petition to the Court of Chancery in 1698

Dave Campbell

New Member
This is a small part of a petition to the Court of Chancery in 1698.

Plaintiffs:Barbara Fairemaner, widow, John Fairemaner, Nicholas Fairemaner, Edmund Fairemaner, Mary Fairemaner and Anne Fairemaner,

Defendants: Richard Brereton, Mary Brereton his wife, Thomas Brereton, Ogle Riggs, John Neale, Edmund Fairemaner and Joan Fairemaner his wife.

Subject:property in East Marden and Stoughton, Sussex

I have got through three A3 sized English pages but am struggling with this, my 'O' Level from 55 years ago is wearing out.
I believe it starts with the regnal year followed by some, at least, of the names above.
The two files overlap quite a lot.
If someone can get me started with a line or two, I can probably carry on myself.
 

Attachments

cinefactus

Censor
Staff member
It is a bit difficult to read, but I am going to guess
Gulielmus tertius dei gratia Anglie Scottie Francie & Hibernie Rex Fidei Defensor &c Dilectis sibi Iacobo...
 

cinefactus

Censor
Staff member
The year is at the end
apud ? quarto die Februarii Anno ? iiji decimo
 

Dave Campbell

New Member
Blimey, I would never have got that first line?

The English pages include the dates William III, 23 Feb and 30 Feb.
Is iiji a recognised number? - I thought the j always terminated the string.
I assume that the last line should translate to 13th year of William III, but the iij1 is confusing - is it 3 or 4, or something else entirely?
 

Westcott

Civis Illustris
This is a writ of dedimus potestatem. It gives power to James Vavasor, Nicholas Covert, Edward Smith, Thomas Peche, John Taylure, Thomas Alcock, John Wakeford and John Sadler to examine witnesses in the case of Barbara Fairemaner, widow, and others, against Richard Brereton and his (unnamed) wife, Thomas Brereton and Joan his wife. The monarch is indeed Gulielmus tertius dei gr[aci]a Angl[ie] Scoc[ie] Franc[ie] & Hib[er]n[ie] Rex fidei defensor. Note, t often becomes c in medieval Latin, and ae becomes e. The rest of the text is completely routine, saying that the examiners have to arrange a hearing and send the results into chancery etc. The date is quarto die Febr[uarii] Anno R[eg]ni n[ost]ri decimo - on the 4th day of February in the tenth year of our reign.
 

cinefactus

Censor
Staff member
What year AD would the 10th year of William III's reign be?
 

Westcott

Civis Illustris
For the full text and translation of a number of writs (dedimus potestatem, ad quod dampnum, de diem clausit extremum, and mandamus) you could try "Making Sense of Latin Documents for Family and Local Historians" by some chap called Westcott, ISBN 978 1 906280 45 1
 

Dave Campbell

New Member
That's great, far beyond my capabilities. My interest is genealogical, which I have gleaned from the English pages but I'm trying to put the story together out of interest. Could you decipher the date at the bottom of this document? It looks to be in a slightly different form than the last one.
 

Attachments

cinefactus

Censor
Staff member
To me it looks like
decimo tertio dei Februarij Anno iiii Guilielmi Tertii Regis Anglie ? ????vicessimo??? coram nobis

which I am presuming is 13 Feb 1692
 

Dave Campbell

New Member
Thanks, that makes more sense.
Nicholas senior inherited after his nephew Thomas died intestate age 6
Nicholas senior died 1664 and his son, Nicholas the younger was
Barbara's husband.
Nicholas the younger died 1698, admon 4 Jul 1698, Barbara administrator & Executor
The
dedimus potestatem is dated 4 Feb 1698/9
The complaint by Barbara has 1698 written in a corner, the "Answers" of Thomas Brereton, gent, is dated 23 Feb 1698/9
So now we have the "Answer" of Richard Brereton, father of Thomas, dated 30 Feb 1700/1

There are admons for Thomas 13 Feb 1697/8, then 4 Jul 1698 and then 14 Oct 1721

I'll study the texts more thoroughly now.

Thanks again,

Dave
 
Top