John of Caswell Esq bap 1583
d 1658/9
John was 16 or 17 when his fatherSir
John IIIwas knighted. The family lived at the grand
house of Mackery End, Wheathampstead. Most of his life he
was called John Brockett of Wheathampstead Esquire,
but here we identify him by his last home Caswell,
to distinguish him from his older second cousin namesake.
Aged 20/21 John was implicated with his father in allegations
of counterfeiting silver in Ireland. The dynasty had
already begun to decline in influence since Sir
John II's death 1598, and John
III's line further suffered from the events in Ireland. Nonetheless
Mackery End was not sold till 1628 and in 1634 John of Caswell
was the subject of a Heralds' Visitation. But towards the
end of his life, John became less and less well off. He sold
his interest in various Wheathampstead lands and spent his
latter years at Caswell, a small farm, which he said he had
difficulty retaining.
| |
______________________________________________________
| |
| |
Sir John I d 1558 Nicholas of Mackery End Esq d 1585
m Margaret Bensted m Margaret Reynolds, nee Hoo
___|____________________ |
| | |
| | |
Sir John II Edward of Wheat- Sir John III m Mary Snagg
d 1598 hampstead Esq d 1599 c 1561-1613 |
|
no surviving | ________|__________________
| | |
sons | | |
John of Wheathampstead Esq Joan m John of m Elizabeth Thomas
c 1571-1649/50 Lacon | Caswell Esq | Mordaunt bap 1584
| |
_______________|____ ________| |___________
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
George Thomas John Lacon Edmond Elizabeth
bap 1624 bap 1628 bap 1612
|
|
In March 1603 20 year-old Lieutenant John Brockett was called
as a witness at the inquiry into the alledged counterfeiting
of coins in Duncannon Fort, Ireland.
He was implicated, but his younger brother Thomas
was not (Calendar of State Papers for Ireland p 578-81).
The Visitation of Herts 1634
named John's wives and children as:
- Jane dau and coheir of Edward LACON
of Willy, Co Hereford. Children: John
and Lacona daughter.
- Elizabeth dau of Edmond MORDAUNT
of Oakley, Bedfordshire. John and Elizabeth married there
8 Jul 1624 (IGI). Children: Edward
and Elizabeth.
The 1860 Gateshead Pedigree gave his first wife's name as
Joan, daughter and heir of Edmond
Lacon of Wilwyn. The Wheathampstead Parish
Registers gave baptism
dates:
- John 29 Jul 1612
- Edwardactually Edmond23
Jun 1625
- Elizabeth 28 Jun 1626.
There was a 13 year gap between John and his brother. John
is the only known Gentleman John Brockett who could have married
Mary Blackwell in Sandridge 1635.
Although the Wheathampstead Parish Registers
and the Visitation of Herts 1634, and then the 1860 Gateshead
Pedigree all named John's 2nd son Edward,
John's will clearly gives his name as Edmond,
as does the 1650 Chancery suit, Edmond's
brother John's will and indeed Edmond's own will. Mother Elizabeth's
father was an Edmond.
The Merchant Taylor's Company's Presentment Books (Guildhall
Library microfilm 352:57) and Index to Freeman (Guildhall
Library microfilm 324) recorded Edmond being presented 4 Apr
1646 and freed 4 May 1653, by master Thomas Pendleton. Freedom
usually coincided with the age of 21, but Edmond was 28. The
only other known contemporary was Edmund
the son of Edmund, Vicar of Luton, bap 1605too early
to have been an apprentice 1646-53. Edmond
the Merchant Taylor died of the plague in
1665 in London in difficult financial circumstances
and a dispute arose over the execution of his will (pr PCC
PROB 11/318) between his widow Judith (d
1688) and the executor, kinsman Thomas
Brockett (PRO C10/107/25 Brockitt v Brochitt, Hare, Banton).
John and Richard Hare were among the defendants.
1609-1613 John's father invested in the Virginia Company
during Sir Thomas Smyth's treasurership.
Before 1639 John's father granted him 200
acres in New Norfolk, Virginia when he assigned it to Francis
Roulston, alias Willcox (Nugent 1934- vol 1 p 110):
| 'Henry Watson, 200 acs, Low Co,
New Norfolk, Jun 10, 1639. On Elizabeth River at the head
of the broad creek. Due by assignment from Francis Roulston
alias Willcox and assigned to the same Francis by John
Brockett, Esqr., son to Sir John Brockett, Knight,
having been granted the sd. Sir John Brockett by bill
of adventure from Sir Thomas Smith, Knight, late treasurer
to the Company for VA.' |
John's brother Thomas was probably the Thomas
Brockett, gentleman, recorded in 1623-4 as an Adventurer
of the Virginia Company (Kinsbury 1906- vol 4 p 366).
During his life John had interest in various lands in and
around Wheathampstead:
- Mackary End House Wheathampstead,
or Mackerells End, was the home of his childhood (VCH
Herts 1908 vol 2 p 300 n 64 citing Westminster Abbey Muniment
14050) and John is said to have conveyed it to Thomas
Levett the day after Ascension Day 4 Charles IMay
1628 (n 65). But in fact it was his younger brother
who did so (PRO CP25/2/248):
| Latin |
English
translation |
1. hec est finalis
concordia ...
5. ...Inter Thomam Levett Armigerum quer' et
Thomam Brockett Armigerum deforc'
6. de Manerio de Mackeryend
cum pertinencijs ac de sex mesuagijs
decem Cotagijs duobus
7. molendinis aquaticis decem Gardinis decem pomarijs
octingentis acris terre
8. quinquaginta acris prati Centum & Viginti acris
pasture sexaginta acris bosci
9. ducentis acris Iampnorum & bruere & quinque
solidat' reddit' cum pertinencijs in
Whethampsted
10. Harpenden & Kimpton …
17. ... nouingentas libras sterlingorum
|
1. This is the
final agreement ...
5. between Thomas Levett Esq purchasor and Thomas
Brockett Esq vendor
6. of the Manor of Mackeryend with
6 messuages, 10 cottages, 2
7. watermills, 10 gardens, 10 apple orchards, 800
acres of land,
8. 50 acres of meadow, 120 acres of pasture, 60 acres
of wood,
9. 200 acres of gorse and heathland and 5s rent, with
appurtenances in Wheathampstead
10. Harpenden & Kimpton ...
17. ... for £900 sterling |
- John and his son John conveyed Saunceys
to James Ellis in 1638 (PRO CP25/2/430; VCH Herts
1908 vol 2 p 302 n 75).
- John spent the last part of his life at Caswell
House (VCH Herts 1908 vol 2 p 296awith a
pictureciting Westminster Abbey Muniment 14117). In
the dispute with Samuel Baker
it is referred to as: 'one Messuage called Casswell house
with thappertenances and seuerall pieces or parcells of
land conteining by estimation two hundred acres
of land arable meadow and pasture set lyeing and being in
the parishes of Harpeden Kympton and Whethamstead in the
said Countye of Hertford'.
This was a dispute over some money John had borrowed
against some of his property in Wheathampstead. Because
of it he was twice briefly imprisoned. His son Edmond
was involved. Two documents have been found: John's Bill of
Complaint and William Cutts' Answer (PRO C9/5/18).
The main details:
| Abbreviations: JB = John Brockett,
EB = Edmond Brockett, WC = William Cutts, W = Wheathampstead |
| line |
John's Bill of Complaint |
line |
William Cutts' Answer |
| 3 |
1646 JB borrows £15
from WC |
3 |
JB already owes WC
£20, making a new total of £35. |
| 4 |
As security, JB gives
WC land in W with annual rent of £9 10s. |
5f |
As security, JB gives
WC land in W with annual rent of £6 till £35
paid off, + 8% interest on £35 meanwhile. |
| 5 |
JB & EB enter
a bond with WC for £30. |
9 |
JB & EB enter
a bond with WC for £60. |
| 6f |
WC receives rents
for 3 years, more than paying off the £15. |
11f |
WC receives £14
4s 6d. |
| 9 |
WC has JB
arrested |
13 |
WC has JB
arrested |
| 10 |
WC is arrested
because of £20 |
14 |
JB has WC
arrested |
| 10f |
Arbitration Jan 1648 |
18 |
Arbitration |
| 12 |
JB & WC promise
each other £40 surety |
19 |
JB to deliver up the
£20 bond |
| 14f |
JB to pay WC annual
rent of £6 + 27s 6d |
20f |
JB & EB to pay
WC annual rent of £6 till debt cleared. |
| 15 |
WC to deliver up the
£30 bond |
22 |
WC to deliver up the
£60 bond |
| 16f |
JB to deliver up the
£20 bond |
25f |
EB refuses to pay
WC the rents |
| 22 |
WC refuses to deliver
up the £30 bond |
34 |
WC has received £4
3s 6d towards another loan to JB of £5. |
| 23 |
Aug 1650 WC has JB
arrested again and imprisoned |
|
|
| 26 |
WC with others steals
14 acres of wheat worth £40-50 from JB while in
prison |
37 |
WC denies stealing
any corn from JB |
This was an involved dispute over John's property
in 'Casswell' in the 1650s. Three documents
have been found but no judgment as yet:
(abbreviationsJB: John Brockett, SB: Samuel Baker)
- JB snr's Bill of Complaint of 9 Feb 1652PRO C10/465/40
- SB jnr's Bill of Complaint of 2 Dec 1652, a new suitPRO
C10/24/23
- JB snr's Plea & Demurrer of 13 Feb 1653 to 2PRO
C10/24/23.
Summary and analysis
| 1. Interpretation of JB snr's argument
in his 9 Feb 1652 Bill of Complaint (C
10/465/40) |
John Brockett snr
built Casswell House (l 44) and owned it himself absolutely
('as of fee' ll 2,3). In 1638 he had a legally binding
deed drawn up settling ownership after his death (ll 5,6).
In it he settled Casswell House with about 200 acres of
adjoining land on himself till his death, part thereafter
to Elisabeth, his wife, till her death (l 6) and part
to JB jnr, his eldest son [by his first wife]. Elisabeth's
part was to revert to her stepson JB jnr on her death
(l 8). JB snr's settlement was a free gift. He did it
for and in consideration of blood and natural affection
and for no other payment. JB snr did not intend to restrict
himself or Elisabeth to having to maintain the property
at the same value (l 9). He had therefore intended to
have the clause 'without
impeachment of waste' in the deed, but he said that
JB jnr influenced the people drawing up the deed into
omitting it (ll 10,11).
| Comment:
JB jnr's reversionary interest in the land would
have been worth more this way. A future holder of
the reversion (like SB snr) would be assured that
when his time came to take possession of the land,
the land would be in much the same state as when
he had purchased it. It might also have put JB jnr
in a position to sue his father, or perhaps rather
his stepmother, for any reduction in the property's
value during their or her tenure. JB snr was careless
when he did not check the deed for the 'without
impeachment of waste' clause, the more so when in
the Bill he insisted to the Court that not being
liable for waste was so important to him. |
After signing and sealing the deed JB snr realised the
omission and questioned JB jnr (ll 12, 13), who promised
him that he wouldn't take any advantage of the omission
and that his father could do what he pleased with the
property during his lifetime (l 13). [His stepmother's
lifetime was not mentioned.] But JB snr did nothing to
rectify the situation except rely on his son's assurances
that all would be well.
| Comment:
But a promise is not a contract. When JB jnr told
his father that 'he (JB jnr) will not take advantage
of this omission and that John Brockett the elder
could for his lifetime do as he pleased as though
the said clause had been inserted' JB jnr could
have been guilty of a misrepresentation of fact,
if at the time he knew his statement to be untrue.
If JB snr was induced to sign because of this misrepresentation
of fact he might have been able to avoid the deed
on the ground of fraud. However, he did not call
on JB jnr to come to court. |
At any rate, JB snr said that he had not been aware that
his son then sold his future inheritance in the land to
Samuel Baker snr of Hempstead, Esq (l 16). He also claimed
that his son parted with it for little if any payment.
| Comment:
If the father's claim were true, why did JB jnr
sell his title so cheaply? Was he in a hurry to
sell? By contrast, SB jnr in his Bill claimed JB
jnr sold it for a valuable consideration. |
According to John snr's Bill, this sale was probably in
1642 or early 1643, because 'not long after' (l 17) SB
snr sued a writ of waste against JB snr for cutting down
some trees on the property. The writ was issued after
Easter in the 18th year of the reign of Charles 1 (l 18),
i.e. about April 1643. Samuel Baker's writ of waste seems
to have gone through court without JB snr's knowledge
(l 21), or so he alledged, and damages of £50 were
awarded against JB snr. As was customary at the time,
these were then trebled to £150 and SB snr was also
awarded 106 acres out of the property, the alledged area
of waste (ll 21, 22). The following year SB snr sued for
execution of this judgement and was awarded an additional
68 acres in lieu of the unpaid £150 (l 24), so he
then owned 174 out of about 200 acres. [The remaining
26 acres would probably have been next to the house.]
SB snr died Dec 1644 (l 26) and his part of the property
and reversionary interest passed to his son Samuel and
to Josias and Faith Martin (l 27). In the ensuing seven
years these three are said to have earned about £800
from the property (l 30), while by contrast JB snr claimed
that he and his family were reduced to subsisting on the
charity of others and were unable to keep the house in
good repair (ll 31, 32).
Late in 1651 JB snr won a court action and got the earlier
judgments overturned (ll 32,33). This was the result of
a Sheriff's inquisition which also awarded him £516
plus expenses (l 36). Avoiding service of this judgment,
SB jnr and Josias Martin refused to make payment and JB
snr's by now 'extreme poverty' (l 38) caused his house
to fall into disrepair, i.e. waste (l 37). [Judgment having
concluded that suit, the holders of the reversionary title
could act afresh on the implied impeachment for waste
clause.] They issued a second writ against JB snr for
alledged waste made on the house in order to gain possession
of it (ll 39,40).
JB snr could not enforce them by the common law to suspend
this new writ till they had paid the £516 (ll 42,
43) which would enable him to repair the house. He was
therefore appealing to equity and good conscience when
on 9 Feb 1652, he requested the High Court to subpoena
his opponents to come and answer to the Lords Commissioners
(ll 47-49). |
| 2. Essence of
SB jnr's argument in his 2 Dec 1652 Bill of Complaint
(C 10/24/23) |
1. In about 1639
JB snr pretended that his estate in the Manor of Sancey
Rothamstead & Chivills was only life interest and
that the reversion was settled on JB jnr (l 7).
2. Agreement for purchase of the reversion was therefore
made between SB snr and JB jnr for a valuable consideration.
3. SB snr died c 1644, so the reversion descended to SB
jnr.
4. Since 1644 JB snr has pretended that his estate was
fee simple (owned absolutely) and that JB jnr had no reversion
and therefore no right in 1639 to sell it (l 15).
5. JB snr and JB jnr have forged and antedated several
deeds for parts of the premises.
6. JB snr is making great waste in the premises.
7. Request to subpoena JB snr and JB jnr to reveal what
estate JB snr has and how it came to him.
8. Request for an injunction to stop more waste. |
| 3. Essence of JB snr's argument in
his 13 Feb 1653 Plea & Demurrer (C
10/24/23) |
Plea 1:
SB jnr has sold everything on to Mr Weedon, so he now
has no right to sue JB snr.
Plea 2: SB jnr had declared an action
v JB snr in the Court of Common Pleas last autumn regarding
the same alledged wastes. This action is still depending.
Demurrer: SB jnr is trying to force JB
snr to acknowledge the waste, which would mean JB snr
would have to forfeit his estate and by law no one can
be forced to do something which would have that result.
|
Chronology of the alledged events
in the dispute
| Year |
Date |
Event |
Source |
Acc. to |
| 1638 |
|
JB snr drew up deed
of settlement. He said JB jnr 'influenced the people drawing
up the deed'. |
Feb 1652 B of C |
JB snr |
| 1638 |
|
JB snr & jnr conveyed
Saunceys
to James Ellis |
PRO CP25/2/430 |
|
| 1639 |
|
Treaty existed between
SB snr and JB snr & jnr re purchase of Manor of Sancey
Rothamstead & Chivills |
Dec 1652 B of C |
SB jnr |
| 1642 |
Or bef spring/ summer
1643 |
Sale of reversionary
interest by JB jnr |
Feb 1652 B of C, Dec
1652 B of C |
JB snr, SB jnr |
| 1643 |
Spring/Summer |
1st writ of waste
by SB snr |
Feb 1652 B of C |
JB snr |
| 1644 |
Hillary |
Writ of execution
by SB snr |
Feb 1652 B of C |
JB snr |
| 1644 |
Dec |
SB snr dies |
Feb 1652 B of C |
JB snr |
| 1651 |
late |
JB snr's writ of error
which successfully sets aside the judgment from the 1st
writ of waste |
Feb 1652 B of C |
JB snr |
| ? |
|
2nd writ of waste
by SB jnr |
Feb 1652 B of C |
JB snr |
| ? |
|
JB snr & jnr 'create
secret estates and antedate the deeds' |
Dec 1652 B of C |
SB jnr |
| 1652 |
9 Feb |
JB snr's writ of subpoena
v SB jnr |
Feb 1652 B of C |
JB snr |
| 1652 |
Autumn |
3rd writ of waste
by SB jnr - still depending in the Court of Common Pleas
in Feb 1653 |
|
|
| 1652 |
2 Dec |
SB jnr's writ of subpoena
v JB snr & jnr |
Dec 1652 B of C |
SB jnr |
| 1653 |
Before Feb |
SB jnr sold all his
estate in the premises to Mr Weedon |
Feb 1653 P & D |
JB snr |
|
| Last
will and testament of John Brockett of Caswell Esquire |
1. In the name of God Amen the seaventh day of March
2. in the yeare of our Lord God One thowsand
six hundred fifty 'and' five
3. I John Brockett of Whethamsted in the
County of Hartford Esqr.
4. being sicke in body but of good and perfect remembrance
I praise
5. God doe make my last will and testament in manner
followeing
6. First I give up my soule into the handes
of Allmighty God hopeing
7. for mercy through Jesus Christ. I desire my body
may be buried
8. in the parish Church of Wheathamsted
neire vnto my father Item
9. I give vnto my eldest sonne John Brockett
one shilling to be paid
10. him within one yeare after my decease. Item
I give vnto my
11. younger sonne Edmond Brockett five shillinges
to be paid 'vnto him' within
12. one yeare after my decease. Item I give 'and
bequeath' vnto Elizabeth my loveing 'wiefe'
13. all the rest of my goodes
Chattelles debtes dues and rightes
whatsoever
14. whom I make sole Executrix of this my laste
will and testament
15. and hereby doe revoke all former willes
by me heretofore made. In
16. witnes whereof I have herevn to putt my hand
and seale the daie
17. and yeare above written : John Brokett. Read
acknowledged
18. subscribed and sealed in the presence of George
Brokett, the
19. marke of Joane Rudd Robert Greene snr.
Probate: London the Fifeteenth day of February One
thowsand six hundred fifty eight ... by
the oath of Elizabeth Brockett the relict and sole
Executrix ...
|
|
|
Too much can be read into wills, but compared to other Esquires'
wills from this century, indeed Gentlemen's and even many
Yeomen's, this one is short and meagre. A
token bequest for the eldest son was not so unusual, if property
had already been passed on, but is less usual for both sons,
and to allow 1 year for such small amounts to be raised from
the estate is odd. It could imply that John had little
to pass on and had fallen on hard times, and/or that
there was some breach between father and sons. Neither daughter
was mentioned.
The witness George Brokett was a son of
the other John Brockett of Wheathampstead Esq. George
was baptised in Wheathampstead 1624 and was still living 1675.
George's brother Thomas
was executor to Edmond Brockett, most probably John
of Caswell's second son.
|