Copyright
Frank Farnsworth Starr.

English Goodwin family papers; being material collected in the search for the ancestry of William and Ozias Goodwin, immigrants of 1632 and residents of Hartford, Connecticut .. online

. (page 17 of 44)
Online LibraryFrank Farnsworth StarrEnglish Goodwin family papers; being material collected in the search for the ancestry of William and Ozias Goodwin, immigrants of 1632 and residents of Hartford, Connecticut .. → online text (page 17 of 44)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook


etc. in the parish of St. Michaels Aswade in ye island of Thanet
in the county of Kent and that the said Elizabeth did importune
your orator to come and live with her in her said farme, and to
bee helpful and out of the love and affection which your orator did
bear the said Elizabeth, said orator did live in the said farme
with ye said Elizabeth for ye space of four yeares etc and the said
Elizabeth did promise to marry your said orator whereupon your
orator having goods and chattels and household stuffs and imple-
ments of husbandry etc. to the value of 5oli. your orator did bring
them all to the said howse and did deliver them into the posses-
sion of the said Elizabeth The said Elizabeth presently married
one William Watts of in the county of Kent, ^oman, and



876 ENGLISH GOODWIN FAMILY PAPERS.

orator now seeks to recover damages, claiming wages due to him
and the recovery of said goods and chattels etc. The joint and
severall answers of William Watts and Elizabeth his wife defend-
ants to the bill of complaint. Denies that complainant was help-
full to the said Elizabeth on the farm etc.etc. Deny debts for
wages etc.

Chancery Proceedings, Charles I, C, bundle 75, no. 22.

The joynt and severall answers of Sir Samuell Saltonstall,
knight. Wye Saltonstall and Alexander Wye, gent, defendants
to the bill of Complaint of Ozias Churchman, complainant. The
said Sir Samuell Saltonstall for himselfe saith that he married
with Elizabeth the daughter and heire of William Wye of Tarl-
ston, couiity Gloycester, councellor at lawe, late of Lincolns Inn,
deceased, and that the said William was seized in fee of and in
the moyte of the tithes in the bill menconed and died seized
thereof and that the said Elizabeth after his death held the said
moyte etc. and at her death this defendant held the same, the
right thereof as tenant being for the term of his natural life, the
reversion belonging to the said Wye Saltonstall his eldest sonne,
and Sonne and heire of the said Elizabeth. Albeit he saith that
it is true there was a will pretended to be made by the said Wil-
liam Wye disposing thereof to Charls Wye in the bill named, and
the said Alexander Wye saith that the said Charles Wye was his
brother and died long since a bachelor without issue and that
Anthony Wye was his eldest brother and heire to whom etc.etc.
Defendant also says that it is true he contracted and concluded
for the consideracon named in the bill, to grant, bargaine and sell
the moyty of the said tythes vnto the complainant as alleged.
And the defendants. Sir Samuell Saltonstall and Wye Sal-
tonstall saye that there is not any statute, judgment, recognizance,
estate charge or incumbrances in being made or had by or against
them to their knowledge etc. etc. And this defendant Alexander
Wye saith that he hath scene a ded indented dated 4 August in
the four and fortieth yeare of Queene Elizabeth made between
Nicholas Overbury, Esq. and the said Anthony Wye this defend-
ants brother of the one parte and Sir Samuell Saltonstall and
Elizabeth his wife deceased of the other parte etc. etc.

Jo : Sotherton.
Bill of Complaint missing. Answer to bill of complaint as above.
Chancery Proceedings, Charles I, C, bundle 62, no. 4.



CHANCERY PROCEEDINGS. '877

undated. Bill of Complaint of John Godwyn of Tylehurst,
county Berks, labourer, sonn and heire of John Godwyn late of
Tylehurst deceased. Your said orator's grandfather John God-
wyn seised of 4 acres of arrable in tything of Norcott in said
parish and other lands etc. borrowed of one William Godwyn
of Kentwood farme in said tything, yeoman £8. and said John
demised said lands to said William etc. and John Godwyn your
orator's late father said William before his death leased said
lands to one Thomas Godwyn of Tylehurst his nephew and heire
and yet though said lands should descend to your orator the said
Thomas combyning with one Edward Newbery and Anne his
wife who are now in possession of said premises and hath made
dyvers secret conveyances of said lands etc. Bill only.

Chancery Proceedings, Charles I, G, bundle 3, no. '54.

The Replicacon of John Gibson, complainant to the answer of
Thomas Godwyn, gent, and John Drefifeld, gent, defendants.
True that Edward Rookewood, Esqre. and Nicholas Rookewood
his Sonne and others did make a lease of said premises to Thomas
Johnson and others as specified in said answer but only in trust
for use of William Dodd and that rent of same was payd to said
Dodd and after to his executors and that said premises coming
into the hands of Sir Frauncys Jones was made unto the sayd
John Blenerhassett, Knt. and said defendant and Henrie Blener-
hassett, gent, in trust for William Webb, defendant doth not
declare by whom said consideration was paid unto the said Sir
Frauncys Jones but believes that said William Webbe did pay
same. True that complainant mortgaged two messuages to said
defendant Duffyld for £80 but complainant never received more
than £40 and that other £40 was appoynted to be payd to said
Thomas Goodwyn which said Dyfifyld afirmed hee had paid yett
which said Goodwyn forth denye etc. etc. etc.

Chancery Proceedings, Charles I, G, bundle 27, no. 11.

Answere of Christopher Dawe one of the defendants to the
bill of complaint of Thomas Godwin, complainant. Bill exhib-
ited to hinder defendant to recover his just debts from said God-
wine. Believe it is true that said John (Dawe?) and Thomas
Dewe his sonne were seised of dyvers messuages as declared.
Denies any knowledge of any such bargaine recognisances etc. to
Males and Dalbott or any other conveyance as pretended did not



878 ENGLISH GOODWIN FAMILY PAPERS.

know that said John and Thomas acknowledged more than one j
such statute, February, 16 James to Anne Littlebury for £400 and \
doth not know particulars and believe same to be sattisfied does ]
not know of any assynment to said Price believes lands conveyed !
to defendant were not lyable to any such statute believes some i
part of said lands were conveyed to one Anthony Stratford who |
conveyed same to defendant writings in hands of complainant '
and that defendant sold his said lands to complainant under value \
and that complainant failing payment and defendant owing !
dyvers somes this defendant was thrown into prison at suite of
one Aderne and one Wright and defendant now hath his bond in
suite against said Godwine, prays to be dismissed.

Chancery Proceedings, Charles I, G, bundle 43, no. 57. j

The replicacon of Henrie Goldsmith, Esq. to the answer of '
Theodor Goodwin, Esqr. defendant. That said bill of complaint
is sufficient etc. but that the answer of defendant is uncertaine
and insufficient in the lawe etc but all advantage of excepcione i
etc. for replicacion. Will averr justifye and maintaine his said ;
bill to be just true etc. and further doth denie all and everie <
thing conteyned in said answere and further that the agreement ,
made by the said Right Worshippful Mr. Doctor Hunte was \
in full satisfaccion of all and everie matter and thing and in :
controvfersie then depending between the defendant and the said i
Robert Bulliver and that the complainant (sic) did perswade \
this Repliant to goe on with the bargaine with the said Billmer 1
and that complainant (sic) did frustrate dyvers purchases >
intended and this repliant did offer said defendant £50 on the j
said 16 October as is alleged and that there is no other matter j
etc. etc.

Chancery Proceedings. Charles I, G, bundle 55, no. 17. ;



The Replicacon of Thomas Goodwyn. complainant, to the '
Answer of Sir Thomas Hinton and Dame Mary his wife, defend- ,
ants. That said bill is such as ought to be and will justeffye 1
mayinteyne and prove same in all things etc. to be right and ;
trew in such sort, manner and forme as they are therein sett :
forth and that the answere of defendants is altogether iniust,
untrue and insufficient etc. to be replyed to benefit of excepcions
etc. this replyant saveth sayeth that all things and matters etc. ;



CHANCERY PROCEEDINGS. 879

in said Bill as he hath already said and without that any other
matter or thing in the said defendants is materiall or efifectuall
to be replyed to and will be ready to averr and prove etc.etc.
Chancery Proceedings, Charles I, G, bundle 57, no. 6.

The Replicacon of John Goodinge and Henry Tatley, com-
plainants to the answere of James Powell, defendant. Will main-
taine their bill etc. and defendant's answeare is ymperfect etc.
Defendant taking advantage of the clarks mistaking the yeare
when repliants sould said wares amounting to £46. 4s. od. to the
said Edward Bayliff on 11 January 1634 instead of January

1633 the said Baylifife tooke his voyage from the City of Bristoll
out of England to sea in March 1633 before the Annunciation in

1634 and in May was arrived at the Citty of Angore in the
Trecera Islands as a letter dated June sheweth and said Baylifife
hath not since returned and the said goods could not have been
sould in January 1634 and is also confessed that the said Bay-
lifife appoynted defendant to pay these repliants the said some
acknowledged to be due 25 July 1634 by a bill of said Baylifife
and that through the said mistake replyants should not be delayed
etc. etc. Defendant alledgeth he hath noe goodes money etc. etc.
to satisfy the said debt yet the defendant hath received divers
parcells of merchandise from the said Bayliffe to pay the said
debt to the value of £98. 17s. 2d. which he hath paid to other
creditors as he defendant alledgeth yet hath left these replyants
unsatissfied etc. and defendant pretendeth that he hath paid to
Mr. Francis Rowe, Mr. John Rowe, David Woodroffe and Jona-
than Scott and others out of the said £98. 17s. 2d. and hath
nothing left belonging to said BaylilTe yet alledgeth said moneys
were not due untill November 1634 yet said replyants debt was
due in Julye etc. etc. All which the said replyants will be ready
to prove and maintaine etc. etc.

Chancery Proceedings, Charles I, G, bundle 58, no. 23.

The replicacon of Sir Francis Goodwin, knight, complainant
to the answere of Charles Yeomans defendant. Said complainant
for replicacon saith that he doth and will averre justifie and
maintaine and proved his said bill and every matter and thing
therein contained and to be true certain and sufficient to be
answered etc. etc. and that the answer is for the most parte verie



88o ENGLISH GOODWIN FAMILY PAPERS.

untrue uncertain and insufficient to be replied to for manie
apparent defects and imperfecons without that there is any
matter or things in the said answere of the defendants contained
material! or effectuall to replie to etc. and is readie to averre and
prove his said bill etc. etc.

Chancery Proceeding's, Charles I, G, bundle 58, no. 3.

The replicacon of Elizabeth Godwin, widow and other com-
plainants to the answer of Robert Godwin, Joseph Godwin,
Edward Strode, Henry Bull and Thomas Muttlebury, defendants.
Will maintaine and prove their said bill and all and every matter
and things therein conteyned to be true certeyne and sufficient
in lawe to be answerred etc. etc. and that the answers of said
complainants (sic) and either of them are very uncertaine and
insufficient to be replied unto for manie defects and imperfecons
etc. etc. Benefit and advantage whereof being now and at all
times reserved and further without that any other matter or
thing in said answer not replied to are materiall or effectuall
etc. etc. and are ready to prove and maintaine said bill, etc. etc.
Chancery Proceedings, Charles I, G, bundle 61, no. 18.

The repliacon of Mary Goodwin, complainant, to the answere
of William Pinson, gent, defendant. Will avere, justifie, and
maintaine and prove her said bill and all and every matter and
thing therein conteyned to be just true certayne and sufficient
in the lawe to be answered unto and that the answers of the
defendant is in the most materiall parts thereof very uncer-
taine untrue and insufficient for replyant to reply to and farther
sayeth that without that any other matter or things in said
defendant's answere conteyned in materiall or efifectuall and
all therein is hereby well and sufficiently replied to and is ready
to avere and prove her said bill.

Chancery Proceedings, Charles I, G, bundle 61, no. 72.

The replicacon of Sir Fraunces Goodwin, knight, complainant
to the answere of John Croke and William Stevens, defendants.
Saith in all and euerye matter and thinge as in the said bill he
hath alreadie said and doth and will averr and mayntayne his
said bill and all and every matter etc. etc. as in the same is sett
forth etc. etc. With that this replyant will averr and prove



CHANCERY PROCEEDINGS. 88 1

that the Manner of Ham which the defendants pretend to lye
in Ham in the bill and answere and mencioned doth not lye in
Ham aforesaid. But the Mannor howse and the demeasne lands
and farmes of the tennants of the said Manor doth lye in the
parish of Wootton saving only that some small closes thereof
extend into the village called Ham which is in the parish of
Woddesdon neere the replyants woods mencioned and that
uppon those closes some small cottages have been built and
tennants thereof have putt their cattell upon the waste called
Ham Greene adjoyning said woods, said woods not uncoppized
and open and replyants tennants had taken their cattle there
which they had noe right to do. Alsoe that defendants nor anie
other inhabitants of Ham have putt anye sheepe or cattle upon
said woods in the sp^d parish of Woddesden lying neere reply-
ants said woods and have impounded replyants tennants cattle
in their said woods and without that that anie other matter is
materiall etc.

Chancery Proceedings, Charles I, G, bundle 6i, no. 97.

The replicacon of Thomas Godden and Elizabeth his wife,
complainants to the answere of Mathew Treasor, defendant.
Sayde in all and everything as they have before said and further
will averr and mayntayne the same and euery clause article and
thing therein conteyned to be good iust and true as by the said
bill is sett forth and declared and said complainant. Elizabeth,
further sayeth that the said writing or letter of attorney by her
sealed and deliuered unto the said defendant was not reade nor
the contents truely revealed unto her at or before such tyme as
shee sealed same but was drawn thereto by the perswaysons of
the defendant under the pretence that the same tended greatly
to her benefitt for if complainant had known true contents and
of the £1000 bond therein conteyned shee would have utterly
refused to scale same without also that the said bill is exhibited
by the practice of the other complainant Thomas but that when
said complainant Elizabeth understood that shee had bound her-
self in iioo to defendants she earnestly entreated her said
husband to call the defendant in question touching the premises
etc. and without that any other matter is materiall etc. etc.
Chancery Proceedings, Charles I, G. bundle 61, no. loi.



882 ENGLISH GOODWIN FAMILY PAPERS.

The replicacon of James Godden, complainant, to the joynt
and seueral answeres of Thomas Godden and Mary his wife
and John Godden, defendants. Saith that in all matters and
things as hee hath formerly said and will averr justify etc. the
same etc. to be good true and sufficient to be answered unto
notwithstanding anie exception hereunto taken by the said
defendants or anie of them by theire said answere to the con-
trary and that the said answeres are and euery of them in all and
every the matters and thinges very uncerteyne untrue and insuf-
ficient etc. etc. Nevertheless all advantage etc. nowe and at
all times saved. Saith that the said seuerall somes of money
menconed for which complainant stood engaged with the defend-
ants was disbursed out of this complainant's owene personal
monies and the the said some of £40 was alsoe payed as is sett
forth and ought to be reimbursed to complainant and that it is
well known to defendant Thomas and Mary that the monies
complainant stood engaged to the said Bewley this said complain-
ant did not reserve one penny thereof to his owne use and for
the repayment thereof they did desire this said replyant to
become bound and this said replyant ought to be disengaged and
that this said replyant did leave the said some of iioo in the
hands of the said Thomas and Mary for such uses as is menconed
and did not request them to pay out of the said monies to the
said Adgoe the said some of ii2 and that the said bonds are
discharged and ought to be delivered upp etc. etc.

Chancery Proceedings, Charles I, G, bundle 61, no. 106.

The reioynder of Phellippe Baker, defendant, to the replicacon
of Thomas Godwyn, complainant. That replicacon is untrue etc.
benefit of excepcion to the uncerteynties etc. saved etc. Sayeth
that in all things so in his answere he hath sayed and that the
replicacion in all materiall points is most false and untrue without
that, that the said bond menconed was sealed and deliuered by
complainant to defendant for any other purpose than is expressed
and complainant confesseth that same was to remayne to defend-
ant for his security while complainant did travell etc. to obtain
a lycence to make a lease of the lands specified unto this defend-
ant which said lycence complainant could not obtain neither did
this defendant enter and enioy the said lands. Agreement made
but lands leased to Richard Taylor and Lewes Shere were to



CHANCERY PROCEEDINGS. 883

be excepted from said lease and that the six acres land menconed
were granted to the said Walter Baker by poll only and com-
position was made between complainant and said Walter Baker
and this defendant, that defendant should have said six acres
demised to him amongst the residue of said complainant's lands
part of said six acres sold to said Harry Copnor and other part to
James Taylor, complainant never performed his said agreement
yet desired your orator to returne him his said bond whereby your
orator would have had noe security whatever for his moneys
so paid to obtain his said lease etc. etc. etc.

Chancery Proceedings, Charles I, G, bundle 61, no. 148.

The replicacon of Sir Fraunces Goodwin, Knight, complainant,
to the Answere of John Becke thelder, defendant. Doth and will
averre and mayntayne said bill etc. as is sett forth and declared
and will averee and proved that the right of common in the
woods of replyant did and of right belong only to replyants
tennants of the Mannor of Woddesdon and that the defendants
and others inhabitants within have never had anie right of
common therein or belong to anie person in respect of lands
bought of Alban Pigott, Esqr or that the said way called
Cortneys way is stopped by agreement between said Pigott and
replyant and that anie cattle placed there and that anie open
and unclosed common lands is not a tenth part of replyants
lands. Denies anie agreement made that if he would sell out
30 acres he would recompense his said tennants in some other
way and that defendant's tennants are remote and far away from
said lands except one Robert Becke and that there is noe con-
venient passage etc. etc. Without that there is any matter of
thing materiall etc. etc.

Chancery Proceedings, Charles I, G, bundle 6i, no. 149.

The replicacion of Hodges Godwin, complainant, to the
answere of George Godwin, defendant. Saith that in all and
every matter etc. as he hath already said and doth and will averr
and justify his said bill and every clause and thing therein etc.
to be trewe just and sufficient etc. etc. and that the said answere
is imperfect and insufficient and further will prove that after
the said defendant had failed to pay this replyant the some of
£180 according to the second agreement menconed hee was soe



884 ENGLISH GOODWIN FAMILY PAPERS.

farr from challenging any freedom or acquittabl thereof as in
said answere he untruly pretendeth so that hee the said defend-
ant did at severall tymes offer unto this defendant (sic) newe
termes viz. att one tyme he offered this defendant (sic) to pay
all the said some of ii8o in one yeare soe as this complainant
would accept his owne bond and at another tyme to pay i6o in
hand and £io yearly for nine yeares following which he earnestly
entreated this complainant to accept and this complainant refused
and defendant desired complainant to have patience untill he had
sold said lands or married a wife when hee would pay com-
plainant said £i8o yett defendant hath both sold said lands and
married and yet refuseth to pay complainant. Complainant
denyeth any agreement to mortgage his lands to defendant and
pay certain monies at the death of one Thomas Raynes. That
complainant hath paid deare enough in foregoing £40 of the
originall debt beside costs and charges and loss in bargaine of
his lands sold to one Crosseman and is ready to prove his said
bill etc.

Chancery Proceedings, Charles I, G, bundle 62, no. 82.

The replicacon of Edward Goodwine, complainant, to the
joynte and seuerall answers of Anthonie Haward, James Har-
ward, John Dericke, gent, and Richard Collier, defendants. Will
maytayne and averr all matters and allegations in said bill sett
forth to be good just and true etc. and that the answeres of
defendants and every of them are very untrue and uncertaine
and insufficient etc. to be replyed to etc. Benefit of exception
etc. saved. Saith that said defendants by practice amongst them
about the tyme menconed did cause the defendant Anthonie
Harwood to make love to Agnes Burchell als Ingram and to
promise her marriage which the said Anthonie Harward did
accordingly and for noe consideration did stripp the said Agnes
of her plate, money and a greate parte of her other goodes etc.
and obtained a deede of gifts from her of all the resedewe of
her goodes and not excepting her wearing apparell and devided
same amongst themselves and the said Anthonie renounced to
marry with her and for the reside we of her goodes which shee
and Richard Burchall her son sould to this complainant and
remained in replyant's possession after her death replyant having
married her grandchild, daughter of said Richard, the said



CHANCERY PROCEEDINGS. 885

defendants have caused an accon to be brought against this
replyant and recorded in the name of said Anthonie but for
their own use with damages and without that the said Agnes
did borowe of said Anthonie anie somes of money or was
indebted to him more than £3. los. and without that that anie other
matter or thing is materiall etc. etc.

Chancery Proceedings, Charles I, G, bundle 62, no. 108.

The replicacon of Jasper Goodinge, complainant, to the answere
of Timothie Damont, defendant. That his bill exhibited against
defendant in this court is very certeyne and sufficient in the lawe
to be answered unto and will mayntayne and avere all and will
the matters and things in his said bill conteyned to be iust and
true that the said answer is for the most part very uncertaine
untrue and insufficient in the lawe to be replied unto for diuers
very manifest and sufficient causes etc. The advantage of excep-
tion etc. nowe and at all times saved etc. and that in all and
euerie matter and thing as he before in his said bill hath said
without that that any other matter or thing in the said defend-
ant's answere is materiall and efifectuall to be repHed to and here
in not sufficiently confessed and avoyded, traversed or denyed in
true all which matters this complainant is ready to aver etc.
Chancery Proceedings, Charles I, G, bundle 63, no. 47.

The Replicacon of John Godwyn, complainant, to the answer
of Richard Godwyn and others, defendants Saving to himself
now and about all times hereafter all manner of advantage and
benefitt of excepcon to the manifold uncertainties, insufficiencies,
and other ymperfections in the answers of said defendants etc.
sayeth that he will maynteyne and proue his said bill and said
and euery the matters and things therein conteyned to be true,
certeyne and sufficient in the lawe to be answered unto by the
defendant in such manner as by the said bill is truely sett forth
and averred and that the said answers are very insufficient, uncer-
tain and untrue and without that that any other matter or thing
in the said answer is materiall and effectual to be replyed unto
and not in this replicacon confessed etc etc and is ready to aver
and prove his said bill etc. etc.

Chancery Proceedings, Charles I, G, bundle 64, no. i.



886 ENGLISH GOODWIN FAMILY PAPERS.

Replicacon of Lettice Godwyn, wydow, complainant to the
answer of Thomas Godwyn, Doctor of Lawes, defendant. Sav-



Online LibraryFrank Farnsworth StarrEnglish Goodwin family papers; being material collected in the search for the ancestry of William and Ozias Goodwin, immigrants of 1632 and residents of Hartford, Connecticut .. → online text (page 17 of 44)