[Fo. 13r] [IMAGE] [ZOOMIFY IMAGE]
11. Item Before he or they had paid and cleered their former debts to the office yea or noe, if yea who | trusted out those things & made those debts, and to what value doth they amount.
12. Item How much and what some of money of the debts that were due to the office the | 18th of June last has bene receaued in to this day, who receaued the same and are all those | receipts duly & truly entered in the booke of accompts of the office vsuall for such receipts | and what are the proffitts of the office, and to what value that haue bene raised since the 18th | of June last to this day in workes bookes debts and money and are all they duly booked and | entered yea or noe.
13. Item what bookes haue bene imprinted and what workes haue bene done in the said | office since the said decree for the proper & perculier parte of Mr Norton or Mr Bill & that were | not ioyntly done by both, as worke proper to the office of Kings Printer, & whoe hath | borne the charge of those workes & is any of that charge put vpon the generall accompts | of the office yea or noe.
14. Item haue you receaued any moneys due to the said office or taken any bookes § | out of the stock since the said decree, that were not entered & are the accompts of the proffits | of the office deliuered up to the nowe commissionrs by the defendant and of the charges & defalcacõns | bene yea or not, if yea howe knowe you the same to beleue and who extracted them out of | the bookes and by whome were they composed.
15. Item whereas by the said decree the defendant is to reconuey the said office wth warranty | against him & all claieming by from or vnder him; what incumbrances hath the defendant charged the said office with all at any tyme before or since the said decree what assurances | or assignements thereof or of the stock or any parte thereof hath he made & to whome is the | same office or stock or any parte thereof ingaged or made ouer or bound for security | of any somes of money, and for what, & whoe haue any clayme title or interest in or | to the said office or stock by from or vnder the said defendant to yor knowledge as yow haue heard.
16. Item when this cause stood referred to Sr Euball Thelwall Mr Phillip Gerrard and | Mr Thomas Jones was not the said Mr Jones of councell | wth the defendant and is not Mr Gerrard also of the defendants councell, and was not the plaintife advised by diuers of his | ffrinds to except against Sr Euble Thelwall if yea for what occassion and howe often | did those three commissionrs meete vpon this busines as you remember and were not you | parte at all, or the most of theire meetings therein.
17. Item did not the said three commissionrs drawe vp a decree in the cause by the assent of the | parties if yea when, what did they determine concerning the office did they not award | Mr Norton to restore yt and convey it vpon payment of 8000li when & howe was that to | be paide and raised, was not Mr Norton vpon payement of the first 2000li thereof | to put out his name of Kinges Printer, and howe was that 2000li to be raised by | intencõn of the said commissionrs & the articles and what tyme did they giue the plaintife to | pay the same, & why did they Limitt him soe short a tyme, & might the 8000li haue bene paid wthin the tyme <if yea, how as you thinke>.
18. Item howe and what did they determine by the said decree as touching the profits & | managing of the said office, and was the same managed & executed accordingly if | noe, why was it not, was the plaintifes agent and accomptant, that was appointed to ouer | see the managing thereof for the best profitt permitted soe to doe, or prohibited if yea when | howe often, in what manner and by whome and howe doe you knowe the same & did | not the plaintife often complaine to the said commissionrs of that abuse and was the defendant to | intermedle with the execucõn of the office or not.
19. Item vpon what occcasion for what reasons & with what intencõn wch yow conceaue | did the commissionrs by that decree make a mencõn of interest at 20 per cent for that 2000li | if yt should not be paid at the day was it not to cause the plaintife to vse his indeuours | in the sale of Vpton farme for payement of that 2000li yea or noe, if yea, howe | doe you knowe the same and did not the plaintife labor & indeauor the sale thereof and | make agreement wth one Mr Windsore for yt if yea when, and who hindered the sale | thereof as you knowe or haue hard of whom haue you heard the same.
20. Item what interest did the said three commissionrs afterwards vpon hearing of the rest | in Anno 1625 resolue to allowe the defendant for that 2000li because it was not paid at the | day & for what reasons did they soe, and howe doe you knowe the same and did they find that the defendant or his daughter Sara or both had crossed the sale of Vpton | haue yow not heard them or some of them affirme as much, and did not you heare the defendant & his daughter or either of them acknowledge the same, & was not Mr Norton | by the said decree to haue procured her to ioyne in the sale of the lands.
21. Item what was concluded or intended touching the parcell & particuler of 285li | for lattine bookes what is yor knowledge therein & the reasons of the same was yt | a debt, due to the defendants moyetye, of the office, yea or noe if yea howe knoe you | to be soe.
22. Item howe farr forth and to what tyme did the said commissionrs charge & conclude | defendant to be charged with the moyetie of such bookes as Mr Bill had receaued
Daniel Hills
Nath. Weston
[Fo. 13v] [IMAGE] [ZOOMIFY IMAGE]
22. out of the office before the decree and for what reasons did they soe, and was not the defendant to allowe one moyetie thereof vpon the halfe yearely accompts in parte of payement for the said office and was not the <one parcell or> some of 220li iiis iiiid parte of that wherewth | the defendant was to be charged what is yor knowledge touching the same.
23. Item what was determined or intended by the commisionrs concerning the debts | mencõned in the seuerall schedules nowe showed you dated 19th Junij 1625 & for what | reasons did they soe and what concerning the rent or purchase of Landes one house | and for what reasons as you conceive.
24. Item did not the said commissionrs & parties agree vpon seuerall articles after the said | decree wch are seuerally dated 30th May 1624 & 7th March 1624, was not agreed by the former | of them (inter alia) what prouision the said Sara should haue in liewe of her ioynture to be sold if yea, what was yt, and is there not prouision for her husband and her, | children also, and was <not> Mr Norton by the former of those Articles & by the foresaid | decree to bring his said daughter to ioyne in the sale of the lands whereof Vpton | was parte and by the latter of those articles was he not to bring in both his said daughter | and her husband to ioyne in the sale of those lands and is there not an exppresse | Article that Vpton should be priuately sold and that all the money arising thereby | should be paid to the defendant towards payment for the office not the defendant hand wth | the three commissionrs to these Articles and did the said Sara neuerthelesse oppose the sale of Vpton and howe knowe yow the same?
25. Item is there not a reseruacõn in those Articles & also in the decree of power | to the said commissionrs of incertion explayenacõn addicõn & amplificacõn according to theire discrecõns or to that purpose and was not that one of the motiues or reasons as yow conceiue that moued the commissionrs to set 20 per cent in the decree because they reserued power to correct the same.
26. Item are not the Letters nowe showed you the true coppies of those lettres wch were | sent by the said Mr Gerrard vnder his hand to the said Mr Jones and howe do you knowe | the same, and did not Mr Gerrard in Anno 1625 affirme in yor heareing that there | was a draught of a newe decree made by him and Mr Jones & that there rested some things | in the Commissionrs brests to be incerted thereunto, before yt should passe wch were not fitt | to be knowne till the plaintife & his wife had levyed the fyne & what doe you conceiue were | those things reserued, and did not <he tell> the plaintifes wife that the accompt for the office was agreed | vpon & should noe more <be> questioned & that they had resolued what to doe for the office | or to that effect; what is yor knowledge herein.
27. Item haue you a note of such bookes & other things as were printed in the said office | from the xxth of Dec. 1622 to the 17th of June 1626. the coppy whereof is now showed yow | whather or not haue you compared or considered the same wth the bookes of the accompt | of the office yea or noe, if no why did you not, if yea, doe the bookes warrent the | seuerall impressions mencõned in the said note, & if noe which of them are not warrented | by the bookes & what numbers did those Impressions, produce & like impressions since | vsually for the most parte.
28. Item what weekly allowance by way of defulcacõn & charge vpon the for said | moiety of the said office, hath the defendant taken vpon his accompts for euery apprentice and | servant by him imployed in the said office from the sequestracõn to the 18th June last.
29. Item what interest did the aforesaid commissionrs allowe the defendant for the forbearance of the afore | said 6000li & for what reasons did they soe as yow knowe or conceiue why thinke yow soe or | howe doe you knowe the same.
30. Item as you knowe or conceiue whither or noe were the three parcells in the schedule | of workes nowe showed yow being the 14th 24th & 28th parcells & soe marginably numbered | imprinted in the aforesaid office or for the accompt of the office before the 17th June | 1626. what doe you knowe & conceue touching the same.
31. Item what numbers haue binne vsually imprinted in the said office vpon | euery impression haue not the vsuall impressions consisted of 3000 & 6000 bookes | as bibles or the like and what allowance of ouerplus in paper hath bene vsually | since the said decree, laid vpon euery of the said impressions or vpon euery sheete of the | same ouer & aboue the precise numbers or reames of paper of the impressions of 3000? & | 6000? & what ouerplus hath such allowances vsually produced in such impressions in | former tymes & since the said decree what is the truth & yor whole knowledge herein | and howe do you knowe the same & for what tyme haue yow knowne the same.
32. Item hath the aforesaid office euer since the said decree bene executed to the best | advantage as yow conceaue yea or noe, if noe why doe you soe thinke hath there | bene bookes kept during that tyme of the workes, sales, receipts, payements & debts of the | office for the generall accompt and carriage of the office as [word illegible] <nowe> fitt & ought to be kept | and which might declare true dealing therein and hath there bene any other booke | or bookes kept besides between Mr Norton & Mr Bill of theire particuler partnershippe | or dealings in the office & in wch of them haue all the receipts bene entered, what is yor | knowledge & what doe you conceiue therein & the reasons thereof.
Daniel Hills Nath. Weston. |
