At a County Court held at Boston April y^e 30^th 1672.

Present

Ri: Bellingham Esq^r Gov^r	Eleaz^r Lusher
Joⁿ Leverett Esq^r dep^t	Edw. Ting
	W^m Stoughton

Grand Jurie y^e Same w^th y^e Last Court

Jurie of Trialls

Dan^ll Cushine	W^m Davis	James Nash
Joⁿ Oliuer	W^m Bartholmew	Joⁿ Loring
Joⁿ Conney	Rob^t Voss	Joⁿ Farrington
Joⁿ Vsher	Samm. Thompson	Joⁿ Turno^r

Joⁿ Freacke, plan^t ags^t Edward Naylor defend^t in an action of the Case for nonpaiment of a debt of two hundred Sixty Seven pounds dew by bill dated the fifth of Decemb^r 1671. & due damages according to Attachm^t dated y^e 11^th Feb^r 1671 . . . the Jurie . . . found for the plan^t two hundred Sixty Seven-pounds mony according to bill & costs of Court w^ch was thirty Seven Shillings & ten pence.

Execution issued y^t 23^th 3m^o 72 for 268^li 17^s 10^d

[Usher v. Naylor]

Hezek^a Vsher senio^r plan^t ags^t Edw. Neylor Defend^t in an action of debt of two hundred pounds or thereabouts dew by booke & due damages according to Attachment bearing date 11^th Feb^r 1671. The Action being cal’d & the Attachmen^t read the plantiffe was nonsuited for not giving Summons to the Defendant.

Atwater ags^t Naylor

Joshua Atwater senio^r plan^t ags^t Edw. Neylo^r Defend^t in an action of debt of thirty pounds in mony dew by bill & dew damages according to Attachm^t dated y^e 19^th February 1671 . . . the Jurie . . . founde for the plantife Thirty pounds in mony & costs of Court w^ch was 25^s 2^d.

Hastings ags^t Parks

Tho: Hastings of Watertowne, & Tho: Cheney of Roxberry plaints ags^t Deacon W^m Parks Defend^t in an action of the case for Trespass done by pulling downe & carrying away part of a Stone wall that was upon a peice of Land in Roxberry nere unto the great Lotts in possession of y^e s^d Thom. Cheny thereby claiming the Title of the s^d Land & soe disturbing his peacable possession contrary to the Law possession w^th all other due damages according to Attachment dated 29^th March 72. Nonsuited

Lidgett ags^t Sampson

Peter Lidgett Attorney to Richard Pikeford plan^t ags^t the Goods or Estate of Francis Sampson of Nevis, in an Action of debt of one hundred pounds or thereabouts as Evidences may Appeare & all other due damages according to Attachm^t dated 31^th Janu^r 1671. Nonsuited for non Appearance. [38]

Atwater ags^t Whetcomb

Joshua Atwater plan^t against James Whetcomb Defend^t in an action of the case for non paiment of a bill of Exchange protested for the Neate quantity of Seven thousand four hundred pounds of merchantable Muscovado Seuger drawne vpon m^r Joseph James of Berbados merchant with all due damages according to Attachm^t dated the 12^th 2^mo 1672 . . . the Jurie . . . finde for the Defendant costs of Court.

Clarke ags^t Nicholls

Thomas Clarke, late of Plim^o plain^t against the Goods, Estate or Debt’s of Joⁿ Nicholls Sone to Mordecai Nichols Late of Boston deceased in the hands of Joⁿ Wiswall senio^r Guardian to the s^d Joⁿ Nicholls Defend^t In an action of review of an Action of the case of two hundred pounds commenced against the s^d Tho: Clarke by the s^d Joⁿ Wiswall guardian to the s^d Joⁿ Nicholls at County Court held at Boston in July last for witholding an Estate left the s^d Joⁿ Nicholls by his mother Alice Clarke by will w^ch will was made according to Contract before her marriage w^th the s^d Thomas Clarke being formerly the estate of Mordecai Nicholls his Father deceased being for the most part an Estate of Movables & Debts by Vertue of w^ch Action Judgm^t was granted against y^e s^d Clarke that hee deliver all y^e Estate now in his Custody or that hee hath any waies disposed of that did belong vnto his Late wife Alice, that was hers before her marriage w^th him (Except what was disposed of by a form^r Verdict) this to bee deliuered to the plain^t for the vse of Joⁿ Nicholls or two hundred pounds money damage & Costs of Court. Vpon w^ch Judgm^t Execution hath beene issued forth & leuied vpon the Estate of the s^d Thomas Clarke absolutely for the Vallew of two hundred pounds in money, greatly to the Damage of the s^d Clarke, in regard the aforesaide Action & Judgm^t is altogether groundlesse & illegall, the before recited will being made not according to but absolutely contrary to the before mentioned Contract w^ch Contract alsoe is voide & of none Effect w^th other due damages according to Attachm^t Dated y^e 1^d of April 1672 . . . the Jurie . . . founde for the Defendant Costs of Court w^ch was twenty two Shillings & ten pence. [39] The Plain^t Appealed from this Judgment to the next Court of Assistants & the s^d Tho: Clarke in four hundred pounds & Joⁿ Freacke & Anthony Checkly in two hundred pounds apeice acknowledged themselues bound to . . . prosecute his Appeale . . .

[For the story of this case to date, see above, pp. 5–9. It appears from papers in S. F. 1404, that the Court of Assistants, on March 5, 1672/73, gave Thomas Clarke an execution on the house and land in question. Thomas Clarke, on June 18, 1673, conveyed the land with “livery and siezin” to his son Andrew Clarke. John Nicholls, nevertheless, sued him for 300l on the ground that the property was entailed to himself and that the judgment was “illegall and erronious.” The house and land in controversy were apprized at 81l 0s 7d for which sum Andrew Clarke alleged that he offered to sell it to John Nicholls, during the trial; but the jury of the Suffolk County Court, in April, 1675, found for the plaintiff 400l against which judgment Andrew Clarke appealed to the Court of Assistants (S. F. 1404.4). John Nicholls’ “answers to Andrew Clarkes reasons of appeal,” which he asserts to be “nothing else but a clamarous cavilling and reflection on the former Jury who knew their own buisness near as well as the present plaintiff,” are in S. F. 1404.3. The Court, in 1675, “found for the deffendant Confirmation of the former Judgment” and costs 41s 6d. Records of the Court of Assistants, i. 47.]

Clarke ags^t Bridgham

Tho: Clarke, Late of Plim^o Plain^t ags^t M^rs Elisabeth Bridgham widow & Relict to Henry Bridgeham Defend^t in an Action of the case for unlawfully witholding & refusing to deliuer unto the s^d Clarke a Summe of Money of his aboue forty pounds w^ch she clandestinely received of Alice the Late wife of the s^d Tho Clarke (without his knowledge consent or Approbation) it being committed to her per the s^d Alice who never had any power soe to doe w^ch hath beene much to the Damage of the s^d Clarke w^th other due Damages according to Attachm^t Dated y^e l^d of April 1672 . . . the Jurie . . . found for the Defend^t Costs of Court w^ch was Thirteene Shillings & four pence.

[Another case involving the Clarke-Nicholls property. See preceding entry. The case is renewed at the July session, 1672. See below, pp. 131–3.]

Holebrooke ags^t Lake

Thomas Holebrooke & Joⁿ Vineing Plaintiffs against Cap^t Tho: Lake Defend^t in an Action of Debt dew for Severall Boate Loads of Stones deliuered for his vse & by his orders to the vallew of twenty & one pound or thereabout of w^ch a part paide as will more plainly Appear by the s^d Cap^t his Booke w^th all due Damages according to Attachm^t bearing date the 9^th of April. 1672. The Plaintiffs withdrew theire Action.

Leads ag^st Richards

Beniamin Leads of Dorchester plaintiffe against Edw. Richards of Dedham Defend^t in an Action of the case for illegall taking away of a Cow, marked w^th a peice cut out of the und^r side of the right ear & alsoe being big w^th calfe w^th due damages according to Attachment dated 22^th 2^mo 1672. both parties after the Action was called desired to come to the merit of the cause the Court consented unto it & after the Evidences in the case produced were read . . . the Jurie . . . found for the Defend^t the cow in Controversy & Costs of Court w^ch was three pounds Seven Shillings & four pence.

Execution issued y^e 23^th 3^mo 72 for 3^li 7^s 4^d costs. [40]

Hutchinson ags^t Bill

Cap^t Edward Hutchinson Plain^t ags^t James Bill Senio^r of pulling point Defend^t according to Attachm^t The Plaintiffe withdrew his Action.

Boseworth ags^t Morse

Sammuel Boseworth plain^t ags^t Joⁿ Morse Defend^t in an Action of the case, for non paim^t of two hundred pounds in lawfull money of New England due by one bond or Obligacion bearing date the 6^th August 1669 w^ch Bond is forfeited by the s^d Morse his refusing to giue unto y^e s^d Boseworth a lawfull deede of Sale according to the Tenor of the condicion annexed unto the s^d Bond of a house & Land therein mentioned Although the s^d Boseworth brought & tendered unto the s^d Morse one hundred & ten pounds of lawful money of New England w^ch refusall of the s^d Morse hath beene & is much to the damage of the s^d Boseworth w^th other due damages according to Attachm^t dated ye 24^th of April 1672 . . . the Jurie . . . founde for the Plaintiffe the forfeiture of the Bond & Costs of Court. The Defend^t Appeals from the Sentance of this Court to the next Court of Assistants & accordingly Joⁿ Morse as Principle in two hundred pounds & Joⁿ Buttolph & James Meares as Sureties in one hundred pounds apeice acknowledged themselves bound to . . . prosecute his Appeale . . .

Savage ags^t Davison

Cap^t Tho: Savage, plain^t against Johanah Davison Relict & Executrix of Nicholas Davison deceased in an Action of Debt of Twenty Six pounds or thereabouts for two pipes of wine delivered unto her for the use of her husband w^th other due damages According to Attachm^t dated y^e 12^th of April 1672. This Action was non-suited.

Hoppine ags^t Hawkins

Stephen Hoppine Plain^t against W^m Hawkins Defend^t according to Attachm^t dated y^e 6^th of April 1672. Non-suited upon non Appearance. [41]

Tho: Norman ags^t Taylor

Tho: Norman plain^t against Caleb Tayler Defend^t in an Action of Debt due by bill for the non paim^t of Twenty Eight pounds in mony, and all dew damages according to Attachm^t dated the 11^th of April 1672 . . . the Jurie . . . founde for the plaintiffe twenty Eight pound in money according to Bill, and Costs of Court w^ch was twenty Seven Shillings.

Execucion issued y^e 7^th 3^mo 1672.

Woodmancy ags^t Joy

Jn^o Woodmancy plain^t against Tho: Joy Defend^t according to Attachm^t dated the 2^d of February 1671. Non Suited upon non Appearance.

[See above, p. 64, and below, p. 103.]

Newcomb ags^t Waite

Andrew Newcomb plain^t against Richard Waite Marshall Defend^t according to Attachm^t dated y^e 7^th of April 1672. Non Suited.

Couch ags^t Barefoote

Robert Couch, plain^t against Walter Barefoote Defend^t according to Attachm^t dated the 14^th of March 167²/₁. Non Suited.

Baker ags^t Morse

Stephen Baker plain^t against Joⁿ Morse Defend^t according to Attachm^t dated the 24^th day of April, 1672. Non Suited being Judged not Actionable

Harris ags^t Edsdall

Peter Goulding Attorny to Henry Harris plain^t ags^t Tho: Edsall Defend^t according to Attachm^t dated the 9^th day of April 1672. Non suited vpon non appearance.

Execution issued y^e 2 5^m 72 for 8^s 2^d Costs.

[A “case depending between Henry Harris Appeal^t and Thomas Edsill defendant” came up on September 3, 1672, in the Court of Assistants, which found “Reuersion of y^e former Judgm^t and ten pounds to bee paid According to Couenant and Costs of Courts.” Records of the Court of Assistants, iii. 220, where writ of execution, dated September 10, 1672, for 12l 6s 7d, is also printed. Since Thomas Edsall produced neither money nor goods, he was committed to prison on September 17, 1672.]

Paine ags^t Atkinson

Henry Paine plain^t against Theodore Atkinson Senio^r Defend^t according to Attachm^t dated the 4^th of April 1672. pl^t Non Suited upon Non Appearance.

Davis ags^t Martin

Tobias Davis plain^t against Samm. Martine Defend^t according to Attachm^t Dated the 1^th of the 12^mo 1671. plaint. Non Suited upon non Appearance.

Shrimpton ags^t Belchoir

Samm. Shrimpton plain^t against Andrew Belchior Defend^t in an Action of Debt of Twenty Six pounds Eleven Shillings & Six pence dew upon the ballance of acco^t & other due damages according to attachment dated 29^th of April 1672 . . . the Jurie . . . founde for the plain^t twenty Six pounds Eluen Shillings & Six pence in money & Costs of Court w^ch was thirty Shillings & ten pence.

Execution issued the 19^th of the 4^mo 1672 for 28^li 2^s 4^d [42]

Parker ags^t Turill

Richard Parker plain^t against Daniell Turill Defend^t According to Attachm^t dated the fiue and twentieth day of April 1672.

This action was withdrawne.

[Joy v. Woodmancy]

Tho: Joy, plain^t against John Woodmancy Defend^t According to Attachm^t dated y^e 16^th April 1672.

This action is continued till next Court.

Tho: Joy Plain^t against Joⁿ Woodmancy Defend^t According to Attachm^t dated y^e 16^th April 1672.

This Action was continued till next Court.

[See p. 145.]

Michelson ags^t Browne

Marshall Edw: Michelson plain^t against Samm. Browne Defend^t who by Spetiall Appointm^t & order of the Court of Assistants was required to Sequester, & take into his possesion all the Estate of Edw. Nailor, w^ch came by his wife or otherwise as by that order more fully Appears, & finding the s^d Browne in possession of a house belonging to that Estate, & and demanding of him the Rent dew for his dwelling in the s^d house, as alsoe possession of the s^d house, and hee refusing to doe either, doe now bring this Action against s^d Browne for witholding possession of s^d house, & alsoe his Rent, w^th all other due damages According to Attachm^t dated April the 29^th 1672 . . . the Jurie . . . founde for the plain^t possession of the house the s^d Browne now liues in w^th with what Rent shall Appeare dew & Costs of Court.

Execution issued y^e 8 3^mo 1672.

Atkinson ags^t Tod

Theodore Atkinson Senio^r plain^t against John Tod Defend^t in an Action of debt of about two hundred & eight pound ten shillings, fiue pence due upon Acco^t as by booke doth appear, part whereof is to bee paide in Merchantable Fish, & part in wheate & flower & all just damages according to attachm^t dated, 23^th April 1672 . . . the Jurie [43] . . . founde for the Defend^t Costs of Court w^ch was fifty one shillings & two pence.

Atkinson ags^t Jewett

Theodore Atkinson Senio^r Plain^t against Joseph Jewetts Executors Defend^ts According to attachm^t dated y^e 23^d of April 1672. pl^t Non Suited, & costs granted the Defend^ts thirty eight shillings & eleven pence.

Execucion issued 4: 6: 74.

Clarke, &c: ags^t Shapleigh

Cap^t Tho: Clarke & Cap^t W^m Davis Administrate^rs to the Estate of the Late Valentine Hill deceased, Plain^ts against Majo^r Nicholas Shapleigh Defend^t in an Action of the case for the forfeiture of a Bond of three hundred pounds for non paim^t of a debt of two hundred Quentalls of Merchantable Fish w^th due damages according to Attachm^t Dated the 9^th day of April 1672. . . . The Jurie . . . founde for the plain^ts the forfeiture of the Bond & Costs of Court w^ch was thirty six shillings & four pence.

Freake ags^t Naylor

John Freacke, Plain^t against Edw. Neylor Defend^t according to Attachm^t dated the 17^th day of February 1671. The Plain^t withdrew his Action.

Edsall ags^t Travis

Tho: Edsall, plain^t against Richard Travis defendt. in an Action of Review of a Case tryed at a Court in April 1667 for holding possession & emproving of a Shop, chamb^r w^th garrett & a yard amounting to Summe of about six pounds ten shillings per yeare (or upwards) for two year & three quarters &c & not paying his due Rent nor repairing that part of the s^d house according to M^rs Hanifordes Contract by w^ch the s^d Edsall is much damnified w^th other due damages according to Attachm^t Dated April 24.1672 . . . the Jurie . . . finde for the Defend^t Costs of Court w^ch was Sixteen Shillings & Eight pence.

Execution issued y^e 19^th 4^mo 1672.

[The dispute arose in part because Travis was his landlord’s tailor, the following deposition and accounts, from 1143.5, 4, being cited in evidence:

James Duevell aged 64 yeares or there abouts testifieth that he was with m^rs Hanniford when she let her house to m^r Edsell for one yeare, & that she would not let the said Edsell her house, unless he would vndertake for the whole rent, and take Goodman Trauis tennant to him, and m^r Edsell said he would pay her the rent and take Goodman Travis to be his tennant, for goodman Travis was in part of the house hee had hired of m^rs Hanniford some weekes before and further saith not.

Deposed in Court the 1^st of May 1667. Edw Rawson Recorder

1664	Thomas Eds[all] debtor vnto Richard Travis	l s d
Apr 24	By you left pay your mens Coates	00:04:06
	It for mending your wastcoats	00:00:06
July 9	It paid to Robert Moby by your order	00:05:06
12	It in money to your selfe	00:07:06
16	It makeing your wastcoate & silke	00:02:03
24	It makeing your drawers & tape & thred	00:03:06
Oct 6	It for makeing your Coate & silke thred & gallo[n]e	00:06:02
16	It in money to your selfe	00:00:04
21	It in tape & thred	00:01:00
9ber: 9:	It in money	00:00:06
	It in money	00:01:10
	It in money	00:05:06
	It by sixty pounds of fish	00:05:00
1665	It for altering your buff dublet	00:05:00
Apr 12	It 1 bushell of wheate	00:05:00
	It in money	00:01:00
	It by one bushell of wheate	00:05:00
May: 1:	It for makeing your daughter Sarah^s Suite & triming	00:05:00
12	It in money	00:10:00
	It twoe Bushels of wheate	00:10:00
	It in money	00:04:00
June: 4:	It paid him by John Johnson on accompt	00:08:00
	It paid Beniamin Whitmore by your order	00:16:06
	It for makeing your coate silke & thred	00:06:06
July: 5:	It for makeing your Boy Aaron his drawers	00:00:09
	It making 2 payer of drawers tape & thred	00:03:04
	It for makeing your man Henerys wastcote	00:02:00
	It in money	00:01:00
	It in money when you went for the cattle	00:02:00
	It in money & a baile for a paile	00:12:06
	It for makeing twoe shirts	00:01:00
	It for makeing your wastcote silke & thred	00:02:00
	It by washing	01:10:00
	It in money	00:15:01
	It for making a shirt and drawers for man that dwelleth with m^r Endicott	00:01:00
	per contra credit^r 9l—12s—3d	09:14:00

[reverse]

Per Contra is Credito^r

By rent begining on the 15^th day of Aprill 1664 and ending on the 29 day of July 1666 being in all twoe yeares one quarter and twoe weekes at fower pounds per yeare coms vnto in all . . 09:04:00

This was sworn to by Travis as a just and true account, and attested as a true copy.

Following this decision, Travis sued Edsall before a Commissioners Court at Boston, for 10s overpayment of rent. This court decided against Travis, June 18, 1672, from which judgment his attorney, Peter Goulding, appealed (S. F. 1143.2), citing as evidence of overpayment the above account and deposition. A writ of execution, dated September 10, 1672, on Travis’s behalf against Edsall’s estate for 2l 14s 4d is printed in Records of the Court of Assistants, iii. 221.]

Callicott ags^t Tomlin

Richard Callicott Attorny to Joⁿ Bundy Plain^t against John Tomlin Defend^t according to Attachment. Noe plaintiffe appearing the case was non suited & 3^s 4^d Costs granted the Defend^t. [44]

Ting ags^t Davis

Edw: Ting Esq^r Plaintiffe against Tho Davis Defend^t in an Action of the case for witholding a Debt of Twenty Seven pounds three Shillings due by bill dated 23 2^mo 1667 together w^th all dew damages According to Attachm^t dated 22 2^mo 1672. . . . The Jurie . . . found for the Plaintiffe Seventeen pounds one Shilling Eleven pence in Specie according to Bill & Costs of Court w^ch was twenty Eight Shillings one penny.

Execution issued 17^th 4^mo 72 for 18^li 10^s 0^d

Kellond ags^t Hudson

Tho: Kellond, Plain^t against Cap^t W^m Hudson Defend^t in an Action of the case for the Summe of one hundred pounds in mony due to s^d Kellond for that the s^d Hudson hath not performed an Award made by Cap^t Edward Hutchinson & M^r Ephraim Turnor bearing date March 30^th 1671, nor made paiment according to the Articles thereof the s^d Hudson being bound thereunto in the Summe of one hundred pounds by Exchange of one Shilling between him & s^d Kellond w^th other due damages according to Attachm^t dated April y^e 24^th 1672 . . . the Jurie . . . founde for the Defend^t Costs of Court & the reason they gave was they finde but one witness.

Richards ags^t Brackett

Joⁿ Richards, Plain^t against Peter Brackett Defend^t in an Action of the case for witholding y^e Summe of fourscore pounds currant mony of New England due by Bond for that the s^d Brackett hath not performed an Award made by Cap^t Tho: Clarke M^r Joⁿ Wiswall & M^r Peter Lidgett bearing date 24^th 4^mo 1669 nor made paiment according to the same w^th dew damages according to Attachm^t dated y^e 25^th April 1672. After the Attachm^t & Evidences in the case produced were read committed to the Jurie & are on file w^th the Records of this Court the Jurie brought in their Verdict & founde for the Plain^t the forfeiture of the Bond & Cost’s of Court being 43^s 2^d. [45]

Patten ags^t Patten

Justine Patten Administratrix to the Estate of Nathaniell Patten her late husband, Plain^t against Thomas Patten Defend^t in an Action of the case for a just & true Acco^t of all his trans Actions as hee was an Attorney unto the s^d Nathaniell Patten, & for all monys, Goods, Bills & Bonds w^ch hee hath received or that have come into his hands any way Appertaining unto that Estate w^th other due damages According to Attachm^t dated 23 l^mo 167½ . . . the Jurie . . . finde for the Plaintiffe, that the Defend^t render to the Plaintiffe a just & true acco^t of what he did Transact by vertue of the Letter of Attourny from his Late Vncle Nathaniell Patten & of all monys, Goods, Bills & bonds w^ch hee hath received, or that hath any ways come into his hands any way Appertaining to that Estate, this to bee done within Six weeks to the Satisfaction of this Court, or to pay Six hundred pounds in money & Costs of Court. W^ch was three pounds, flue Shillings & ten pence.

[See above, pp. 80, 93, 95, below, pp. 110, 125.]

Hawkin’s bond for appea^r & good behavior

W^m Hawkins presented by the Grand Jurie, for being principally Instrumentall & privately conveying away in the night Hannah Hoppine without her friends consent who is reported to bee w^th Childe.the case being committed to the Jurie they brought in theire Verdict. they finde that the s^d W^m Hawkins hath beene Intrumentall in conveying Hannah Hoppine out of the Country w^th out her friends consent. The Court considering that the case of W^m Hawkins relates to a person that is at soe great a distance being Sent to Barbados who may thereby bee greatly injured the Court refers it to the next Court of this County. & in the meane time the s^d W^m Hawkins to bee bound to the good Behavior in one hundred pounds principle to Appear as before & accordingly W^m Hawkins as principle in one hundred pounds & Joⁿ Freake & Cap^t Samm. Scarlett as Sureties in fifty pounds apeice aknowledged themselues bound to the Treasuro^r of the County of Suffolke on condicion that W^m Hawkins shall appear at the next Court of this County & abide the Sentance of the Court & not depart without Licence & in time bee of good behavior.

[See above, p. 101.]

Jenkins discharged of Adminstracion

The Court orders that the Estate that is left of Joseph [46] Whetstone shalbee divided amongst the Children the Eldest Sone to haue a double portion & Edw. Jenkins to bee discharged.

Ord^r about Badcocks Estate

Robert Tucker, Sergeant W^m Blake & Leiv^t Quinzy are ordered & appointed by this Court to Apprize the Estate of the Late George Badcock of Milton & make return thereof to this Court.

Ord^r about Pascoa

John Pascoa a weavor complained of by the Selectmen of this Towne for imposing himselfe upon the Towne without theire consent & having a wife in England the Court ordered him to goe to his wife by the first oppertunity or pay twenty pounds according to Law.

Badcocks liberty to bring in new Inven^t

The Court orders Mary Badcock widow haue Liberty to hand a new Aprizall of the Estate of her Late Husband noe Inventory being yet vpon Oath brought in.

Ord^r to Rocke

Vpon complainte made by the Guardians of the Late Thomas Robinsons Children to this Court of the backwardness & unwillingness of M^r Joseph Rocke to giue or come to an Acco^t w^th s^d Guardians, the Court ordered that the Clarke signify to him theire pleasure to giue him & s^d Guardians a hearing this day after dinn^r.

[See Stoddard v. Rock, below, pp. 217, 241, 466, 493.]

Ord^r to Lattimore

Vpon the peticion of Joⁿ Bundy to this Court tis Ordered that X^opher Lattimore (having put in a caution against s^d Bundy’s Administracion formerly) that hee appeare forthw^th in Court to giue in his Reasons of the afores^d Caveat.

Auditt [Atkinson v. Todd].

The Court Appoints Cap^t Edw. Hutchinson & M^r Joⁿ Howard to Auditt the Acco^ts betwixt Theodore Atkinson Senio^r & Joⁿ Tod & make Returne thereof to this Court.

Lorines Administ^t Bond

M^rs Jane Lorine, & Thom. Lorine & Joⁿ Lorine her Sonnes acknowledged themselues jointly & Severally bound to the Treasuro^r of the County of Suffolke in the Summe of Sixteene hundred pounds, on condicion that they shall Administer vpon the Estate of M^r Thom. Lorine her Late husband and their Father & bee accoumptable to this Court when called for.

M^r Josiah Flinte tooke the Oath of Freedom of this Colony, 1. 3^mo 1672.

Patten’s Bond for Administracion

W^m Staughton Esq^r Cap^t Hopestill Foster & Joⁿ Garnitt acknowledged themselues bound to the Treasuro^r of the County of Suffolke in the Summe of two thousand pounds, on condicion that M^rs Justine Patten shall Administer vpon the Estate of her Late husband M^r Nathaniell Patten according to Law & bee accoumptable to the Court of this County wⁿ called for.

[47] The Court orders & Appoints W^m Staughton Esq^r to take the Oath of M^rs Justine Patten to the Inventory of M^r Nathaniell Patten her late husband.

[See above, pp. 81, 93, 95, 107, and consult Index.]

Shrimpton’s Bond to the Keeper

Samm: Shrimpton Appeared in Court & acknowledged himselfe bound to the Keeper of the Prison in Boston in the Summe of two hundred pounds & forty on condicion that Thomas Norman shalbee & Returne a true prison^r to him the s^d Keeper when at any time hee shall goe to attend the publique worship of God at any of the Meeting houses in this Towne, either on Sabbath or Lecture dayes, And the Keeper hath hereby Liberty from this Court to Suffer him to goe as abouesaid.

Hull Towne p^rsent.

The Towne of Hull p^rsented for insufficiency of there pound Nathaniell Bozward made answ^r it was mended.

Chamberlain’s Present

W^m Chamberlaine Sen^r of Hull & W^m Chamberlaine Jun^r presented for Absenting themselues from the Publique Worship, they appeared not & the Court Ordered a Spetiall Warrant to bee issued out for them against y^e next Court.

Whetcomb’s discharg.

James Whetcomb acquainting the Court that Williams Anderson a Taylor for whome hee was Surety was departed. The Court ordered that if soe that hee is gone his & his Sureties bond is declared Null.

Doily & Winter’s disch.

Vpon due Proclamacion made, Joⁿ Doyly & Tim^o Winter were discharged from theire Bonds of good Behavior.

Boston present^d

The Towne of Boston presented for Insufficiency of the highway betwixt the house of Richard Bennett & M^r Snelling the Presentm^t not being proved fell.

The Towne of Boston Presented for not Attending the Law in providing measures for theire Towne Standards. The presentment was not proved & soe fell.

Coleborn’s dismision

Nathaniell Coleborne of Dedham is by Order of this Court dismissed from Ordinary Trainings, paying Six Shillings per Annum in Mony to the Clarke of the Company.

Nathaniell Bosworth of Hull acquainting this Court of the occasion of his being disappointed of bringing the Votes to the Meeting of the Commission^rs of the Severall Townes of this County for the Nominacion of Magistrates. The Court accepted of his Answere. [48]

Discharges of Bonds

Thom: Grant was vpon due Proclamacion discharged of the Bonds hee gaue for the Peace.

Elizabeth Arnold Vpon due Proclamacion was discharged of her Bonds of good Behavior.

W^m Carpenter was alsoe discharged on like Proclamacion.

Cornelius White was alsoe discharged on due Proclamacion.

Joⁿ Hurd Jun^r was alsoe discharged on due Proclamacion.

Samm. Browne was alsoe discharged on due Proclamacion.

Culler of Fish

Francis Hudson Sworne Culler of Fish for the yeare Ensuing.

Chicke to Broughton

Thom: Chicke Appeared in Court & Acknowledged a Judgm^t against himselfe & Estate for twelue pounds thirteene shillings in Deale Boards or any currant pay at Piscataqua at price currant, Vnto George Broughton of Boston & hee acknowledged it was in full of all Acco^ts betwixt them.

Execution issued y^e 28 3^mo 1672.

Whiting’s fine halfe Remitted

Vpon the humble Peticion of James Whiting of Hingham the Court was pleased to Remit halfe the fine imposed upon him by the Worshipfull Edw. Ting Esq^r for Selling Liquors without Licence according to Presentm^t Last Court.

Webbs fine halfe Remitted

Vpon the humble Peticion of X^opher Webb the Court Remits halfe of his fine & freed him from his Bonds of good Behavior on due proclamacion made.

Hurd’s bond Pardoned

The Court was pleased to Remit & pardon the forfeited Bond of five pound paide by Goodwife Hurd for her husband, ordering the Treasuro^r to Repay it her againe.

Chandlor Sentanced

Henry Chandelor, convicted of Severall pilfring & fellonious Crimes which he confes’t & were proved against him in Court. The Court Sentances him to pay to Andrew Belchior Sen^r of Cambridge twenty four Shillings Returning his Cup againe to Joⁿ Turnor twenty four Shillings in Like mony & his Cup againe to John Carthew five pounds two Shillings in money & his goods againe to Joⁿ Skeats thirty two Shillings in money & his goods againe, to Francis Coward eight shillings & his drawers againe, to Phillip French five pounds one Shilling in money & his goods againe, to Tremble Gridly forty Shillings in mony & his goods againe to Rebecca Halsey forty Shillings in mony & her goods againe [49] to Joⁿ Freacke ten Shillings in Mony & his Booke againe & to Caleb Taylor Thirteene pounds two Shillings & four pence in mony & his goods againe & that hee shalbee whip’t with Twenty Stripes severely Laide on & pay fees of Court & prison Standing committed till the Sentance be performed.

James an Indian Sentanced

James an Indian convicted of breaking into Benj^a Scotts house of Brantery & there drinking & Spilling neere a Bar^ll of Sider. The Court Sentanced him to be whip’t w^th Thirty Stripes & to pay three-fold damage & charge of witnesses Thirty two Shillings. & fees of Court & Prison Standing committed till the Sentance bee performed.

Gross sentanced

Isaac Gross convicted of severall abusive Speeches to Thom. Maxwell reflecting on his State of Church Membership as alsoe of breaking the Peace in Striking & drawing bloode from a Baker & severall other disorderly carriages as by Evidence Appeares hee alsoe being under Bonds of good behavior. The Court duely considering his Offences declare his & his Sureties bond forfeited & Sentances him to bee whip’t w^th Twenty Stripes or pay ten pounds in money fine to the County & fees of Court & to finde Sureties & put in Bond for his better behavior to bee imprisoned till the Sentance bee performed, & accordingly the saide Isaac Gross as principle in twenty pounds & Edward Porter & Thom. Edsall as Sureties in ten pounds apeice acknowledge themselves bound to the Treasuro^r of the County of Suffolke on condicion that the saide Isaac Gross shalbee of better behavior & Appear at the next Court of this County.

Court Order concern. John Hurd

The Court Orders that wⁿ Joⁿ Hurd Sen^r come to Towne hee bee called to Acco^t & proceeded with according to Law.

Warro Sentanced

Silvanus Warro convicted for Stealing mony from his master Deacon W^m Parks having a false Key to his Box hee owned the fact. The Court Sentanced him to pay twenty pounds in Mony to Deacon W^m Parks the mony returned to bee part & to bee whip’t with twenty Stripes paying fees of Court & Prison Standing committed till the Sentance bee performed.

The Court taking into consideracion the Bastard Childe born at Roxberry begotten by the saide Silvanus. [50] They Order that the saide Silvanus Warro make provicion in paying two shillings six pence per week for its maintenance to save the Towne of Roxberry harmeless from the chardge of that Childe & in case of failor therein hee the saide Silvanus is to bee sold to the Effect abouesaide by his s^d master & the Select men of s^d Towne of Roxberry & in case of disagreem^t the Marshall is to bee joined w^th them.

[Warro, a negro slave, had been punished in 1668 for running away with his master’s horse, S. F. 1109.2.]

Knight Sentanced

Gillian Knight convicted for Enticing Dan^ll Herring to her house & there Embracing him pick’t his pocket and Stole Seven Shillings from him, the Fact was proved & The Court Sentanced her to pay the s^d Daniell Herring twenty one Shillings in mony & that Shee bee whip’t with ten Stripes paiing fees of Court Standing Committed till y^e Sentance bee performed.

Carwithee Sentanc’d

Francis Carwithee alias Rolph convicted for Selling Ale at 3^d per quart & without Licence, she owned the fact & craved the Court’s favor who Sentanced her to pay fiue pounds fine in mony to the County & fees of Court Standing comimtted till the Sentance bee performed. Vpon her humble Peticion they were pleased to Remit halfe the abouesaide fine.

Harwood Sentanc’d

Henry Harwood convicted for abusing & beating his wife who was great with Childe, The Court Sentanced him to bee whip’t with ten Stripes or pay five pounds in mony fine to the County & fees of Court Standing committed till the Sentance bee performed.

Collicott Sentancd

Preserv’d Collicott & Deborah his wife bound over to this Court to Answere for theire committing fornicacion before marriage. The Court Sentances them to pay forty Shillings apeice fine to the County & fees of Court or to bee whip’t with ten stripes apeice Standing committed till the Sentance bee performed.

Reade sentanced

Phillip Reade of Concord presented for Swearing and cursing, the presentment not being fully proved though not without Strong Suspicion of his being guilty the Court Sentenced him to bee Admonished & pay fees of Court.

[Philip Read, physician of Concord, was accused by his mother-in-law of uttering blasphemy. This was a very serious matter for which the penalty in the Bay jurisdiction was death. Thomas Danforth, assistant and magistrate, issued on July 5, 1671, a warrant “in his Majesties name” to the Constable of Concord “to apprehend the body of Philip Read, & bring him forthwith before mee at my house in Cambr. to answ^r for some cursed & blasphemous words by him vttered to y^e reproach of y^e name of y^e liveing Lord God,” and to bring with him the wife of Richard Rice (S. F. 1052.1). On the back is the return by John Grundy and Moses Wheat, constables, declaring the parties to have been apprehended and to be brought “befour your worsheph this sixth of July 71.” Before the magistrate, Read admitted “that the name of Christ was mentioned,” but denied having uttered blasphemy, and Elizabeth Rice would say nothing; nevertheless Thomas Danforth committed Read to Cambridge prison “being accused of curseing & blasphemy (in a dreadfull & highhanded mann^r) the name of the liveing God. You are to keep him safe untill he be orderly discharged, & in so doeing this shall be yo^r warrant. dat. 6. 5. 1671.” By warrant dated July 12, 1671, to the keeper of the prison in Boston, signed by Danforth and Richard Russell, Read was transferred to Boston jail. The indictment (S. F. 1052.9) follows:

Wee The Grand Jury for ou^r Soueraigne Lord the king doe Indict Phillip Read of Concord Chirurgeon or practitione^r in Phisick: for not having the feare of God before his eyes & being Instigated by the divill did sometime in may last Blaspheeme the holy name of christ & also on a motion then & there made to pray to God for his wife then sick blasphemously Cursed bidding the Divill take yo^w & yo^r praye^rs. Contrary to the peace of our Soueraigne Lord the king his Crowne & dignity the lawes of God & of this Land title Blasphemy, doe find this to be a true bill. James Euerell fore man

Boston this 5^th 7^ber 1671

One of the several depositions in the case (S. F. 1052.7):

Susanna Gleison aged ab^t 55 yeares, being Sworne do say, that Sometime ab^t may last, Shee being present at y^e house of Philip Read at Concord, whose wife was yⁿ weak & neer death (as her friends thought) her mother mentioneing y^e name of ch^t Hee y^e Said Read replyed, y^e Devill take you & yo^r ch^t and a motion being made of praying to God for her He said y^e Divel take you & yo^r pray^ers. And y^e wife of David fisk Soone after comeing in, this depon^t took occasion to manifest her trouble at y^e s^d Read, for his evill speaking Whereupon his mother in law Goody Rice replyed he blasphemed he blasphemed. And after this y^e Said Read comeing to y^e house of this Depon^t shee told him of his curseing & evill speaking, to w^ch he replyed, excusing his rage y^t he was then:—Saying y^t The woman (his mother in law) had made him mad, and Said the Devill take her for shee had brought him to [ ]

Susanna Gleison

Philip Read denied this; and William Gleason, Elizabeth Rice, and Benjamin Russell, who were present on the occasion of Read meeting his mother-in-law, declared that they heard not the alleged words (S. F. 1052.4–6, 8).]

Georges licence

On Certificate from the Select men of Dorchester Nicholas George had his Licence renewed to keepe an Ordinary, & the s^d Nicholas George as principall in ten pounds & Samm. Paul & Samm. Minott [51] as Sureties in five pounds apeice Acknowledged themselues bound . . .

Jacobs licence

On like Certificate from the Selectmen of Hingham, Joⁿ Jacobs had his Licence renewed to keepe a house of publique Entertainm^t for the yeare Ensuing and Ensgine Joⁿ Thaxter in ten pounds & Cap^t James Oliver & Lieu^t Richard Woody in five pounds apeice Acknowledged themselues bound . . .

Daniells licence

On Like Certificate from the Select men of Milton, W^m Daniell had Like Liberty to Sell wine Beire & Liquors to keepe a house of publique Entertainment for the yeare ensuing. & the s^d W^m Daniell as principle in ten pounds & Robert Voss of Milton & John Keine of Boston in five pound apeice as Sureties Acknowledged themselues bound . . .

Thorne Presented

Mary Thorne presented for Abusing and Striking her husband the presentm^t not being fully proved The Court Sentanced her to bee cautioned.

Edwards Sentanc’d

Vrsula the wife of Henry Edwards presented for striking her husband & abusiue Carriage & Language the presentment was Owned & she was Sentanced to be whipt w^th ten Stripes or pay twenty Shillings fine in money to the County & fees of Court Standing committed till the Sentance bee performed.

Bendall Present^d

Free Grace Bendall, presented for suffering his wrack to lye in the Roade way which Endangers Vessells going out & comming in, The Presentm^t was Owned & the Court Sentanced him to remove the s^d wrack within a fortnight on penalty of five pounds in money fine to the County & to bee Liable to pay all Damages that come to any thereby.

Parks Presented

Deacon William Parks presented for doing & consenting to such Actions on the Sabbath day as Seeme not Suitable to bee done upon the Sabbath, in the transportacion of Eliz^a Parker from his one house [52] To Goodman Kibbies house beyond Muddy River The Court on due Examinacion of the Presentm^t found that in the fact there was noe cause of presentm^t & soe hee was Acquitted.

Abraham How presented for the like was also Acquitted.

Richardson & Reads Peticion

In answer to the Peticion of Jeffery Richardson & W^m Reade, The Court Orders that the Petitioners bee Sent to the quarries at Charles Towne & what they Earne above their Maintenance is to pay theire Creditors proportionably.

Murphey Present^d

The wife of Brian Murphey presented for Suspicion of Stealing, by breaking Fence & carrying it into her house, She Appeared in Court & owned that she carried some broken Fence home, but that she brake it not & noe sufficient proofe comming in the Court discharged her.

Lidgett &^e Present^d

Peter Lidgett Richard Wharton & Joⁿ Vsher presented for Buying Raw Hides contrary to Law p. 49. Sect. 2. & p. 37. Sect. 1. the Presentm^t not being proved they were discharged.

[The references are to The Book of the General Lawes and Libertyes of 1660. Sec. 2 on page 49 forbids anyone to sell hides insufficiently tanned or treated with “unkind heates” or “warme woozes.” This was a part of the English Assize of Leather, adopted by the General Court in 1642 in order to protect the consumer from inferior quality, and to protect tanners from unfair competition. Sec. 1 on page 37 forbids the delivery on board ship of raw hides, skins, or pelts, “with the intent to have the same transported out of this Iurisdiction.” This was a part of the mercantilist legislation of the Bay, the intent being to keep raw materials at home where working them up into finished goods would provide employment.]

Gillam Present^d

Anne Gillam Sen^r presented for absenting her Selfe from the Publique worship of God upon the Lord’s Dayes The Presentm^t not being proved & soe fell.

Gross Presented

Mathew Gross of Boston presented for Selling Beere without Licence contrary to Law. The presentment not being proved fell. The Court Adjourned till y^e 13^th June next.

Boston 9^th 3^mo 1672.

Present Joⁿ Leverett Esq^r Dp^t Gov^r Edw. Ting Esq^r.

[Ricks Estate]

Administracion to the Estate of Elisha Ricks Late of Boston deceased is granted to John Ricks his Brother on behalfe of himselfe & others concerned hee bringing in an Inventory of s^d Estate & giue Security to Administer according to Law, this thus done as Attests. Free Grace Bendall Cler.

Present. Joⁿ Leverett Esq^r Dep^t Gov^r Edw. Ting Esq^r

[Cooper Estate]

Administracion to the Estate of Francis Cooper Late widdow Gold of Boston deceased is granted to Doctor Daniell Stone and Matthew Bernard, they [53] Bringing in an Inventory of s^d Estate & giue Security to Administer According to Law. This was thus done y^e 14^th 3^mo 1672. As Attests Free Grace Bendall Cler.

Gibson to Mosly

Robert Gibson Appeared before John Leverett Esq^r Dep^t Gov^r & Edw. Ting Esq^r & Acknowledged a Judgm^t against himselfe & Estate of forty one pounds twelue Shillings & six pence in mony unto Cap^t Samm. Mosely being in full of two Bonds & other things as Appeareth per Acco^t on file, this was thus done as Attests. Free Grace Bendall Cler. Execution issued y^e 4^th 4^mo 1672.

At a County Court held at Boston y^e 14^th 4^mo 1672, being Adjourned from yesterday by reason of The Fast by the Worshipfull Edw: Ting Esq^rs646

Hall Sentanced

Richard Hall of haverill Late of hull presented for fonication w^th Martha his now wife before marriage the Court Sentanced them to bee whip’t with fifteen Stripes apiece or to pay forty shillings apeice fine to the County in mony w^th fees of Court & charge of the Constable of Merrimack six Shillings Standing committed till the Sentance be performed.

Indians Sentanced

Francke Simon & John all Indians convicted for breaking into Angola Negro’s house which they confest The Court Sentanced them to bee whip’t w^th twenty Stripes apeice paying fees of Court & prison Standing committed till the Sentance bee performed.

Court Order to the Keeper about James Indian

Vpon the complainte of the Keeper of the Prison of this Towne concerning James an Indian that broke into Benj^a Scot’s house of Brantery & drancke & spoiled Liquors, for which the Court Sentanced him to pay the saide Scot threefold damage & charge of witnesses Thirty two Shillings, & hitherto Saide Scot hath not Looked after him. The Court orders that if saide Scot or any for him come not within a fortnight to discharge the Prison from him, it is in the power of the Keeper to dispose of him.

Division of Lorines Estate

Vpon the Motion of the Administrato^r to the Estate of Thom. Lorine Late of Hull for a divition of s^d Estate. The Court orders that the widow haue [54] her Thirds for her Life, the Eldest Sone a double portion & the rest of the Children equall portions according to Law.

Bragg Sentanced

Peter Brag, presented by the Select men of this Towne for abiding in this Towne without theire Leaue & having a wife in England The Court Sentanced him to depart for England with the first Opportunity on penalty of Twenty pounds according to Law.

Tho: Gold’s guardian

Daniell Stone is appointed Guardian to Thom. Goold.

Mathew Bernard is Appointed Guardian to Elizabeth Gold & Benj^a Goold.

Court Order to Brantry

The Court orders a warrant to bee issued to the Select men of Brantery to make returne to the next Court of this County what they haue done in obedince to y^e Court’s Order concerning the Arrears of the Late Reverend M^r Hennry Flintte.

Court order concern Burt’s Estate

The Court Orders that Godfrey Armitage who was Appointed Administrato^r to the Estate of Thom. Burt Late of Boston deceased, giue acco^t & deliver all the Estate of Thomas Burt, as appeares per Inventory unto John Faireweather Attourny to Giles Burt the onely Brother to the saide Thom. Burt whome the Court admits as sole heire to s^d Estate & the s^d Fairweathers power fully proved whose receipt to the s^d Armitage shall bee a full discharge from his Administracion aforesaide.

Hauthorne &c Sentanced

William Hauthorne William Brasy & Silvanus Davis convicted for disorderly travelling to Dorchester yesterday being the fast day & that contrary to theire Master’s minde & M^r Stoughton’s Order. The Court Sentances them to pay theire offence five Shillings apeice & fees of Court.

Silvanus Davis convicted for Lying the Court Sentances him to pay ten shillings in mony fine.

Daniell Cushine tooke the Oath of Freedom of this Colony.

Court Order concern. Rebecca Greene

The Court orders that John Bonner giue good Security to the Court for two hundred pounds in good Spetie for to pay Rebecca the daughter of Richard Greene when she comes to age or day of Marriage, which being done Rebecca y^e Late widow of Richard Greene is discharged from her Administracion. [55]

Tuder ordered to depart the Towne

John Tuder Committed to prison for contempt of the Order of Court in not departing the Towne, the Court Ordered him to depart by next Thursday vpon penalty of imprisonem^t

Gilford discharg^d from Service

Paul Gilford is by Order of this Court released from his Service to & w^th Jeremiah Bumsteede & the s^d Gilford is committed to the honored Gov^r to dispose of to a good master or as hee pleaseth.

Licences continued

The Court continueth all the Last years Licences adding Nathaniell Bishop to sell Beere & Cap^t Wright to sell wine.

Pointing ordered to depart y^e Towne

The wife of Phillip Pointing was Ordered to depart the Towne & goe to Tanton to her husband.

Vpon the humble Peticion of Free Grace Bendall the Court was pleased to condescend to his going this Voyage to Madera & accept of M^r Isaac Addington to offitiate in his place till his Returne of which all persons concerned may take notice.

The Court Adjourned till y^e 20^th Ins^t

Vialls Licence

Vpon certificate from the Select men of Boston John Vyall had his Licence renewed to Sell Beere & wine & keepe a house of publique Entertainment for the yeare Ensuing, & that hee Shall Sell Sider & not for more than two pence per quart. & John Viall as principle in ten pounds & Daniell Stone & John Woodmancy as Sureties in five pounds apeice acknowledged themselves bound to the Treasuro^r of the County of Suffolke on condicion that the saide John Viall shall obserue the Law title Inkeepers w^th its addicions.

Turnors Licence

Vpon like certificate John Turno^r had his Licence renewed to Sell Beere & wine & keepe a house of publique Entertainm^t for the yeare Ensuing . . . Cap^t James Oliver & John Fairewether as Sureties . . .

[56] Norden’s Licence

Samm. Norden, on like certificate had his Licence renewed to Sell Beere & keepe a house of publique Entertainm^t for the yeare ensuing . . . W^m Smith & Samm. Emmons as Sureties . . .

Keen’s Licence

John Keene, on like certificate had his Licence renewed to keepe a Cook’s Shop for the yeare Ensuing & John Keene in ten pounds & Robert Cox & Clement Gross in five pounds apeice acknowledged themselves bound to the Treasuro^r of the County of Suffolke on condicion John Keene shall not Sell wine strong Beere nor Liquors, but shall obserue the Law title Victuallers.

[There is no title Victuallers in the Laws of 1662 or of 1672; victuallers’ and cooks’ shops are included under the same regulations as innkeepers.]

Winsor’s Licence

Rebecca Winsor on like certificate had a Licence granted her to Keepe a Cook’s Shop & to dress & Sell Victualls for the yeare Ensuing & Cap^t James Oliver & James Brading in five pounds apeice acknowledged themselves bound to the Treasuro^r of the County of Suffolke on condicion that the s^d Rebecca Winsor shall not Sell Wine, Strong Beere Liquors nor Sider; but Shall observe the Law title Victuallers.

Kentts Licence

W^m Kentt, on like certificate had his Licence renewed to keepe a Cookes Shop for the yeare Ensuing & W^m Kent in ten pounds & Joⁿ Woodmancy & Dan^ll Stone in five pounds apeice acknowledged themselves bound to the Treasuro^r of the County of Suffolke on condicion as aboves^d.

Cox Licence

Robert Cox, on like certificate had his Licence renewed to Sell Beere & keepe a house of publique Entertainmen^t for the year Ensuing . . . John Keene & Clement Gross [sureties] . . .

Gross’ Licence

Clement Gross on like certificate had his Licence renewed to Sell Beere & keepe a house of publique entertainm^t for y^e yeare Ensuing . . . Rob^t Cox & John Keene [sureties] . . .

[57] Pollard’s Licence

William Pollard, on like certificate, had his Licence renewed to Sell Beere & keepe a house of publique Entertainm^t for the yeare Ensuing . . . Joⁿ Woodmancy & Seth Perry [sureties] . . .

Wardell’s Licence

Widow Wardell, on like certificate, had her Licence renewed, to Sell Beere, & keepe a house of publique Entertainm^t for the yeare Ensuing . . . John Woodmancy & Seth Perry [sureties] . . .

Wright’s Licence

Cap^t W^m Wright on like certificate had his Licence renewed to Sell Beere & keepe a house of publique Entertainm^t as alsoe to Sell Wine for the yeare Ensuing . . . & Cap^t James Oliver & Leiv^t Richard Woody [sureties]. . . .

Bishop’s Licence

Nathaniell Bishop, on like certificate had a Licence granted him to Sell Beere & keepe a house of publique Entertainm^t for the yeare Ensuing . . . Cap^t James Oliver & Leiv^t Richa^d Woody [sureties] . . .

Vpshalls License

Widow Vpshall, on like certificate, had her Licence renewed to Sell Beere & keepe a house of publique Entertainm^t for the yeare Ensuing . . . Joseph Cock & Francis Hudson [sureties]. . .

Corsier’s Licence

William Corsier, on like certificate had his licence renewed to Sell Beere, & keepe a publique house of Entertainm^t for the yeare Ensuing . . . Thom. Dewer & John Andrews [sureties] . . .

Salter’s Licence

William Salter, on like certificate had his Licence [58] Renewed to sell Beere & keepe a house of publique Entertainment for the yeare Ensuing . . . Joseph Belknap & Manasseh Beck [sureties] . . .

Hudson’s License

Francis Hudson on like certificate had his Licence renewed to Sell Beere & keepe a house of publique Entertainm^t for the yeare Ensuing . . . Joseph Cock & Thom. Bill [sureties] . . .

Beale of Hingham’s Licence

Nathaniell Beale, on certificate from the Select men of Hingham had his Licence renewed to Sell Beere & keepe a house of publique Entertainm^t for the yeare Ensuing . . . Josiah Hubbard [surety] . . .

Smith’s Licence

Thom: Smith had his Licence renewed to distill & retaile Strong waters for the yeare Ensuing . . . Jon^a Ting & Richard Knights [sureties] . . . that the s^d Thom. Smith shall obserue the Law concerning distilling & retailing Strong waters.

Wey’s Licence

Richard Wey had his Licence renewed to Retaile Strong waters for the yeare Ensuing . . . Cap^t James Oliver [surety] . . . on condicion as aforesaide.

Hudson’s Licence

Cap^t W^m Hudson on like certificate had his Licence renewed to Sell wine & Beere & keepe a house of publique Entertainm^t for the yeare Ensuing . . . Cap^t James Oliver & Leiv^t Joshua Hews [sureties] . . .

Isaac Lobdell of Hull, on like certificate had his Licence renewed to keepe a house of publique Entertainm^t [59] for the year Ensuing . . . Joseph Davis & Daaivd Saywell [sureties] . . .

The Court met according to Adjournm^t y^e 20^th of An^o 1672.

Present

Ri: Bellingham, Esq^r Gov^r	Edw^d Tyng
Joⁿ Leverett, Esq^r Dep^t Gov^r	W^m Stoughton

Plumm sentanced

Mary Plumm, being committed to Prison for being in the Chamber of Timm^o Connell late at night being ye 16^th Instant in Suspitious manner. Acknowledged in Court she was there naked to her Shift where were two men in Bed. The Court Sentances her to be whip’t with twenty Stripes & Stands committed to the house of Correction till a Service be provided for her to the Approbacion of the Selectmen of Dorchester.

Court Order for Thom: Patten

M^r Thom: Patten, having brought in his acco^t & given in all the Bills and Bonds mencioned in the Acco^t vpon oath. The Court Orders that his Ant Justine Patten Signe & Seale him a discharge in full.

Doggett & Nichols Sentanced

Henry Doggett & Jonathan Nicholls are sentanced to pay ten shillings apeice in mony fine to the County for breach of the Sabbath being convicted thereof & to give in bond for the good behavior. Paying fees of Court Standing committed till the sentance bee performed, & William Tower & Thomas Stanbrough Acknowledged themselues jointly and Severally bound in five pounds apeice to the Treasuro^r of the County of Suffolke on condicion that the s^d Henry Doggett & Jonathan Nicholls shalbee of good behavior & appear at the next Court of this County.

Connell sentanc’d [and] Bond for the Behavio^r

Timm^o Connell convicted for giving Entertainm^t in his house to men & women in the night in a Suspitious mann^r. The Court Sentances him to bee bound to the good behaviour & and pay fees of Court Standing committed till hee finde Sureties. The Court accepted of his one bond. [60]

And accordingly the saide Tim^o Connell Acknowledged himself bound to the Treasuro^r of the County of Suffolke on condicion that hee the saide Connell shalbee of good Behavior & Appear at the next Court of this County.

Taylor fined 5^s

John Taylor convicted for breach of the Peace in Strikeing Brian Murphey. The Court Sentanced him to pay five Shillings in Mony fine to the County & fees of Court.

Alice Thomas her Liberty

In Answer to the petition of Alice Thomas The Court alloweth her Liberty to bee abroade from Eight of the clocke in the morning till Six a clocke at night. She giving in Sufficient Security to the Keeper to Return to Prison every night at the hour Appointed & to be a true prisoner & this Liberty to continue till the first day of the next Court of this County.

[See above, p. 83.]

Freemen Sworn

Symon Amory, Henry Allen, James Townsend, Edw. Grant & William Griggs tooke the Oath of Freedom of this Colony.

Bakers of Bread Peticion answered

In Answer to the Peticion of the Loafe bread Bakers the Court Refers it to the Select men of Boston to see what may bee redressed of theire complaints.

1 It will be understood that all matter in this type is quoted.

2 Massachusetts Bay Records, ii. 38.

3 Which then included Muddy River (Brookline), Winnisimet (Chelsea), Rumney Marsh (Revere), and what is now Winthrop.

4 The Suffolk County of 1680 included the following towns and cities which were incorporated later than 1680: Bellingham, Medway, Franklin, Wrentham, Foxborough, Walpole, Sharon, Stoughton, Randolph, Canton, Quincy, Cohasset, Dover, Holbrook, Millis, Avon, Plainville, Norwood, Westwood, Wellesley, Norfolk, and Needham. The Hingham of 1680 may have included parts of present-day Abington, Norwell, and Scituate; while the Braintree of that day may have included parts of modern Brockton and Abington. (I am indebted to Albert H. Hall, Esq., for much of this information.)

5 But Cambridge, in Middlesex County, included the land on the right bank of the Charles that later became Brighton and Newton.

6 A Century of Population Growth (Bureau of the Census, 1909), p. 11.

7 Massachusetts Bay Records, i. 169.

8 See our Publications, xviii. 56 n¹.

9 William H. Whitmore, Ed., The Colonial Laws of Massachusetts, Reprinted from the Edition of 1660, with the Supplements to 1672, p. 132 (cited hereafter as Whitmore, Colonial Laws, 1660–1672); Whitmore, Ed., The Colonial Laws of Massachusetts, Reprinted from the Edition of 1672, with the Supplements through 1086, p. 21 (cited hereafter as Whitmore, Colonial Laws, 1672–1686).

10 H. L. Osgood, American Colonies in the Seventeenth Century, i. 190.

11 Norfolk County was entirely distinct from the present Massachusetts county of that name. It was organized in 1643 for the benefit of the recently annexed towns in New Hampshire, and also included Salisbury and Haverhill (Mass. Bay Records, n. 38); Pascataqua County apparently was carved out of Norfolk when the laws were revised (Whitmore, Colonial Laws, 1660–1672, p. 144). New Hampshire was organized as a separate Royal Province in January, 1679/80; and on February 4, the General Court of Massachusetts Bay recognized this unwelcome fact by relinquishing the Counties of Norfolk and Pascataqua, and declaring the towns of Salisbury, Amesbury, and Haverhill annexed to Essex County (Mass. Bay Records, v. 264).

12 Whitmore, Colonial Laws, 1672–1686, pp. 218, 221.

13 Osgood, i. 190–191.

14 Osgood, r., pp. 191–192; Whitmore, Colonial Laws, 1660–1672, pp. 132–133; Whitmore, Colonial Laws, 1672–1686, pp. 20–21. Several cases involving proceedings in the Cominissioners’ Court are indexed in this book under Cominissioners’ Court, e.g., Golden v. Clements, pp. 13–17.

15 Whitmore, Colonial Laws, 1672–1686, pp. 37–38. See this introduction, Conflict of Laws.

16 Whitmore, Colonial Laws, 1672–1686, pp. 28–29.

17 Possibly the petition of Mrs. Naylor against her notorious husband, referred by the County Court to the Court of Assistants (below, p. 96; and see Michelson v. Browne, p. 103) asked for a divorce. The divorced Whartons appear on p. 914.

18 Whitmore, Colonial Laws, 1672–1686, p. 36. The “Capital Lawes” in this compilation were still those of the Body of Liberties: idolatry, witchcraft, blasphemy, murder, manslaughter, bestiality, sodomy, adultery, man stealing, false witness, and conspiracy, with the addition of rape, cursing or smiting parents, or being a stubborn or rebellious son. The last two never seem to have been enforced, and there were no laws on the statute book for which loss of a “member” or banishment were prescribed. (Banishment was, however, imposed in some cases.) The inclusion of blasphemy among the capital laws makes it difficult to explain why the Suffolk County Court took cognizance of a case of that nature (below, pp. 114–115).

19 Whitmore, Colonial Laws, 1672–1686, p. 34.

20 Whitmore, Colonial Laws, 1672–1686, p. 3.

21 Id., pp. 34, 152.

22 Id., p. 38.

23 Whitmore, Colonial Laws, 1660–1672, p. 232; W^rhitmore, Colonial Laws, 1672–1686, pp. 206, 212, 272, 288, 294, 313.

24 Woody v. Harrison, pp. 654–655.

25 Patten v. Dyer, p. 215; Patten v. Woody, p. 215; Belcher v. Braintree Selectmen, p. 776.

26 Whitmore, Colonial Laws, 1672–1686, p. 152.

27 See Holowells v. Butler, at p. 1036; Simpson v. Salter, pp. 1040–1041.

28 Patten v. Winsley, at p. 384.

29 Bridgham Estate, pp. 848–849; Holowells v. Butler, at pp. 1033–1034.

30 Below, pp. 788–791.

31 Lechford, Plaine Dealing.

32 Winthrop’s Journal (1908 ed.) ii. 37.

33 The Laws and Liberties of Massachusetts, Reprinted from the 1648 Edition (1929).

34 Whitmore, Colonial Laws, 1660–1672, p. 141, title Counsel, Advice.

35 Id., p. 224.

36 Whitmore, Colonial Laws, 1672–1686, p. 211. See also title Attachments, Summons, sec. 3, id., pp. 7–8.

37 Introduction to Proceedings of the Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1695–1729.

38 See Patten’s power of attorney from England, pp. 377–378; Addington v. Timberlak, p. 242, where Addington was attorney for a Rhode Islander.

39 Batt v. Harris, pp. 539–542. Judge Bond’s introduction mentions a feminine attorney in Maryland, who has been heralded as the first woman attorney at law in America.

40 Below, pp. 1153–1157. For other illustrations of lawyerlike arguments, see Patten v. Dyer, at pp. 373–375; Purkis v. Winder, at p. 1004; Danson v. Eliott, at p. 1090

41 Below, pp. 761, 766.

42 Order about Cornish, pp. 560–561.

43 Hutchinson, Atty, p. 95.

44 Below, pp. 14–15.

45 Below, pp. 295–296.

46 Below, pp. 388–390.

47 Below, pp. 550–554.

48 Below, pp. 563–564.

49 Below, pp. 451–453.

50 Below, pp. 1042–1044.

51 Below, pp. 899–900, 1047.

52 Below, pp. 1170–1171.

53 Below, p. 71. A few years after these volumes terminate, the Boston press began to issue printed forms and blanks for bonds and other legal documents. Broadsides, Ballads, &c., printed in Massachusetts (Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., LXXV), pp. vii, 16. The earliest known copy of a printed bond is dated 1685, and is found in the Massachusetts Archives, XL. 529; the earliest found in the Suffolk Files is dated 1688.

54 History of Massachusetts Bay, i. 323 n.

55 Leverett, p. 312; Palmer, p. 1069; Leverett, p. 1153; Dowden, pp. 890–894.

56 See Ashton v. Gibbs, pp. 347–358; Whetcomb v. Gibbs, p. 512; Gibbs v. Whetcomb, pp. 587–592.

57 Below, p. 186.

58 Bellingham v. Smith, p. 248; Wharton v. Walley, pp. 745–746.

59 In 1686, Andros obliged attorneys to take oath upon admission to the bar. In 1701, a statute required such an oath. Warren, History of the American Bar (1911), pp. 72, 77–78.

60 History of Massachusetts Bay, i. 269–270 n. See also Dictionary of American Biography, ii. 166.

61 Legal Development in Colonial Massachusetts, 1630–1686, p. 144; see also pp. 5, 66 ff.

62 “The English Common Law in the Early American Colonies,” in Select Essays in Anglo-American Legal History, i. 367 ff. See also R. B. Morris, “Massachusetts and the Common Law: the Declaration of 1646,” American Historical Review, xxxi. 443.

63 Review of “Laws and Liberties of 1648,” in New England Quarterly, iii. 157–158.

64 Hilkey, pp. 66–67.

65 Poore, Federal and State Constitutions, Colonial Charters, etc., i. 940.

66 Below, pp. 373–376.

67 Darvall v. Dudson, at p. 366. See also Cooke v. Broughton, at p. 71.

68 Stuart and Ludden, at p. 406; Newcomb at p. 696. Title Man-slaughter in the revisions of 1660 and 1672 covered only killing in self-defense, etc.

69 Introduction to Proceedings of the Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1695–1729.

70 Scottow v. Shapleigh, at p. 1112.

71 Massachusetts Bay Records, II. 212

72 Below, p. 1105.

73 Mead v. Turner, pp. 36–43. An order of 1650 by the General Court as to this book is quoted by Warren, History of the American Bar, p. 71.

74 See this introduction, Attorneys and Magistrates.

75 Mittimus, pp. 191, 487; supersedeas, pp. 788–791.

76 Below, p. 298; see also for Latin phrases, pp. 533, 534, 536, 769.

77 Below, p. 163.

78 Ashton v. Gibbs, at pp. 347, 350, 351.

79 Patten v. Winsley, pp. 377–384.

80 Douglas Estate, pp. 1104–1105.

81 “King’s Law and Local Custom in Seventeenth-Century New England,” Columbia Law Review, XXXI. 416.

82 Hilkey, p. 68.

83 Earl of Oxford’s Case, 1 Chancery Rep. 1. This reference was suggested by Dean Pound as was also King v. University of Cambridge, 1 Strange 557, 567, where Chief Justice Pratt uses a Biblical illustration as late as 1736: “The objection for want of notice can never be got over. The laws of God and man both give the party an opportunity to make his defence, if he has any. I remember to have heard it observed by a very learned man upon such an occasion, that even God himself did not pass sentence upon Adam, before he was called upon to make his defence, Adam (says God) where art thou? Hast thou not eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat? And the same question was put to Eve also.” For other English examples, see Warren, History of the American Bar, p. 65 n; Ratcliff’s Case, 3 Coke Rep. 40a, b; Winfield, Chief Sources of English Legal History, p. 146.

84 Below, pp. 203, 309, 535, 892–893, 1116.

85 Below, p. 52.

86 Below, p. 568

87 Below, p. 624.

88 Below, p. 1155

89 Below, pp. 303–304.

90 Below, p. 615

91 Below, pp. 404–408.

92 Below, pp. 1147–1148.

93 Below, at pp. 1034, 1037. The same Biblical passage is unsuccessfully cited in Douglas Est., at 1105, as binding, in accordance with the preamble, in order to fill the gap in title Wills, which gave a decedent’s property to his heirs without defining who they were.

94 On the distinction between this principle of judicial consistency and the modern principle of the binding force of judicial decisions, see Winfield, Chief Sources of English Legal History, pp. 149 f. Some of the passages he cites from the Year-Books, of oral court-room discussion mentioning past cases, resemble the Massachusetts material described below. See also Lewis, “The History of Judicial Precedent,” Law Quarterly Review, xlvi. 341.

95 Below, at pp. 70–71.

96 Below, at pp. 365, 367.

97 Hutchinson v. Blake, pp. 271–274.

98 Below, at p. 714.

99 Below, pp. 797–799.

100 Below, at pp. 654–655.

101 Whitmore, Colonial Laws, 1672–1686, p. 38. See this introduction, Appellate Courts.

102 Peck v. Bonner, pp. 31–36.

103 Ashton v. Gibbs, pp. 347–358.

104 Below, pp. 99–100, 131–133, 201.

105 Clarke v. Nicholls, pp. 5–9, 98–99

106 Dinely v. Steenwick, pp. 167–173, 246–247, 292–293; Dinely, p. 234; Davis v. Dinely, pp. 568–569.

107 Clarke v. Lamb, pp. 1131–1136.

108 Below, pp. 1029–1037.

109 Pincheon v. Collecot, pp. 319–322.

110 Whitmore, Colonial Laws, 1672–1686, p. 9. See Kelly v. Blower, p. 13; Atkinson v. Williams, pp. 53–54; and other entries indexed under Barratry.

111 See this introduction, Attorneys and Magistrates.

112 Cooke v. Broughton, at pp. 70–71. The court nevertheless nullified the deed.

113 Hodges, at p. 190.

114 The same conclusion is stated by Washburn, Sketches of the Judicial History of Massachusetts (1840), p. 48. Goebel observes the same fact in Plymouth Colony and attributes it to the influence of the English county courts. “King’s Law and Local Custom,” Columbia Law Review xxxi 437–438

115 Three different English reporters have been examined for cases in the year 1670–1671. Out of twenty-four cases in 1 T. Raymond 189–218, only three are case; four are assumpsit, one general assumpsit, seven debt, three trespass, four replevin, one covenant, one words (slander). Out of twenty-four cases in 1 Levinz 285–301, only four are case; eight are debt, four assumpsit, two general assumpsit, and there is one each for trespass, ejectment, words (slander), account, trover, and covenant. Out of twenty-four cases beginning 2 Saunders 73, nine are case, a somewhat larger proportion; nine are debt, two ejectment, three assumpsit, and one trover.

116 For example, Leverett v. Ely, p. 4; Greenough v. Hazelden, p. 9; Hutchinson v. Douty, p. 11; Thayre v. Rose, pp. 322–325; Hudson v. George, p. 514.

117 Parker v. Champeroone and Leverett v. Ely.

118 Examples are Bacon v. Gold, p. 12; Oliver v. Woodmancy, p. 17; Cutler v. Hersy, pp. 44–45; Parker v. Corbyn, p. 316; Leverett v. Dowden, p. 882.

119 Sheafe v. Hawkins, pp. 1–3.

120 Anderson v. Cox, pp. 204–205; 287, Gross v. Pearce, p. 275; Clarke v. Clement, p. 636.

121 For example, Bucher v. Bastar, p. 17; Hastings v. Parks, pp. 97–98; Hudson v. Skinner, p. 290; Raynsfords v. Green, p. 853; Leverett v. Fox, p. 935.

122 Hudson v. Hunt, pp. 289–290.

123 Sanders v. Harris, p. 640.

124 Woodcock v. Sutton, p. 773.

125 Brackett v. Clarke, pp. 45–52.

126 Leeds v. Richards, p. 100; Bill v. Wayte, p. 271.

127 Goodman v. Cocke, pp. 200–201.

128 Mosely v. Mason, p. 65.

129 Lidgett v. Collins, pp. 43–44; Smith v. Carrington, p. 155.

130 Sandys v. Locke, pp. 205–209, Hutchinson v. Blake, pp. 271–274, are examples, and others will be found in the Index. See the form of the writ in Wbitmore, Colonial Laws, 1672–1686, p. 162.

131 Marsh v. Machee, p. 43; Baker v. Joy, p. 134.

132 Smith v. Cartwright, p. 10.

133 Dudson v. Darvall, pp. 385–387. Actions of defamation: MackDaniel v. Hale, p. 818, and Legg v. Flood, p. 880. Case upon defamation: Barnes v. Harwood, p. 984.

134 MackDaniel v. Hale, p. 818.

135 Below, p. 13.

136 Francks v. Ely, p. 135; Dudson v. Darvall, pp. 385–387.

137 Wbitmore, Colonial Laws, 1672–1686, p.

138 Id, P. 7.

139 See Jones v. Crispe, at p. 458.

140 Mass. Perpetual Laws, 1780–1800 (1801), i. 199.

141 No. 27. Reprinted in Whitmore’s Bibliographical Sketch of the Laws of the Massachusetts Colony (1630–1686), p. 39.

142 Massachusetts Bay Records, ii. 219.

143 Sheafe v. Palmer at pp. 829–830; Scottow v. Shapleigh, at pp. 1114–1116; Dudley v. Paige, at p. 1120, called “plea”; Townsend v. Williams, at p. 1127, in Court of Assistants; Cooke v. Oliver, at pp. 1146–1148. A declaration is mentioned in Gibbs v. Whetcomb, at p. 588.

144 Cooke v. Broughton, at p. 68; Cooke v. Oliver, at pp. 1148–1149.

145 Mead v. Turner, at p. 39; Dudley v. Paige, at p. 1120.

146 Whitmore, Colonial Laws, 1672–1686, p. 211.

147 Id., p. 7.

148 Robinson, “Anticipations under the Commonwealth of Changes in the Law,” Select Essays in Anglo-American Legal History, i. 480.

149 Plumb v. Parke, p. 146.

150 Henchman v. Rock, at p. 197; Giffard v. Leverett, p. 747; Saffin v. Jesson, pp. 774–775; Lynde v. Haughton, p. 1009.

151 Below, pp. 417–420.

152 Porter v. Appleton, pp. 1137–1139.

153 Below, p. 69.

154 Below, pp. 173, 760.

155 Cooke v. Oliver, pp. 1144–1150

156 Parmiter v. Perry, p. 294.

157 Cooke v. Broughton, at p. 73; Clarke v. Nicholls, at p. 79; Willys v. Baker, pp. 1073–1074.

158 Blackstone, Commentaries, iii. 418.

159 Oxenbridge Complaint, p. 437.

160 Sands v. Hutchinson, pp. 460–461.

161 Whaley, p. 1164.

162 Harris v. Edsall, p. 102; Scottow v. Felton, pp. 317–318; Lytherland v. Brown, pp. 500–504; Lytherland v. Veren, p. 529; Fogg v. Williams, pp. 656–660; Hukely to Rawson, pp. 677–678.

163 Select Essays in Anglo-American Legal History, i. 375.

164 Whitmore, Colonial Laws, 1672–1686, p. 6.

165 Walley v. Waite, pp. 802–803.

166 Below, pp. 139, 657.

167 Richardson and Read, p. 117.

168 Man v. Hews, p. 1058.

169 Bleaze v. Edwards, p. 925.

170 Title Tryals, Whitmore, Colonial Laws, 1672–1686, p. 152.

171 Mead v. Turner, at p. 39.

172 More v. Jones, pp. 156–158.

173 Dudley v. Paige, at pp. 1120–1121; Townsend v. Williams, at p. 1127. See also Sands v. Hutchinson, pp. 460–461, petition for respite of execution.

174 Hutchinson v. Paine, at p. 635.

175 Title Appeal, sec. 2; Snelling, pp. 1103–1104; Townsend v. Williams, at p. 1130.

176 Title Appeal, sec. 2; Jones v. Crispe, at p. 459; Flood v. Legg, at p. 859; Lidgett v. Smith, pp. 876–879; Hill v. Obbinson, at p. 1095; Cooke v. Oliver, at p. 1148.

177 Brattle v. Knight, at p. 799.

178 Hodges, pp. 190–193; Stuart and Ludden, pp. 404–408.

179 Hutchinson, p. 95.

180 Dowden, pp. 890–894.

181 Clarke v. Nicholls, pp. 5–9.

182 Sands v. Hutchinson, pp. 460–461.

183 Starkey, p. 258—abduction; Dobleday, p. 626—lasciviousness; Rigby, p. 940—drinking and wife-beating.

184 Stuart and Ludden, at p. 408—manslaughter. On early Massachusetts criminal trials without right to a jury, see Frankfurter and Corcoran, “Petty Federal Offences etc.,” Harvard Law Review xxxrx. 938–942.

185 In the Court of Assistants; Brattle v. Knight, at p. 799.

186 Kent v. Phillips, pp. 929–930; Savage v. Hutchinson, p. 1039; Maryon v. Wright, pp. 1121–1122; Indicott v. Kent, pp. 1140, 1144.

187 Hutchinson v. Sands, p. 470.

188 Cutler v. Jacob, p. 530.

189 Indicott, p. 1101.

190 Thayer, Preliminary Treatise on Evidence, pp. 130–132.

191 Skinner v. Lowell, at p. 391.

192 Legg v. Flood, pp. 1054–1055.

193 Title Jurors, Juries, sec. 5; Middlecott v. Scotto, pp. 821–822.

194 Batt v. Harris, at p. 540; see the form of the juror’s oath in Whitmore, Colonial Laws, 1672–1686, p. 167.

195 Clarke v. Nicholls, pp. 5–9, 98–99.

196 Bucher v. Bastar, p. 17; Checkly v. Williams, p. 372.

197 Lidgett v. Collins, pp. 43–44.

198 Bellingham Executors v. Smith, pp. 240–241; Middlecott v. Scotto, pp. 821–822.

199 Jones v. Crispe, at p. 459.

200. Hill v. Obbinson, at p. 1095.

201 Jay v. Wharton, pp. 577–578; Winslow v. Bendall, pp. 611–612; Norman v. Skinnar, pp. 803–806; Man v. Wing, p. 1039; Paige v. West, pp. 1080–1083.

202 Hutchinson v. Paine, at p. 536; see title Jurors, Juries, sec. 1, and this introduction, Equity.

203 Gibbs v. Whetcomb, pp. 587–592. The preceding cases leading up to the dispute are Edmunds, p. 486; Waters, pp. 490, 493; Whetcomb v. Gibbs, p. 512.

204 New England Quarterly, v. 812–818.

205 Lawton and Bonner’s Bond, at pp. 180–181, see also Lawton, at p. 304; Jay v. Woodmansey, at p. 577; Cooke v. Oliver, at p. 1150. The statute of May 15, 1672 (Whitmore, Colonial Laws, 1672–1686, p. 201) is not absolutely clear that only a jury in the Court of Assistants could be attainted whereas the verdict of a County Court jury had to be accepted by the bench. Such is the interpretation of Hilkey (Legal Development in Colonial Massachusetts, pp. 79–80), but neither Thayer (Preliminary Treatise on Evidence, p. 173 n) nor Reinsch (in Select Essays in Anglo-American Legal History, I. 379) speaks of such a limitation. It seems possible that the “unless” clause in the statute of 1672 modifies the whole preceding portion of the sentence and not merely the preceding clause. The statute of September 10, 1684, modifying attaints (Whitmore, Colonial Laws, 1672–1686, p. 319), throws no light on the problem. The three attaints in this book, cited above, were against juries in the Court of Assistants. Unquestionably, the attaint was always tried by a jury of twenty-four in the Court of Assistants.

206 J. H. Wigmore, Treatise on Evidence (2d ed. 1923) i. 108.

207 Title Witnesses, sec. 1, enacted in 1641.

208 Waldren v. Smith, at p. 203; Stoughton v. Bishops, at p. 297; Noakes, pp. 308–310; Hutchinson v. Paine, pp. 530–536; Dowden, pp. 890–894. On the history of the numerical system of counting witnesses, which England was already abandoning, see Wigmore, iv. 300.

209 Golden v. Clements, at p. 15.

210 Title Indians, sec. 10; Prince, p. 181; Penniman, p. 328; Eaton, p. 491.

211 Mason, p. 1013.

212 Newcomb pp. 695–697; Clarke v. Lamb, pp. 1134–1135.

213 Massachusetts Bay Records, iv (1). 27.

214 Below, p. 480.

215 Below, pp. 1030–1031.

216 Waldren v. Smith, pp. 202–204; Joy v. Baker, pp. 393–394; Jay v. Woodmancy, pp. 572–577; Batt v. Welds, pp. 614–617; Lidgett v. Smith, pp. 876–879; Cooke v. Oliver, pp. 1144–1150.

217 Below, p. 169.

218 Clarke v. Holmes, pp. 1079–1080; Cooke v. Oliver, at pp. 1144–1145.

219 Purkis v. Winder, pp. 1002–1005.

220 Stoughton v. Bishops, at p. 299; Waldron v. Marshall, at p. 763.

221 Patten v. Winsley, pp. 377–384; Waldron v. Marshall, pp. 759–764; Proutt v. Scarlett, pp. 792–793; Drurey Fined, pp. 837–841; Holowells v. Butler, pp. 1029–1037; Dudley v. Paige, at pp. 1119–1120

222 Woody v. Harrison, at p. 653; Williams v. Fogg, pp. 685–687.

223 Below, pp. 1145–1146.

224 Wigmore, iii. 330 ff.; Woody v. Harrison, pp. 651–656.

225 Wigmore, ii. 662, citing Massachusetts statute of 1882; Cowell, p. 402; Preist, p. 409; Hemaway and Peggy, p. 555; Cox, p. 643; Boulter, p. 719; Butler, pp. 915–916; Childe, p. 939.

226 Trott, p. 222.

227 Cooke v. Oliver, at pp. 1147–1148.

228 Bennett, p. 786; see Waldron v. Marshall, at p. 763.

229 Roscoe Pound, “Puritanism and the Common Law,” American Law Review, XLV. 825, reprinted in his Spirit of the Common Law. Attacks on Chancery under Cromwell are described by Robinson, “Anticipations under the Commonwealth of Changes in the Law,” Select Essays in Anglo-American Legal History, i. 470–472.

230 Hutchinson v. Paine, at p. 536, subsequently discussed.

231 Ashton v. Gibbs, at p. 356; Sharp v. Rider, at p. 363; Patten v. Dyer, at p. 375; Jones v. Crispe, at p. 459.

232 Below, p. 71

233 Below, pp. 530–536, especially, p. 534.

234 See below, p. 4 n. The common term today is “chancerizing.”

235 Parker v. Champeroone, p. 4.

236 Below, pp. 882–883.

237 Below, pp. 1079–1080.

238 Frankes v. Rock, at p. 1049; Dudley v. Paige, at pp. 1120–1121.

239 Below, pp 1137–1139.

240 See Ames, “Specialty Contracts and Equitable Defences,” Harvard Law Review, IX. 49.

241 Below, pp. 530–536. See Williams v. Woodbridge, pp. 767–770, where the defendant unsuccessfully asserted that he was compelled by duress to sign the bond; this defense was probably available in an English common-law court. The same case discusses the assignability of bonds, under a statute, title Bills.

242 Stoughton v. Bishops, pp. 294–299.

243 Below, pp. 788–791

244 Below, p. 885.

245 Dowden, at p. 892. Compare Quincy’s Reports, p. 537 and note.

246 Below, p. 629.

247 Hickson and Bedwell, pp. 442–443; Forrest and Julian Knight, p. 1161.

248 Ex parte Warfield, 40 Texas Criminal Reports 413 (1899); Pound, Cases on Equitable Relief against Defamation (2d ed., 1930) 79 n.

249 Belcher’s Bond, p. 809; Spur, p. 810.

250 Michelson v. Browne, p. 103. See also p. 442.

251 Naylor’s Petition, p. 96. See the discussion of Appellate Courts in this introduction.

252 Baker v. Johnson, p. 392.

253 Thayer v. Paine, pp. 563–564; see also Billing v. Rawson, p. 819.

254 Atherton v. Lockwood, pp. 512–513.

255 Davie v. Hall, pp. 875–876.

256 Skinner v. Lowell, pp. 388–392.

257 Greely v. Hall, pp. 988–989.

258 Bromage v. Genning, 1 Roll. R. 368 (1616).

259 Baildon, Select Cases in Chancery, p. xiv.

260 Cokayn v. Hurst (1458), in Baildon, Select Cases in Chancery, No. 143.

261 Below, pp. 65–78.

262 Cutler v. Cutler, p. 881.

263 Aspinwall v. Evans, p. 981.

264 Parke v. Morrise, pp. 463–464. On the affairs of this charitable trust, see Massachusetts Bay Records, iv (ii). 434, 441, 455–458; v. 5, 22

265 Alford v. Endicott, pp. 726–735.

266 Lamb v. Williams, p. 1051.

267 Fowle v. Stevens, p. 854; Aldredge v. Stevens, p. 854; Wilcocks v. Viall, p. 855.

268 Note by Gray in Quincy’s Reports, p. 537; Woodruff, “Chancery in Massachusetts,” Law Quarterly Review, v. 370, reprinted, with additional material, in Boston University Law Review, ix. 168.

269 Massachusetts Bay Records, v. 477–478.

270 Baker v. Joy, p. 134; Bennet v. Gridley, p. 744; Sedgwick v. Rock, pp. 770–771; Burnes v. Harwood, p. 984; Smith v. Cartwright, p. 10; Tay v. Hawkins, p. 688; Griggs v. Chock, p. 1042; Fogg v. Leverett, p. 689.

271 Marsh v. Machee, p. 43; MackDaniel v. Hale, p. 818.

272 Keen v. Wiswall, p. 1039.

273 Legg v. Flood, p. 880.

274 Clarke v. Kent, pp. 908–909.

275 Scottow v. Shapleigh, pp. 1108–1116

276 Smith v. Cartwright, p. 10. Retractions were ordered in the cases cited in notes 1–4, except Bennet v. Gridley, Tay v. Hawkins, and Fogg v. Leverett.

277 Danson v. Ellitt, p. 1123.

278 See the Hindoo’s comment on the English remedy of damages quoted from Kipling by Pound, “Interests of Personality,” Harvard Law Review, xxviii. 446 n.

279 Id., pp. 364, 449.

280 Burn, Ecclesiastical Law (9th ed., 1842) n. 137–138. This reference was supplied by Dean Pound.

281 Finnish Temperance Society v. Raivaaja, 219 Mass. Reports 28 (1914).

282 Rex v. Penny, 1 Lord Raymond 153 (1697).

283 Holdsworth, History of English Law, v. 211.

284 Below, pp. 992–993.

285 See below, p. 228 n.

286 Below, p. 231; see also Sprague, p. 424.

287 Below, pp. 228–229.

288 Below, p. 232.

289 Below, pp. 237–238; see Bellingham v. Smith, p. 248.

290 Commonwealth v. Canter, 269 Mass. Reports 359 (1929), discussed in Harvard Law Review, xliii. 663–664.

291 Pound, Cases on Equitable Relief against Defamation (2d ed., 1930), p. 13 n.

292 Wainwright, p. 225.

293 Below, p. 235.

294 Below, p. 753.

295 Holdsworth, History of English Law, viii. 449–459.

296 Countess of Shrewsbury’s Case, 5 Coke Reports 13. On the purchase of law books, see Sources of Law in this introduction.

297 Milton v. Eliott, p. 3.

298 Clarke v. Harbour, pp. 736–737.

299 Yardley v. Boden, p. 775.

300 Sheafe v. Palmer, pp. 829–830.

301 Woode v. Chantrell, pp. 159–163.

302 Snelling v. Chantrel, p. 166.

303 See Hay, “Death as a Civil Cause of Action in Massachusetts,” Harvard Law Review, vn. 170.

304 Admiralty Commrs. v. The Amerika, 1917 A. C. 38—marine accident; Panama Railroad v. Rock, 266 United States Reports 209 (1924)—accident in the Canal Zone. See the adverse criticism of these decisions in Harvard Law Review, xxx. 742; xxxviii. 499. Negligent death at sea is discussed by Whitelock, “Extra-territorial Marine Torts,” id., xxii. 403.

305 Title Bridges, Whitmore, Colonial Laws, 1672–1686, p. 12, enacted in 1648.

306 Below, p. 160.

307 Below, pp. 404–408.

308 Below, p. 149.

309 Below, p. 644

310 Below, pp. 695–697.

311 Newcomb v. Wardell, p. 800.

312 Lorin, pp. 332–333; Dare, p. 333.

313 Whitwell, p. 258; Gatch, p. 259; Wakefeild, p. 785.

314 See Forms of Action, in this introduction.

315 Crowne v. Sprague, p. 156; Sandford v. Orchard, pp. 669–671; see also Toy v. Howard, p. 130.

316 Harris v. Bridgeham, p. 277.

317 Gilbert v. Obison, pp. 738–742.

318 Scarlett v. Long, Salter v. Manning, p. 584.

319 Below, pp. 759–766.

320 Norman v. Skinnar, pp. 803–806.

321 Acorman v. Valentine, pp. 982–983. For cases involving chattels in New York, see pp. 385–387, 856–857.

322 Skinner v. Lowell, pp. 388–392.

323 Phillips v. Wharton, p. 420.

324 Salter v. Rose, p. 984.

325 Bartholmew v. Ashton, p. 318. See Litigiousness, in this introduction.

326 Norman v. Salter, p. 131; Scottow v. Felton, pp. 317–318.

327 MackDaniel v. Hale, p. 818.

328 Ashton v. Gibbs, pp. 347–358; Edsall v. Johnson, p. 639.

329 Kelly v. Blower, p. 13; Francks v. Ely, p. 135; Dudson v. Darvall, pp. 385–387. Several instances of the same tort are given in Maine Province and Court Records, indexed under Crimes and Torts.

330 Jones v. Neylor, 471.

331 Stanton v. Trott, 242.

332 Keen v.

333 Sweete v. Gibbs, pp. 742–743; Danson v. Eliott, pp. 1086–1092.

334 Title Conveyances, Deeds and Writings, sec. 1, emphasized in Patten v. Winsley, at p. 381.

335 Cooke v. Broughton, at p. 66 (transaction in 1659); Clarke v. Nicholls, p. 99 (in 1673); Mead and Alcock, p. 456 (in 1673/4); Salter v. Checkley, at p. 580 (in 1674/5).

336 Title Conveyances, etc., sec. 2; Clarke v. Nicholls, at p. 99; Rawson v. Billings, at p. 546.

337 Bundy v. Tomlin, pp. 210–211; Glover Estate, at pp. 428–429.

338 J. H. Beale, “The Origin of the System of Recording Deeds in America,” Green Bag, xix. 335.

339 Cutler v. Cutler, p. 881.

340 Below, pp. 860–862.

341 Boseworth v. Morse, pp. 100–101.

342 Hiskett v. Paine, p. 318.

343 Below, p. 567.

344 29 Charles II c. 3, sec. 4 (1677). This did not apply in a colony unless expressly received there by act of assembly or usage. See 25 Geo. II c. 6, sec. 10 (1752).

345 Title Conveyances, Deeds and Writings, sec. 1. “Sale” as used here does not include a contract to sell.

346 Woody v. Harrison, pp. 651–656; Leverett v. Bullis, pp. 860–862.

347 Tower v. Hobart, pp. 507–508; Harrison v. Woddee, p. 528.

348 Cutler v. Jacob, p. 530.

349 Sheffield v. Harrison, p. 529.

350 Order to Joyliffe, p. 755.

351 Walker v. Ellis, p. 823; Addams v. Jay, p. 1052.

352 Sheafe v. Hawkins, pp. 1–3, continued on pp. 275–277, 564–565, 684, 705–706; Deane v. Gibbs, p. 725; Allen v. Emmons, p. 772; Stoughton v. Gilbert, p. 772; Tompson v. Simons, p. 909; Sheafe v. Salter, p. 1085.

353 Smith to Jones, p. 1026.

354 Hudson v. Daniel, p. 776.

355 Hill v. Obbinson, pp. 1094–1095.

356 Below, pp. 579–583.

357 Below, pp. 426–429.

358 Widow Bridgham, pp. 132–133; Governor Bellingham, pp. 230–231; Glover, pp. 428–429; widow Ward, pp. 1032–1033.

359 Patten v. Dyer, at p. 374; Patten v. Winsley, pp. 381–383; Holowells v. Butler, pp. 1029–1037.

360 Phippen Estate, p. 996.

361 Whitmore, Colonial Laws, 1672–1686, pp. 32, 157–158.

362 Statute of Frauds, 29 Charles II c. 3 sec. 5. This did not apply to the colonies, except as they accepted it.

363 Wills Act, 7 William IV & 1 Victoria, c. 26.

364 Title Wills, sec. 3, Whitmore, Colonial Laws, 1672–1686, p. 158. The statute was apparently enacted in this form in 1649, for the intestacy statute of 1641 (see Liberties 81, 82), incorporated in the Laws and Liberties of 1648, pp. 53–54, lacks these provisions, and merely specifies the rule for division among children which also appears in the revisions of 1660 and 1672 and is explained in the text. In England the distribution of personal property was not regulated by statute until 1670.

365 Examples are: Lorine Est., p. 119; George Est., p. 223; Marshall Est., pp. 225–226; Phippen Est., p. 996; Gallop Est., pp. 1015–1016; Clement Est., p. 1017; Winslow Est., p. 1067; Ward Est., pp. 1069–1070; Blackman Est., p. 1165; Clap Est., pp. 1167–1168.

366 It is arguable that the statutory clause, “where there are no Sons, the daughters shall inherit as Copartners,” gave the daughters nothing when there were sons. This would correspond to the division of land only among sons under the English custom of gavellcind, discussed below. But the cases in this book indicate no such discrimination against daughters. Every case cited in the preceding note gives equal portions to all children except the eldest son. To explain this result on the ground that there were only boys in ten families, several of them numerous, would outrage the law of probabilities. Indeed, Clap’s Estate, pp. 1167–1168, expressly mentions a daughter as well as sons. In the Probate Records of Essex County during our period, cases have been noted of daughters sharing with sons (ii. 258, 271, 279, 284–285, 307–308).

367 Andrews, “The Influence of Colonial Conditions as Illustrated in the Connecticut Intestacy Law,” Select Essays in Anglo-American Legal History, L 431 ff.; Morris, “Massachusetts and the Common Law,” American Historical Review, xxxi. 447–448, referring to Deuteronomy, xxi: 15–17, and questioning some statements of Andrews.

368 Blackstone, Commentaries, n. 79–89, 216.

369 Robinson, “Anticipations under the Commonwealth of Changes in the Law,” Select Essays in Anglo-American Legal History, i. 488–490.

370 St. 12 Charles II c. 24 (1660).

371 Poore, Federal and State Constitutions, Colonial Charters, etc., i. 933. See also, the Plymouth Charter of 1620, id., i. 926; the Provincial Charter of 1691, id., i. 947; E. P. Cheyney, “The Manor of East Greenwich in the County of Kent,” American Historical Review, xi. 29; V. F. Barnes, “Land Tenure in English Colonial Charters of the Seventeenth Century,” in Essays in Colonial History Presented to Charles M. Andrews, p. 4; Morris, Studies in the History of American Law (1930), pp. 103–120; and the report of the 1695 survey of theroyal manor of East Greenwich in Kimbell, An Account of the Legacies, etc., of the Parish of St. Alphege Greenwich (1816), pp. 183 ff.

372 Macdonald, Select Charters, 1606–1775, p. 10.

373 No. 10 (1641), Whitmore’s Bibliographical Sketch, p. 35; title Lands, free Lands, Colonial Laws, 1672–1786, p. 88.

374 Patten v. Winsley, at p. 381.

375 George Estate, p. 223.

376 Pratt Estate, p. 716.

377 Clarke v. Nicholls, pp. 5–9, 98–99; Clarke v. Lamb, pp. 1131–1136.

378 Simpson v. Salter, pp. 1040–1041.

379 Below, pp. 1064, 1096–1097.

380 Patten v. Dyer, pp. 373–376; Patten v. Winsley, pp. 377–384; Salter v. Checkley, pp. 579–583. See Index for other references.

381 Below, pp. 1029–1037.

382 Below, pp. 1104–1105.

383 Below, pp. 860–862

384 Below, pp. 1131–1136.

385 Below, pp. 821–822.

386 Glover Estate, pp. 426–433; Rawson v. Glover, pp. 472–473, 508–511; Rawson v. Billing, pp. 543–546.

387 Below, pp. 81, 109.

388 Below, p. 95.

389 Hudson v. Smith, pp. 592–594, 833

390 Whipple Estate, p. 939.

391. Chamberlayne Estate, p. 992.

392 Examples are: Bernard Est., p. 267; Curtice Est., p. 960; Smith Est., pp. 991–992; Tay Est., p. 994; Elkins Est., p. 1010.

393 Below, pp. 797–799

394 Rogers v. Rowste, p. 689.

395 Kent v. Smith, p. 128. Frankes v. Smith, p. 690.

396 Deane v. Perry, pp. 724–725

397 Keen v. Oxe, pp. 906–908.

398 A bond to pay a debt is reprinted on p. 171. Other examples are cited in this introduction, Sources of Law. Compare a bond executed in London, partly in Latin, on pp. 1003–1004.

399 Townsend v. Williams, pp. 1125–1126.

400 Examples are: Kellond v. Hudson, pp. 106–107; Richards v. Brackett, p. 107; Ashton v. Bonner, p. 167. On colonial resort to arbitration, see Morris, Studies in the History of American Law, p. 60.

401 Below, pp. 195–200.

402 Our Publications, vm. 150–185.

403 Whitmore, Colonial Laws, 1672–1686, pp. 93–100.

404 Our Publications, viii. 156; Charles M. Hough, Records of Cases in the Vice-Admiralty and Admiralty Courts of New York (1925); F. B. Wiener, “Notes on the Rhode Island Admiralty, 1727–1790,” Harvard Law Review, xlvi. 44; Marguerite Appleton, “Rhode Island’s First Court of Admiralty,” New England Quarterly, v. 148.

405 Below, pp. 250–252.

406 Whitmore, Colonial Laws, 1672–1686, p. 213.

407 Melyn v. Dudson, p. 364; Darvall v. Dudson, pp. 364–369.

408 Below, p. 369

409 See in this introduction, Attorneys and Magistrates, and Litigiousness.

410 Dudson v. Darvall, pp. 385–387.

411 Below, p. 413. Notice the Puritan uncertainty about the “Saint” in the records.

412 White v. Lemoigne, p. 988. Another prize-money suit by a “Griffin” seaman is Jackson v. White, p. 982.

413 White, pp. 994–995.

414 Sheafe v. Palmer, pp. 829–830; Smith v. Rand, pp. 621–624.

415 Flood v. Legg, pp. 858–860; Legg v. Flood, pp. 1054–1055.

416 Sprague v. Collins, pp. 18–20; Lidgett v. Collins, pp. 43–44.

417 Hollett v. Pelton, p. 1077.

418 Warren v. More, p. 824.

419 The William and Thomas, pp. 1068–1069.

420 Woode v. Chantrell, at p. 162.

421 Stuart and Ludden, pp. 407–408.

422 See Litigiousness, in this introduction.

423 Miller v. Risco, pp. 277–285.

424 Waldren v. Smith, pp. 135–139.

425 Davis v. Legg, pp. 504–507.

426 Wharton v. Elson, pp. 661–669

427 Alford v. Endicott, at p. 727

428 The Providence, pp. 250–252.

429 Below, pp. 31–36.

430 Below, pp. 901–903, 1119.

431 Below, pp. 279–280, 1119.

432 Below, pp. 471, 661–669.

433 Below, pp. 134, 858–860.

434 Below, pp. 277–278, 1117–1118.

435 Below, pp. 141–142, 157, 505, 622, 663–664.

436 Waldron v. Henderson, at p. 901.

437 Title Bills, enacted in 1647.

438 See Williams v. Woodbridge, pp. 767–770. However, judgments were not assignable, by title Judgments in the revisions of 1660 and 1672.

439 Examples are Mead v. Turner, pp. 36–43; Sharp v. Rider, pp. 359–363. It is not stated that these instruments were under seal.

440 Mead v. Turner, pp. 36–43.

441 Sharp v. Rider, pp. 359–363; Hunt v. Warren, p. 1170.

442 Rawson v. Cooke, p. 475; Paige v. West, pp. 1080–1083.

443 Wharton v. Elson, pp. 661–669.

444 Briggs v. Giffard, pp. 691–692.

445 Briggs v. Leverett, pp. 617–619.

446 Yeale v. Shoare, p. 326. 8

447 Lidgett v. Foote, p. 774.

448 Deane v. Hubbard, pp. 788–791.

449 Below, pp. 1080–1083.

450 An example is reprinted on p. 14. See Index under Bills and Notes.

451 Whitcomb v. Burnham, p. 21.

452 Jesson v. Bushell, p. 672; see in this introduction, Juries.

453 Whitmore, Colonial Laws, 1672–1686, pp. 120–121; see in this introduction, Equity.

454 Below, pp. 30, 295, 317–318.

455 Below, pp. 79, 1072.

456 See in this introduction, Negotiable Instruments.

457 Examples are found on pp. 47–48, 1137–1138.

458 Title Money, Whitmore, Colonial Laws, 1672–1686, pp. 117–119. See the discussion of money and payment in Maine Province and Court Records, ii. xi.

459 Below, pp. 60–62, 156–158.

460 Below, pp. 359–363, 1052.

461 Below, pp. 1123–1124.

462 Below, pp. 661–669.

463 Below, p. 910.

464 Below, p. 927.

465 See E. G. Baird, “Business Regulation in Colonial Massachusetts (1620–1780),” Dakota Law Review, m. 227.

466 Russell v. Barefoot, pp. 299–300; Snelling’s License, 559–560.

467 Lidgett, p. 117; Marsh, p. 339; Gilbert v. Matson, 796–797; other cases involving this industry are on pp. 313, 413.

468 Jenners Fined, Parkman Fined, p. 311.

469 Waldron v. Marshall, at p. 763.

470 Below, p. 126.

471 Below, p. 412.

472 Stanberry, p. 559.

473 Batt, p. 632.

474 Roberts, p. 602.

475 Whitmore, Colonial Laws, 1672–1686, p. 36.

476 Marshall, p. 86; Barefoote, pp. 86–87.

477 Reade, pp. 114–115.

478 Hannah, pp. 1153–1157.

479 Francis, pp. 555–556.

480 Holleday, p. 782.

481 Synderland, p. 600; Cannon, p. 604.

482 Phips, p. 887.

483 Noakes, pp. 308–310.

484 Knight v. Moulder, p. 274

485 Cittern, p. 189.

486 Baker, p. 939.

487 Langle, p. 959.

488 Gross, pp. 112–113; Robbinson, p. 302.

489 Norman v. Salter, p. 131.

490 Richardson, p. 23; Read, p. 24; Wainwright, p. 265; Butcher, pp. 896–897.

491 Gold, p. 184.

492 Chandler, p. 232

493 Gibbs, p. 304.

494 Meadore, p. 753.

495 Dove, Admonished, p. 785.

496 Title Tobacco, Whitmore, Colonial Laws, 1672–1686. p. 146

497 Below, pp. 937, 995.

498 Whitmore, Colonial Laws, 1672–1686, p. 233.

499 Hemenway Presented, p. 698; Roberts Admonished, p. 751.

500 Whitmore, p. 206.

501 Below, pp. 90, 92.

502 Below, p. 255

503 Below, pp. 116, 1101; Title Ballast, Whitmore, Colonial Laws, 1672–1686, p. 9.

504 Pray, p. 188; Hutchinson’s Presentment, p. 227.

505 Below, pp. 629, 675.

506 Our Publications, iii. 51 ff.

507 Hoppin, p. 89; Wainwright, p. 265; Chamberlin, p. 266; Wharton, p. 674; Marnel, p. 894. Read (p. 84) was imprisoned at hard labor at the court’s pleasure, but the place of confinement is not mentioned.

508 Smith, pp. 1101–1102.

509 The provisions for sale are too numerous to cite (see Index) and seem to become more frequent toward the end of our period.

510 Atherton, p. 956; Marshcroft, p. 995.

511 Examples are: Chandler Sentenced, p. 112; Decro, p. 938; White, pp. 994–995; Willistone, pp. 1160–1161.

512 Colcord to Thornton, p. 945.

513 Atherton, p. 151; Pitman, p. 890.

514 Mason Admonished, p. 150; Waldron v. Marshall, at p. 763; Waldron v. Bassett, at pp. 764–765; Marshall v. Waldron, at pp. 783–784; Whaley and Ranger, p. 1164; see also this introduction, Negligence.

515 Lincoln Fined, pp. 329–330; Gulliver Sentenced, p. 482; Tappin Fined, pp. 780–781. See Dudson v. Darvall, at p. 387; and the controversy about Waters’s horse and the obstinate Jesson, this introduction, Juries.

516 Tailor Sentenced, p. 88; Keyn’s Sentence, p. 235; Pollard, p. 1163.

517 Carr Sentenced, pp. 556–557.

518 Lawton, pp. 302–304, Curie, pp. 628–629; Barker, p. 886.

519 Hickson, pp. 442–443; Bed well, p. 443; Colcord, p. 943.

520 Below, pp. 84–85.

521 Below, pp. 231, 697, 302.

522 Brewster, etc., p. 843. See also Hawkins, p. 558; Wharton, p. 674; Gibbs, p. 677.

523 Below, p. 151.

524 Below, p. 674.

525 Below, p. 302.

526 For instance, Morton, pp. 521–522; Jinkins and Whitmarsh, p. 1068; Davis, pp. 1098–1099.

527 Below, p. 1157.

528 Below, p. 1100.

529 See topic Indians in index to Whitmore’s Colonial Laws, 1672–1686.

530 James Indian, pp. 112, 119.

531 Coweset Indian, pp. 147–148. John Indian, p. 148, also had a hair-cut.

532 Wickersham Commission’s Report on Lawlessness in Law Enforcement (1931), pp. 108–109.

533 Below, p. 23.

534 Sprague, p. 442; see Robbinson, p. 1101.

535 Whitmore, Colonial Laws, 1672–1686, p. 31; Harris, p. 24; Mason Admonished, p. 150; Ashton V. Gibbs, pp. 347–358; Stevens, p. 913; Toleman, p. 956.

536 Tuder, p. 26; Wiswall, p. 27.

537 Fairebanks, p. 257.

538 Whitmore, Colonial Laws, 1672–1686, pp. 31, 221.

539 Below, p. 350.

540 For instance, Read, p. 88.

541 Below, p. 89.

542 Below, p. 90

543 Below, p. 300.

544 Whitmore, Colonial Laws, 1672–1686, pp. 101–102, 130. See C. L. Powell, “Marriage in Early New England,” New England Quarterly, i. 323.

545 Whitmore, Colonial Laws, 1672–1686, pp. 101, 28.

546 Below, pp. 82, 107–108.

547 Below, p. 221.

548 Below, p. 258.

549 Below, p. 265.

550 Hall, p. 23; Pascoa, p. 108; Bragg, p. 119; Blake and Burrell, pp. 518–519; Cresey, pp. 779–780; Welden, p. 942; Whitmore, Colonial Laws, 1672–1686, pp. 101–102.

551 Below, pp. 720, 811

552 Below, p. 943.

553 Below, p. 943.

554 Below, p. 232.

555 Below, p. 150.

556 Below, p. 1158.

557 Below, pp. 754–755, 837–841.

558 Below, pp. 442–443. See Wharton and Gridley, p. 914; Knight and Forrest, pp. 1023–1024, 1161.

559 Below, pp. 809–810. See under Equity, in this introduction, for modern Parallels.

560 Examples of this frequent offense are: Egerton, p. 22; Wheaton, pp. 23, 80; Middleton, pp. 90–91. Sometimes the public acknowledgment was omitted: Collicott, p. 114; Hall, pp. 23, 119.

On this topic and its relation to common-law marriages, see Powell, in New England Quarterly, i. 323, giving similar cases in Plymouth Colony: H. B. Parkes, “Morals and Law Enforcement in Colonial New England,” id., v. 431; Parkes, “Sexual Morals and the Great Awakening,” id., iii. 133; Maine Province and Court Records, ii. xliii.

561 Below, pp. 82–84, 126, 266.

562 Kent v. Smith, p. 128; Smith, pp. 149–150; Smith v. Kent, pp. 164–165; Smith, pp. 185–186; Blacklock, pp. 189, 237.

563 Below, pp. 185–186, 189. See Carpenter, p. 91.

564 Below, p. 914. See Wharton, p. 674.

565 Wheeler and Peirce, p. 443.

566 Below, p. 941. For other instances of misconduct by wives, see Moxon, p. 94; Veering and Smith, p. 233; Hickson and Bedwell, pp. 442–443; Blake and Burrell, pp. 518–519; Morton, pp. 521–522; Ockerly and Langberry, pp. 604–605; Wharton, p. 674; Gill, p. 941; Forrest and Knight, pp. 113–114, 237, 1023–1024, 1161.

567 Plumm, pp. 125, 185; Sprague, p. 424; Dobleday, p. 626; Jay, p. 697; Messenger and Hews, pp. 912–913; Jinkins and Whitmarsh, p. 1068.

568 Hawkins and Fogg, p. 558

569 Man, p. 807.

570 See under Evidence, in this introduction.

571 Below, pp. 91, 254, 939, 1012.

572 Warro, p. 113; Judkin, pp. 183–184; Mason, p. 185; Rock’s Negro, p. 232; Jasper and Joan, p. 233; Miriam, Morea, p. 809; John Negro, p. 1067.

573 Bradford, History of Plymouth Plantation, (ed. 1912) ii. 309.

574 Fiske, p. 28.

575 Gillam, p. 118; Chamberlin, pp. 253, 594–595; Shippin, p. 917.

576 Below, pp. 256–257; see p. 597.

577 Below, p. 257; see p. 182.

578 Below, pp. 438–439, 441, 487–489, 599, 630, 677, 753, 997.

579 Below, pp. 438–439, 599. See Index for his other cases.

580 Below, p. 487.

581 Title Provoking Evils, Whitmore, Colonial Laws, 1672–1686, p. 234.

582 Matson, p. 753.

583 Below, pp. 677, 997.

584 Below, p. 519.

585 Lopez v. Howe, 259 Federal Reporter, 401 (1919).

586 Below, pp. 86–87; 144–145; Whitmore, Colonial, 1672–1686, p. 14.

587 Chafee, The Inquiring Mind, pp. 110–116. Both prosecutions failed.

588 Platts, p. 645; Evered, p. 868.

589 Order, p. 646

590 Stretton, p. 867; Newcomb, p. 307. See also pp. 307, 598, and Index.

591 Below, pp. 120, 867, 942.

592 Webb, p. 28

593 Below, pp. 305–306.

594 Below, p. 843. Another South Church case is Hill, p. 940. See also Adams, p. 596.

595 Newcombe, pp. 695–697.

596 Carteret v. Petty, 2 Swanston 323 (1675).

597 Title Courts, sec. 8, in Whitmore, Colonial Laws, 1672–1686, p. 37.

598 Id., p. 207.

599 Below, pp. 153, 178–180.

600 Below, p. 624.

601 Whitcomb v. Burnam, p. 10. On the history of foreign attachment, which was derived from the custom of London, see Beale, “The Exercise of Jurisdiction in rem to Compel Payment of a Debt,” Harvard Law Review, xxvii. 107.

602 Warner v. Franklyn, pp. 1055–1056.

603 Below, pp. 27–28.

604 Harding and Tillinghast, p. 519; Hyde, p. 677.

605 Simmons, pp. 808–809.

606 Evered, p. 868.

607 Usher v. Timberlack, pp. 154–155.

608 Usher v. Timberlack, pp. 154–155.

609 Dinely v. Steenwick, pp. 166–173; Keen v. Dafforn, pp. 1123–1124.

610 Hutchinson v. Paine, pp. 530–536; Purkis v. Winder, pp. 1002–1005.

611 Hunt v. Warren, p. 1170.

612 Lamb v. Williams, p. 1051.

613 For instance: More v. Jones, pp. 156–158; Miller v. Risco, pp. 277–285; Snith v. Rand, pp. 621–624; Darvall v. Dudson, pp. 364–369; White v. Lemoigne, p. 988; Davis v. Legg, pp. 504–507.

614 Sweete v. Gibbs, pp. 742–743.

615 Dudson v. Darvall, pp. 385–387. See also Wensley v. Davis, pp. 856–857.

616 Danson v. Ellitt, p. 1123.

617 Below, p. 600.

618 Below, pp. 628–629.

619 Matthews, p. 436; Combes, pp. 436, 440–441; Cann, p. 439.

620 Sharp v. Rider, pp. 359–363.

621 Below, pp. 680–682.

622 Below, p. 1106.

623 Temple Est., pp. 476–477; Price Est., pp. 479–480; Howlet Est., p. 871; Elkins Est., p. 1010.

624 Whitmore, Colonial Laws, 1672–1686, p. 158; Deacon Est., pp. 29–30; Biggleston Est., p. 188.

625 Below, pp. 726–735.

626 Macdonald, Select Charters, 1606–1775, p. 99.

627 Below, pp. 193, 219, 225, 524.

628 Below, pp. 560–561.

629 Danson v. Eliott, pp. 1086–1092.

630 Below, pp. 347–358.

631 Below, pp. 680–682.

632 The earliest example of the verb “chancer” in the New English Dictionary is dated 1798. See earlier examples in the Nation, lxxiv. 12 (N. Y., 1901).

633 Son of Sir John Davie, Bt., and father of John Davie, Harvard, A.B. 1681, who was informed of his succession to the baronetcy when working on his farm in Groton, Connecticut.

634 Height. See New English Dictionary, “Chief,” sb.9.

635 Father of the Captain John Bonner who made the first engraved map of Boston. 5 Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., VI. 134, 318; VII. 370.

636 Lawton, in the case to which this belongs.

637 The frequent mention in this case of Lex Mercatoria refers to a well-known English legal treatise, Consuetudo vel Lex Mercatoria, or The Ancient Law-Merchant, by Gerard Malynes. First published in 1622, this book went through several editions during the seventeenth century. A comparison of Turner’s references in the text shows that he used the latest edition, that of 1656. A popular legal tract, Advice Concerning Bills of Exchange by John Marius, was bound in with this edition. Several of Turner’s references in the text are to the Advice of Marius, and not to the treatise of Malynes.

638 This refers to the common practice of giving bills of exchange in sets of three, only one of which was to be paid; this was to allow for possible losses of one or two bills in transmission.

639 This would have been true of a regular bill of exchange payable at a specified date, but the law required a bill payable “after sight” to be accepted in writing because only thus would the date for payment be made definite on the instrument.

640 On 20 July, 1662, Lord Windsor, Governor of Jamaica, appeared at Barbados in command of a fleet, seeking recruits to settle his own colony. Owing to his royal backing the Barbadian authorities were unable to prevent him from carrying off sundry indented servants and debtors. V. T. Harlow, History of Barbados, p. 139.

641 “If any man be proved, and judged a common barrater, vexing others with unjust, frequent & endles suites, it shall be in the power of the Court, both to reject his cause, and to punish him for his Barratry.” Act of 1641, in The Book of the General Lawes and Libertyes (1660), p. 5.

642 An ancient English form of conveyance, which did not require a deed or a record. The two parties went to the actual piece of land that was to be conveyed, in company with whatever freemen they could collect, and the grantor, after describing the bounds in presence of the witnesses, gave livery and seizen by handing to the grantee a bit of turf from the land, or a stone, twig, or some such symbol.

643 This Checkley (1609–1685) was not the father nor any relation to the Anglican controversialist of the same name—see New England Historical and Genealogical Register, n. 350.

644 Copyist’s error for Sedal, i. e., Schedule; also printed Cedal in this same document. The soft pronunciation of the sch in Schedule still prevails in England.

645 Pages 29 and 30 are wanting.

646 The list of judges is wanting for this session.

647 A corruption of “portage,” which originally meant a seaman’s privilege or space allowed him for goods on his own account. When this mode of recompensing a sailor became obsolete, the word “portage” was used for seamen’s wages. A portage bill means “the register or account of the names and claims for wages, allowances, etc., of the crew of a ship.” A blank “Portage Bill” issued by a Boston stationer about the year 1901 is before me as I write. See New English Dictionary under “Port, sb.¹ 4,” and “Portledge”; the examples there given were furnished by our associate, Albert Matthews.

648 Winscal Point, probably identical with Schoodic Peninsula at the eastward side of Frenchmans Bay, Maine, is shown on the eighteenth-century editions of the English Coast Pilot for that region. See illustrations in our Publications, xxvii. There is a Wonsqueak Harbor on the modem government charts of Schoodic Peninsula.

649 Moosepeak or Moosabec Reach, in eastern Maine.

650 The son of Governor Leverett and father of President Leverett.

651 Beginning at this point the records are in the handwriting of Isaac Addington, Freegrace Bendall having taken his departure for Madeira according to the permission granted by the Court, above, p. 121.

652 “Due for primage 5^s 7^d” in margin.

653 John-a-nokes and John-a-stiles were fictitious names for parties in a legal action.

654 Nominy Creek or River, on the Virginia side of the Potomac. A place at the mouth was made a market town by act of the General Assembly in 1691. Nominy Hall on the Creek was the seat of “King” Carter.

655 Possibly a copyist’s error for “January ye 23th.”

656 The reference is to The Generall Laws and Liberties, 1672, p. 152.

657 See note to Lawton v. Bonner at the special court of August, 1672, above, p. 153.

658 A quotation of the Body of Liberties, incorporated in the Book of the General Laws and Libertyes, 1660 and 1672 editions. It is true that the law of October 8, 1672, changing the rules about strangers’ suits, was not published within a year of its enactment. Colonial Laws of Massachusetts, Reprinted from Edition of 1672, p. 207.

659 The reference is to The Book of the General Lawes and Libertyes, 1660. “For as much as the bounds of townes, and of the lands of particular persons, are carefully to be maintained, & not without great danger to be removed by any, which notwithstanding by deficiency & decay of marks, may at unawares be done, wherby great jealousies of persons, trouble in townes, & incumbrances in Courts doe often arise, which by ane care & meanes might be prevented. It is therefore Ordered by this Court & Authority thereof; That every towne shall sett out their bounds, within twelve months after their bounds are graunted. And that when their bounds are once sett out; once in three yeares three or more persons of a towne, appointed by the Select men, shall appoint with the adjacent townes, to goe the bounds, betwixt their said townes, & renew their marks; which marks shall be a great heape of stone, or a trench of six foot long & two-foot broad, the most ancient towne to give notice, of the time & place of meeting for this perambulation; Which time shall be in the first or second month, upon paine of five pound for every towne that shall neglect the same; provided that the three men appointed for perambulation shall goe in their several quarters, by order of the select men, and at the charge of the several townes.”

660 Deputy-Governor Leverett.

661 Deputy-Governor Leverett.

662 Probably a copyist’s error for Angels. “Having treated of Gold at large, I am now obliged to say something concerning the Gold Weights; which are either Pounds, Marks, Ounces, or Angels. In Europe twenty Angels make one Ounce, though here but sixteen go to an Ounce.” William Bosman, A New and Accurate Description of the Coast of Guinea, London, 1721 (2nd ed.), p. 75. We are indebted to Professor Leo Wiener for this reference.

663 “7. And every person or persons whatsoever, that shall revile the Office or person of Magistrates or Ministers, as is usual with the Quakers, such person or persons shall be severely whipt, or pay the sum of five pounds.” The General Laws and Liberties, 1672, p. 61.

664 The case of Hawkins v. Sheafe, which should follow at this point, will be found on p. 1171, below.

665 Probably “actions,” as in the third line below where “accounts” was corrected to the present reading.

666 The term “father-in-law” here means step-father.

667 Perhaps quoted from Coke, who often uses the maxim, e. g., 4 Reports 47a.

668 Then a part of the “Rehoboth North Purchase” which Thomas Willet and associates purchased of Massassoit’s son Alexander in 1661. A traveller in 1704 “Got to y^e House of old Woodcocks, now Inhabited by one Slack, at Attleberry, w^r we stopt y^e Heat of y^e Day.” 1 Proceedings Massachusetts Historical Society xiii. 250. It was half a day’s journey from Billings’s tavern in Dedham.

669 See Hutchinson v. Blake, above, p. 271.

670 Gap in pagination here, although no pages of the manuscript are missing.

671 Cape Newagen, Maine?

672 New Orange (Albany), or New York.

At a County Court held at Boston April ye 30th 1672.

Present

Jurie of Trialls

[Usher v. Naylor]

Atwater agst Naylor

Hastings agst Parks

Lidgett agst Sampson

Atwater agst Whetcomb

Clarke agst Nicholls

Clarke agst Bridgham

Holebrooke agst Lake

Leads agst Richards

Hutchinson agst Bill

Boseworth agst Morse

Savage agst Davison

Hoppine agst Hawkins

Tho: Norman agst Taylor

Woodmancy agst Joy

Newcomb agst Waite

Couch agst Barefoote

Baker agst Morse

Harris agst Edsdall

Paine agst Atkinson

Davis agst Martin

Shrimpton agst Belchoir

Parker agst Turill

[Joy v. Woodmancy]

Michelson agst Browne

Atkinson agst Tod

Atkinson agst Jewett

Clarke, &c: agst Shapleigh

Freake agst Naylor

Edsall agst Travis

Callicott agst Tomlin

Ting agst Davis

Kellond agst Hudson

Richards agst Brackett

Patten agst Patten

Hawkin’s bond for appear & good behavior

Jenkins discharged of Adminstracion

Ordr about Badcocks Estate

Ordr about Pascoa

Badcocks liberty to bring in new Invent

Ordr to Rocke

Ordr to Lattimore

Auditt [Atkinson v. Todd].

Lorines Administt Bond

Patten’s Bond for Administracion

Shrimpton’s Bond to the Keeper

Hull Towne prsent.

Chamberlain’s Present

Whetcomb’s discharg.

Doily & Winter’s disch.

Boston presentd

Coleborn’s dismision

Discharges of Bonds

Culler of Fish

Chicke to Broughton

Whiting’s fine halfe Remitted

Webbs fine halfe Remitted

Hurd’s bond Pardoned

Chandlor Sentanced

James an Indian Sentanced

Gross sentanced

Court Order concern. John Hurd

Warro Sentanced

Knight Sentanced

Carwithee Sentanc’d

Harwood Sentanc’d

Collicott Sentancd

Reade sentanced

Georges licence

Jacobs licence

Daniells licence

Thorne Presented

Edwards Sentanc’d

Bendall Presentd

Parks Presented

Richardson & Reads Peticion

Murphey Presentd

At a County Court held at Boston April y^e 30^th 1672.

Atwater ags^t Naylor

Hastings ags^t Parks

Lidgett ags^t Sampson

Atwater ags^t Whetcomb

Clarke ags^t Nicholls

Clarke ags^t Bridgham

Holebrooke ags^t Lake

Leads ag^st Richards

Hutchinson ags^t Bill

Boseworth ags^t Morse

Savage ags^t Davison

Hoppine ags^t Hawkins

Tho: Norman ags^t Taylor

Woodmancy ags^t Joy

Newcomb ags^t Waite

Couch ags^t Barefoote

Baker ags^t Morse

Harris ags^t Edsdall

Paine ags^t Atkinson

Davis ags^t Martin

Shrimpton ags^t Belchoir

Parker ags^t Turill

Michelson ags^t Browne

Atkinson ags^t Tod

Atkinson ags^t Jewett

Clarke, &c: ags^t Shapleigh

Freake ags^t Naylor

Edsall ags^t Travis

Callicott ags^t Tomlin

Ting ags^t Davis

Kellond ags^t Hudson

Richards ags^t Brackett

Patten ags^t Patten

Hawkin’s bond for appea^r & good behavior

Ord^r about Badcocks Estate

Ord^r about Pascoa

Badcocks liberty to bring in new Inven^t

Ord^r to Rocke

Ord^r to Lattimore

Lorines Administ^t Bond

Hull Towne p^rsent.

Boston present^d

Bendall Present^d

Murphey Present^d

Lidgett &^e Present^d

Gillam Present^d

Boston 9^th 3^mo 1672.

Gilford discharg^d from Service

Pointing ordered to depart y^e Towne

Connell sentanc’d [and] Bond for the Behavio^r

Taylor fined 5^s