Star Chamber (PRO STAC8/163/9 Rich Harlakenden v Wm Eedies et al)

4.11.1606 (Tuesday 4 November 1606)

document 19100726

Sam Diglette miller Halsted aged 38yr said Hen Pullen had acquainted him of his lands and leases and how he had disposed of them after his death said that about twelve years before Hen Pullen's death the earl of Oxford in consideration of work done by Hen Pullen made a lease to him of the mill for twenty one years and afterwards Hen Pullen assigned the greater part of the lease to one Wm Clarke his son in law yielding 10li per annum and a peck of wheat weekly after his death he devised the wheat to his widow and the rent from the lease to his daughter Mary the original lease was given to the informant with the counterpart he said there was never any talk by Pullen of a lease in reversion and he heard nothing till a year or two past a little before the expiry of the lease if there had been any lease in reversion he would have been made acquainted with it in Pullen's life when Pullen told him of his bequest of the remainder of the lease to his daughter Mary he the deponent said she ought to have the writing herself but Pullen said no for if she had it then her husband Eedies would get it by some means or other and she would be little the better