[an error occurred while processing this directive]

Chancery Decrees and Orders (PRO C38/44 report: Rose Partridge widow v Rich Harlakenden)

7.6.1622 (Friday 7 June 1622)

document 18400005

Rose Partridge widow plaintiff and Rich Harlakenden defendant according to an order of 3.6. I have considered of the plaintiff's bill and defendant's answer in the presence of the defendant's counsel none attending for the plaintiff though they were summoned and do find the charges in the bill be truly expressed in the said order and that none of them do charge the now defendant except the charge that the said defendant compounded with the plaintiff for the 6a and the surrender thereof from her as lawful owner thereof and that the defendant had discredited the plaintiff's title yet the defendant in his care to defend the reputation and credit of his father hath answered that he knoweth nothing of his own knowledge of the matter contained in the bill but only of those that have been done since the defendant came to be lord of the said manor of Earls Colne which was about nineteen or twenty years since the acts wherewith his father is charged being about thirty years since which in his conscience he thinketh were just and honest and as to the charges against the now defend ant the first does answer itself the plaintiff confessing her composition with the defendant for the said 6a about twelve years since and has surrendered thereafter to the defendant willingly and as to the last surrender to the plaintiff for life the remainder to her children by her first husband Cuckock after the said copyhold lands were forfeited to the defendant's father as is alleged the defendant confesseth the same accordingly and as to the charge of scandaling the plaintiff's title by producing a court roll in the 33Eliz1 in the bill mentioned he denieth that he ever publicised any such court roll in any other manner than he thinketh was fit for him being lord of the manor to do by which roll the defendant saith in his answer it appeareth that the surrenders were made unto the said Partridge her husband and his heirs was taken in open court and that she was duly examined upon the same and so the plaintiff's title in no sort scandalized by the defendant so as I said the defendant not otherwise in substance charged by the said bill and in the said order is expressed which being the full scope of the power to me hereby given I most humbly leave the further consideration thereof to the grave judgement of this most honourable court Jn Mychell