[an error occurred while processing this directive]

Court of Requests (PRO REQ2/403/15 Jn Brewer v Thos Prior and Xoph Isack)

27.1.1609 (Friday 27 January 1609)

document 19800005

answer of Isack to Brewer by Geo Coe gentleman on commission on 20.1.1609 says his is informed that the bill of complaint is insufficient etc says he knows that it was his majesty's pleasure that sir Hen Maxey knight and others named in the bill would examine and hear and end the business between the plaintiff and the defendant and to certify as in the bill alleged he was informed that letters were writ to Hen Maxey knight Hen Gent esq and Chas Chibbourne esq to examine and end the differences (torn) further answers that the defendant in .1.1608 being very sick and not able to travel the said Hen Maxey and mr Gent repaired to the defendant and made (torn) with their letters and did hear the complaint of the plaintiff made against the defendant sir Hen mr Gent to the knowledge of the defendant did not propound or make any order for the defendant to pay any (torn) to the plaintiff neither did there appear any cause to them of debt for any sum or sums of money which the defendant should owe the plaintiff but the plaintiff is justly indebted to the defendant and sir Hen Maxey and mr Gent (torn) importunity of the plaintiff as the defendant takes it did wish the defendant and the plaintiff to become bound either to the other and to abide the order and award of one (torn) Roughton and Wm Siday whereunto the plaintiff and defendant assented and (torn) and thereupon the arbitrators did hear the matter in difference between the plaintiff and defendant and they could not find that the defendant did owe the plaintiff any sum or sums of money nor was (torn) any way unto him but it did appear unto them the plaintiff was indebted to the defendant in divers sums of money due to him from the plaintiff by bonds and specialties yet the plaintiff not herewith satisfied importuned the (torn) again in the business whereupon sir Hen appointed one Thos Pilgrime to hear and order the matters of difference and the defendant thereunto agreed and bonds were entered on the behalf of the defendant and plaintiff to abide the order and award of Thos Pilgrime who did also examine and hear the state of the business and the defendant thinks finding no just cause to relieve the plaintiff left the same without any (torn) the defendant does deny that at the time of the hearing of the causes before sir Hen Maxey and mr Gent or either of them or before ever bought or sold anything with the plaintiff whereby he should be indebted to the plaintiff (torn) and the defendant or even was justly indebted to the plaintiff but the defendant confesses that after such time as the said several arbitrators chosen as aforesaid severally heard the matters alleged by the plaintiff against the defendant they did find no matter to relieve the plaintiff in but that he was justly indebted to the defendant then the plaintiff very cunningly and deceitfully repaired again to the defendant in the time of his sickness and taking advantage of his weakness confidently affirmed that sir Hen Maxey willed the plaintiff to certify the defendant that he Hen had ordered the defendant should pay the plaintiff the sum of 21li=s whereupon the defendant being very sickly and fearful of suits and troubles and unable to travel to any counsel about the same and himself altogether unlearned did agree that if mr Hen Maxey had so ordered this defendant would give to the said party 10li viz 5li between that time and michaelmas. and 5li more at such times as the defendant should afterwards agree was if the said sir Hen had made any such order as aforesaid which was the substance of the agreement made by the defendant with the plaintiff to the now best remembrance of this defendant but this (torn) says that he is informed that Hen Maxey made no such order nor did will the plaintiff to signify that any such determination of any such order neither was there any such cause that he should so (torn) and this defendant hopes under favour of this court that he shall not be compelled to pay anything to the plaintiff where nothing can appear to be due but only to be rested by vexation deceit and (torn) plaintiff which without cause and just ground of suit and as touching such bonds bills and specialties which the defendant has of the plaintiff and which the plaintiff by his bill alleges that he did promise to deliver to the plaintiff the said defendant answers that he has several bonds and bills whereby the plaintiff stands indebted to him in several sums of which bonds the defendant has not as yet received any manner of satisfaction and therefore no cause wherefore the defendant ought to be compelled to deliver the same to the plaintiff but only the agreement which the plaintiff by his bill pretended should be made with him by the defendant and the defendant says he made the same in no other manner to his now best remembrance than as before he has confessed that is that if sir Hen Maxey had ordered that the defendant should pay to the complainant 21li10s as the plaintiff has affirmed then the defendant would give him the sum of 10li as aforesaid and deliver to him the bonds and specialties as in the bill which the defendant under favour of the court thinks he is not bound to do either by law or conscience for that he never received any due satisfaction for the bonds or especialties nor has by any means lawfully released the same nor has any just consideration for the delivery of the bonds and specialties without that upon due examination of the plaintiff's suit the said Hen Maxey and mr Gent to the knowledge of him did find him to be (torn) to the plaintiff in the sum of 16li and upwards and that they ordered the defendant should pay the same to the plaintiff and were about to certify the same as by the bill is most untruly surmised and without that the defendant finding that sir Hen Maxey and mr Gent would certify against him he thereupon treated with the plaintiff that a stay thereof might be made as by the bill alleged and without that the defendant offered and was contented to the plaintiff the sum of 10li and to deliver to him all his bills bonds etc as is set forth otherwise than the defendant has before expressed he was drawn unto in the time of his weakness by the deceitful and untrue assertions of the plaintiff without any just cause or (torn) or consideration and without that any other matter or thing mentioned in the bill and not answered etc direction from the court to Geo Coe and Wm Siday to send to them the bill of complaint against Xoph Isack defendant trusting in their wisdom (torn and unclear) and they question each and these to be put into court at Whitehall under their seals at hilary next to the intent that the court by advice of counsel may do as the case requires dated under privy seal 23.11.6Jas1