Subjects: Canon law

It was unusual, but not unknown, for arguments in a cause at Chester in the middle of the sixteenth century to be based on the authority of lawyers who were trained in Roman or canon law. This may be considered to be one survival of pre-Reformation practice.

Lanfranco de Oriano

EDC 5/1566/9  – Ellen [Helen] Smith contra Katherine Moseley
EDC 5/1580/3 – John Nutter

Subjects: Occupations and professions

Early cause papers seem less likely to give the occupation of litigants, but later causes indicate that a range of people from all walks of life came before the consistory court.

Alderman

EDC 5/1580/3 – Hugh Rogerson, a witness for the plaintiff, was an alderman of Chester and kept a shop there

Clerk

This was the general term for a member of the clergy at the time.

EDC 5/1575/3 – John Vawdrey and Richard Vawdrey contra Ralph Calveley
EDC 5/1580/3 – John Nutter
EDC 5/1580/11 – Richard Hall, the defendant in this cause, was a Fellow of Manchester College

Joiner

EDC 5/1587/8 – John Ledsam, the younger, was a joiner from Holt

Preacher

Clergy who described themselves as ‘preacher’ were often associated with radical reformist views, and even by the end of the century some clergy did not preach regularly, or at all, but read prescribed homilies.

EDC 5/1580/3 – John Nutter
EDC 5/1591/2 – Andrew Brednam M.A., vicar of St John’s in Chester

Shearman

Shearing was an important part of the finishing process of woollen cloth. The nap of the woven cloth was raised with teasels and then clipped with shears so that the surface was even (Norman Lowe, The Lancashire Textile Industry in the Sixteenth Century, (Chetham Society, Manchester, 1972), pp. 38-39). There was a separate guild of Shearmen in Chester by 1467 (J S Barrow, J D Herson, A H Lawes, P J Riden and M V J Seaborne, ‘Economic infrastructure and institutions: Craft guilds’, in A History of the County of Chester: Volume 5 Part 2, the City of Chester: Culture, Buildings, Institutions, ed. A T Thacker and C P Lewis (London, 2005), pp. 114-124. British History Online http://www.british-history.ac.uk/vch/ches/vol5/pt2/pp114-124 [accessed 26 November 2022]).

EDC 5/1580/5 – Thomas Wilson of the city of Chester was described as a ‘sheareman’.

Shopkeeper

EDC 5/1580/3 – Hugh Rogerson, a witness for the plaintiff, kept a shop in Chester and was an alderman of the city

Swordbearer

EDC 5/1580/5 – James Banester was described as ‘swordbearer’, one of the principal officers of the mayor of Chester

Tanner

There was an important trade in cattle and skins from Ireland through Chester and before the Reformation the Tanners’ company maintained a light in St John’s church. (J S Barrow, J D Herson, A H Lawes, P J Riden and M V J Seaborne, ‘Economic infrastructure and institutions: Craft guilds’, in A History of the County of Chester: Volume 5 Part 2, the City of Chester: Culture, Buildings, Institutions, ed. A T Thacker and C P Lewis (London, 2005), pp. 114-124. British History Online http://www.british-history.ac.uk/vch/ches/vol5/pt2/pp114-124 [accessed 26 November 2022]).

EDC 5/1591/2 – Henry Aneon, senior

Under miller

In EDC 5/1580/10 it was suggested that a water mill was so noisy while it was working that comments by one of the witnesses could not be heard. This mill was used for grinding corn.

EDC 5/1580/10 – Anne Jackson contra Anne Jones, wife of Thomas Jones

Subjects: Illegitimacy

As sexual activity outside marriage was forbidden by the church at this time, matters concerning illegitimate children might be brought before the church courts.

Complaints about child support were, however, increasingly brought before Justices of the Peace although there was no Commission of the Peace in Cheshire until 1536.

Acknowledgement of illegitimate child

The church court could enforce the acknowledgement of paternity of an illegitimate child and sometimes oblige the father to support the child.

EDC 5/9/1 – Francis Buckley contra Elizabeth Traves

Care of illegitimate children

Despite the strictures of the church against illegitimacy, an illegitimate child might be supported by the father without any formal arrangement. In such cases, particularly when the father was a member of the gentry, the care and support of such children might be undertaken by supporters or servants of the family.

EDC 5/3/2 – Sir Richard Brereton contra Thomas Valentine

Subjects: Witnesses

Witnesses were not only summoned to make statements, or depositions, but might be required for other matters such a attestation of virginity in matrimonial causes or as hands where compurgation was ordered.

Age of witnesses

EDC 5/1580/10 – Anne Jackson contra Anne Jones, wife of Thomas Jones. The defendant sought to discredit one of the witnesses on the grounds of age as he was not yet 20 and should not have been admitted as a witness as he was under 25.

Independence

Witnesses were supposed to be disinterested parties and exceptions against witnesses often included a claim that a particular witness was biased in an effort to discredit his or her deposition.

EDC 5/3/2 – Sir Richard Brereton contra Thomas Valentine

Virginity

A claim for a marriage to be annulled might succeed if it could be proved that the marriage had not be consummated as the wife was still a virgin. This would be established by a physical examination, usually carried out by a number of  ‘honest and willing matrons’ as witnesses.

EDC 5/1/1 – Ellen Knottisford contra Ralph Bury

Women as witnesses

Attempts might be made to discredit the evidence of women witnesses because they were said to be unreliable on account of their sex.

EDC 5/1575/2 – Ellen Bamvile contra Rose Smith

Subjects: Women

The Cause Papers illustrate many ways in which the position of women in the sixteenth century differed from today.

Control by family and friends

It was sometimes claimed that a woman was encouraged to leave her husband if the family had a grudge against him and she might then be kept as a prisoner, in effect.

EDC 5/1/5 – Anne Orell contra Piers Orrell

Virginity

A claim for a marriage to be annulled might succeed if it could be proved that the wife was still a virgin. This would be established by a physical examination, usually carried out by a number of  ‘honest and willing matrons’.

EDC 5/1/1 – Ellen Knottisford contra Ralph Bury

Women as litigants

Married women were permitted to sue in the consistory court in their own name, similarly they could be sued. This differed from common law which did not usually recognise married women as litigants in their own right. Unmarried women also embarked upon litigation.

EDC 5/1/1 – Ellen Knottisford contra Ralph Bury
EDC 5/1/2 – Elizabeth Levar contra Adam Levar
EDC 5/1/3 – Margery Thornycrofte contra John Cokkes alias Stokes
EDC 5/1/4 – Joan Dutton alias Sompnor contra Richard Sompnor
EDC 5/1/5 – Anne Orell contra Piers Orrell
EDC 5/1/7 – Agnes Rosbothom contra Robert Haryson
EDC 5/4/1 – Pernell Danyell contra Joan Walton
EDC 5/9/2 – Elizabeth Stapultun contra Thomas Stapultun
EDC 5/17/4 – Isabelle Holden, wife of Ralph Holden, esquire, of Duckworth contra Roger Rishton
EDC 5/1560/2 – Joan Fitton, wife of Robert Fitton, contra Ralph Leche
EDC 5/1566/2 – Elizabeth Wilson contra William Gooddigar
EDC 5/1566/9 – Ellen Smith contra Katherine Moseley, wife of John Moseley
EDC 5/1566/10 – Ellen Smith contra John Moseley, Katherine Moseley, Isabelle Croft and Margery Powell
EDC 5/1575/1 – Jane Shepherd contra Francis Sefton and Margaret Sefton
EDC 5/1575/2 – Ellen Bamvile contra Rose Smith
EDC 5/1575/5 – Margaret Harper contra Margery Radcliffe
EDC 5/1580/1 – Elizabeth Cowley alias Johnson, wife of Richard Cowley alias Johnson, contra Richard Cowley alias Johnson
EDC 5/1580/4 – Elizabeth Meycock contra Thomas Davie
EDC 5/1580/8 – Alice Haselwall, wife of Christopher Haselwall, contra Ellen Barrowe
EDC 5/1580/9 – Jane Agard contra John Legh, esquire, of Ridge and Elizabeth Legh, widow, of Ridge
EDC 5/1580/10 – Anne Jackson contra Anne Jones, wife of Thomas Jones
EDC 5/1580/11 – Jane Chetam, wife of Henry Chetam, contra Richard Hall, clerk
EDC 5/1587/8 – Katherine Clubb contra John Ledsam

Women as witnesses

Attempts might be made to discredit the evidence of women witnesses because they were said to be unreliable on account of their sex.

EDC 5/1575/2 – Ellen Bamvile contra Rose Smith

Subjects: Tithes – modus

Tithes originated as a tax payable in kind of one tenth of all agricultural produce to be handed over annually by parishioners to support their parish church and clergy. Artisans were similarly required to pay one tenth of their income after expenses.

Over time a classification system developed whereby tithes were classified as:
‘predial’ arising from the ground or the fruits of trees or garden produce
‘mixed’ arising not immediately from the ground, but from things immediately nourished by it such as livestock, including calves, lambs, milk, cheese, poultry, honey and wool
‘personal’ arising from the product of labour or industry after deduction of expenses, although day labourers were specifically exempted by a statute of 1548/9

Predial tithes were further divided on the basis of value into great and small (or minute). Great tithes included corn, hay, wood and orchard fruit whereas small tithes comprised flax and other less valuable crops. Mixed tithes were also classified as small tithes.

Many Chester tithe causes refer to ‘greater and lesser, mixed and minute’ tithes. The great tithes were payable to the rector and generally comprised the more valuable crops while the small tithes were usually payable to the vicar and comprised all other produce.

The ownership of tithes could be bought, sold, leased or mortgaged like any other property rights and the occupier after such a transfer was known as the ‘farmer’.

Following the dissolution of monasteries and colleges in the 1540s many rectories, and their associated rights to tithes, passed into lay hands although the vicar usually continued to receive the vicarial tithes. There was an increase in tithe suits in the consistory court after about 1540, many brought by lay rectors or farmers. This may have been in part to confirm their right to receive the tithes in dispute.

In the medieval period money payments began to take over from payments in kind and in some cases fixed quantities of produce were agreed for some tithes such as corn. This fixed sum or quantity was known as a ‘modus’. Additionally, some variable payments known as compositions were agreed.

As inflation began to take hold in the sixteenth century, however, and as lay impropriators sought to increase their return from their ecclesiastical investments, they sometimes sought to overturn the old agreements.

Sources:

Andrew Lewis, ‘Tithe Personal and Praedial’, The Journal of Legal History, vol. 42:2 (2021), pp. 123-146

Thomas Moore (ed), Dictionary of the English Church Ancient and Modern (London, 1870)

J.S. Purvis, Select XVI Century Causes in Tithe,Yorkshire Archaeological Society, Record Series, vol. CXIV (1949), pp. v-viii

Anne Tarver, ‘The Due Tenth: Problems of the Leicestershire Tithing process 1560-1640’, Transactions of the Leicestershire Archaeological and Historical Society, vol. 78 (2004), pp. 97-107

Oats, barley and hay

EDC 5/1566/3 – William Farington, esquire, contra Thomas Ireland, senior (Blackburn).
EDC 5/1566/4 – William Farington, esquire, contra Robert Ratcliffe (Blackburn).

Subjects: Taxation of costs

When a cause reached its conclusion through the court the winning party could claim their costs.

A bill of costs would then be drawn up for review by the court. Some of the costs comprised fixed fees, such as those paid to the court for hearings and decrees. Others were variable, notably the witnesses’ expenses in attending court to give evidence. No doubt then, as now, there was skill involved in drawing up a bill of costs.

The bill would then be referred to the court for ‘taxation’, which was the process whereby the judge decided the amount which he considered reasonable. 

A list of fees recepi et solvi consueta (accustomed to be received and paid) by proctors in the Chester Consistory Court as agreed by the bishop in 1583 is held by Cheshire Archives and Local Studies. The list was signed by four proctors and is thought to date from about 1660-1670. The four signed to confirm that ‘The Fees above written wee take and Claime, And wee nether take, nor Claime any other, or greater fees, sumes of moneys, or gratuities, then is aboue exprested.’ Thus the proctors saw no increase in their fees for the best part of a century.

Source:

CALS DDX 153

Defamation

EDC 5/1575/5 – Margaret Harper contra Margery Radcliffe.

Immorality – acknowledgement of illegitimate child

EDC 5/1580/5 – James Banester contra Ellen Urmeston.
The judgement included a provision that the costs should be taxed with the greatest moderation.

Subjects: Subtraction of church dues and offerings

Subjects: Sequestration of rectory

Subjects: Separation from bed and board

Although there was no procedure whereby a marriage could be ended by divorce, as we know it today, there were some circumstances, most frequently infidelity or cruelty, in which a formal separation could be awarded by the church courts, but the couple were not granted the right to remarry. This was often referred to as a ‘divorce a mensa et thoro’.

Sometimes arrangements were made for the payment of alimony to the wife for the rest of her life.

Sources:

R. H. Helmholz, Marriage Litigation in Medieval England, (London, 1974), pp. 100-107

Ralph Houlbrooke, Church Courts and the People during the English Reformation , (Oxford, 1979), pp. 67-75

Adultery by the husband

EDC 5/1/2 – Elizabeth Levar contra Adam Levar

Adultery by the wife

EDC 5/1580/2 – Thomas Darcie, gentleman, contra Cecily Darcie
EDC 5/1580/3 – Thomas Darcie, gentleman, contra Cecily Darcie

Adultery and cruelty by the husband

EDC 5/1/5 – Anne Orell contra Piers Orrell
EDC 5/1580/1 – Elizabeth Cowley alias Johnson, wife of Richard Cowley alias Johnson, contra Richard Cowley alias Johnson