Master's Report in John Henslowe v. Agnes Henslowe et al

TNA: C 38/25

ff [1–2] (30 April)

Inter Iohannem Henslow querentem. Agnetem Henslow
viduam Edwardum Allen, et Roger Cole defendantes

By direccion of an order of this honourable Court of the xvth of this instant Aprill, I have considered of the plaintiffes Bill and defendantes answere, and of the ‸⸢plaintiffes⸣ thexcepcions thereunvto, and doe thereby finde that the scope of the Bill is to be releuied against a will pretended to be made by one Phillip Henslowe now deceased late husband of the said defendant Agnes Henslowe, and yt is alleadged in the said Bill that the Phillip married the said Agnes beinge a widow, whoe had yssue Ioane before the said marriage, and that Philip died seised in fee of diuerse freehold landes and possessed of goodes and Chatelles to the value of 10 or 12000 li. and died without yssue, and that the plaintiffe is next in blood to Phillip and sheweth howe by discent To which the defendantes Edward and Agnes answere, that they doe neyther knowe nor beleiue yt to be true, that he died possessed of an estate of that value, or neare therevnto which I conceiue to be noe good answere, for that they haue not sett forth any certainty of estate of the said Phillip what yt was, and the value thereof neyther doe they answere whether the plaintiffe be next of blood, and heire to the said Phillip, which in my opinion they ought to haue done/ The plaintiffe further sheweth that Allen the defendant marryed Ioane the daughter of Agnes, and knowinge or being informed that the said Phillip by his will had disposed of his estate amongst his kinsfolkes and freindes and findinge the said Phillip ‸ ⸢to be⸣ in daunger of death, did practise with thother defendantes to drawe the said Phillip to alter his will and to settle all his estate on the said Agnes, and | to make hir his sole executrix and thother defendantes Overseers, which Phillip often refused to doe To which point the defendantes by their answere say That there was not any such Confederacy amongst them neyther did they or any of them perswade the said Phillip to alter any former will made, or to settle all his estate vpon the said Agnes duringe her life and to make hir his sole executrix and thother defendantes his overseers. which answere is alsoe insufficyent as I take yt ffor they ought directly to haue answered whether Allen had married Ioane the daughter of Agnes, (That being laid as inducement to the practise, and laid to their Chardg. and whether they or any of them did perswade the said Phillip to settle any parte of his estate vpon the said Agnes during hir life which they haue not done./ And whereas the plaintiffe doth Chardge the said Allen that the said Phillip beinge soe feeble that he was not able to moue his hand, or had any sence to write or moue a penn, did offer to guide his hand to write his name, and that the defendantes or some of them worying the said Phillip, the said Allen did put a pen into his hand, and that Phillip made only a marke beinge in his life tyme well able to write. And that the defendant Allens scope was to gaine to himselfe all thestate of the said Phillip by making the said Agnes his sole executrix whereby he would intitle hir to all the leasses of the said Phillip To which the defendant Allen doth not answere whether he did offer to guide his hand to write his name nor whether he did offer to put a penn into his hand, which I thinke fitt Allen should answere | he being chardged in the bill to sett the pretended will on foote to gaine the whole estate to himself./ The plaintiffe likewise by his bill setteth forth That although Phillip died on the Saturday night, the defendantes spared not to proue that will on the next Sabbaoth day in the morning To which point alsoe I am of opo opinion, the defendantes ought to haue answered, because the suddenness of the probate, with other thinges, may induce the greater suspicion of the practise to sett on foote the supposed will. The rest of the excepcions I conceiue to be fully answered. All which I humble leaue to the censure of th this most honourable Court./

(signed) Rychard Moore

  • Footnotes
    • the: for the said
    • done./: closing parenthesis hidden in gutter
  • Endnote

    For the progress of this case through the court of Chancery, see further Appendix 4: I.

    Further disputes over Henslowe's property and its distribution continued into the 1620s; see the Introduction: History of the Properties; Briley, 'Edward Alleyn and Henslowe's Will', pp 324–8.

  • Document Description

    Record title: Master's Report in John Henslowe v. Agnes Henslowe et al
    Repository: TNA
    Shelfmark: C 38/25
    Repository location: Kew

    On 30 April 1616, master in Chancery Richard Moore made an initial report on the suit brought by John Henslowe, the nephew of Philip Henslowe, on 23 January 1615/16 against Edward Alleyn, Agnes Henslowe, and Roger Cole; see Appendix 4: I. c. The report summarises the bill and answers, replications and rejoinders of the plaintiff and defendants, the originals of which do not survive. The answers of the defendants were found insufficient, firstly, on the value of Philip's estate; secondly, on the question of whether they had put undue influence and pressure on Philip during the composition of the will; thirdly, on the reasons for the rapid submission of the case through probate.

    30 April 1616; English; paper; bifolium; 310mm x 202mm; no pagination, filed with reports arranged chronologically within sequences by the first letter of the first plaintiff's name; leaf edges torn, with central section mouldered away; bound in white vellum over boards, torn along spine, title in ink, 'REPORTS | 1616 | F TO N,' with pasted paper label, '25.'

TOOLS
TOOLS
Back To Top
Footnote