas.
Ad 4 articulum dicit et deponit that betwixt
ester and whitsontide last past, This
examinate was entreated to goe with one Iohn
hooper and, Iohn Smith his preconteste to the
f. 264v
house of the articulate Joan Pynner, alias Davies, in the parish of Holme Lacy articulate to examine the said Joan touching some slanderous speeches uttered by her touching Sybil Smith, the plaintiff, who went accordingly, and called her out of her house unto a stile hard by where she was demanded by the said Hooper whether she said that Sybil Smith, the plaintiff, was delivered of a child at Byford, and she answered that she did say so and that she knew to whom she spoke it, but she thought no harm, and desired that she might be forgiven for it. And otherwise he knows nothing to depose.
To the fourth he says it is true.
To the fifth he refers to the depositions he has made etc.
To the sixth he says that he knows nothing to depose.
To the seventh he says his depositions made above were and are true etc.
By me John Owen
13th day July 1599
Jacob Ballard
Eleanor Phellpotes, spinster, of the parish of Byford in the county of Hereford where she has lived for one year now passed or thereabouts, and before at Bolstone in the aforesaid county, aged twenty years or thereabouts. The witness, produced, sworn, and examined, says and deposes as follows.
To the first article she says the same is true.
Transcript
howse of the articulate Iohan Pynner alias
davies in the parishe of homlacie articulate
to se whether examine the said Iohan
touching somme slaunderous speaches vttered
by her touching Sible Smithe thee plaintiff whoe went accord[i]nglie, and
called called her out of her howse vnto
a stile hard by where she was demaunded
by the said hooper whethe[r] she said that
Sible Smith the plaintiffe was deliuered
of a Child at Biford, and she answered
that she did saie soe \and that she knewe to whom she spake it/ but she though[t] noe
harme, and desired that she might be
forgiuen for it Et aliter nescit deponere etc.
Ad 4 dicit eundem esse verum.
Ad quintum refert se ad predeposita etc.
Ad sextum dicit quod nescit deponere.
Ad septimum dicit predeposita sua fuisse et
esse vera etc.
per me Ioh owen
xiij die
Iulij 1599
Iacobus Ballard
Elenora Phellpotes parochie de
Biford in Comitatu, hereford Spinster
vbi inhabitavit per vnum Annum iam
elapsum aut eo circiter, et antea apud
Boulson in Comitatu predicti, ætatis xx annorum
aut eo circiter testis producta iuratus iurata
et examinata dicit et deponit vt sequitur.
Ad primum articulum dicit eundem esse verum.
f. 265r
To the second article she says that she refers it to the aforesaid.
To the third article she says and deposes that in the Lent last past, this examinate, Joan Jennings, and the defendant, Joan Pynner, coming from Hereford all together homewards, and having conference about diverse matters, and especially touching the plaintiff, Sybil Smith, the said Joan Pynner demanded of this examinate whether the said Sybil Smith was delivered of a child at Byford at this examinate’s father’s house. And this examinate denied the same whereupon the said Joan Pynner answered that she would justify the same, and she, the said Joan [Pynner], said further that it was Sybil Smith that was delivered of a boy at Byford, which words were spoken in the presence of Joan Jennings and this examinate between Dynder’s mill and Upton being within the parish of Holme Lacy as she takes it. And otherwise she knows nothing to depose.
To the fourth she says it is true.
To the fifth she says that she refers to the deposition that she made.
To the sixth she says that the articulate, Sybil Smith, is put to expenses and charges in this matter by reason of the speaking of the said words, and in her opinion the good name and fame of the said Sybil by these means is impaired and hurt. And otherwise she knows nothing to depose.
To the last she says her depositions made above were and are true etc.
Transcript
Ad secundum articulum dicit quod refert se ad
Leges articulatas.
Ad tertium articulum dicit et deponit that in the
Lent last past, this examinate, Iohan Ienninges
and the defendant Iohan Pynner coming from
hereford all together homewardes, and having
conference aboutes diuers matters, w assoone
and especially touching the plaintiffe Sible
Smithe, the said Iohan Pynner demaunded of
this examinate whether the said Sible Smith
were deliuered of a Child at Biford at this examinates
fathers howse, and this examinate denied the same
wherevppon the said Sible Iohan \pynner/ answered
that she wold iustifie the same, and \she the said Iohan/ said \furth[e]r/
that it was Sible Smithe that was deliuered
of a Boye at Biford, which wordes were
spoken vnto his in the presence of Iohan
Ienninges and this examinate betweene dynders
mill and Vpton being within the parishe of
homlacy as she taketh it Et aliter nescit
deponere.
4. Ad quartum dicit eundem esse verum.
5 Ad quintum dicit quod refert se ad predepositam.
6 Ad sextum dicit that the articulate Sible
Smith is putto expences and chardges
in this matter by reason of the speaking
of the said wordes, and in her opinion
the goode name and fame of the said
Sible by these meanes is impaired and
hurte Et aliter nescit deponere.
Ad vltimum dicit predeposita sua fuisse et esse
vera etc.
f. 265v
27 July 1599
Jacob Ballard
Joan Jennings, spinster, of the parish of Holme Lacy in the county of Hereford, where she was born, aged seventeen years or thereabouts. The witness, produced, sworn, and examined, says and deposes as follows.
To the first article she says the same is true.
To the second she says that she refers to the laws set forth in that behalf.
To the third article she says and deposes that in the Lent last, this examinate, happening to travel from Hereford to Holme Lacy in the company of Eleanor Phellpotes, her precontest, and the defendant Joan Pynner, heard the said Eleanor and Joan talk of one Sybil, the said Joan affirming that it was Sybil Smith, and the said Eleanor Phellpotes denying it, and saying that "it was Joan," then the said Joan Pynner said "she had changed her name for her name was Syble" which words were spoken between Dynder and Upton in the parishes of Holme and Dynder as she take it. And said that after this examinate came home, she demanded of the said Eleanor what speech and conversation she and the said Joan Pynner had by the way, who answered this examinate that the said Joan Pynner told her, the said Eleanor Phellpotes, that it was John Whoper his wench which was delivered of a
Transcript
xxvij Iulij 1599
Iacobus Ballard
Iohanna Ienninges parochie de Homlacy
in Comitatu hereford spinster vbi nata fuit
ætatis xvij annorum aut eo circiter testis
producta iurata et examinata dicit et
deponit vt sequitur.
Ad primum articulum dicit eundem esse verum.
Ad secundum dicit quod refert se ad
Leges in ea parte editas.
Ad tertium articulum dicit et deponit That
in the lent last this examinate happening to
travaile from hereford to homlacy in the
Companie of Elinor Phellpotes her precontest
and the defendant Iohan Pynner heard the
said helinor and Iohan take talke of one
Sible, the said Iohan affirming that
it was Sible Smith, and the said
Elinor Phellpotes denieng it, and saieng that
it was Iohan, then said the said Iohan
Pynner said she hath changed her name
for her name was Sible which wordes were
spoken betwixt dynder and vpton in
the parishes of hom and dinder as she taketh
it And afte saieth that after this examinate
cam home she demaunded of the said Elinor
what speech and Conuercacion shee and the said
Iohan Pynner had by the way whoe answered this
examinate that the said Iohan Pynner tould
her the said Elinor Phellpotes that it was
Iohn whoper his wench which was deliuered of a
f. 266r
child at Byford, meaning the plaintiff Sybil Smith. And otherwise she knows nothing to depose.
To the fourth she says that she knows nothing to depose.
To the fifth she says that she knows nothing to depose other than she has deposed.
To the sixth she says that she knows nothing to depose.
To the last she says her depositions made above were and are true etc. Also regarding and concerning the same things public voice and fame are circulating, etc.
JJ
Transcript
Child at Biford meaning the plaintiff Sible
Smithe Et aliter nescit deponere.
Ad quartum dicit quod nescit deponere.
Ad quintum dicit quod nescit deponere alias
quam predeposuit.
Ad sextum dicit quod nescit deponere
Ad vltimum dicit predeposita sua fuisse et
esse vera etc. ac de et super eisdem
Laborant publica vox et fama etc.
II
4. William Caldoe defames Anne Freeman
Examinations of witnesses concerning a cause of defamation arising from William Caldoe's verbal abuse of his own wife by comparing her unchaste comportment to Anne Freeman's poor character, which he claims was so terrible that Anne's father had to bribe someone to marry her.
People
f. 205v
23rd day February 1598
Jacob Ballard
Examinations of the witnesses on the part of Anne Freeman against William Caldoe in a cause of defamation or insult follow. Upon the libel.
Mary Caldoe, wife of William Caldoe the younger of Luston, of the parish of Eye in the county of Hereford, aged thirty years or thereabouts. The witness, produced, sworn, and examined, says and deposes as follows, namely:
To the first article she says the same is true etc.
To the second she says that she refers to the laws.
To the third article she says and deposes that between the feast of All Saints and the Feast of Christmas last, the articulate, William Caldoe the Elder, falling into a rage for that his wife had tarried long at Kington's market upon a Wednesday, uttered these words following, namely: speaking of his wife he said, “she is taken up by my lord’s men and she is gone whoring with them as Wanklen’s former wife [who is now] Freeman’s wife did[1] (meaning the articulate, Anne Freeman) whose father was fame to give a score of sheep and a couple of cows to marry her again.” Which words the said William Caldoe the Elder did speak in his own house in Luston in the hearing of this examinate, at what time one Humphrey Hill being then very near unto this examinate did also hear the said words (as she is persuaded). And otherwise she knows nothing to depose.
To the fourth she says the same is true.
To the fifth she says the depositions made above are true etc.
The same [Mary Caldoe] examined upon the question administered on the part of Caldoe etc.
To the first question she deposes and says that she refers to her deposition above upon the libel. And otherwise knows not to depose.
To the second article or question she says that she hopes for victory in this cause for the one in the right, and that she has not been instructed nor informed what she should depose in this instance and with regard to the other contents in the said question, she refers to the deposition above etc.
M
[1] Heavy editing, please refer to original if necessary.
Transcript
xxij die ffebruarij
1598
Iacobus Ballard
Examinaciones testium ex parte Anne ffreeman contra Willelmum
Caldoe in causa diffamationis siue Convitij
sequuntur. Super libello.
Maria Caldoe vxor Willelmi Caldoe Iunior
de luston parochie de Ey in comitatu hereford
ætatis xxxta annorum aut eo in circiter.
testis producta iurata et examinata dicit et
deponit vt sequitur videlicet.
1. Ad primum articulum dicit eundem esse verum etc.
2. Ad 2 tertium dicit quod nescit deponeret \refert se ad leges/
3. Ad tertium articulum dicit et deponit That betwixt
the ffeaste of All Saintes and the feast of christmas
last This examinate The articulate william Caldoe
the elder falling into \a/ rage for that his wief had
taried longe at Kingtons market vppon a wensday
vttered these wordes following viz. speaking of
his wief he said she is taken vpp by my
lordes men and she is gonne a hooring as with
them as wanklens wief that was and ffremans
wief that is \ hath denne did meaning the articulate Anne Waucklen ffreman/ whose father was fame to giue a
score of sheepe and a couple of k<yne> to mary
her againe which wordes the said w<i>lliam Caldoe
the elder did speake in his hi owne howse in luston in
the hearing of this examinate, at what time one
humfrey hill being then verie neere vnto this
examinate did allsoe heare the said wordes (as she is
perswaded) Et aliter nescit deponere
Ad 4 articulum dicit eundem esse verum etc.
Ad 5 dicit predepositaesse vera etc.
Eadem examinata super Interrogatione ex parte
Caldoe ministrata etc.
1. Ad primum interrogationem deponit et dicit quod refert
se ad predeposita sua super libello Et aliter
nescit deponere.
2. Ad secundum articulum \siue Interrogationem/ dicit quod optat victoriam in hac
causa Ius habenti, et quod non est instructa
nec informata quid deponeret in hac instantia Et aliter et pro ceteris contentes in dicta pod Interrogatione
refert se ad predepositam etc.
M
f. 206r
Jacob Ballard
Humphrey Hill of the parish of Eye in the county of Hereford, aged twenty-nine years or thereabouts. The witness, produced, sworn, and examined, says and deposes as follows.
To the first article he says the same is true.
To the second he says that he refers to the articulate laws.
To the third article he says and deposes that between the feast of All Saints and the feast of Christmas last past (the time certain otherwise he now remembers not), the articulate, William Caldoe the Elder, being much offended with his wife for that she had made long tarriance at Kington market used many reproachful words towards her. And amongst those[1] speeches, this examinate did hear him speak these words following namely, speaking of his wife, he said, "She is taken up with my lord’s men and she is gone whoring with them as did Wanklen’s former wife [who is now] Freeman’s wife"[2] (meaning the articulate Anne Freeman) "whose father was fame to give a couple of cows and a score of sheep to marry her again," which words the said William Caldoe did speak in his own house in Luston, at what time one Mary Caldoe being near unto this examinate [at] the time and place aforesaid did hear the said words as he does believe. And otherwise he knows nothing to depose.
To the fourth he says the same is true.
To the fifth he says that his depositions made above were and are true.
The same [Humphrey] examined upon the questions administered on the part of Caldoe etc.
To the first he deposes and says that he refers to the deposition above etc.
Transcript
Iacobus Ballard
Humfredus Hill parochie de Ey in comitatu hereford
ætatis xix annorum aut eo in circiter. Testis
productus iuratus et examinatus dicit et deponit
vt sequitur.
1. Ad primum articulum dicit eundem esse verum
2. Ad secundum refert se ad leges articulatas.
3. Ad tertium articulum dicit et deponit That betwixt
the feast of all saintes last and the feast of christmas
last past the time certaine otherwise he nowe
remembreth not The articulate william Caldoe the
elder being much offended with his wief for that
she had made longe tarriaunce at Kington
market vsed may reprochfull wordes towardes her
And amongst them \speches/ this examinate did heare him
speak these wordes following viz. speaking of his
wief he said she is taken vpp with my lordes
men and she is gonne a hooring with them
as wanklens wief that was and ffremans wief
that is (meaning the articulate Anne \ffreeman/ wauc klens) did
whose father was fame to giue a Couple of
kyne and a score of sheepte to marry her againe
which wordes the said william Caldoe did speake
in his owne howse \in luston/ at what time one Mary
Caldoe being neere vnto this examinate di the
time and place aforesaid did heare the said
wordes as he doeth beleawe Et aliter nescit
deponere.
4. Ad 4 dicit eundem esse verum.
5. Ad 5 dicit predeposita sua fuisse et esse vera etc.
Idem examinatus super Interrogatione ex parte
Caldoe ministrata etc.
Ad primum dicit quod refert se ad predeposita etc.
f. 206v
To the second article or question he says that he desires victory in this cause at law to the one in the right, and that he has not been instructed nor informed what he should depose in this instance, and concerning other contents in the said interrogation/question he refers it to the aforesaid etc.
Signed [by] Humphrey Hill
Anna Flinsham of the parish of Eye in the county of Hereford, spinster, aged twenty-five years of thereabouts. The witness, produced, sworn, and examined, says and deposes as follows.
To the first article she says the same to be true.
To the second she says that she refers to the law.
To the fourth and fifth she says that she knows nothing to depose.
To the last she says that the depositions made above are true.
Jacob Ballard
William Jones of the city of Hereford in the county of Hereford, aged twenty years or thereabouts. The witness, produced, sworn, and examined, says and deposes as follows.
To the first article he says the same to be true.
To the second article he says that he refers to the articulate laws.
To the third he says that a little after harvest last, the articulate William Caldoe the Elder being offended for that his wife did tarry long at Kington upon that occasion uttered some words concerning his wife which in
Transcript
Ad secundum dicit quod optat victoriam in hac causa
Ius habenti, et dicit quod non est instructus nec
informatus quid deponeret in hac
instantia et pro ceteris contentes in dicta Interrogatione.
refert se ad predeposita etc.
Signa Humfredi Hill
Anna fflinsham parochie de Ey in
comitatu hereford spinster vbi moram fecit
ætatis xxv annorum aut eo circiter testis
producta iurata et examinata dicit et deponit
vt sequitur.
1. Ad primum articulum dicit eundem esse verum.
2. Ad 2 dicit refert se ad leges
articulatas.
Ad 4 et 5 dicit quod nescit deponere
Ad vltimam dicit predeposita esse vera etc.
Jacobus Ballard
Willelmus Iones de civitate hereford in
comitatu hereford ætatis xxi annorum aut
eo circiter. Testis productus iuratus et
examinatus dicit et deponit vt sequitur.
1. Ad primum articulum dicit eundem esse verum.
2. Ad 2 articulum dicit quod refert se ad predeposita
leges articulatas etc.
Ad tertium dicit that a little after harvest
last the articulate william Caldoe the elder
being offended for that his wief did tary
longe at kington \vppn that occacion/ vttered soimme wordes
concerning her vppo his wief which in
f. 207r
effect are these which follow, namely: the said William, speaking of his wife, said, “I think she will play Anne Wanklen, somebody must give me a score of sheep to take her home again as dairymaid Anne Wanklen’s father did give to her, the said Anne Wanklen’s husband, to take her home again.” By speaking of which words this examinate does verily persuade with himself in his conscience that the said William Caldoe the Elder did mean that the said Anne Wanklen and now Anne Freeman was a bad woman. And further he deposes that the said words were spoken in his, the said William Caldoe, his own house in Luston aforesaid in the presence of this examinate and John Caldoe. And otherwise he knows nothing to depose.
To the fourth he says that by speaking of the said words the credit and estimation of the said Anne Wanklen is much impaired and hurt. And that by reason thereof she is put to expenses and trouble. And otherwise he knows nothing to depose.
To the last he says that his depositions made above were and are true etc.
[Mark in lieu of signature]
Transcript
effect as \are these which/ followeth viz sp the said william speaking
of his wief said I thinke she will play
Anne wancklen, somme body must giue
me a score of sheepe to take her home againe
As dey w dey Anne wancklens father
did giue to her the said Anne wancklens
husband to take her home againe by speakyng
of which wordes this examinate doeth verily perswade
with himself in the his conscience that the said
\William Caldoe the elder did meane that the said/ Anne wancklen and nowe Ann ffreeman was
a bad wooman. Et vlterius deponit that the said
wordes were spoken in his ow the said William
Caldoe his owne howse in Luston aforesaid
in the presence of this examinate and Iohn Caldoe
Et aliter nescit deponere.
Ad 5 4 dicit eundem esse verum that by
speaking of the said wordes the Credit and
estimacion of the said Anne wancklen is much
impaired and hurt and that by reason there of
she is put to expences and trouble Et aliter
nescit deponere.
Ad vltimam dicit predeposita sua fuisse et esse
vera etc.
[Mark in lieu of signature]
3. William Whitton defames Thomas Lane
Examinations of witnesses concerning a cause of defamation arising from accusations made by William Whitton about Thomas Lane's adultery with Elizabeth Whitton. See Cause 2 for a related cause.
People
| Name | Date of Birth | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Edmund Aldred | 1556 | Rector, Hope Baggard. Cause 3 (1598): deponent, 42, rector of church at Hope Baggard. Other docments: Record of positions in church until death. 1579-1602. https://theclergydatabase.org.uk/jsp/persons/CreatePersonFrames.jsp?PersonID=67275 |
| Elizabeth Whitton | Wife of Francis Whitton, the elder. Mother of Francis, Susan, and Whorwood Whitton. Cause 2a and 2b (1598): Whitton sues Mary Angel for defamation. Cause 3 (1598): mentioned. Other documents: Marriage settlement. Covenant that Whorwood, son of Francis and Elizabeth Whitton shall marry Elizabeth daughter of Richard Tompkyns before the feast of the nativity of St John Baptist next. 28 April 1599. Mentions second son Edmund. X11/1/2/1/10 10/11. https://www.shropshirearchives.org.uk/collections/getrecord/CCA_X11_1_2_1_10 |
|
| Elizabeth Whitton | Wife of Francis Whitton, the elder. Mother of Francis, Susan, and Whorwood Whitton. Cause 2a and 2b (1598): Whitton sues Mary Angel for defamation. Cause 3 (1598): mentioned. Other documents: Marriage settlement. Covenant that Whorwood, son of Francis and Elizabeth Whitton shall marry Elizabeth daughter of Richard Tompkyns before the feast of the nativity of St John Baptist next. 28 April 1599. Mentions second son Edmund. X11/1/2/1/10 10/11. https://www.shropshirearchives.org.uk/collections/getrecord/CCA_X11_1_2_1_10 |
|
| Francis Whitton, the elder | Husband of Elizabeth Whitton. Brother of William Whitton. Father of Whorwood, Susan, and Francis Whitton, the younger. Resident at Burford Cause 2a (1598): mentioned. Cause 3 (1598): mentioned. Other documents: Mortgage of Faintree Manor to Frauncis Whitton and Elizabeth 1602. https://www.shropshirearchives.org.uk/collections/getrecord/CCA_X11_1_2_2_15 Marriage settlement. Covenant that Whorwood, son of Francis and Elizabeth Whitton shall marry Elizabeth daughter of Richard Tompkyns before the feast of the nativity of St John Baptist next. 28 April 1599. Mentions second son Edmund. X11/1/2/1/10 10/11. https://www.shropshirearchives.org.uk/collections/getrecord/CCA_X11_1_2_1_10 |
|
| Francis Whitton, the younger. | 1580 | Son of Elizabeth Whitton and Francis Whitton, the elder. Brother to Susan and Whorwood Whitton. Cause 2a (1598): deponent and listed as 18 years old. |
| John Nicols | 1550 | Yeoman, born and lived in Burford, Shropshire. Cause 3 (1598): deponent, 48 years of age. |
| Richard Shrawley de Westmore | 1569 | Yeoman of Burford, Shropshire. Cause 3: deponent, 29 years of age, yeoman from the parish of Burford, Shropshire. |
| Thomas Lane | 1558 | Yeoman, teacher at Whitton Chapel, born in Tenbury ca. 1558, resident of Burford. Cause 2a (1598): deponent, described as yeoman, 40 years of age, and resident of Burford in Shropshire for seven years. Prior to that he lived, where he was born, in Tenbury, an adjoining town in Worcestershire. Cause 2b (1598): described as living in the Whitton household, teaching their four children as well as others in the chapel at Whitton (poss. St. Mary’s Church, Whitton). Cause 3 (1598): sues William Whitton for Defamation. Disambiguation: Someone called Thomas Lane was rector at Burford 1567-69 and priest 1569-1587 but this could not be the same person. (If this record is correct the Thomas Lane mentioned in this case would only have been 9 at appointment.) The rector and priest were almost certainly this Thomas Lane's father which is suggested by the 1605 lease to "Thomas Lane, his wife Anne, and his son Thomas." Other documents: Clergy records, 1567-87. Rector and priest at Burford. Person ID: 65140. https://theclergydatabase.org.uk/jsp/persons/index.jsp Lease to Thomas, mentions job as yeoman, wife Anne, & son Thomas, 1605. https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/9c44e6f6-a51c-46c9-9ca3-0439852b4a29 Indenture to Francis Whitton in 1595. https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C4951304 |
| William Whitton | 1535 | Brother of Francis Whitton, the elder. Moved to Coreley 1596. Prior to this lived at Chetton. Cause 2a (1598): deponent, described as 63 years of age and having lived in the parish of Coreley/Coreldy for two years prior to which he lived at Chetton. Cause 3 (1598): sued for defamation by Thomas Lane. |
f. 135v
30 June, 1598
Jacob Ballard
Examinations of the witnesses on behalf of and for the party Thomas Lane against William Whitton in a cause of defamation. Upon the libel etc.
Richard Shrawley de Westmore, yeoman, of the parish of Burford in the county of Shropshire where he has lived for half the year, aged twenty-nine years or thereabouts. The witness, produced, sworn, and examined, says and deposes as follows.
To the first article he says the same is true.
To the second and third articles he says that he refers to the articulate laws and constitution.
To the fourth article he says and deposes that diverse times within this twelvemonth last past, he, this examinate, had heard the articulate William Whitton say that Elizabeth Whitton articulate did not lie with her husband, Francis Whitton, named in this article, for seven years together before her last child was born, which this examinate did hear spoken in the parish of Corely or Nashe. And otherwise he knows nothing to depose.
To the fifth he says that the articulate, Thomas Lane, is vexed with expenses by reason and occasion of this suite. And otherwise he knows nothing to depose.
To the last he says that all and singular deposed above by him were and are true.
Richard Shrawley
Jacob Ballard
Edmund Aldred, cleric rector of the church of the parish of Hope Baggard in the county of Shropshire, aged forty-two years or thereabouts. The witness, produced, sworn, and examined, says and deposes as follows.
To the first article he says the same is true.
To the second and third he says that he refers to the articulate laws etc.
Transcript
xxo Iunij
1598
Iacobus Ballard
Examinaciones testium ex parte et
per partem Thome Lane contra
Willelmum Whitton in Causa diffamationis. super
libelo etc.
Richardus Shrawley de westmore
parochie de Burford in Comitatu Salopie
yeoman vbi moram fecit per 2 Ann
Biennium ætatis xxiiij annorum aut eo
circiter testis productus iuratus
et examinatus dicit et deponit vt sequitur.
Ad primum articulum dicit eundem esse verum etc.
Ad 2 et tertium articulos dicit quod refert se ad
leges et Constitucionem articulatas.
Ad quartum articulum dicit et deponit That
diuers times within this twelvemoneth last
past, he this Examinate hathe heard the articulate william
whitton saie, that Elizabeth whitton articulate, did
not lie with her husband ffraunces whitton
named in this article, for seaven yeares together
before her last Childe was borne Et aliter
which this examinate did heare spoken in the parishe
of Coreley or Nashe. Et aliter nescit deponere.
Ad 5 dicit that the articulate Thomas Lane
is vexed with expenses in this suite, by reason
and occasion of this suite. Et aliter nescit deponere.
Ad vltimum dicit omnia et singula per eum predeposita
fuisse et esse vera etc.
Richard Shrawley
Iacobus Ballard
Edmundus Aldred Cleruicus Rector ecclesie
parochialis de hopebaggard in Comitatu Salopie
ætatis lij annorum aut eo circiter Testis
productus iuratus dicit examinatus dicit et
deponit vt sequitur. videlicet.
Ad primum articulum dicit eundem esse verum.
Ad 2 et 3. dicit quod refert se ad leges articulatas etc.
f. 136r
To the fourth article he says and deposes that in the oat harvest 1596 this examinate, conferring with the articulate William Whitton, at a field of oats called Hope Field within the parish of Hope Baggard, he, this said William Whitton, said to this examinate that no man but a whoremaster would have denied him to come over an old piece of land, meaning thereby the articulate Thomas Lane as he thinks. Further he deposed that about September following this examinate and William Whitton aforesaid met together in a lane by the Corte of hill, and as they were talking, there passed by Frances Whitton, Elizabeth his wife, and the articulate Thomas Lane. And after they were gone by, the said William Whitton said to this examinate that the little child that the said Elizabeth had last was not his brothers (meaning Master Francis Whitton), but the foresaid Thomas Lane’s. And otherwise he knows nothing to depose.
To the fifth, he says it is true etc.
To the last he says all and singular deposed above by him were and are true.
By me Edmund Aldred.
21st day of the month of October 1598
Jacob Ballard
Richard Nashe, husbandman, of the parish of Millson in the county of Shropshire where he has lived for fifteen years or thereabouts, born in the parish of Nashe in the aforesaid county. The witness, produced, sworn, and examined, says and deposes as follows.
To the first article he says the same is true.
To the second and third articles he says that he refers to the articulate laws etc.
To the fourth article he says and deposes that about the feast of All Saints last past, this examinate being in the company with William Whitton articulate in the house of one Shrawley in Ludlow, having speech and communication concerning diverse matters, amongst other speech then and there
Transcript
Ad quartum articulum dicit et deponit That in oate
harvest 1596 this examinate, conferring with the
articulate william whitton, at a field of oates of this examinates called hope field within the parishe of
hope baggard, he this ex said william whitton
said to this examinate that the articulate Thomas lane noe man but a hooremaister wold haue
denied him to come over an old piece of land
meaning thereby the said \articulate Thomas/ Lane \as he thinketh/. ffurther he
deposeth that aboutes September following this
examinate and william whitton aforesaid met together in
a lane by the Corte of hill, and as as they were
talking, there passed by the ffraunces whitton
Elizabeth his wief and the articulate Thomas lane
and after they were gonne by the said william whitton
said to this examinate that the litle Child that the
litle Child that the said Elizabeth had last
was not his brothers (meaning master ffrancis
whitton,) but the foresaid Thomas lanes.
Et aliter nescit deponere.
Ad quintum dicit eundem esse verum etc.
Ad vltimum dicit omnia et singula per eum predeposita
fuisse et vera etc.
per me Edmundum Alred
xxj die mensis
Octobris 1598
Iacobus Ballard
Richardus Nashe parochie de millson in
Comitatu Salopie husbandman vbi
moram fecit per xv annos aut eo
circiter natus in parochia de Nashe in
Comitatu predicto testis productus iuratus et examinatus
dicit et deponit vt sequitur.
1 Ad primum articulum dicit eundem esse verum.
2 3. Ad secundum et tertium articulos dicit quod refert se ad
leges articulatas etc.
4. Ad quartum articulum dicit et deponit That aboutes
the feast of all saintes last past This examinate
being in company with william whitton articulate
in the howse of one Shrawley in ludlowe
having speache and Comunicacion concerning diuers
matters amongst other speche then and there
f. 136v
passed, he this examinate did hear the said William Whitton say that his brother, Master Francis Whitton, had not lain with his wife, Mistress Elizabeth Whitton, for ten or eleven years and that the said Mistress Elizabeth Whitton was lately delivered of a child and that the articulate Thomas Lane, using the house of the said Master Francis Whitton, was famed to be the father of that child, and that he the said William Whitton did not think the said child to be his brother’s considering he did not lie with the said Elizabeth his wife for so long time. And [he] said that Richard Shrawley and his mother were present at the speaking of the said words. And otherwise he knows nothing to depose.
To the fourth he says that he knows nothing to depose other than what he has already deposed.
To the last he says that all and singular deposed above by him were and are true.
[Mark in lieu of signature]
3rd day November 1598
Repeated before Master Ballard 3rd day of November
John Nichols, yeoman, of the parish of Burford in the county of Shropshire where he has lived since his birth, aged forty-three years or thereabouts. The witness, produced, sworn, and examined, says and deposes as follows.
To the first article he says that as he, this examinate, does think the articulate, William Whitton, is of the parish of Coreldy. And otherwise he knows nothing to depose.
To the second and third he says that he refers to the rights and laws in this part etc.
To the third [sic] article he says and deposes about a fortnight before the feast of the Nativity of our Lord last past, this examinate did hear the articulate, William Whitton, say that the articulate, Thomas Lane, was a whoremaster and that he did lie incontinently with the articulate, Elizabeth Whitton, and that he kept her as commonly
Transcript
passed he this Examinate did heare the said william
whitton said that his Brother, master ffraunces
whitton had not laid layen with his wief
mistries Elizabeth whitton for ten or eleauen yeres
and that that the said mistries Elizabeth whitton
was latelie deliuered of a Childe and that
the articulate Thomas Lane vsing the howse of
the said master ffrances whitton was famed
to be father of that childe, and that he
the said william whitton did not thinke the
said child to be his Brothers considering he
did not lie with the said Elizabeth his wief
for soe longe time, And saieth that
Richard Shrawley and the Sisterof the his mother were present at the
speaking of the said wordes Et aliter
nescit deponere
Ad quintum dicit quod nescit deponere alias quam
predeposuit.
Ad vltimum dicit omnia et singula per eum
predeposita fuisse et esse vera etc.
[Mark in lieu of signature]
3o die
Novembris
1598
repetitur coram
magistro Ballard
3o Nouembris
Johanes Nicholls parochie de Burford in
Comitatu Salopie yeoman, vbi moram
fecit a nativitate sua aetatis [unlear] xlviij
annorum aut eo circiter. Testis productus iuratus
et examinatus dicit et deponit vt sequitur.
1. Ad primum articulum dicit that as he this examinate
doeth thincke the articulate william whitton is
of the parishe of Coreldy Et aliter nescit deponere
2 3 Ad secundum et tertium dicit quod refert
se ad Iura et leges in ea parte etc.
Ad tertium articulum dicit et deponit aboutes
a fortnight before the feast of the Nativity
of our lord last past This examinate did heare
the articulate William Whitton saie that the articulate
Thomas Lane was a hooremaster, and that he
did liue incontinently with the articulate Elizabeth
whitton, And that he kept her is commonly
f. 137r
as he, the said William Whitton, did keep his own wife. Which words were spoken privately unto this examinate, by the said William Whitton, in Tenbury. And otherwise he knows nothing to depose.
To the fifth he says that the articulate, Thomas Lane, is much troubled in this matter and that he does sustain charges and expenses by reason of this suit. And otherwise he knows nothing to depose.
To the last he says the depositions made above were and are true.
By me John Nichols
Transcript
as he the said william whitton did keepe his owne
weif, which wordes were spoken privatly vnto
this examinate by the said william whitton in Tenbury
Et aliter nescit deponere
Ad 5 dicit that the articulate Thomas
Lane is much troubled in this matter
and that he is doeth susteigne
chardges and expenses by reason of
this suite. Et aliter nescit deponere.
Ad vltimum dicit predeposita fuisse et esse vera etc.
per me Iohannem nycolles
2b. Mary Angel defames Elizabeth Whitton (Exceptions)
Examinations of witnesses concerning a cause of defamation arising from accusations made by Mary Angel with respect to Elizabeth Whitton's chaste character. Elizabeth (wife of Francis Whitton) was defamed in the presence of her family and her children's teacher (Thomas Lane). The allegations suggest a previous relationship between William Whitton (Francis's brother) and Elizabeth; also more recent rumours of adultery with the teacher Thomas Lane. It is notable that Elizabeth Whitton is reported to suffer from seizures, possibly due to epilepsy. See Cause 3 for a related cause.
The documents here are the "Exceptions" brought on the part of Mary Angel regarding the suit of defamation against her and follow-up examinations or interrogations on the part of Elizabeth Whitton. This is to say, Angel's party brought witnesses in her defence who were then examined by Whitton's party.
People
| Name | Date of Birth | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| David Jones | 1546 | Husband of Frances Jones (alias Inkes). Both of Hopton Wafers, Shropshire. Case 2a: mentioned. Husband of deponent, Frances Jones. |
| Edmund Sherman | 1578 | Gentleman. Resident of Ludlow, Shropshire. Cause 2b: deponent. |
| Elizabeth Whitton | Wife of Francis Whitton, the elder. Mother of Francis, Susan, and Whorwood Whitton. Cause 2a and 2b (1598): Whitton sues Mary Angel for defamation. Cause 3 (1598): mentioned. Other documents: Marriage settlement. Covenant that Whorwood, son of Francis and Elizabeth Whitton shall marry Elizabeth daughter of Richard Tompkyns before the feast of the nativity of St John Baptist next. 28 April 1599. Mentions second son Edmund. X11/1/2/1/10 10/11. https://www.shropshirearchives.org.uk/collections/getrecord/CCA_X11_1_2_1_10 |
|
| Frances Jones (alias Inkes) | 1555 | Wife of David Jones of Hopton Wafers, Shropshire. Cause 2b: deponent, 43 years of age. |
| Mary Angel | Cause 2a: Mary Angel sued for defamation by Elizabeth Whitton. Cause 2b: Mary Angel resents exceptions to the cause of defamation. |
|
| Mistress Fox of Stoke | Case 2b: mentioned. |
f. 230v
5th of
May 1598
Jacob Ballard
Examinations of the witnesses on the part and behalf of Mary Angel against Elizabeth Whitton in a cause of defamation upon the exceptions[1], as follow.
Edmund Sherman, gentleman, of the parish of Ludlow in the county of Shropshire, aged twenty years or more. The witness, produced, sworn, and examined, says and deposes as follows.
To the first article he says and deposes that this examinate on a time came to visit the articulate, Elizabeth Whitton, who then lay extremely sick. And at his coming, to the said Elizabeth, found her lying sick in her bed, at what time this examinate did see the said Thomas Lane lie upon the one side of the said bed by the said Elizabeth Whitton, under the coverlet in his clothes and one Frances Inkes sat under her head. Which thing they commonly did (as this examinate was then given to understand) to keep the said Elizabeth down in her fits. And further he said the fame of the country is (and has been for three years last past) that the said Thomas Lane and Elizabeth Whitton have lived incontinently together. And otherwise he knows nothing to depose.
To the second article he said he knows nothing to depose.
To the third article he says and deposes that the articulate, Thomas Lane, as this examinate had heard, had had his meat, drink, and lodging in the house with the articulate, Elizabeth Whitton, and her husband for seven years last past or thereabouts. And finally he says that he, this examinate, has seen the said Thomas Lane at sundry times within the said space or somewhat before at dinner and supper in the said house with
[1] Term means formal objections or challenges to inadequate testimony. Oxford English Dictionary, s.v. “exception (n.)” nos. 4 and 5. June 2024, https://doi.org/10.1093/OED/2700665522.
Transcript
vo die
May 1598
Iacobus Ballard
Examinaciones testium ex parte et pro
partem Marie Angell contra Elizabeth
Whitton in causa diffamationis super
ex[c]eptionibus sequuntur.
Edmundus Shermane parochie de
Ludlowe in comitatu [Salopie] generosus ætatis xxta annorum
et vltra. Testis productus iuratus et examinatus
dicit et deponit vt sequitur.
Ad primum articulum dicit et deponit That
this examinate one a time cam to visit the articulate
Elizabeth Whitten whoe then lay extreeme sicke
And at his coming to the said Elizabeth found
her lieng sicke in her bed; at what time
this examinate did se the said Thomas Lane
lie vpon the one side of the said bed by
the said Elizabeth Whitton vnder the
Coverlette in his Clothes, and and one
ffraunces Inkes sate vnder her heade
wich thinge ther vsed accustomably (as this
examinate did then was then given to vnderstand)
to keape the said Elizabeth downe in her fittes
And further he saieth the fame of the
Countrey is \and hath beine for three yeres last past/ that the said Thomas Lane
and Elizabeth Whitton have lived incontinently
together Et aliter nescit deponere
2. Ad secundum articulum dicit quod nescit deponere.
3 Ad tertium articulum dicit et deponit that
the articulate Thomas Lane as this examinate
hath heard hath had his meate drinke
and lodging in the howse with the articulate
Elizabeth Whitton and her husband for seaven
yeres last past or thereaboutes Et vlterius
dicit that he this examinate at hath seene
the said Thomas Lane at Sundrie tymes
within the said space at or somwhat before
at dynner and supper in the said howse with
f. 231r
the said Elizabeth and her husband. And otherwise he knows nothing to depose.
To the fourth and fifth he says he knows nothing to depose.
To the sixth he says that the articulate, Frances Whitton, is the natural and lawful son of the foresaid Elizabeth Whitton. And otherwise he knows nothing to depose.
To the seventh he says that he knows nothing to depose.
To the last he says his depositions made above were and are true.
Concerning the interrogations administered on the part of Elizabeth Whitton the same examinate says as follows, namely.
To the first question he responds in the negative.
To the second article he says that this examinate did hear that the articulate, Frances Inkes alias Iones, had a child of her body unlawfully begotten. And otherwise he knows nothing to depose.
To the third question he says and deposes that about eight years last past this examinate did see the articulate, Thomas Lane, lie upon the bed of the said Elizabeth Whitton in manner and form as is in his depositions to the first article (of the matter exceptive) declared unto which he refer himself, being in the presence of Mistress Fox of Stoke, Frances Iones alias Inkes, and some others whose names he does not now remember. And otherwise he knows nothing to depose.
To the fourth question he knows nothing to depose.
Transcript
the said Elizabeth and her husband. Et aliter
nescit deponere.
Ad quartum et quintum dicit quod necsit deponere.
6. Ad sextum dicit that the articulate ffraunnces
Whitton is the naturall and lawfull
sonne of the foresaid Elizabeth Whitton
Et aliter nescit deponere.
Ad 7 dicit quod nescit deponere.
Ad vltimum dicit predeposita sua fuisse et esse
vera etc.
Idem examinatus super Interrogationibus ex parte
Elizabeth Whitton ministratis dicit vt
sequitur videlicet.
Ad primum Interrogationem dicit respondet negative.
2. Ad secundum articulum dicit that this examinate did
Heare that the sa articulate ffraunces Inkes alias
Iones had a Child of her bodie vnlawfully
begotten Et aliter nescit deponere.
3 Ad tertium interrogationem dicit that aboutes eight yeares
past this examinate did see the articulate Thomas
Lane lie vppon the bed of the said Elizabeth
whitton in manner and forme as th is in his des deposicions to the first article \of the matter exceptive/ declared
vnto which he referreth himself, being in the
presence of mistres ffox of stoke, ffraunces Iones
alias Inkes and somme others whose names he
doeth not nowe remember. Et aliter nescit deponere.
Ad quartum Interrogationem nescit deponere.
f. 231v
To the fifth question he says that he does know that the articulate, Thomas Lane, did teach and instruct four of the children of the articulate Elizabeth Whitton begotten by her husband Francis Whitton (as he believes) together with diverse other children in the country thereabouts the chapel at Whitton, and had his table free with Master Whitton as he had heard. And otherwise he knows nothing to depose.
To the sixth and seventh he says that he knows nothing to depose.
Edmund Sherman
Jacob Ballard
Francesca Jones, wife of David Jones, of the parish of Hopton Wafers in the county of Shropshire, aged fifty-two years or thereabouts. The witness, produced, sworn, and examined, says and deposes as follows.
To the first article she says and deposes that for two or three years last past, there has been a speech in the country that the articulate, Thomas Lane, has lived incontinently with the articulate, Elizabeth Whitton. And otherwise she says that about seven years last past, this examinate came to visit the said Elizabeth Whitton, then lying sick being upon a Monday as far she now remembers. And at her coming to the said Elizabeth, she found the said Elizabeth laying in her bed and the said Thomas Lane in the bed with her in his clothes between the sheets and she coming to the bed (did put in her hand and did feel) the said Thomas Lane, his right leg between the said Elizabeth Whitton her legs, her smock being up so upon her belly, and one of her arms was under his neck, and her other arm upon him and one of his arms lay over her body about her girdle. And this examinate demanding of the said Thomas Lane why he lay in such a manner, he
Transcript
Ad quintum Interrogationem dicit that he doeth
knowe that the articulate Thomas lane
did teache and instructe fower of the
chilldren of the articulate Elizabeth whitton
begotten by her husband ffraunces whitton
(as he beleaveth) together with diuers
other Chilldren in the Countrie thereaboutes
in the Chappell at whitton, and had
his table\ free /with master whitton as he hath
heard Et aliter nescit deponere.
Ad sextum et septimum dicit quod nescit
deponere.
Edmunde shermonde
Iacobus Ballard
ffrancisca Iones vxor david
Iones parochie de Hopton wafers
in Comitatu Salopie, ætatis v
lijo annorum aut eo circiter testis producta
iurata et examinata dicit et deponit
vt sequitur.
1 Ad primum articulum dicit et deponit That
for twoo or three yeares last past, there have
benne a speach in the Countrie, that the articulate
Thomas lane hath liued incontinently with the
articulate Elizabeth whitton. Et vlterius dicit that
aboutes seaven yeares\ last/ past, this examinate cam to visite
the ar said Elizabeth whitton then lieng sicke being
vpon a munday as ffarre as she nowe remembreth
And at her coming th to the said Elizabeth
she found the said Elizabeth lieng in her bedd
and the said Thomas lane in the bedd with
her in his clothes betwixt the sheetes and she
comming to the bed \did put in her hand and did feele/ s<aw>e the said Thomas lane his
right legge betwixt the said Elizabeth whitton
her legges, her smocke being trussed vpp so vppon
her belly, and one of her armes was vnder his
necke and her other arme vpon him and one
of his armes laie ouer her bodie about her girdle
And this examinate demaunding of the said Thomas
lane whie he laie in such manner he
f. 232r
answered that he lay so to make the said Elizabeth to sleep, and to keep her in the bed in her extreme fits, in which she would be very outrageous all with one Francis Wright being present in the chamber which this examinate did see and behold. And otherwise says that diverse times afterwards she did see the said Thomas Lane lie in the bed with the said Elizabeth Whitton (sometimes in the night and sometimes in the day) being in his clothes. And once she did see him lie in bed with her barelegged, at what time one of the maid servants of the said Elizabeth Whitton did rub his legs instead of her mistress’ legs which rubbing they used for ease of pain which the said Elizabeth had then in her legs. And otherwise she knows not to depose.
To the second article she says and deposes that she knows nothing to depose.
To the third article she says and deposes that for four years together (before the time articulate) she knew that the said Thomas Lane had had his meat and drink at the said Elizabeth Whitton and her husband’s table and that he had during the said space lodged in the said Elizabeth Whitton and her husband’s house, giving an explanation said that she was during that space dwelling in Whitton very near to the said Elizabeth Whitton and thereby knows it to be true. And otherwise she knows nothing to depose.
To the fourth she says that she knows nothing to depose.
Transcript
answered that he he laie soe, to make the said
Elizabeth to sleape, and to keepe her in the bedd
in her extreeme fittes, in which she wold be verievnruelie O outragious. and saieth th all with
one ffraunces wright being present in the said
Chamber which this examinate, did see did see
and behould Et vlterius dicit that diuers times
afterwardes she did see the said Thomas
Lane lie in the bedd together with the said
Elizabeth whitton \somtimes in the night and somtimes in the daie/ being in his Clothes, and once
she did see him lie in bedd with her and his noestockinges and his legges barelegged, at what
\time/ one of the maid servantes of the said Elizabeth
whitton did rubbe his legges in steed of her
mistres legges being which rubbing they vsed
for a p ease of a paine which the said Elizabeth
had then in her legges, but she saieth thatshe never sawe the said Thomas lane lie withthe said Elizabeth whitton in bedd, but there wassomme Companie or other in the Chamber wherethey laie. Et aliter nescit deponere.
2. Ad qu secundum articulum dicit et deponit quod nescit
deponere.
3. Ad tertium articulum dicit et deponit t hat for
foure yeares together \before the time articulate/ she knoweth that the
said Thomas Lane hath had his meate and
drincke at the said Elizabeth whitton and her
husbandes table and that he hath during the said
space lodged in the said Elizabeth whitton and
her husbandes howse, reddens racionem saieth
that she was during that space dwelling in
whitton very neere to the said Elizabeth whitton
and thereby knoweth it to be true. Et aliter
nescit deponere.
Ad quartum dicit quod nescit deponere.
f. 232v
To the fifth she says that she knows nothing to depose.
To the sixth article she says and depose that she had known the articulate, Francis Whitton, ever since his birth, and said that he is now seventeen years of age, as she takes it, and not above. And otherwise she says that he, the said Francis, is natural and lawful son of the said Elizabeth Whitton and so commonly reputed and taken. And otherwise she knows nothing to depose.
To the seventh she says that she knows nothing to depose.
To the last she says that her depositions made above were and are true.
Concerning the interrogation administered on the part of Elizabeth Whitton, the same examinate says as follows, namely:
To the first question she responded in the negative.
To the second article she says that this examinate’s husband is a day labourer, and he keeps three cows and lives of his own [i.e., on his own resources], and that her credit or estimation is not any way impeached. And as to the rest of the content of the article she says that she is not bound by the law to accuse herself (as she believes) and otherwise she does not know how to respond.
To the third she says that she did not see the articulate, Thomas Lane, lie in bed with the said Elizabeth Whitton he alone with her alone at any time other than when the said Elizabeth was sick, and
Transcript
f. 232v
Ad quintum dicit quod nescit deponere.
Ad sextum articulum dicit et deponit that she
hath knowen the articulate ffraunces
whitton euer sithence his Birth, and
saieth that she doeth he is wi nowe
seaventeene yeres of age, as she taketh
it and not above Et vlterius dicit
that he the [said] ffraunces is naturall and
Lawfull sonne of the said Elizabeth
whitton and soe commonlie reputed and
taken. Et aliter nescit deponere.
Ad septimum dicit quod nescit deponere.
Ad vltimum dicit predeposita sua[1] fuisse et
esse vera etc.
Eadem examinata super Interrogatione ex parte
Elizabeth whitton ministrata
dicit vt sequitur videlicet.
1 Ad primum interrogationem respondet negativa.
2 Ad secundum articulum dicit that this examinates
husband is a day laborer, and he keapeth
three kine and liveth of his owne, and
that her Credit or estimacion is not any
waie impeached. Et quoad cetera in
articulo contente dicit quod non tenetur de
Iure seipsam accusare (vti credit) Et aliter
nescit respondere
Ad tertium dicit that she did \not/ se the articulate
Thomas lane at any other time the lie in
bedd with the said Elizabeth whitton solus
cum solat sola at anie time other then
when the said Elizabeth was sicke, and
[1] macron is otiose.
f. 233r
that at those times there was somebody always in the chamber with them. And as far as the rest of the content in the article she refers to her depositions on the first article with exceptive material[1] and otherwise she knows nothing to depose.
To the fourth question she says that she knows nothing to depose.
To the fifth she says that in the time articulate the said Thomas Lane did teach and instruct four of the children of the said Mistress Whitton, and had his table free for the same (as this examinate was told by the said Mistress Whitton). And otherwise says that the said Lane did teach diverse other children in the country thereabouts in the chapel at Whitton. And otherwise she knows nothing to depose.
To the sixth and seventh questions she knows nothing to depose.
F
[1] matters objected to (i.e. the exceptions).
Transcript
that at those times there was somebody allwaies
in the Chamber with them. Et quoad cetera in
articulo contente refert se ad depositiones suas super
primo articulo materie exeptive Et aliter nescit deponere
Ad quartum Interrogationem dicit quod nescit deponere.
5. Ad quintum dicit that in the time libellat articulate
the said Thomas lane did teache and
instructe for fower of the Children of the
said mistres whitton, and had his table
free for the same (as this examinate was told
by the said mistres whitton). Et vlterius dicit
that the said lane did teache diuers other
Chilldren in the Countrie thereaboutes in the
Chappell at whitton. Et aliter nescit deponere.
Ad sextum et septimum Interrogationes dicit quod nescit
deponere.
F
2a. Mary Angel defames Elizabeth Whitton
Examinations of witnesses concerning a cause of defamation arising from accusations made by Mary Angel with respect to Elizabeth Whitton's chaste character. Elizabeth (wife of Francis Whitton) was defamed in the presence of her family and her children's teacher (Thomas Lane). The allegations suggest a previous relationship between William Whitton (Francis's brother) and Elizabeth; also more recent rumours of adultery with the teacher Thomas Lane. It is notable that Elizabeth Whitton is reported to suffer from seizures, possibly due to epilepsy.
See Cause 2b for Elizabeth Whitton's exceptions to this cause. See Cause 3 for a related cause.
People
| Name | Date of Birth | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Eleanor Meredith | Spinster, living in Burford, Shropshire. Cause 2a (1598): witness. |
|
| Elizabeth Whitton | Wife of Francis Whitton, the elder. Mother of Francis, Susan, and Whorwood Whitton. Cause 2a and 2b (1598): Whitton sues Mary Angel for defamation. Cause 3 (1598): mentioned. Other documents: Marriage settlement. Covenant that Whorwood, son of Francis and Elizabeth Whitton shall marry Elizabeth daughter of Richard Tompkyns before the feast of the nativity of St John Baptist next. 28 April 1599. Mentions second son Edmund. X11/1/2/1/10 10/11. https://www.shropshirearchives.org.uk/collections/getrecord/CCA_X11_1_2_1_10 |
|
| Francis Whitton, the elder | Husband of Elizabeth Whitton. Brother of William Whitton. Father of Whorwood, Susan, and Francis Whitton, the younger. Resident at Burford Cause 2a (1598): mentioned. Cause 3 (1598): mentioned. Other documents: Mortgage of Faintree Manor to Frauncis Whitton and Elizabeth 1602. https://www.shropshirearchives.org.uk/collections/getrecord/CCA_X11_1_2_2_15 Marriage settlement. Covenant that Whorwood, son of Francis and Elizabeth Whitton shall marry Elizabeth daughter of Richard Tompkyns before the feast of the nativity of St John Baptist next. 28 April 1599. Mentions second son Edmund. X11/1/2/1/10 10/11. https://www.shropshirearchives.org.uk/collections/getrecord/CCA_X11_1_2_1_10 |
|
| Francis Whitton, the younger. | 1580 | Son of Elizabeth Whitton and Francis Whitton, the elder. Brother to Susan and Whorwood Whitton. Cause 2a (1598): deponent and listed as 18 years old. |
| Susan Whitton | Sister of Francis Whitton, the younger and Whorwood Whitton. Daughter of Elizabeth Whitton and Francis Whitton, the elder Cause 2a (1598): mentioned. |
|
| Thomas James | 1558 | Yeoman, born and lived at Caynham, Shropshire. Cause 2a (1598): deponent. |
| Thomas Lane | 1558 | Yeoman, teacher at Whitton Chapel, born in Tenbury ca. 1558, resident of Burford. Cause 2a (1598): deponent, described as yeoman, 40 years of age, and resident of Burford in Shropshire for seven years. Prior to that he lived, where he was born, in Tenbury, an adjoining town in Worcestershire. Cause 2b (1598): described as living in the Whitton household, teaching their four children as well as others in the chapel at Whitton (poss. St. Mary’s Church, Whitton). Cause 3 (1598): sues William Whitton for Defamation. Disambiguation: Someone called Thomas Lane was rector at Burford 1567-69 and priest 1569-1587 but this could not be the same person. (If this record is correct the Thomas Lane mentioned in this case would only have been 9 at appointment.) The rector and priest were almost certainly this Thomas Lane's father which is suggested by the 1605 lease to "Thomas Lane, his wife Anne, and his son Thomas." Other documents: Clergy records, 1567-87. Rector and priest at Burford. Person ID: 65140. https://theclergydatabase.org.uk/jsp/persons/index.jsp Lease to Thomas, mentions job as yeoman, wife Anne, & son Thomas, 1605. https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/9c44e6f6-a51c-46c9-9ca3-0439852b4a29 Indenture to Francis Whitton in 1595. https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C4951304 |
| William Whitton | 1535 | Brother of Francis Whitton, the elder. Moved to Coreley 1596. Prior to this lived at Chetton. Cause 2a (1598): deponent, described as 63 years of age and having lived in the parish of Coreley/Coreldy for two years prior to which he lived at Chetton. Cause 3 (1598): sued for defamation by Thomas Lane. |
f. 123v
Upon the libel
16 June, 1598
Repeated before magistrate.
Jacob Ballard
Examinations of the witnesses on behalf of Elizabeth Whitton, gentlewoman, against Mary Angel in a cause of defamation or insult follow.
Thomas Lane, yeoman, of the parish of Burford in the county of Shropshire where he has lived for seven years or thereabouts, born in the parish of Tenbury in the county of Worcester, aged forty years or thereabouts. The witness, produced, sworn, and examined, says and deposes as follows.
To the first article he says the same is true.
To the second article he says that he refers to the articulate constitution etc.
To the third article he says and deposes that he refers to the articulate royal laws etc.
To the fourth article he says and deposes that about the feast of the Nativity of Christ last past – the precise time he does not otherwise recall – this examinate being at Whitton in the parish of Burford articulate in the house of Master Francis Whitton, husband of the articulate Elizabeth Whitton, the said Elizabeth Whitton called this examinate to her and told him that the articulate, Mary Angel, had reported unto her, the said Mistress Whitton, that William Whitton did make his boast unto the said Mary Angel, that he the said William Whitton might have had the use of the body of the said Elizabeth Whitton carnally at his pleasure when she the said Elizabeth Whitton dwelled at Faintree. Whereupon this examinate answered, “No, by the grace of God, that old man is not so lusty.” Then the said Mary Angel, being then and there present, replied in these words, “Yes, faith, he spoke the very same words to me at Tenbury in one Watie’s house that he might have had the use of her body at Faintree at his pleasure,” which words were so uttered by the same Mary Angel [at] the time and place afore specified in the presence of this examinate, Francis Whitton the younger, and Susan Whitton. And otherwise, he knows nothing to depose.
To the fifth he says it is true.
To the last he says that all and singular deposed above by him were and are true. Also, regarding and concerning these same things, public voice and fame are circulating, etc.
[Signed] by me Thomas Lane
Transcript
Super libello
xvj Junij 1598
repetito coram magistro
Iacobo Ballard
Examinaciones testium ex parte Elizabeth Whitton generosa
contra Mariam Angell in Causa diffamationis
siue Convicij sequntur videlicit.
Thomas Lane parochie de Burford in Comitatu Salopie
yeoman vbi moram fecit per vij annos aut
eo circiter, et antea natus infra parochiam de
Tenburie in Comitatu pre wigornie, ætatis xlta
annorum aut eo circiter Testis productus iuratus
et examinatus dicit et deponit vt sequitur.
1 Ad primum articulum dicit eundem esse verum.
2 Ad secundum articulum dicit quod refert se ad
Constitucionem articulatum etc.
3 Ad tertium articulum dicit et deponit quod refert se ad
leges regias articulatas etc.
4 Ad quartum articulum dicit et deponit. That aboutes
the feaste of the Nativitie of Christe last past
tempus certum aliter non recolit. This examinate being
at whitton in the parishe of Burford articulate in the
howse of master ffraunces whitton husband of the articulate
Elizabeth whitton, the said Elizabeth whitton called
this examinate to her and told him that ye articulate marie marie
Angell had reported, and vnto tha s her the said
mistres whitton that william whitton did make his boaste
vnto the said marie Angell, that he the said william
whitton, mighte haue had the vse of the bodie
of the said Elizabeth whitton carnally at his pleasure
when she the said Elizabeth dwelled at ffaintree
wherevppon this examinate answered noe by the grace of
god that old man is not soe lustie, Then the
said Marie Angell being then and there present, replied
in these wordes, yes faieth he spake the verie
same wordes to me at Tenbury, in one waties
howse that he mighte have had the bodi the
vse of her bodie at ffaintree \at his pleasure/ which wordes were
soe vttered by the said mary Angell the time and
place afore specified in the presence of this examinate, In
ffraunces whitton the yonger, and Susan whitton
Et aliter nescit deponere.
Ad quintum dicit eundem esse verum.
Ad vltimum dicit omnia et singula per eum predeposita
fuisse et esse vera etc. ac de et super eisdem laborant
publica vox et fama etc.
per me Thomam Lanem
f. 124r
Francis Whitton the younger of the Whitton [family], gentleman, from the parish of Burford in the county of Shropshire where he has lived for most of his life of eighteen years or thereabouts. The witness, produced, sworn, and examined, says and deposes as follows, namely:
To the first article he says and deposes the same is true.
To the second and third article he says and deposes that he refers it to the articulate laws and constitutions etc.
To the fourth article he says and deposes that about the feast of the Nativity of our Lord – the precise time he cannot otherwise remember – the articulate Mary Angel at Whitton in the parish of Burford articulate in the house of Francis Whitton, gentleman, this examinate’s father, did utter and report openly in the hearing and presence of this examinate, Thomas Lane his previous fellow witness, and Susan Whitton this deponent’s sister, that William Whitton articulate told her, the said Mary Angel, that he the said William Whitton might have carnally to deal with the body of the articulate Elizabeth Whitton, this examinate’s mother, at his pleasure when she, the said Elizabeth Whitton, dwelled at Faintree. And otherwise, he knows nothing to depose as he says
To the fifth he says it is true etc.
To the last he says that all and singular deposed above by him were and are true. Also, regarding and concerning these same things public voice and fame are circulating, etc.
Francis Whitton.
William Whitton, gentleman, of the parish of Coreley in the county of Shropshire where he has lived for two years or thereabouts and before at Chelton in the aforesaid county, aged 63 years or thereabouts. The witness, produced, sworn, and examined, says and deposes as follows, namely:
To the first article he says the same is true.
To the second and third articles he says and deposes that he refers to the articulate laws.
To the fourth article he says and deposes that he never heard Mary Angel speak the words articulate and being further examined whether he spoke any of the words recorded in the libel to Mary Angel, he utterly refused to answer the same.
Transcript
ffranciscus whitton \iunior/ de Whitton parochie
de Burford in comitatu Salopie generosus
vbi moram fecit per maximum tempus vite
sue, ætatis xviij annorum aut eo circiter. Testis
productus iuratus et examinatus dicit et deponit vt
sequitur videlicet.
1 Ad primum articulum dicit et deponit eundem articulum esse
verum.
2 3. Ad secundum et tertium articulos dicit et deponit quod
refert se ad leges et constituciones articulatas etc.
4. Ad quartum articulum dicit et deponit That aboutes
The ffeaste of the Nativitie of our lord last past tempus
certum aliter non recolit Thes examinate articulate Marie
Angell, did at whitton in the parishe of Burford articulate
in the howse of ffraunces whitton gentleman this examinates father
did vtter and reporte openly, in the hearing and presence
of thes examinate, Thomas Lane his preconteste, and Susan
whitton this deponentes Sister, that william whitton articulate
told her the said Marie Angell, that he the said william
whitton mighte have Carnally to deal with the bodie
of the articulate Elizabeth whitton this examinates mother at his
pleasure when she the said Elizabeth whitton dwelled
at ffainetree. Et aliter nescit deponere vt dicit.
5. Ad quintum dicit eundem esse verum etc.
6. Ad vltimum dicit omnia et singula per eum predeposita fuisse
et esse vera etc. ac de et super eisdem laborant
publica vox et fama etc.
ffrances Whitton
willelmus whitton parochie de Coreley
in comitatu Salopie generosus, vbi
moram fecit per 2 Annos elapsos aut
eo circiter, et antea apud Chetton in comitatu
predicto, ætatis lxviij aut eo circiter. Testis
productus iuratus et examinatus dicit et
deponit vt sequitur videlicet.
1 Ad primum articulum dicit eundem esse verum
2 3 Ad secundum et tertium articulos dicit et deponit
quod refert se ad leges articulatas etc.
4 Ad quartum articulum dicit et deponit q That he neuer
heard Mary Angell speake the wordes articulate, And
being further examined whether he spake any
of the wordes libelate to mary Angell, he vtterly
refuseth to answere the same.
f. 124v
To the fifth he says that he knows nothing to depose.
To the last he says that all and singular deposed above by him were and are true etc.
Jacob Ballard
Thomas James, yeoman, of the parish of Caynham in the county of Shropshire where he has lived from the cradle aged forty years or thereabouts. The witness, produced, sworn, and examined, says and deposes as follows.
To the first article he says the same is true.
To the second and third articles he says that he refers to the articulate laws etc.
To the fourth articles he says and deposes that since the entrance of this cause now in question, he, this examinate, by chance meeting with the articulate Mary Angel and conferring of diverse matters, amongst other words passed between them, the said Mary Angel questioned with this examinate for what cause Mistress Whitton articulate should sue her at Hereford. Whereupon this examinate answered that the suit was for slanderous words and that some of the words were [slanderous], for that the said Mary Angel should say that William Whitton, also named in this article, might have had carnally the use of the body of the aforesaid Elizabeth Whitton when he would [i.e., whenever he wanted] when she dwelled at Faintree. Then the said Mary Angel answered, “If that be all I care not, for when I spoke these words there was nobody by but Thomas Lane, Francis Whitton, and Susan Whitton, and they cannot be witnesses.” And otherwise he knows nothing depose.
To the fifth he says it is true.
To the last he says that all and singular deposed above by him were and are true etc.
Thomas James
Transcript
Ad quintum dicit quod nescit deponere
Ad vltimum dicit omnia et singula per eum
predeposita fuisse et esse vera etc.
Iacobus Ballard
Thomas Iames parochie de Cayneham
in comitatu Salopie yeoman vbi
moram fecit a cunabulis, ætatis xlta
annorum aut eo circiter. Testis productus
iuratus et examinatus dicit et deponit
vt sequitur
Ad primum articulum dicit eundem esse verum etc.
Ad secundum et tertium articulos dicit quod refert se
ad leges articulatas etc.
Ad quartum articulum dicit et deponit That
sithence the enteraunce of this Cause now in
question, he this examinate by chaunce meeting with
the articulate Marie Angell, and conferring of diuers
matters, Amongst other wordes passed betweene
them, the said Marie Angell questioned with this
examinate, for what cause mistres whitton articulate sholde
sue her at hereford, wherevppon this \examinate/ answered that
the suite was for slaunderouse wordes. and that some
of the wordes were, for that the said Marie
Angell should saie that william whitton allsoe named
in this article, mighte haue had \carnallie/ the vse of the bodie
of william the foresaid Elizabeth \whitton/ when he would
when she dwelled at ffaynetree, Then the said
Marie Angell answered if that be all I care not
for when I spake those wordes there was noebody
by but Thomas Lane, ffraunces whitton, and Susan
whitton, and they cannot be wittnesses. Et aliter nescit
deponere.
Ad quintum dicit eundem esse verum.
Ad vltimum dicit omnia et singula per eum predeposita
fuisse et esse vera etc.
Thomas Iames
f. 128r
Upon the libel.
On the part of Whitton against Angel.
Eleanor Meredith, spinster, of the parish of Burford in the county of Shropshire, aged fifty or thereabouts. The witness, produced, sworn, and examined, says and deposes as follows, namely:
To the first article she says the same is true.
To the second and third articles she says that she refers to the articulate laws, etc.
To the fourth article she says that she knows nothing to depose.
To the fifth, that there is much speech in the country concerning this cause. And otherwise, she knows nothing to depose.
To the last she says the depositions made above are true, etc.
Transcript
Super libelo
Ex parte whitton contraLane Angell.
Elenora Meredith parochie de Burford in Comitatu
Salopie spinster vbi ætatis l annorum aut
eo circiter testis producta iurata et examinata dicit
et deponit vt sequitur videlicet.
1 Ad primum articulum dicit eundem esse verum.
2. 3. Ad secundum et tertium articulos dicit quod refert se
ad Consticiones et leges regias articulatas etc.
Ad 4 articulum dicit quod nescit deponere.
Ad 5 dicit that there is much speach in the
Cuntry concerning this Cause. Et aliter nescit deponere
Ad vltimum dicit predeposita esse vera etc.
lc-test
People
| Name | Date of Birth | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| John ap Lewis | 1557 | Born in Llandigte (Wales). Resident in Pesteigne from 1593. Cause 1 (1597): deponent, 40 years old. Takes place in Staunton on Arrow. |
| John Williams | 1557 | Resident in Knill. 40 years old in 1597. Cause 1 (1597): deponent concerning events in Staunton on Arrow. |
f. 96v
13 January, 1597
Concerning the libel
Jacob Ballard
Examinations of the witness on behalf of Elinor Greenly against Alice Fletcher in a cause of defamation or insult follow.
John Williams, husbandman, of the parish of Knill in the county of Hereford where he has lived since his birth aged forty years and more. The witness, produced, sworn, and examined, says and deposes as follows.
To the first article, he says the same is true.
To the second article, he says that he refers to the articulate laws .
To the third article he says and deposes that in harvest last past in the current year of our Lord 1597--he does not otherwise recollect the time--this examinate being reaping in a field within the parish of Staunton on Arrow articulate. The articulate Alice Fletcher and Elinor Greenly were at very hard words and foul speeches one with the other, not far from the place where this examinate was at work. And amongst diverse words then and there passed between them, this examinate did hear the said Alice Fletcher speak and utter these words following unto the said Elinor Greenly, namely (speaking unto the said Elinor) [she] said, "You are a whore, an errant whore, a rotten whore, a tilitadown[1] whore, and a Welsh goat," and many other unseemly words tending to the great defamation of the said Elinor. And moreover, [he] sayeth that the said words were so spoken by the said Alice Fletcher in the hearing of this examinate [himself], John ap Lewis, and diverse others whose names this examinate does not now remember. And otherwise he knows nothing to depose.
To the fourth article he says it is true.
To the last he says that all and singular deposed above by him were and are true. And regarding and concerning these same things public voice and fame are circulating.
Signed [by] John Williams.
John ap Lewis, husbandman, of the parish of Presteigne in the county of Radnor where he has lived for about four years, born in the parish of Llandovery in the county of Radnor aforesaid, aged around forty years. The witness, produced, sworn, and examined, says and deposes as follows.
To the first article he declares the same is true.
[1] On f. 97v this is spelled "tiltadown." Evidently, the term means falling down or downfallen.
Transcript
xiijo Ianuary 1597
Super libello/
Iacobus Ballard
Examinaciones testium ex parte Elinore
Greenely, contra Aliciam ffletcher
in causa diffamacionis siue convitij
sequu[n]tur.
Johannes Williams parochie de Knill in comitatu hereford
husbandman vbi moram fecit a nativitate sua ætatis
xlta annorum et vltra testis productus iuratus et
examinatus dicit et deponit vt sequitur.
Ad primum articulum dicit eundem esse verum.
Ad secundum articulum dicit eundem esse ve quod refert se ad
Leges articulatas etc.
Ad tertium articulum dicit et deponit, That in harvest last
past in Anno domini 1597 iam currente tempus certum aliter non
recolit. This examinate being reaping in a field within
the parishe of Staunton vppon Arrowe articulate the
articulate Alice ffletcher and Elinor Greenelie, were
at varie harde wordes and foule speeches one with the
other not farre from the place where this examinate was at
worke. And amongst divers wordes then and there
passed betweene them, this examinate did heere the said
Alice ffletcher speake and vtter these wordes following
vnto the said Elinor Greenelie videlicet speaking vnto
the said Elinor said, thowe arte a hoore an arrand
hoore, a rotten hoore, a tilitadown hoore, and a
welshe goate, and manie other vnseamelie wordes
tending to the greate diffamacion of the said Elinor
And moreouer saieth that the said wordes were
soe spoken by the said Alice ffletcher, in the
hearing of this examinate John Bevan ap lewes and
diuers others whose Names this examinate doeth not
nowe remember Et aliter nescit deponere.
Ad quartum articulum dicit eundem quod credit eundem esse
verum.
Ad vltimum dipcit omnia et singula per eum predeposita fuisse
et esse vera etc. ac de et super eisdem laborant
publica vox et fama etc.
Signatum Iohannes williams[1]
Iacobus Ballard
Johannes ap lewes parochie de presteigne in
Comitatu Radnor husbandman vbi moram
fecit per quatuor Annos aut eo circiter
natus in parochia de llandigte in Comitatu Radnor
praedicti ætatis xlta annorum aut eo circiter
testis productus iuratus et examinatus dicit et
deponit vt super sequitur.
Ad primum articulum dicit eundem esse verum.
[1]It appears that the scribe has written this above two marks made in lieu of a signature by the examinate John Williams.