Return to Files List    



Matthew Phillips and Ursula Langley Phillips brought suit against Anthony Ashley, John Turnor, Jane Langley the younger, and Henry Leake, along with John Hide and John Hancock, Ashley's agents. In his pleading, Matthew Phillips refers explicitly to Hannibal Gammon's earlier suit, recounting that Gammon, John Terry, and Richard Langley had sued Jane Langley the elder, John Turner, and Robert Ashley in an attempt to deploy four leases to property in the Manor of Paris Garden to settle debts owed them by Francis Langley, deceased. On 30 November 1604 the court ordered that the leases be kept by Jane Langley for the duration of her lifetime and that the rest of the late Francis Langley's assets be divided among his creditors. Text has been modernised, but surnames retain their original spelling.
    • The Bill of Complaint of Matthew and Ursula Phillips
    • The Answer of Henry Leake
    • The Answer of John Hide & John Hancock
    • The Answer of John Turnor

The Bill of Complaint of Matthew and Ursula Phillips

xxix die Januarij 1611
Saunders
To the Right Honourable Lord Ellesmere Lord Chancellor of England

[01] Most humbly sheweth unto your honourable good lordship your daily orators Matthew Phillippes of Sherborne in the county of Dorset practitioner and professor of chirurgery and Ursula his wife That whereas Fra[ncis]
[02] Langley & Jane his wife deceased the late father & mother of the said Ursula stood seised by their lifetimes to them two & to the heirs of the said Francis of and in the Manor of Parisgarden in the county of S[urrey]
[03] with divers lands tenements and hereditaments thereunto belonging, And the said Francis at the same time being indebted to divers persons was very desirous (the better to be enabled to pay his creditors) to make sale of [the]
[04] said Manor & premises And to the intent that he the said Francis might the more easily persuade the said Jane to join with him the said Francis in a fine to be levied for the sale thereof did promins and ag[ree to]
[05] & with her the said Jane, that one Mr Brocker (to whom it was then fully concluded & agreed that the same should be sold) should make four leases of parcel of the said Manor [for divers years the]
[06] number of which years is unknown to your said orators) which should be & remain all the term therein contained to the use of the said Jane & her children whereof the said Ursula is one and [***]
[07] making of the said leases, was the eldest daughter of the said Francis & Jane, which sale & agreement was afterwards performed unto the said Mr Brooker accordingly [By the said sale]
[08] divers of the creditors of the said Francis were satisfied & paid their debts out of the money for which the same Manor and premises were so sold. After which conveyance made the foresaid [four leases]
[09] were by the said Mr Broocker according to the former agreement made sealed & delivered as perfect good leases unto one John Turnor in trust to the use and benefit of the said Jane Langley [& her]
[10] said children After which the said Francis about ten years now last past died intestate and the said Jane sued out letters of administration of the goods & chattels of the said Franc[is And divers o***]
[11] creditors of the said Francis which were at his death unsatisfied as namely Hannibal Gamon John Terry & Richard Langley exhibited their Bill of Complaint in this honorable Court against the said [Jane]
[12] as administratrix to the said Francis; And against one Robert Ashely esquire & John Turnor concerning the debts due unto them or some of them by the said Francis the intestate to be [relieved thereby of their]
[13] said debts out of the state of goods & leases late of the said Francis; Amongst which the four leases as aforesaid were then supposed to be parcels: And the said Bill & suit thereupon against the [***]
[14] coming afterwards to hearing in this honorable Court That is to say On the thirtieth day of November in the second year of the reign of our most gracious sovereign lord king James [*** thereof *** the]
[15] counsel learned on both parts and upon understanding of former orders made in the cause; It was ordered and decreed by consent of both parties That the said four leases so formerly [*** unto ***]
[16] Turnor in trust by the said Mr Broocker and by the appointment of the said Francis Langley should by virtue of the said decree remain good & be employed to the only use & benefit of the said [Jane]
[17] Langley and her children. And that all the rest of the late estate of the said Francis either in goods debts leases or otherwise should go to be decided amongst all the creditors of the said Fr[ancis]
[18] & ratably according to the quantity and quality of the same debts & creditors as by the said order & decree among other things more at large it doth & may appear; By virtue of which decree the said John Turnor
[19] & \his/ assigns by all the lifetime of the said Jane did permit the profits of the lands demised by the said four leases to be enjoyed by the said Jane and her children or some of them, being in number [four children]
[20] until the death of the said Jane who about the month of June last past died; And your said orator Matthew Phillippes (having about two years last past taken to wife the said Ursula dwelling
[21] & remaining in Sherborne aforesaid about a hundred miles from the lands in question and altogether ignorant of the said decree and of such right to the said lands demised by the said four leases as
[22] was by the same decree ordered & decreed to the said Ursula jointly with the said Jane & other the children of the said Jane agreeable to the intent & true meaning of the said Francis, and expecting as always
[23] was promised unto him the said Matthew) by the said Jane) an equal part with the residue of the children of the said Jane of & in all the leases goods & chattels of the said Jane after her decease which were due
[24] & payable to the said Ursula) did together with the said Ursula shortly after the death of the said Jane & about the month of July last past repair to the late dwelling house of the said Jane in the Manor
[25] of Parisgarden aforesaid parcel of the lands demised by the said four leases to be informed in what sort the said Jane had disposed of her estate; And upon such their repair thither they found [accidentally ***]
[26] said Jane at her death intended to your orators an equal part of her estate with her other children And on her death bed (as your orators have been of late very credibly informed) used these words [to Jane]
[27] one of her daughters before persons of good credit vizt Jane here is the key (delivering the same) by which you shall come to the four leases of Parisgarden; keep them safe from your uncle Sir Anthony Ashely
[28] that he finger them not and so overthrow your & the rest of my children's state; with admonishments notwithstanding the said Jane the daughter being drawn by the fair promises & shows of great [tr***]
[29] made by the said Sir Anthony Asheley purposely to abuse your orators was at last persuaded to deliver up the said four leases to him without your orator's privity or consent Now so it is may it please
[30] your good lordship that the said Sir Anthony Asheley having so easily obtained the said four leases which the said Jane the mother so carefully intended to preserve for her children: The said Sir Anthony
[31] Asheley the very natural brother to the said Jane the mother and uncle unto your said orator Ursula & the rest of the children seemed very forward in settling an indifferent and [unde* *fo*se mo**]
[32] them the said children and in show much inclined to benefit them to the uttermost, that the state of the said Jane would permit; But the said Sir Anthony Asheley minding nothing less [**he end**]
[33] hath proved having also gotten the interest of the said four leases & lands therein demised sithence the death of the said Jane by like undue means from the said John Turnor to be ass[*** unto ***]
[34] himself John Hide & John Hancock servants xxxxxxx unto the said Sir Anthony Asheley whom he knew he might well command not giving for the same above twenty nobles unto [***]
[35] said John Turnor the said John Turnor well knowing that he had nothing but in trust in any of the said leases; but the said Sir Anthony Asheley having an intent to gain the said [***]
[36] his own use concealed from your orators and every of them their interest to the said lands mentioned by force of the said decree whereof your orators were a long time utterly ignorant of [***]
[37] said Sir Anthony Asheley now having by these undue courses gotten the interest of the said leases assigned unto him the said Jane the mother being dead and utterly contrary to the det[** of ***]
[38] honorable Court to defeat your orator and the said wife of their interest in the said leases determined in show to sell the same unto one Henry Leake \gent/ for the sum of four hundred pounds which by the [***]
[39] of the said Jane the mother he never offered to attempt nor would she have consented thereunto though the said Leake had offered to her by her life time four hundred & four score pounds for the s[*** ***]
[40] notwithstanding the said Sir Anthony Asheley being resolute in his course of sald of the said leases (into the interest whereof he thrust himself without trust reposed in him by the said Jane the [***]
[41] & outward appearance upon the sale thereof, he pretended to divide the said four hundred pounds among the said children) did sell the same accordingly \without any provision for the tenants that [have *** sale]/ and after such sale [to the said ***]
[42] receipt of the said four hundred pounds he did then most unconscionably convert in a manner all the said four hundred pounds to his own use under pretense of diverse sums of money [d*** ***]
[43] the said Jane the mother amounting to a great value; For which he hath not the hand & seal of the said Jane the mother or other note under her hand or any other [thing whereof y***]
[44] executors or administrators with the same, such also as if they were disbursed, he hath been thereof by her lifetime truly repaid by her, or else are such debts as the said Sir Anthony [*** hath h***]
[45] paid or made show to have paid sithence his death which are not to be laid on the four leases by any reason or conscience as among the rest fifty two pounds to one Hicks and four score [T***]
[46] eight shillings \to one Pryse/ to the prejudice of the poor children aforesaid And the said Sir Anthony Asheley aiming chiefly to abuse your said orators dwelling farthest from him and so by [***]
[47] farther from his care to respect them (as by late his decision of some things of good value in his possession amongst the said children was lately manifested from whom the said [***]
[48] well understood he could never have drawn consent to depart with their interest to the said four leases, had they known that the same had been in any sort theirs or decreed unto them [***]
[49] decree, your said orator Matthew Phillippes much respecting such a certainty of maintenance for his said wife out of her own estate, as the said four leases will afford being [above ***]
[50] for many years yet to come for the part of your said orator Ursula therein And the more the said Matthew Phillippes respecteth the same leases for that he the said Matthew [s***]
[51] any so good advancement to leave her his said wife, after his death his chiefest maintenance being his practice in chirurgery And the said Sir Anthony Asheley well knowing th[***]
[52] said orator Matthew Phillippes to leave such certainty of maintenance unto his said wife if by any means he could attain unto the same did therefore most uncharitably [and ***]
[53] might to conceal your orators' interest ordered & decreed to them by the said decree from the knowledge of your said orators thereby to defeat the said Ursula his niece of her mainten[ance ***]
[54] unto her Though yet the said Henry Leake did urge the said Sir Anthony Asheley that your orators & the other children might join in the grant or assignment of the same [to h***]
[55] said Sir Anthony Asheley answered the said Henry Leake, that your orators & the said children were all poor & needy and must of necessity stand at his the said Sir Anthony Ash[eley ***]
[56] their means of maintenance affirming further that he would deal with them at his pleasure and would assure him the said Henry Leake of the said four leases & lands therein mentioned [***]
[57] And the said Sir Anthony Asheley the better to effect his most ungodly & uncharitable purpose utterly to bereave his said niece & other the children of their means of maintenance and [***]
[58] said interest of your orators decreed in the said decree & order did repair to the said lands about the month of November last past, where he did well know he should find [***]
[59] dwelling there in whose presence he resolved to seal the assignment of the said four leases & lands or some other writings concerning the same without reading of any part thereof [***]
[60] with great protestations that what he did in the sale of the said four leases or caused to be [perished]em was wholly for the equal benefit of the said children And by such [***]
[61] godless protestations & subtle persuasions therein drew your orators to subscribe witnesses to th[ perished ]ynement to such hateful means to gain a show of consent of [y***]
[62] to the said assignment of the said four leases & lands therein demised or other writings concerning [ perished ] which your orators did not then know were decreed unto them [bu***]
[63] said Sir Anthony Ashely could lawfully of himself assign the same without your orators nor [ perished ]your orators then suspect the uncharitable & m[ali]cious intent of the said Sir [?Anthony Ashley ***]
[64] your orators by himself & others again & again to be witnesses to the said assignment thereby to obtain their testimonies to the said assignment and so [conclude]
[65] the sale of their interest to the said four leases & lands therein demised which they then knew not were theirs as the said Sir Anthony Asheley doth now sithence most unconscionably [p***]
[66] tender consideration whereof and for that your orators & some other of the children of the said Jane the mother sithence her death have been [***] and in the possess[ion of the ***]
[67] in the said four leases by virtue of the said decree and are threatened by the said Henry Leake with suits at the common law for the recovery of the lands demised [***]
[68] extremity of law which yet the said Henry Leake did know before his bargaining for the said lands were decreed unto your orators Ursula & the other children [** be** d**]
[69] law your said orators by the strict course of the law can make no defense nor be relieved in their just title to the same lands & four leases, but by course of equity [***]
[70] the said Sir Anthony Ashely hath given out that he will draw your orators out of the possession of the same and hath of late caused [***] of his [des**r* ?servants] to bre[***]
[71] your said orators in the chief house of the premises in the absence of the said Matthew Phillippes much affrighting thereby your said orator Ursula being with child and [keeping yo** ***]
[72] lodging do themselves remain there and lie in your said orators' bed And by force keeps the gates of the said \cho**s/ house and will not permit your orator Matthew [Phillippes to have access ***]
[73] Ursula his wife And for that also the said John Hyde & John Hancock have been persons sometime standing at the devotion of the said Sir Anthony Asheley therein to [**sons of them the said ***]
[74] Turnor did convey or assign the same four leases contrary to the trust mentioned in the said decree howsoever the said Sir Anthony Asheley under pretence of [***]
[75] given unto the said John Turnor will draw the whole benefit of four hundred pounds (if he sold not the same for much more) to himself without remorse of consc[ience ***]
[76] all at \his/ [***] \the/ miserable estate of his said sister's children by whose means used to the said Francis Langley her husband the said Sir Anthony Ashly hath [received such & s** **y ***]
[77] the same he could not now justly have said he could have had his being) Upon pretence only of the vain & idle disbursements aforesaid alleged to be laid out by the said Sir Anthony for his [***]
[78] the said four leases and the lands therein demised were by the said decree ordered and decreed equally to be divided among the five children of the said Jane the mother it may therefore [***]
[79] good lordship the premises considered to grant his majesty's most gracious writ of injunction to settle the possession of the premises according to the said decree And also his majesty's most gracious writ of
[80] subpoena to be directed unto the said Sir Anthony Asheley John Turnor John Hyde John Hancock Jane Langley the daughter and to Henry Leake and to every of them commanding [them]
[81] thereby at a certain day and under a certain pain therein to be limited personally to appear before your honorable good lordship in the high Court of Chancery Then & there to answer the premises upon their
[82] corporal oaths and to show cause why the said decree should not be performed according to the purport thereof and by what authority or pretence the said Sir Anthony Ashely hath taken upon
[83] him to sell the same \leases and lands/ from your orators without making your orators privy of their interest thereunto And to abide such further order & decree touching the premises [*** honorable good lordship shall]
[84] seem meet & agreeable to good conscience And your orators according to their bounden duty shall pray to God for your honor's long [***]
The Answer of Henry Leake

Jur 10 Febr 1611 Mat C***
Pennyman

The answers of Henry Leake one of the defendants to the Bill of Complaint of Matthew Phillips and Ursula his wife complainants

[1] The said defendant saving to him all advantage of exception to be taken to the said Bill of Complaint for answer to so much thereof as doth concern him saith that here it is (as this defendant hath heard) that
[2] the said Francis Langley and Jane his wife deceased the father and mother of the complainant Ursula were or the said Francis was seised of the Manor of Parisgarden and other the lands ini the Bill mentioned of such estate
[3] as in the Bill is set forth. And that the said Francis and Jane (as this defendant hath also heard) did by fine sell and convey the inheritance thereof to Mr Brooker in the Bill named who (as this defendant hath
[4] credibly heard did make four several leases of some parcels of the said Manor and lands to him sold to one John Turner by the direction and appointment of the said Francis Langley for divers years yet to come
[5] as by the several indentures of the leases thereof all bearing date the twentieth day of January in the four and fortieth year of the \reign of the/ late queen Elizabeth more plainly and at large appeareth. But
[6] what agreement was between the said Francis Langley and Jane in this behalf or whether the same leases were made and sealed in trust to the use of the said Jane and her children this defendant knoweth not but rather
[7] thinketh that the same leases were made to the said Turner in trust to the use of the said Francis and Jane, and that she alone after the decease of the said Francis who died before her had power over the same
[8] both for that the said Jane had a jointure (as this defendant hath been told) of the whole Manor and lands which the said Brooker bought and did at the instance of her said husband depart therewith to the
[9] said Brooker (as this defendant hath heard) and as by the Bill of Complaint is acknowledged And also for that in the lifetime of the said Jane & during her widowhood she continued the quiet possession & was reputed the right owner thereof
[10] and in her right afterwards one [blank] Delahaye who married her & about [blank] years past last past died after whose death she the said Jane being still accounted owner thereof did in her own name alone demise &
[11] let parcel of the lands in the said four leases made unto the said Turnor contained & did likewise of herself as this defendant hath been credibly informed make divers leases of particular parcels of the same without demanding the
[12] consent of any her children therein (as this defendant hath been informed & as by the counterpart of certain indentures between the said Jane & certain others ready to be showed forth to this honorable Court whereunto the said Jane
[13] alone was party of the one part & whereunto for more certainty relation be had more plainly & at large it doth & may appear, And this defendant further saith that she the said Jane being so possessed of the premises as
[14] aforesaid, offered to sell the same to diverse (as this defendant hath heard) & among other to this defendant who thereupon entered into treaty with her to buy the same of her, she taking upon her to have absolute power to dispose
[15] thereof at her pleasure without mentioning her children to be in any sort interessed in the said house & lands or any part thereof or that her said children or any of them needed to join in the sale thereof or that they
[16] should share with her any part of the money which was to come of the sale of the same, But made this defendant acquainted that the estate & interest of the said leases was about October quadragesimo quarto Elizabethe
[17] assigned by the said Turnor unto two others of the defendants Hide & Hancocke who were then the servants of Sir Anthony Ashley knight one other of the defendants in the said Bill named who was brother unto the said
[18] Jane Delahaie in trust to the use by the direction of the said brother she offering & promising that the said Hancock & Hyde should join with her in the conveying thereof to this defendant, if they did proceed in their bargain
[19] whereupon this defendant so far proceeded with the said Jane that he offered unto her four hundred & thirty pounds about a year & more sithence for a good assignment of the several leases & lands thereby mentioned
[20] to be leased unto the said Turnor, so as the said Jane would together with the said assignment deliver the messuages & closes thereby intended to be assigned sufficiently repaired fenced & mounded into the possession of this defendant with covenants
[21] in the deed of assignment for this defendant his quiet enjoying thereof & other covenants in such assignment to be contained, and this defendant was the more willing to have bargained with the said Jane, for the premises, for that he was encouraged and
[22] much persuaded thereunto by some of the children of the said Jane (who by the Bill of Complaint as is pretended) have an interest in the said leases as good as the complainant if the complainant have any (as this defendant hopeth they have not) But
[23] this defendant further showeth that before any bargain concluded between the said Jane & this defendant the said Jane died: shortly after which decease the said Sir Anthony Ashley taking upon him to have the absolute disposition of the said
[24] leases, offered to sell the same unto this defendant, telling him that the said Jane had appointed the same upon her deathbed to be sold by him the said Sir Anthony Ashley & telling this defendant further that if he would buy them of him he
[25] should have them worth his money & so good assurance as he might reasonably require, more than which this defendant did not desire, being willing then to buy the same, for that he wanted a convenient house wherein to settle himself & his
[26] family in or near London as he desired, & this defendant was the more willing to bargain with the said Sir Anthony Ashley for an assignment of the said leases & lands in them contained being persuaded by some of the children of the said Mrs
[27] Delahaie thereunto, upon which persuasions & offers of the said Sir Anthony Ashley this defendant entered into further treaty with him by which it was agreed that for the whole term in the said leases then to come & benefit thereof to be assigned
[28] to this defendant he this defendant should pay unto the said Sir Anthony Ashley four hundred pounds whereupon the said Sir Anthony Ashley delivered unto this defendant a box with deeds & writings therein concerning the premises by the perusing
[29] of which deeds & writings such an assignment was desired by this defendant might be the better drawn, among which writings there was a copy of the order or decree mentioned in the Bill of Complaint as this defendant taketh it which being perused by
[30] this defendant & his counsel & some doubt made thereupon how by reason thereof this defendant might deal safely with the said Sir Anthony Ashley for the lands aforesaid unless the children of the said Mrs Delahaie would join in the sale thereof
[31] with those who had the interest in law therein this defendant thereupon went again unto the said Sir Anthony Ashley & told him how much it concerned him to be secured against the said children, to which the said Sir Anthony replied
[32] that he would save him harmless against the said children & that they were all willing the same should be sold which this defendant the rather believed for that some of them had formerly showed their willingness therein unto the defendant
[33] himself as he hath been told requested the said Hide & Hancock to join in the sale thereof with the said Sir Anthony Ashley whereupon this defendant proceeded to a final conclusion with the said Sir Anthony Ashley & gave him four
[34] hundred pounds for a good assignment of the premises & took an assignment thereof from him & the said Hide & Hancock with covenants for this defendant his quiet enjoying thereof against the said Turnor Hide Hancocke & the children of the said
[35] Mrs Delahaie But this defendant denieth that any of the said children of the said Jane did to this defendant's knowledge take any profit of the said lands leased in the lifetime of the said Jane, & affirmeth that he hath credibly heard
[36] that the said Jane did herself during her widowhood after the decease of her said husband Francis Langley until her marriage with the said [blank] Delahaie take the profits of the premises to her own use and the said [blank] Delahaie
[37] after his marriage with her until his death took them in her right & after the decease of the said Delahaie she again during her life took the profits thereof to her own use for aught this defendant knoweth to the contrary. And whether
[38] the complainants ought to have an equal part of the estate of the said Jane with the residue of her children this defendant knoweth not, yet if it be true as this defendant is informed the complainants have been offered as great a portion
[39] of her estate as any of the rest of her children & refuseth to accept thereof preferring rather to proceed in this suit against this defendant though unconscionable whereby this defendant is induced to conceive that they complain
[40] rather out of a contentious disposition than for any just cause of grief, And whereas it is by the complainants in their Bill suggested that the said Sir Anthony Ashley hath by undue means sithence the death of the said Jane procured the interest of
[41] the said leases to be assigned by the said Turnor unto himself & the other defendants Hide & Hancocke, This defendant doth verily believe such allegations to be most untrue, for that he this defendant in the lifetime of the said Jane when he should have bought
[42] the said leases of the said Jane was by her showed the assignment before mentioned, from the said Turnor made long before the death of the said Jane as aforesaid, unto the said Hide & Hancocke alone & not unto the said Sir Anthony Ashley, but this defendant hath
[43] been informed & believeth that such assignment to them made was by the procurement & direction of the said Sir Anthony Ashley by the consent of the said Jane in trust to the use of the said Jane And also as the said Sir Anthony Ashley hath
[44] told this defendant, for his the said Sir Anthony Ashley's security of certain money which he had disbursed for his said sister in her lifetime, And this defendant is the rather moved to think that the said assignment was made to the said Hide &
[45] Hancocke as well for the benefit of the said Sir Anthony as of the said Jane, for that the said Hide & Hancocke have acknowledged that they were sometimes the servants of the said Sir Anthony Ashley but what interest the said Sir Anthony Ashley
[46] had therein this defendant referreth himself to the Answer of the said Sir Anthony Ashley & of the said Hide & Hancocke for he can say nothing certainly thereof by his own knowledge. And further this defendant saieth that at the time
[47] that he should have bought the remnant of the said several terms in the said four leases made to the said Turnor comprised of the said Jane in her lifetime this defendant never offered her above the sum of four hundred & thirty pounds
[48] \as he now remembreth/ which he did also for the reasons before expressed yet it is true that after the death of the said Jane he paid only four hundred pounds as aforesaid to the said Sir Anthony Ashley for the same. And the occasion thereof was
[49] for that when he dealt with the said Sir Anthony Ashley for the said leases the bargain was worse than when he treated with the said Mrs Delahaie for that not long before her death the orchard was defaced & many of the best trees fruit
[50] trees taken up in an unseasonable time of the year by an undertenant to her whereby this defendant hath been fain to supply the ground anew & to furnish it with above a hundred trees since she bought the same And moreover there was one
[51] year & more of the said term expired then when he made such offer to the said Jane, And this defendant further saith that he was the rather moved to deal & contract for the said messuage & lands after the death of the said Jane, for that
[52] he was given to understand that the said Jane had by so little writing or note made by the direction but little before her death in the nature of a will declared her mind & desire to be that the said four leases & term therein to come
[53] should be sold for payment of her debts, which the said Sir Anthony Ashley did undertake both for sale & payment & with whom this defendant was the more willing also to deal because his said servants were interessed in the estate of the said
[54] leases, as also for that the said Sir Anthony Ashley told this defendant that he the said Sir Anthony was (as this defendant hopeth he is a man of sufficient ability to secure this defendant for the quiet enjoying thereof against the said
[55] Francis Langley & Jane & their children & against the said Turnor Hide & Hancocke & all persons claiming by or under them the said Francis & Jane, Turnor Hide & Hancocke & every of them & so hath by his deed covenanted with this
[56] defendant, which covenant is already broken by the means of the said complainants not suffering this defendant quietly to enjoy the premises as he expected & hoped he should have done, And this defendant further saith that he did desire as he now remembreth
[57] that all the children of the said Francis & Jane might also join in the same assurance which he did not for any good title that they or any of them have to the same for aught this defendant knoweth but for that the said Turnor & the children
[58] of the said Francis & Jane & the said Hide & Hancocke were all the said persons which to the seeming of this defendant could by any likelihood or apparent possibility at any time make any pretense of challenge of title thereunto But this
[59] defendant was answered by the said Sir Anthony Ashley that this land was by the mother's appointment to be sold for the payment of her debts & all the said children were by their mother otherwise provided for with the sum
[60] of four hundred \pounds/ which this defendant hath heard is in the hands of Francis Ashley esquire brother unto the said Sir Anthony Ashley & which she the said Jane had disposed as the said Sir Anthony Ashley said amongst the others
[61] being as he said also to the full value of the land, or to such effect, with which answer this defendant being in some sort satisfied did accept of the said Sir Anthony Ashley's security for his quiet enjoying of the said premises
[62] against the said Turnor, Hide & Hancocke & the said children, And accordingly the assurance being drawn & endorsed the said Sir Anthony Ashley & this defendant did repair to the manor house of Parisgarden being parcel of the premises
[63] assigned to this defendant to sell seal the same deeds, where the effect of the assignment unto this defendant was as this defendant hopeth he shall be able to prove declared in the presence of the now complainant & some other of the children of the said Mrs
[64] Delahaie & afterwards sealed & determined neither the complainants or any other of the children gainsaying the same or seeming to be discontented that the said Sir Anthony Ashley had sold or the said Hide & Hancocke had assigned the same
[65] unto this defendant & to show their contentedness with the sale thereof & consent thereunto as this defendant taketh it, they the said complainants among others subscribed their names as witnesses thereunto & \shortly after at the request of this defendant/ delivered the keys of the house said house
[66] & seemed to yield the possession thereof to this defendant, for upon the delivery of the keys as aforesaid they requested this defendant that they might stay in the said house for four or five days only & that then they would be gone, [***]
[67] subscribing of their names & delivery of the keys as aforesaid they seemed to do most willingly neither could they be ignorant as this defendant verily thinketh that these deeds did purport a sale of the said four leases made formerly
[68] to the said Turnor & afterwards assigned by him to the said Hide & Hancocke & by the said Hide & Hancocke to this defendant for that before the ensealing of the same much conference & speech then was used concerning the same And this
[69] defendant is verily persuaded that the complainants before they did subscribe their names unto the said assignment made unto him did know the said [ hole ]ree in the Chancery on which they now seem to rely for their title & were well contented by
[70] so late perasthance benefit which they might have claimed thereby being either for the most part satisfied formerly by the said [ hole ] or trusting more to the courtesy of the said Sir Anthony Ashley being veale viete h*
[71] said complainant Ursula than to any benefit which they hoped to have by the said order. And this defendant further saith that tru[ hole ] having bought the said leases & premises by the same demised & paid the sum of four hundred
[72] pounds for the same as aforesaid & the complainants afterwards continuing in the said house many days after the time promised by [ hole ] from thence this defendant first gently required them to yield unto him the quiet possession of the same house
[73] which they refusing to do he then then did threaten the complainants & others who were wrongfully and without title kept & detained the possession of the said manor house from him that he would sue them at the common law for the return
[74] of the lands by the said four leases demised as he hopeth he lawfully might & may do And that whatsoever reckoning or account are to be made between the complainants & the other children of the said Francis Langley on the one part &
[75] the said Sir Anthony Ashley on the other part, the leases which the said Hide & Hancocke have assigned unto him this defendant & wherein the complainants by their said Bill pretend they have an interest by the said order or decree in the Chancery
[76] shall not be subject thereunto both for that this defendant hath bought them of those who in law had the sole interest in them & paid more for them than he thinketh any other man would have given & bought them without any fraud
[77] or coven and also for that the said Sir Anthony Ashley is as this defendant taketh it sufficient to answer unto the complainants & the rest of the children of the said Francis Langley the four hundred pounds which this defendant (bona fida) without
[78] any fraud or coven hath paid unto him proportionably according to the right which they or any of them have to the same or any part thereof, without that \that/ any other matter or thing in the said Bill of Complaint contained
[79] **rial* or effectual to be answered unto by this defendant & herein not sufficiently answered unto confessed and avoided traversed or denied is true to the knowledge of this defendant All which matters & things this defendant
[80] *ed* will be ready to swear & prove as this honorable Court shall award and prayeth to be dismissed out of the same with his reasonable costs and charges herein wrongfully sustained
The Answer of John Hide & John Hancock

***tuque nec 10 Febr 1611 Mat C***
Pennyman

The joint and several answers of John Hide and John Hancock to the Bill of Complaint of Matthew Phillips and Ursula his wife complainants

[1] The said defendants saving to themselves all advantage of exception to be taken to the said Bill of Complaint and to the imperfections & uncertainties contained. And by protestation not acknowledging the matter in
[2] the same contained to be true in such manner & form as the same are therein set forth & declared for answer to so much thereof as doth any ways concern these defendants or either of them they say and each of them
[3] for himself sayeth That they think it to be true that the said Francis Langley and Jane his wife the father & mother of the complainant Ursula were in their lifetime seised of and in the Manor of Paris
[4] Garden and the lands & tenements thereunto belonging unto them two and the heirs of the said Francis and that upon the sale thereof by the said Francis and Jane unto the said Mr Brooker in the Bill named
[5] he the said Brooker did by virtue of an agreement in this behalf made between him & the said Francis & Jane as these defendants have heard make & seal four leases of some parcels of the same
[6] unto John Turnor in the Bill named for & during a certain number of years of which many are yet unexpired for & to the use of the said Francis for so many years as he should live, and after to the
[7] use of the said Jane as these defendants believe for & in respect of the estate which she the said Jane formerly had in the said whole Manor & lands by her & the said Francis sold to the said Brooker as aforesaid
[8] By force whereof the said John Turnor was of the same parcels by the said four leases demised accordingly possessed in trust to the uses aforesaid as these defendants do believe and are so induced to think
[9] not only for the reason before expressed but likewise for that she the said Jane did by all her lifetime take and receive the whole profits of the lands by the said four leases demised to her own
[10] use her children taking no part thereof with her but more by her the said Jane & at her charge brought up & maintained as these defendants have heard and do verily believe. And these defendants do also
[11] say that true it is that shortly after the death of the said Francis Langley (the complainant Ursula's father) and many years before the death of her said mother he the said John Turnor
[12] by the procurement and appointment of the said Sir Anthony Ashley and the said Jane did grant & assign over to these defendants the said four leases and all the said Turnor's interest therein These
[13] defendants conceiving themselves to be for such purpose nominated by the said Sir Anthony Ashley and the said Jane his sister to take such estate in trust to the use and benefit of the said Jane
[14] as aforesaid for aught these defendants do know or did at any time heretofore understand. And moreover these defendants say & acknowledge that since the decease of the said Jane they
[15] the said defendants being requested by the said Sir Anthony Ashley to convey over their interest in trust of the said leases to Henry Leake one other of the defendants, and \they/ were the rather
[16] induced thereunto by reason Nicholas Thurston that married one of the daughters of the said Jane did in the behalf of his said wife and the rest of the said children earnestly
[17] request and advise the said defendants to convey the said leases (according to the request and motion of the said Sir Anthony) to the said Henry Leake. And he the said Nicholas
[18] did then further assure the said defendants that his wife with the rest of the said children did give & yield their full consents thereunto. And moreover he then said and affirmed
[19] it was their best & safest course for the present preferment of them all for that they did wholly rely & trust to the favor and countenance of the said Sir Anthony. Neither do
[20] these defendants think or believe that the said Sir Anthony Ashley by procuring of the said leases to be assigned by the said Turnor to these defendants had any intent to gain the
[21] same leases to his own use as by the Bill of Complaint is slanderously supposed. Without that that the interest of the said four leases and lands thereby demised
[22] were assigned to these defendants since the death of the said Jane but many years before as aforesaid, nor by any undue meaans, or contrary to the trust mentioned in any
[23] decree concerning the same to the knowledge of these defendants or either of them as in the Bill of Complaint is mentioned. And without that that these defendants did at any time
[24] stand at the devotion of the said Sir Anthony Ashley concerning the said leases in any other sort than is herein before expressed as in the said Bill of Complaint is
[25] maliciously informed. And without that that any other matter or thing in the said Bill of Complaint contained material or effectual to be answered unto by these
[26] defendants and herein not sufficiently answered unto confessed and avoided traversed or denied is true to the knowledge of these defendants or either of them. And which
[27] matters these defendants are ready to aver and prove unto this honorable Court, humbly praying they may be dismissed out of this Court with their reasonable costs and
[28] charges herein most wrongfully sustained.

Sand hic

Fra Ashley            

The Answer of John Turnor

Jur 12 Febr 1611 Mat sands
Pennyman

The answer of John Turnor one of the defendants to the Bill of Complaint of Matthew Philips and Ursula his wife complainants

[1] The said defendant for answer to so much of the said Bill of Complaint as doth concern him this defendant saith That he doth think it to be true, That the said Francis Langley
[2] and Jane his wife in the Bill named were seised of such an estate of and in the Manor of Paris Garden and the lands thereunto belonging as in the Bill of
[3] Complaint is showed. And that they did afterwards join in sale thereof by fine and other assurance unto the said Mr Brooker in the Bill named who being by
[4] force thereof seised in his demesne as of fee, did in consideration thereof and by virtue of an agreement in this behalf, made by and between the said Mr
[5] Brooker Francis Langley and Jane his wife (as this defendant believeth) make and seal unto this defendant four leases of some parcels of the said
[6] Manor and lands by several deeds for divers years not unexpired which leases were unto this defendant so made and sealed in trust to the use
[7] of the said Francis Langley for so many years of the said term as the said Francis Langley should live, And after his decease in trust
[8] to the use of the said Jane his wife only and not in trust to any other use for aught this defendant knoweth. And further this defendant saith that
[9] shortly after the death of the said Francis Langley he this defendant being desired by the said Jane to assign over his interest in the same four
[10] leases unto other persons in trust in trust to her use, This defendant refused to make any such grant or assignment until he were satisfied of twenty
[11] nobles in money which this defendant then claimed to be due and owing unto him by the said Francis Langley deceased whereof the said Jane not being
[12] at that time furnished as it should seem, did therefore procure her brother Sir Anthony Ashley another defendant to disburse the same for her for this
[13] defendant's satisfaction. And thereupon this defendant, by and with the direction and consent of the said Jane and of the said Sir Anthony Ashley, and for
[14] and in discharge of the trust in him reposed concerning the same leases and lands therein demised did grant and assign over the said four leases
[15] and all this defendant's interest therein to the defendants John Hyde and John Hancock in trust for and to the use and behoof of the said Jane only, and
[16] to none other use and intent to the knowledge of this defendant. Without that, that this defendant did grant and assign over the said leases for or
[17] in consideration of the sum of twenty nobles unto him in such behalf given by the said Sir Anthony Ashley as by the Bill of Complaint is
[18] slanderously alleged. And without that that any other matter or thing in the said Bill of Complaint contained material or effectual
[19] to be answered unto by him this defendant and herein not sufficiently answered unto confessed and avoided traversed or denied is true to the
[20] knowledge of this defendant. And which matters this defendant is and will be ready to aver and prove as this honorable Court shall award and
[21] therefore humbly prayeth to be dismissed out of the same Court with his costs and charges in this behalf most wrongfully sustained.

Fra Ashley