John Witter submits a replication in his Court of Requests suit against John Heminges and Henry Condell. Witter argues that a proviso such as Heminges describes, which deprives a widow of her rights to her husband's estate in the event she should remarry, does not abide by 'our lawes nor yet in the Ecclesiasticall lawes of this Realme, nor in the imperiall or Romane Civill lawes.' Even if the clause were legal, he claims, it would not apply under the circumstances of his suit, as Anne Phillips had transferred the property to Witter before Heminges seized possession of it. Witter contends that he 'is not nor was tyed or bound by the lawe' to contribute to the 'newe buildinge' of the Globe after its destruction by fire, the fault for which he assigns to the defendants' other partners and 'fellowe players.' Witter finally asserts that the documents attesting to his forfeiture of the share to Heminges and Condell following his nonpayment of the rebuilding tax are 'idle and impertinent matters,' and invented by the defendants to deprive him of his rightful claim to the 'former estate tytle and lease.'
| Name | Event Role(s) | Document Role(s) |
|---|---|---|
| Phillips, Augustine | deceased | husband, playhouse sharer, testator |
| Heminges, John | defendant | playhouse sharer |
| Phillips, Anne | executrix | heir, widow, wife |
| Brend, Nicholas | landowner | lessor |
| Witter, John | plaintiff | gentleman, husband, playhouse sharer |
| Condell, Henry | plaintiff | playhouse sharer |
| Walshe, John | plaintiff's counsel | |
| Isham, Eusebius | trustee | knight |