Search All      View Names A-Z      View Locations A-Z

Source

TypePrivate prosecution
Unique Identifying TextTNA CP 40/503 m. 312d
Archive nameThe National Archives (London)
CountyCambridgeshire
Text (English translation)John Esmond of Milton in mercy for numerous defaults etc. The same John was attached to answer to John Sibile in a plea of why he, together with William Smyth of Beach, Richard Reymes, John Hobert, John the son of Thomas Skot, John Peche of Barway, Hugh Prioures, William Prest, John the son of Robert Bunte, John Bas of Aldreth, John Mordon of Milton, Bartholomew Knyth, John the parson's servant of Milton, Thomas Rysyng of Barway, John atte Fen of Barway, Thomas Handeyn of Beach, John the son of Roger Wodecok, John Lane junior, John Fyde, junior, John the son of John Wodecok and John the son of Robert Cros of Waterbeach, with force and arms broke into the close and houses of the same John Sibile at Upware, and seized and carried off his goods and chattels found there, to the value of forty pounds, and inflicted other outrages on him, to the same John Sibile's great harm and against the king's peace. And concerning this the same John Sibile, through John Orewell his attorney, makes complaint that the aforesaid John Estmond, together etc. on the Monday after the feast of St Peter ad vincula in the fifth year of the present lord king's reign, with force and arms, that is, with swords, bows and arrows, broke into the close and houses of the same John Sibile at Upware, and seized and carried off his goods and chattels found there, namely wheat, barley, beans, peas and oats in the grain, cloths, towels, brass and wooden vessels, and various household utensils to a value etc. and other outrages etc. to the great harm etc. and against the peace etc. From which he says that he is harmed and has damages to the value of one hundred pounds. And on this he brings suit etc. And the aforesaid John Estmond appears in person and defends the force and injury, when etc. And with regard to the coming with force and arms etc. he says that he is in no way guilty of this. And with regard to the whole of the remaining trespass, he says that at the time of the insurrection of the lord king's rebels in various parts of England that has lately arisen, namely on the Saturday, Sunday and Monday in the present lord king's fourth year, the same John Estmond came to Upware with the same malefactors under coercion and by the threats of John Hanchach and other rebels in the county of Cambridge, at the aforesaid time, namely on the aforesaid Monday following the feast of Corpus Christi in the fourth year of the present lord king's reign, without doing any damage there and without him doing any evil there or coming to do any evil there. And this he is prepared to prove and to excuse himself by four men of the aforesaid county, according to the form of the statute provided for such a case, and without him in the fifth year of the present lord king, or at any other time except the time alleged by the same John Esmond, breaking into the close of the aforesaid John Sibile, or carrying off any of his goods or chattels. And this he is prepared to prove. Whereupon he requests judgment etc. And the aforesaid John Sibile says that the aforesaid John Estmond, together etc. at the time contained in his account, broke into the same John Sibile's close with force and arms, and seized and carried off his aforesaid goods and chattels, against the king's peace, as he makes complaint above. And he requests that this might be enquired into by the country. And the aforesaid John Estmond likewise. Therefore the sheriff is ordered to have appear here at the octave of St Hilary twelve etc. by whom etc. and who do not etc. to investigate etc. Because as much etc. Afterwards process continued on this between the aforesaid parties by juries adjourned on this between them here until on this day, namely at the octave of Michaelmas in the thirteenth year of the present lord king's reign, unless John Cassy, the chief baron of the lord king's exchequer, by the form of the statute etc. on the Thursday following the feast of St Margaret the virgin last, previously appeared at Cambridge . . . And now the aforesaid parties appear here on this day in person. And the aforesaid John Cassy before whom etc. sent his record here in these words etc. Afterwards, on the day and in the place contained below, before John Cassy the chief baron of the lord [king's] exchequer, associating to himself William Gascoigne according to the form of the statute etc., the parties named below appear in person. And when the jury had been summoned and had appeared, the aforesaid John Estmond challenges the drawing-up of the aforesaid panel, because he says that that panel was drawn up by Henry Englissh, lately sheriff of the aforesaid county, and his ministers, at the denomination of the aforesaid John Sibile and in a suspicious manner in favour of the same John Sibile; and by assessment of the aforesaid panel this challenge is found to be true. Therefore etc. Therefore it is decided that the aforesaid panel should be removed and annulled etc. And the sheriff is ordered again to have appear here twelve etc. of the aforesaid neighbourhood on the morrow of St Martin, by whom etc. and who do not etc. to investigate etc. because as much etc.
Image of Source

People

IDFirst nameLast nameGenderOccupationDomicileRole in sourceIncidentsGo to participant page
25469JohnBasMaleAldreth,Cambridgeshire4349Go to participant page
25467JohnBunteMale4349Go to participant page
25468RobertBunteMale4349Go to participant page
25486JohnCassyMale4349Go to participant page
25482JohnCrosMaleWaterbeach,Cambridgeshire4349Go to participant page
25483RobertCrosMaleWaterbeach,Cambridgeshire4349Go to participant page
25488HenryEnglisshMaleSheriff4349Go to participant page
25458JohnEsmondMaleMilton,Northstow Hundred,Cambridgeshire4349Go to participant page
25474Johnatte FenMaleBarway,Cambridgeshire4349Go to participant page
25479JohnFydeMale4349Go to participant page
25487WilliamGascoigneMale4349Go to participant page
25485JohnHanchachMale4349Go to participant page
25475ThomasHandeynMaleLandbeach,Cambridgeshire4349Go to participant page
25461JohnHobertMale4349Go to participant page
25471BartholomewKnythMale4349Go to participant page
25478JohnLaneMale4349Go to participant page
25470JohnMordonMaleMilton,Northstow Hundred,Cambridgeshire4349Go to participant page
25484JohnOrewellMaleAttorney4349Go to participant page
25464JohnPecheMaleBarway,Cambridgeshire4349Go to participant page
25466WilliamPrestMale4349Go to participant page
25465HughPriouresMale4349Go to participant page
25460RichardReymesMale4349Go to participant page
25473ThomasRysyngMaleBarway,Cambridgeshire4349Go to participant page
25457JohnSibileMaleUpware,Cambridgeshire4349Go to participant page
25462JohnSkotMale4349Go to participant page
25463ThomasSkotMale4349Go to participant page
25459WilliamSmythMaleLandbeach,Cambridgeshire4349Go to participant page
25476JohnWodecokMale4349Go to participant page
25480JohnWodecokMale4349Go to participant page
25481JohnWodecokMale4349Go to participant page
25477RogerWodecokMale4349Go to participant page
25472JohnMaleServantMilton,Northstow Hundred,Cambridgeshire4349Go to participant page

Incidents

IDSummaryDescriptionTypeGo to incidents page
4349John Sibile v. John EsmondJohn Esmond attached to answer John Sibile on a plea that he together with others on 5 August 1381 with force and arms broke his close and houses at Upware and seized goods and chattels worth £40. John Esmond appears and pleads not guilty to the plea of force and arms; with regards to the remaining trespass, he says that he came to Upware on Monday 17 June 1381 at the time of the insurrection under the coercion of John Hanchach, without doing any damage or breaking into the property of John Sibile. The parties appear in the octave of Michaelmas 13 Ric II and John Esmond claims that the jury panel selection has been influenced by John Sibile; this is found to be true and the panel annulled.Larceny: theft of goods,Raising the commons: forcing others to join company,Abuse of legal procedure: false accusation,Trespass to land: forcible entry of close and houses,Trespass to chattels: removal of goodsGo to incidents page

Incidents and People

PersonIncidentRoleComments
John Bas ( 25469 )John Sibile v. John Esmond (4349)Accused
John Bunte ( 25467 )John Sibile v. John Esmond (4349)Accused
Robert Bunte ( 25468 )John Sibile v. John Esmond (4349)Mentioned
John Cassy ( 25486 )John Sibile v. John Esmond (4349)Mentioned
John Cros ( 25482 )John Sibile v. John Esmond (4349)Accused
Robert Cros ( 25483 )John Sibile v. John Esmond (4349)Mentioned
Henry Englissh ( 25488 )John Sibile v. John Esmond (4349)Sheriff
John Esmond ( 25458 )John Sibile v. John Esmond (4349)Accused
John atte Fen ( 25474 )John Sibile v. John Esmond (4349)Accused
John Fyde ( 25479 )John Sibile v. John Esmond (4349)Accused
William Gascoigne ( 25487 )John Sibile v. John Esmond (4349)Mentioned
John Hanchach ( 25485 )John Sibile v. John Esmond (4349)Mentioned
Thomas Handeyn ( 25475 )John Sibile v. John Esmond (4349)Accused
John Hobert ( 25461 )John Sibile v. John Esmond (4349)Accused
Bartholomew Knyth ( 25471 )John Sibile v. John Esmond (4349)Accused
John Lane ( 25478 )John Sibile v. John Esmond (4349)Accused
John Mordon ( 25470 )John Sibile v. John Esmond (4349)Accused
John Orewell ( 25484 )John Sibile v. John Esmond (4349)Accused
John Peche ( 25464 )John Sibile v. John Esmond (4349)Accused
William Prest ( 25466 )John Sibile v. John Esmond (4349)Accused
Hugh Prioures ( 25465 )John Sibile v. John Esmond (4349)Accused
Richard Reymes ( 25460 )John Sibile v. John Esmond (4349)Accused
Thomas Rysyng ( 25473 )John Sibile v. John Esmond (4349)Accused
John Sibile ( 25457 )John Sibile v. John Esmond (4349)Victim
John Skot ( 25462 )John Sibile v. John Esmond (4349)Accused
Thomas Skot ( 25463 )John Sibile v. John Esmond (4349)Mentioned
William Smyth ( 25459 )John Sibile v. John Esmond (4349)Accused
John Wodecok ( 25476 )John Sibile v. John Esmond (4349)Accused
John Wodecok ( 25480 )John Sibile v. John Esmond (4349)Accused
John Wodecok ( 25481 )John Sibile v. John Esmond (4349)Mentioned
Roger Wodecok ( 25477 )John Sibile v. John Esmond (4349)Mentioned
John ( 25472 )John Sibile v. John Esmond (4349)Accused