Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Costs in Chancery cases
89 views
Skip to first unread message
Richard Smith
Jun 23, 2017, 11:11:19 AM6/23/17
to
I've recently been researching a 1675 Chancery case in which a local
church sued a man named Thomas Buck who had failed to pay the church
40/- which under the terms of a charity set up in 1584, the owner of a
particular property was obliged to do. Buck lost the case and was
ordered to pay the arrears back to 1670 when he inherited the property.
The church duly received £12 arrears and £2 p.a. thereafter.
The church records include an itemised attorney's bill for work on the
case over a five year period (1671-75) totalling £47 10s 7d. That's
nearly 24 years' income from the charity. The Chancery decree makes no
mention of costs. Does this mean each party paid their own costs? Even
though the case seems to me pretty clear-cut, I find it hard to believe
they'd risk paying so much for such a small income.
In modern English law, as I understand it, costs have to be mentioned
explicitly in the judgement for them to be awarded, even though it is
the expectation that costs would normally be awarded against the losing
party. Was the same true in the 17th century? Or was there then a
presumption that the loser would pay costs if nothing to the contrary
was ordered?
Richard
Vance Mead
Jun 23, 2017, 1:04:43 PM6/23/17
to
A bit earlier and more Common Law than Chancery. From Sir John Baker's Oxford History of the Laws of England, (which dealt with 1483-1558):
The costs were regarded as part of the damages, and the plaintiff could ask for the damages and costs to be awarded jointly if he so wished. However, in practice, nearly all verdicts dealt with the costs separately.
The costs were regarded as part of the damages, and the plaintiff could ask for the damages and costs to be awarded jointly if he so wished. However, in practice, nearly all verdicts dealt with the costs separately.
Richard Smith
Jun 23, 2017, 7:34:26 PM6/23/17
to
what it means. In particular, what does "part of the damages" mean?
That they were implicitly included if not explicitly stated. Also, what
does "awarded jointly" mean in this context? That the cost are split
equally between the plaintiff and defendant? Finally, what about
"separately"? That it would be in a separate judgement document? Or
that they should be explicitly mentioned separately to other damages in
the judgement?
Richard
Robert O'Connor
Jun 23, 2017, 9:39:24 PM6/23/17
to
Could you please identify which Thomas Buck this is and the parish that he was bing sued by?
In particular, I am wondering if this Thomas Buck was of the Westwick, Cambridgeshire Bucks, from whom my wife descends?
Could you also post the UK National Archives reference for the Chancery decree?
Regards
Robert O'Conno
Vance Mead
Jun 24, 2017, 12:08:30 AM6/24/17
to
Richard
In Common Pleas, the jury would reach a verdict about awarding damages to the winning plaintiff. Most of the time they would make a separate determination about the court costs to be awarded.
Jurors at that time were not passive listeners but were expected to be active investigators. Today a juror will be dismissed if he or she has independent knowledge of the case. At that time - 16th century and earlier - they were encouraged to find out as much as they could. As late as the 17th century jurors could shout out questions to witnesses.
This is Common Pleas, so the procedure inn Chancery would be different. In the absence of a jury it was the Lord Chancellor and his assistants, the Masters in Chancery, who would determine damages.
Vance
In Common Pleas, the jury would reach a verdict about awarding damages to the winning plaintiff. Most of the time they would make a separate determination about the court costs to be awarded.
Jurors at that time were not passive listeners but were expected to be active investigators. Today a juror will be dismissed if he or she has independent knowledge of the case. At that time - 16th century and earlier - they were encouraged to find out as much as they could. As late as the 17th century jurors could shout out questions to witnesses.
This is Common Pleas, so the procedure inn Chancery would be different. In the absence of a jury it was the Lord Chancellor and his assistants, the Masters in Chancery, who would determine damages.
Vance
Robert O'Connor
Jun 24, 2017, 12:49:27 AM6/24/17
to
Hi Richard
Further to my earlier post above, I have located the Chancery decree to which you referred and note that the UK National Archives reference for it is C78/853/7.
I also see that the Thomas Buck involved in this litigation was indeed my wife's ancestor Thomas Buck of Westwick, Cambs (1628-1702).
For your information, the biographical information that I have on this Thomas Buck is as follows:
THOMAS BUCKE, J.P., M.A., of Westwick, in the Parish of Oakington, Co. Cambs., Bapt. 6 July 1628 at St. Benedict’s Church, Cambridge – recorded in the baptismal register as “Thomas, son of Mr John Buck [sic]”. Recorded as “Thomas Buck [sic] 1st son of John Buck [sic] (1615)” he matriculated as a pensioner at St. Catherine’s College, Cambridge University, Easter 1645. M 1st c. 1646 Rebecca (Bur. 16 June 1682 at Oakington – recorded in the burial register as “Rebecca the wife of Tho [sic] Buck [sic] Esquire”), d. of Thomas Lovering, M.A., Headmaster of Norwich Grammar School, Norfolk & his 1st wife Blanche (See LOVERING). Graduated B.A., 1648/9 & M.A., 1652. At the baptism of his daughter Elizabeth he & his wife were recorded in the St. Edward’s Church, Cambridge baptismal register as “Mr Thomas Bucke the younger & Rebecca his wife”, 24 Nov. 1650. At the baptism of his son Thomas he & his wife were recorded in the St. Edward’s Church, Cambridge baptismal register as “Thomas Bucke & Rebecca”, 21 Jan. 1651/2. At the baptism of his son John he & his wife were recorded in the Oakington baptismal register as “Master Thomas Buck [sic] & his wife Rebecka [sic]”, 26 July 1653. At the baptism of his son Samuel he was recorded in the Oakington baptismal register as “Samuel son of Mr Thomas Bucke”, 2 June 1660. Mentioned in the will of his paternal uncle Thomas Bucke as “my nephew Thomas Buck [sic] of Westwick” under which he was named as executor & received a bequest of the residue of his uncle’s estate, 21 Sept. 1667. At the baptism of his son Hatton he & his wife were recorded in the Oakington baptismal register as “Tho[mas] Buck Esquire & his wife Rebecca”, 5 Nov. 1672. J.P. for Co. Cambs. Recorded as “Thomas Buck [sic] of Westwick, Cambridgeshire, Esq.” he was recorded as party to a deed concerning lands at Ugley, 23 Sept. 1679. In J.E Foster’s ‘The Diary of Samuel Newton, Alderman of Cambridge 1662-1717’ it was recorded that his father “Mr John Buck [sic] Esquire Beadle” died “at his son Thomas Buck’s [sic] house at Westwick”, 23 Oct. 1680. At the burial of his 1st wife Rebecca he was recorded in the Oakington burial register as “Tho [sic] Buck [sic] Esquire”, 16 June 1682. M 2nd after 16 June 1682 Mary (She M 1st Rev. Ralph Davenant, Rector of Saint Mary, Whitechapel, London - whose Will Proved at P.C.C., 26 Feb. 1681. She was mentioned in her 2nd husband’s will as “my beloved wife”, 29 May 1695. Her Will dated 1 Dec. 1709 – in which she was described as “Mary Buck [sic] late of Westwick in the County of Cambridge widow & relict of Thomas Buck [sic] late of Westwick aforesaid Esquire deceased”. Her Will Proved at P.C.C., 18 March 1709/10), d. of Rev. Dr. John Johnson, D.D., of Whitechapel, London. He was recorded as “aged 56”, 1684. In Blome’s ‘Britannia: A Geographical Description of the Kingdoms of England, Scotland, & Ireland with the Isles & Territories thereto belonging’ he was listed amongst the “Nobility & Gentry, which are, or lately were, related unto the County of Cambridge” as “Thomas Bucke of Westwick, Esq.”, 1687. Mentioned as “my honoured father Thomas Buck [sic] Esquire” he was appointed supervisor of the will of his son Thomas, 20 Aug. 1687. Will dated 29 May 1695 - in which he was described as “Thomas Buck [sic] of Westwick in the County of Cambridge Esquire” & mentioned “my lands tenements or hereditaments whatsoever wherein I have any estate of freehold or inheritance in Grosden Lidgate & Aleham in the County of Suffolk & in Cambridge in the County of Cambridge”. Died 1702. Will Proved at P.C.C., 1 July 1702.
I would be very interested in learning more about what you have discovered about this litigation and would be grateful if you would contact me offline.
Best wishes
Robert O'Connor
Further to my earlier post above, I have located the Chancery decree to which you referred and note that the UK National Archives reference for it is C78/853/7.
I also see that the Thomas Buck involved in this litigation was indeed my wife's ancestor Thomas Buck of Westwick, Cambs (1628-1702).
For your information, the biographical information that I have on this Thomas Buck is as follows:
THOMAS BUCKE, J.P., M.A., of Westwick, in the Parish of Oakington, Co. Cambs., Bapt. 6 July 1628 at St. Benedict’s Church, Cambridge – recorded in the baptismal register as “Thomas, son of Mr John Buck [sic]”. Recorded as “Thomas Buck [sic] 1st son of John Buck [sic] (1615)” he matriculated as a pensioner at St. Catherine’s College, Cambridge University, Easter 1645. M 1st c. 1646 Rebecca (Bur. 16 June 1682 at Oakington – recorded in the burial register as “Rebecca the wife of Tho [sic] Buck [sic] Esquire”), d. of Thomas Lovering, M.A., Headmaster of Norwich Grammar School, Norfolk & his 1st wife Blanche (See LOVERING). Graduated B.A., 1648/9 & M.A., 1652. At the baptism of his daughter Elizabeth he & his wife were recorded in the St. Edward’s Church, Cambridge baptismal register as “Mr Thomas Bucke the younger & Rebecca his wife”, 24 Nov. 1650. At the baptism of his son Thomas he & his wife were recorded in the St. Edward’s Church, Cambridge baptismal register as “Thomas Bucke & Rebecca”, 21 Jan. 1651/2. At the baptism of his son John he & his wife were recorded in the Oakington baptismal register as “Master Thomas Buck [sic] & his wife Rebecka [sic]”, 26 July 1653. At the baptism of his son Samuel he was recorded in the Oakington baptismal register as “Samuel son of Mr Thomas Bucke”, 2 June 1660. Mentioned in the will of his paternal uncle Thomas Bucke as “my nephew Thomas Buck [sic] of Westwick” under which he was named as executor & received a bequest of the residue of his uncle’s estate, 21 Sept. 1667. At the baptism of his son Hatton he & his wife were recorded in the Oakington baptismal register as “Tho[mas] Buck Esquire & his wife Rebecca”, 5 Nov. 1672. J.P. for Co. Cambs. Recorded as “Thomas Buck [sic] of Westwick, Cambridgeshire, Esq.” he was recorded as party to a deed concerning lands at Ugley, 23 Sept. 1679. In J.E Foster’s ‘The Diary of Samuel Newton, Alderman of Cambridge 1662-1717’ it was recorded that his father “Mr John Buck [sic] Esquire Beadle” died “at his son Thomas Buck’s [sic] house at Westwick”, 23 Oct. 1680. At the burial of his 1st wife Rebecca he was recorded in the Oakington burial register as “Tho [sic] Buck [sic] Esquire”, 16 June 1682. M 2nd after 16 June 1682 Mary (She M 1st Rev. Ralph Davenant, Rector of Saint Mary, Whitechapel, London - whose Will Proved at P.C.C., 26 Feb. 1681. She was mentioned in her 2nd husband’s will as “my beloved wife”, 29 May 1695. Her Will dated 1 Dec. 1709 – in which she was described as “Mary Buck [sic] late of Westwick in the County of Cambridge widow & relict of Thomas Buck [sic] late of Westwick aforesaid Esquire deceased”. Her Will Proved at P.C.C., 18 March 1709/10), d. of Rev. Dr. John Johnson, D.D., of Whitechapel, London. He was recorded as “aged 56”, 1684. In Blome’s ‘Britannia: A Geographical Description of the Kingdoms of England, Scotland, & Ireland with the Isles & Territories thereto belonging’ he was listed amongst the “Nobility & Gentry, which are, or lately were, related unto the County of Cambridge” as “Thomas Bucke of Westwick, Esq.”, 1687. Mentioned as “my honoured father Thomas Buck [sic] Esquire” he was appointed supervisor of the will of his son Thomas, 20 Aug. 1687. Will dated 29 May 1695 - in which he was described as “Thomas Buck [sic] of Westwick in the County of Cambridge Esquire” & mentioned “my lands tenements or hereditaments whatsoever wherein I have any estate of freehold or inheritance in Grosden Lidgate & Aleham in the County of Suffolk & in Cambridge in the County of Cambridge”. Died 1702. Will Proved at P.C.C., 1 July 1702.
I would be very interested in learning more about what you have discovered about this litigation and would be grateful if you would contact me offline.
Best wishes
Robert O'Connor
Richard Smith
Jun 24, 2017, 9:23:55 AM6/24/17
to
On 24/06/17 02:39, Robert O'Connor wrote:
> Could you please identify which Thomas Buck this is and the parish
> that he was bing sued by?
>
> In particular, I am wondering if this Thomas Buck was of the
> Westwick, Cambridgeshire Bucks, from whom my wife descends?
Yes, it is a Thomas Buck of Westwick, Cambs. The parish in question is
> Could you please identify which Thomas Buck this is and the parish
> that he was bing sued by?
>
> In particular, I am wondering if this Thomas Buck was of the
> Westwick, Cambridgeshire Bucks, from whom my wife descends?
Great St Mary's, Cambridge.
> Could you also post the UK National Archives reference for the Chancery decree?
in your other post you've shown it does). The copy I found is the in
the Cambridgeshire Archives, ref P30/6/5. I'm afraid I didn't take a
photo of it as the battery in my camera had run out by that point, and I
doubt my notes will be very useful to you as my interest was in the
property under dispute rather than the Buck family.
The property in question was a messuage on the site of the old Austin
Friary in Cambridge (which occupied almost precisely the area that is
now the New Museums Site of the University). Thomas Buck of Westwick
had inherited it in 1670 from his uncle, Thomas Buck, Esquire Bedell to
the University. The uncle's will is PROB 11/332/583.
Richard
0 new messages