Viewing Event Record: Star Chamber, Samwell vs Langley et al: Francis Langley deposes

Abstract

Francis Langley deposes in the case brought against him and others by Richard Samwell the Elder. The deposition provides information about the disagreement over ownership of the galleries in the inn, and of Langley's legal campaign against the Samwells. Langley says that the galleries were built in the great yard, which had not been demised by Woodliffe to Samwell, and therefore the galleries were in the possession of Woodliffe, who sold his interest in the inn to Langley by an indenture of 7 November 1599. Langley denies that he procured Anthony Strayles, Alexander Foxley, John Johnston, or Peter Boulton to invade the inn and assault Samwell and his son on 16 December, but that Strayles, Foxley, Johnston, and Boulton did enter the inn on that day to lawfully arrest Samwell at the suit of Oliver Woodliffe. Samwell submitted to arrest but was soon rescued by his son who, Langley heard, assaulted the marshal's men. No one to Langley's knowledge threw a dagger at the Samwells. Langley says that neither he nor any one in his company forcibly entered the inn armed on 23 or 24 December, but that on 24 December he did send Strayles to collect money from those in the galleries who came to see the play, amounting to about 5s. Langley denies that he or his agents collected money from the galleries on St. Stephen's Day (26 December), but that he and Strayles did attempt to collect gallery money that day, since the galleries stand upon his ground, but were prevented by Samwell the younger. Owen Roberts cut down certain parts of the galleries by his command around Christmas, but only Langley and Roberts were present when this was done. Langley responds that around last Christmas Samwell the younger was arrested twice for trespass, once at the suit of Richard Bishop and once of Thomas Wolleston. Edward Willys, Samwell's servant, was also arrested for trespass around the same time at Bishop's suit. He denies that he procured Winifred Samwell's arrest, nor does he know anything of fees collected for the arrests. He denies Samwell's accusation that he or anyone else forged warrants for the arrests. He does not know of any arrests other than those he has mentioned. Langley has heard that Foxley, Johnson, and Boulton arrested Winifred on a warrant from the Court of Marshalsea for participating in the rescue of Samwell the Elder from arrest, but he procured neither that arrest, nor any other of Samwell and his servants. The actions against Samwell the younger and Willys now pending in the Court of Marshalsea are at the suit of Richard Bishop, and were drawn up by an attorney at that court. Bishop is above twenty years old, has a lease on part of the Boar's Head from Thomas Wolleston by an indenture dated 15 December 1599, and did indeed initiate all the actions undertaken in his name. Langley insists that the only suits he has entered into are those already cited, and he has financed only suits involving his title to the Boar's Head. He has not prosecuted the suits in order to cause the Samwell family grief. He was acquainted with the arrest of the younger Samwell in the King's Bench at the suit of Wolleston.

Date Event Recorded

Date

From: 30 April 1600 (Source of claim: transcription)

Date Event Happened

Date

From: 7 November 1599 To: 30 April 1600 (Source of claim: transcription)

Venues

Name

Boar's Head

People