KENT ARCHAEOLOGICAL SOCIETY  -- RESEARCH   Studying and sharing Kent's past      Homepage

Archaeologia Cantiana -  Vol. 134  2014

A History of the Ecclesiastical Courts of the Diocese of Canterbury, 1566-86, based on the
   Cause papers bound within the Volume MS.F.4.12. By Karen Rushton

Return to entry number and folio number introduction

Entry 12 f.30 verso – Sentence, Defamation - Transcription and Translation

Editorial Conventions
Each entry that has been selected for transcription is given with its entry number and folio number as well as the type of record and type of case. Directly following each transcription is a full translation of the entry, and the sections of entries that were originally in English are shown in italics in the translation. The transcription follows the original exactly in terms of spelling, punctuation and capitalisation. Also, capitalisation of certain words can be inconsistent or inaccurate but again it has been transcribed without corrections as not to do so would detract from the research value and would be wrongly influencing the record’s interpretation.
   All abbreviated words have been extended with the missing letters included in square brackets. Words and sentences that have been inserted later are indicated by a forward and backward slash to show where it has been inserted. In the same vein words that have been crossed out by the scribe are transcribed with a line running through them to illustrate the mistakes of the scribe and to try and remain true to the original. Where words have been seemingly joined together they are shown separately in the transcription apart from the occasions when the word ‘que’ has been added on the end of words to indicate ‘and’. Letters such as i and j and u, v, and n, which can often be indistinguishable from one another, are transcribed in the form they are written in rather than the letter they are supposed to represent when it is clear.
    In the translation Christian names have been anglicised but all surnames remain as in the original record. Correcting surnames to their modernised forms would not accurately reflect the meaning and is sometimes difficult to do, especially given the inconsistencies in the spelling of surnames, which is in itself a potentially interesting point. Similar to Christian names, all place names appear in the translation in their modern forms.

In dei no[m]i[n]e amen, auditis, viris, intellectis, ac plenarie
et mature discussis per nos Robertu[m] Bysshoppe, legu[m]
doctorem, Reverendi d[omi]ni Archi[diaco]ni Cantuar[iensis] officialem, rite
et l[egi]time fulcitu[r], Meritis et circu[m]stanciis cuiusdam pu[ ]se
cause diffamac[i]onis sive convitii, que coram nobis in
Iudicio inter Mariam Besbeeche uxorem Thome Besbeeche
p[ar]ochie de goodherst Cant[uariensis] dioc[esis], p[ar]tem agen[tem] et querelan[tem]
ex una, et Alexandru[m] Courthoppe de ead[em] p[ar]ochia, p[ar]tem
ream pu[ ]sam et querelat p[ar]tibus ex altera, q[ue] aliq[ua]mdin
vertebatur, vertiturq[ue] adhuc et pendet indecises, rite et
l[egi]time p[ro]ceden[s], Partibusq[ue] p[re]dict[is] p[er] earu[m] p[ro]cur[ato]res coram
nobis in Iudicio sufficientur et l[egi]time comp[ar]en[tes], Parteq[ue] d[i]c[t]i
Alexandri Courthoppe Sententiam ferri et iusticiam fieri
p[ro] p[ar]te sua, Parte quoq[ue] d[i]c[t]e Marie Besbeeche iusticiam
etiam fieri p[ro] p[ar]te sua respective et instanter postulan[ti]
et peten[ti], Rimatoq[ue] primitus p[er] nos toto et integro
p[ro]cessu in h[uius]mo[d]i c[aus]a habit[o] et fact[o], s[er]vatisq[ue] p[er] nos de
iure in hac p[ar]te s[er]vand[is], ad n[ost]re Sententie diffinitive
sive n[ost]ri finalis decreti p[ro]lac[i]o[n]em in h[uius]mo[d]i pu[ ]sa causa
ferend[am], sic duximus p[ro]cedend[um] fore et p[ro]cedimus in hunc
qui sequitur modum, Quia p[er] acta, inactitata, p[ro]po[n]ita
deducta, allegata, p[ro]bata, p[ar]iter et confessata comp[er]imus
luculenter et invenimus p[ar]tem p[re]fate Marie Besbeeche
intenc[i]o[n]em suam in quodam suo pu[ ]so libello al[ia]s coram nobis
Iudicial[i] dat[o] et oblat[o] deductam, Cuius quidem pu[ ]si
libelli tenor sequitur et est talis, In dei no[m]i[n]e amen
coram vobis ven[er]abili viro m[agist]ro Roberto Bysshoppe legu[m] doctorEND
Reverendi D[omi]ni Archi[diaco]ni Cant[uariensis] officiali, rite et l[egi]time
fulcit[ur], vestrove in hac p[ar]te surrogat[o], aut alio Iudice
in ea p[ar]te competen[te] quoc[um]q[ue], Pars discrete mulieris
Marie Besbeeche uxoris Thome Besbeeche p[ar]ochie de
goodherst, contra et adversus Alexandru[m] Courthoppe
de ead[em] etc, quem quidem libellum p[ro] hic lect[o] et ins[er]t[o]
habemus et haberi volumus, minime fundasse aut
p[ro]basse, sed in p[ro]bac[i]one eiusd[em] omnino defecisse et
deficere, Idcirco nos Robertus Bysshoppe officialis
an[ti]dictus chr[ist]i no[m]i[n]e primitus invocat[o], ac ip[su]m solum
deu[m] p[re] oculis n[ostr]is haben[tes], de et cu[m] consilio iurisperito[rum]

f.30 recto
cum quibus in hac p[ar]te co[mmun]icavimus, p[re]fatu[m] Alexandrum
Courthoppe ab instantia et impetic[i]one p[re]fate Marie
Besbeeche, quoad petit in d[i]c[t]o suo pu[ ]so libello
dimittend[um] et absolvend[um] fore debere, ac cu[m] effectu
sic dimitti et absolvi censemus, decernimus et
declaramus, ac dimittimus et absolvimus, Silentiu[m]q[ue]
p[er]petuu[m] eidem Marie Besbeeche quoad p[re]missa
imponend[um] fore debere, et cu[m] effectu imponimus
Eandemq[ue] Mariam Besbeeche in expensis l[egi]timis
p[er] p[ar]tem d[i]c[t]i Alexandri Courthoppe in hac c[aus]a
et occasione litis h[uius]mo[d]i fact[is] et fiend[is]
condemnand[us] et condemnamus p[er] hanc n[ost]ram
Sententiam diffinitivam, sive hoc n[ost]r[u]m finale
decretu[m], quam sive q[uo]d ferimus et p[ro]mulgamus
in hiis script[is], Taxac[i]o[n]em vero seu moderac[i]o[n]em
expensaru[m] h[uius]mo[d]i nobis aut alii Iudici in ea p[ar]te
competen[ti] cuicu[m]q[ue] res[er]vand[arum], et res[er]vamus

In the name of God amen, The merits and circumstances of a certain cause of defamation or insult having been heard, seen, understood and fully discussed by us Robert Bysshoppe, doctor of laws, official of the reverend lord Archdeacon of Canterbury, duly and lawfully upheld. Which, duly and lawfully proceeding before us in investigation between Mary Besbeeche, wife of Thomas Besbeeche of the parish of Goudhurst of the diocese of Canterbury, on the part of the plaintiff, and Alexander Courthoppe of the same parish, on the part of the defendant. And for some time it was and is being considered and hitherto is pending undecided. And the aforesaid parties will be represented by their proctors, lawfully appearing before us in trial. And for the part of Alexander Courthoppe earnestly seeking and requiring the sentence to be borne and justice to be made for his part, and also the part of the said Mary Besbeeche respectively earnestly seeking and requiring justice to be made for her part. And we having first examined the whole and entire process before us, had and made in this cause, and with due observance by us concerning the law in this regard, to be considered in the production of our definitive sentence or final decree and to be brought in this cause. We have thus thought it fit to proceed and we proceed in the manner which follows.
   Whereas, by the things enacted, propounded, tried, alleged, proved and also confessed, we clearly find and discover the part of the aforesaid May Besbeeche and her accusation in a certain petition at another time before us judicially, given and offered in court. The tenor of the certain petition follows and is as such.
In the name of God amen, before you the venerable man Master Robert Bysshoppe, doctor of laws, official of the Reverend Lord the Archdeacon of Canterbury duly and lawfully upheld, or to you substituted in this part by any other judge whithersoever competent in this regard. The part of the honest woman Mary Besbeeche, wife of Thomas Besbeeche, of the parish of Goudhurst, against Alexander Courthoppe of the same etc. Which certain petition, for now read and inserted, we hold and wish to be held to be in no way established and proved, but in the proof of the same to fail and to be wholly failed.
   For that reason, we Robert Bysshoppe, aforesaid official, firstly having invoked the name of Christ and holding God alone before our eyes, and concerning and with the advice of those learned in law, who we communicated with in this regard, we assess, determine and declare and we dismiss and absolve the aforesaid Alexander Courthoppe from the instance and impeachment of the said Mary Besbeeche, as regards this what she seeks in the same petition ought to be dismissed and absolved and thus to be dismissed and absolved with effect. And we impose with effect the lasting silence for the same Mary Besbeeche that ought to be imposed as regards the aforementioned things. And we condemn to be condemned the said Mary Besbeeche for lawful expenses made and accrued by the part of the said Alexander Courthoppe in this cause and occasion of this lawsuit by this our definitive sentence or this our final decree, which we pronounce and publish in these writings. And we maintain true guidance or assessment of expenses of this kind to be maintained for us or any other agreeing judge in this regard.

Return to entry number and folio number introduction

For details about the advantages of membership of the Kent Archaeological Society   click here

Back the Contents page   To Arch. Cant. List    To Publications On-line     To Research Page    To Homepage

Kent Archaeological Society is a registered charity number 223382
© Kent Archaeological Society February 2014

This website is constructed by enthusiastic amateurs. Any errors noticed by other researchers will be to gratefully received so
 that we can amend our pages to give as accurate a record as possible. Please send details too