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

29.11.4Jas1 (Saturday 29 November 1606)

document 19204091

to the second question says that about the time aforesaid he did understand the lease in reversion only to be illegible text and not otherwise further says that Sam Diglett the younger and Jn Diglett in the bill did not report to him that Edes had such a lease and that both or one of them had been with Edes to take removal (sic) thereupon and that the same was esteemed by counsel to be a good lease neither did they or either of them report or tell Cobbe anything touching such lease