Star Chamber (PRO STAC8/289/30 Eliz and Francis Veer v Rich Harlakenden)

29.11.4Jas1 (Saturday 29 November 1606)

document 19204064

to question thirty one says that he did not consult or agree with mr Harlakenden to enquire if a riot to be committed by Edes and his wife Strutt Sillitoe Peartree and others with any purpose to hide the supposed misdemeanour of him Waldgrave mr Harlakenden and his servants and others as in the bill for the manifestation of the truth touching the matter he says that complaint or information was given him that Edes and his wife Strutt Sillitoe Peartree and others had riotously and unlawfully assembled themselves together in the millhouse and by force did hold and keep possession and upon such complaint and information he and sir Thos Gardiner knight being the next justice of the peace to the said mill where the said riot and force was alleged to be committed to cause the same suspected offences to be enquired of by juries to enquire as well of the suspected riot as of the suspected force and that mr Harlakenden claimed to have then in his company one mr Tiffin counsellor at law who at that time as Waldgrave heard kept court for mr Harlakenden in Earls Colne in Essex mr Tiffin claiming to be so then did seek evidence to the jury touching the supposed riots and force Waldgrave and sir Thos Gardiner notwithstanding that the jury were willing to send an ignoramus about the supposed force did advise the jury to go together and be better advised in their verdict but did not by any advise or any other means to any of the jury to give back again and send a riot to be committed by Edes and others for he said that the jury who enquired of the riot were not agreed on an ignoramus to that indictment to his knowledge and were as he thinks well resolved to find the said bill of themselves whether at the time of the verdict the doors were shut and the verdict taken privately or no he does not know and as touching the cause why he Waldgrave did not charge the jury empanelled to enquire of the suspected riots and misdemeanours to have been committed by Harlakenden his servants and others he says that there was not any complaint made of them to him neither was he required to cause any enquiry thereof to be made so no enquiry was made nor can he further say