Short Title: Mervyn v Mervyn. [Cause code: SCEL-01046]. Documents: bill, answer/s,...

STAC 5/M52/16

1566 Nov 17-1567 Nov 16

Short Title: Mervyn v Mervyn. [Cause code: SCEL-01046].

Documents: bill, answer/s, replication, rejoinder, commission, interrogatories, depositions.

Plaintiffs: James Mervyn of Fonthill Gifford, eldest son and heir of Sir John Meryn deceased.

Defendants: Dame Elizabeth Mervyn widow of Sir John Mervyn, William Gyll clerk, parson of Fonthill Gifford, and others.

County: Wiltshire.

Subject: forgery of the will of Sir John Mervyn of Fonthill Gifford, by insertion of a clause giving away his lands after Sir John had lost his mind and speech.

Regnal year: 9 Eliz I. Note: Discussed at length in Dyer's Lost Notebooks, Vol 1 (1994) Case 262, pp 187-9, including other reports on both the forgery and Blanchard's words. Case report, taken from Star Chamber Reports, BL Harley MS 2143, ed K. J. Kesselring (List and Index Society, Special Series 57, 2018): [39] Mervyn, plaintiff, and the Lord [Lady] Mervyn, a commission upon the hearing of the cause awarded to hear and determine the cause or to certify their proceedings. . Trinity 10 Elizabeth, fo. 29 . [232] Marvyn, plaintiff, and the Lady Marvyn et al, defendants, for the forgery of a will, which was not sentenced but referred to the law, and 2 reasons moved the Lord Keeper not to adjudge it, first that he doubted that it was not within the statute, secondly for that he doubted whether the inserting o[f] a clause in a will to give away the plaintiff’s land were forgery of the whole will or not, and therefore he would not judge it. Easter 12 Elizabeth fo. 272. [404] Henry Blanchard, a defendant and of the profession of the law, was convicted upon Mr Attorney’s information to the court that he upon the finding of an office in a cause that was before heard in this court between Marvyn and Widow Marvyn et al, in the opening of the evidence to the jury before the court did amongst other things open the tenor of the order of judgment in that case and in declaring of the sentence and opinion of the Earl of Leicester and Sir William Cecil did expound the order contrary to that which was set down in the order saying that they had given their sentence upon bare presumptions and not upon good proof, adding also for further slander to them in his evidence to the said jury that humanum est errare and he would have induced them to have been of his mind, all which being affirmed by the commissioners at the bar against him the court committed him to the Fleet and fine at £40; whereupon the Lord Keeper by way of admonition to the counsellor at the bar declared that in Henry VIII’s days a bill was exhibited into this court by one Sir William Turbervile against the Lord Marquess Dorset for the killing of his deer, it was laid in the bill that he had stolen his deer, whereupon he complained to this court and the plaintiff being called thereto said that his counsel had put in those words without his privity who being also called to the bar, (whose name was John Beamont) could not deny the same, for which slander inserting of those words (for stealing of his deer) he was committed and fined at £50 although the said Lord Marquess had used some violence in killing his deer. Michaelmas 12 et 13 Elizabeth fo. 301. [405] Blanchard’s fine remitted upon his open submission read in open court and entered the same term. Michaelmas 12 et 13 Elizabeth fo. 304 [note: folio references are to the lost Star Chamber decree and order entry books].

Public Record(s)

Open Document, Open Description