Chancery Depositions (PRO C5/418/146 Buttolph Cowland Pigg and Dove v Hatley and Crowe)

17.11.1662 (Monday 17 November 1662)

document 16700472

(there is a copy of the previous complaint and a subpoena) the joint and several answers of Wm Hatley and Rich Sharp Wm Hatley for himself says that he believes it to be true that Jn Pearson in the bill mentioned was in his lifetime that is to say about eighteen years since but not fourteen years seised in fee copy of court roll according to the custom of the manor of Barwick Hall in White Colne not the manor of White Colne as in the bill of and in the messuage and tenement with barns stable and oat mill belonging as in the bill to the yearly value of 4li10s and no more that being as much as he could let it yearly but not of the yearly value of 5li as is supposed he believes that Jn Pearson had not any issue by Jane his wife and that he did intend to provide for the future maintenance of her Jane and to give the same premises to her and her heirs but not in such manner as in the bill alleged and he believes that the said Jn Pearson in 1644 surrendered the customary messuage and tenement barns and yards appurtenances etc to his last will in writing which surrender was afterwards presented at the court held for the manor in the month of .4.1645 as in and by court rolls whereunto relation being had may appear and this defendant believes that Jn Pearson did make his last will in writing bearing date 27.9.20Chas1 and did bequeath to Jane and her heirs these premises as his customary messuage etc called Crackbones alias Gilders in White Colne without that he did gave the messuage and premises to her in such manner and to such uses as in the bill or any other manner than to her Jane and her heirs as is above set forth and the defendant says that Jn Pearson having made his will and surrender afterwards about sixteen years since and not thirteen years as in the bill died by and after whose death the premises by force and virtue of the last will did come as of right to Jane not subject to the limitations in the bill or to any conditions or limitations whatsoever whereby to defeat or hinder her from the disposing of the premises at her own will and pleasure after her death and she at a court held on 8.10.1646 was admitted tenant to herself and heirs according to custom of the manor and this can be shown by the court roll and she Jane did all her lifetime quietly enjoy the premises but he the defendant denies that after her death the same ought to have descended and come to the complainants in coparency as eldest sons of the sisters of the said Jane as in the bill or otherwise and he says that true it is that since the death of Jn Pearson Jane married and did take to husband Wm Hatley and about three years since she Jane died and before her death and during her intermarriage with Wm Hatley at a court held for the manor on 20.10.1653 she Jane together with the defendant did duly render the copyhold messuage or tenement with yards and gardens called Crackbones alias Gilders to the use of her last will and after the making of the surrender she Jane was very desirous to make her will and accordingly did so in writing dated 19.12.1653 and therein and thereby she did of her own free and good will being moved thereof her own part for the love she did bear her husband give and bequeath him the messuage and tenement and all the premises with appurtenances to have and to hold to his heirs forever where in the last will it may more plainly appear and Jane dying about the time aforesaid this defendant at a court held for the manor on 12.3.1660 was admitted tenant to the premises from the surrender and last will of Jane as is shown by the rolls of the court by virtue whereof he enjoyed the premises as he humbly conceives of right he ought to do having just title thereunto and good powers and authority as he is informed to sell or dispose the same but he does utterly deny that he did at any time sell or lease the messuage and other the premises or any part thereof to the other defendant Rich Sharp or to any other person or persons in trust for him or for his use for a great number of years or for any term whatsoever or did grant sell or convey to him any interest or estate in the premises or any part whatsoever and he says the will and surrender was made by Jane according to her intent and desire voluntarily and without any compulsion and without menaces and threats from this defendant Wm Hatley as is in the bill inserted and he says that the will and surrender were made by Jane during her coverture with him yet he is advised by his counsel she had good powers so to do that the law did enable her with him this defendant her husband to surrender as aforesaid she being examined by the steward and consenting thereunto and he further says that at such time that she made the surrender and will she was of a disposing mind and memory and well understood and knew what she did and he does deny that by combination with the other defendants or otherwise he had got into his hands or custody the last will of Jn Pearson or any deeds writings evidences copies of court roll which do in any ways concern the premises or any part thereof save only the probate of the will of Jn Pearson which he says belongs to him and to at all to the complainants and he says that he does not refuse to permit the complainants to enjoy the premises for he claims nothing and has no estate therein nor has he any right there for the space of one year last past and more for he has sold and surrendered the premises to one Crow and his heirs who is accordingly admitted to the same and he the defendant says that he never had he original will of Jn Pearson in his custody and therefore had the complainants desired a sight of it or any copy thereof he might have refused it but they might have had a sight of it from the ecclesiastical court where it was proved in the year 1646 by Jane the executrix named in the will which is now there remaining for ought this defendant knows to the contrary he denies that he refused to give them copies or a copy of the will of Jane for the same was never demanded of him and these defendants and either of them deny all combination and confederacy wherefore they are charged in and by the bill and the defendant Rich Sharp says he is a mere stranger to all and particular the passages mentioned and charged by the complainants in their bills and is altogether unconcerned therein save only as to the will of Jane to which he set his name as a witness and that he did never know Jn Pearson nor knows he anything touching the making of his will nor the date thereof or if the custody of the same remains otherwise than is herein mentioned by the defendant nor did he ever pretend that Jane did ever surrender the premises to the use of her will in any other manner as in the bill alleged and these defendants do conceive that the original will of Jn Pearson being in the ecclesiastical court where it was proved its not in the power of these defendants to (torn) the same in this court and they or either of them or any other person or persons to their use or deliveries confederacies privaties etc did have any deeds or copies of court roll that do in any way concern the premises or part thereof and the defendant Wm Hatley says that Jane his late wife did make the will and surrender spontaneously and of her own free will and mind she did not make the same by compulsion or threat as pretended and that she was not enforced thereunto by any act of unkindness towards her from this defendant who was not at all eager to have her estate for several times after making of the surrender she desired him to send but one Jn Pakenham cleric about the time the said will date (torn) as he is informed sent for by Jane who desired him to write her will which at her entreaty he did undertake and Jane did then declare that she did give to this defendant her then husband and his heirs the messuage and tenement and all other premises and also all she had besides and for the writing of the will and during the time the same was in writing he the defendant did propose to her that she would give anything to any of her friends he would be willing withal but her answer to this defendant was that she would not give anything away from him because she did not know as she said but she might live to spend it and according to the directions given by Jane to mr Pakenham he did write the will as above which she then signed sealed and acknowledged to be her will and was of a disposing mind and well understood what she did and this defendant by reason of her last sickness after the making of the will being above a year did cost this defendant very near if not altogether as much as the value of the premises and whatsoever else she gave him and he says that the persons whose names are subscribed to the will of Jane are the defendant Rich Sharp Ann Bedlow and mr Packenham and the defendant is informed and does believe that mr Packenham at the time of the sealing of the will was about the age of 50yrs and the defendant Rich Sharp about 19yr and Ann Bedlow about 50yr and he says he knows not if the said Jane did always or at any time promise to leave the premises or any part thereof to descend to the complainants and he denies that he did give his consent to illegible text resolution but he was never desired so to do these defendants either of them do disclaim all title and interest in the premises and he Rich does believe that Wm Hatley did enter into the premises by virtue of the surrender and will of Jane and does deny that he received any rents issues and profits of the premises or any part thereof or had any estate therein and therefore is not chargeable as he conceives to make any accounts to the complainants and the defendant Wm Hatley does confess that he did receive the rents and issues of the premises for about two years since the death of Jane and has as he conceives good right so to do and ought to enjoy the same to his own use without being liable to make any account therefore to the complainants and Rich Sharp says that he believes that Jane at the time of making her will was of good understanding and memory and well knew what she then did without any other matter or thing etc they ask to be dismissed mark Wm Hatley Rich Sharp