C22/601/28  

DEPOSITIONS: Taken from witnesses in the Chancery disputes between Robert Barker v. Bonham Norton (1626-27)   •  DOWNLOAD DEPOSITIONS (PDF 756 KB)

[Fo. 14^r]     [IMAGE]     [ZOOMIFY IMAGE]

Interrogatories for the examinacõn of Bonham Norton esquier

defendant in the sute of | Robert Barker esq^r

1.  Imprimis whereas you were to haue 8000^li by the decree made in June 1623. in lieu of the office of | Kinges Printer was not 2000.^li thereof to be paid within fower or fiue daies, after the passing of the said decree | and were not you vpon receipt thereof to leaue the name of Kinge Printer to the plaintife. How and by what meanes was | that 2000^li to be raised, and had the plaintife any stake of his owne at that tyme in his hands or at his disposicõn to raise the same 2000^li, if yea, what was yt, and were not you then well acquainted with his estate.

2.  Item were not you by the said decree to procure your daughter Sara Barker to ioyne in sale of such her Ioynture | as should be made to fulfill any the payments in the said decree, And did not shee afterwards goe to M^r Gerrard | and declare to him, that shee would not sell Vpton, or to any such prupose, what was the truth thereof as you knowe | or haue heard from her. And did you persuade aduise or direct her so to doe, And did you at any time since the | said decree, advise her not to consent to the sale thereof, yf yea, when, how often, why, and in what manner | did you soe and to what intent?

3.  Item did not you agree by articles, vnder your hand dated the thirteth Maie 1624 vpon a recompence for your | daughter Sara in lieu of her Ioynture to be sold, [word illegible] and was yt the same recompence that was intended her by the | decree or another, and was yt to assise out of the office of Kinges Printer or out of lands. And did S^r Euble | Thelwall Phillip Gerrard and Thomas Jones Esquires Commission^rs put their hands also to those articles.

4.  Item did not you agree by articles, vnder your hand dated the vii^th of March 1624 that Vpton should | be then priuately sold, and that all the money arrising thereby should goe in parte payment for the | office of Kinges printer. And are not the articles now shewed you the selfe same articles or a | Counter parte of them.

5.  Item did not you afterwards contract a sale or an asignemen^t of Vpton to William Windsor, yf | yea, was the assignemen^t drawne and ingrossed, did the plaintife euer see yt till yt was brought him | to be sealed and did he not send you word neuertheles that he would seale yt, so as yo^u would giue an acquittance or a discharge for so much money as receaved by you in parte of payment | for the office, and did not you refuse so to doe, And, what date did that assignemen^t beare.

6.  Item what money was the said William Windsor to paie for the said landes and to whome & when | was the same to be paid, what was paid or to be paid in hand at the sealing of the assignmen^t | and at what tymes the rest, and vpon what security and what shold haue become of Vpton | and who should haue had the same in case M^r Windsor shold not paie the money at the | times agreed vpon.

7.  Item was yt not agreed betweene you and the said Windsor, that if he should not paie yo^u | 3000^li for Vpton in Aprill 1626. that then the said Assignemen^t shold be and remaine to | yo^r vse And that M^r Windsor shold be possessed of Vpton for yo^u? And was there not a defeazance agreed vpon drawne or sealed to that or the like purpose, And what was M^r Windsor to | forfeit and to whome, in case he shold not paie the said 3000^li at the daie, And was not he also | to assigne back Vpton woods beside to some of yo^r sonnes, if yea, when and to what vses & | vpon what condicõn? what is the truth hereof?

8.  Item did Christopher Barker and Sara his wife seale the foresaid assignemen^t and sale of Vpton to | M^r Windsor, if yea, when, and where [hole: &] what recompence had they at that tyme in lieu thereof | and what more were they to haue for the same, and how was the same secured and by whome | and what assurance and who made the same.

9.  Item did not you seale and deliuer as yo^r Act and deed the severall Indentures now shewed yo^u | the one dated the xiii^th of Julie 1625. And the other the xv^th of December last or either both, or w^ch of them, And is the wryting now shewed you, dated the xiiith of December 1623 subsigned w^th yo^r | proper hand, & is not the date of [hole] & the subscription thereof yo^r hand wryting.

10.  Item whether or not was the plaintife or his agent or Accomptant Robert Constable, or any other for | him, partie [hole] or consenting to all or any the bargaines of paper bought for the vse of the | office of Kinges Printer since the making of the said decree, or to all or any of the bargaines | or sale of bookes or makeing or forebearing of debts, or trusting out the Stock of the office | yea or noe, wherew^th was he acquainted and to what & what bargaines was he | partie §§§§ as yo^u knowe or haue heard from of whome haue yo^u heard the same.

                                                            Daniel Hills Nath. Weston.