The particulars of the Relation are, as they doe appeare by the seuerall Secti­ons, the proofes whereof are noted in the Margent.

1. AN Inquisition vpon an ad quod damnum, Copy of the Inquisi­tion. da­ted die lune proxime ante festum Assentionum Domini, Anno 7. Regni regis Ricardi secundi.

2. King Richard the 2. granted licence of the 16. of Iune, Copy of the Licence. in the 7. of his reigne to Walter Burnell and William Pendock Chaplaines, for erecting of a free Grammer schoole in Wooton-vnderedge in the Countie of Glocester, and for indowment thereof, with the land and Tenements therein mentioned for maintenance and sustentation of a Master, and two poore Schollers, and their successors for euer.

3. Thomas Lord Berkley, Copy of the Licence. Lord of Berkley gran­ted Licence Dated 1. Iuly Anno 8. Regni regis Ri­cardi 2. to the said Walter Burnell and William Pen­dock, for erecting the said Schoole, and for indow­ment thereof with the Lands in the same Licence mentioned, for maintenance and sustentation of a Master and two poore Schollers, and their successors for euer.

4. That the 20. day of October in the said eight yeare of the reigne of King Richard the 2. Copy of the Grant. a Grant was made by the said Walter Burnell and William Pen­dock, at the charges and procurement of Katherine Lady Berkley, for erecting the said Schoole, and for indowment thereof with the Lands and Tenements in the same Grant mentioned, for maintenance and sustentation of a Master and two poore Schollers, for teaching of Schollers in the Art and rudiments of Grammer; the Patronage of which Schoole [Page] was intayled vpon the heires males of the said Tho­mas Lord Berkley. An exemplification of a Record and Smiths Decree in Chancery, Sect. 40. Numero 7.

5. In this estate the Schoole continued for the space of 200. yeares, and vntill Smith endeuoured to alter the same; and the Lands belonging to the Schoole are worth 300. pound Certificate of the Archibishop of Cant: Bishops of London and Winton to his Maiestie. per annum at this day.

6. That Robert Coldewell was Schoolemaster of that Schoole, duly presented, and was in right there­of seized of and in all the lands & Tenements there­to belonging, and being so seized, by his Confessed by Smiths said Decree in Chancery, Sect. 40. Numero. 8. Inden­ture vnder the common Seale of that Schoole, bea­ring date the 27. of May, in the 37. yeare of the reigne of King Hen. the 8. did demise one messuage with the appurtenances called Warrens Court, in North-Nibley in the said County of Glocester, par­cell of the said Schoole lands, vnto one William Tho­mas his Executors & Assignes, from the feast of the Anunciation of the blessed Lady S. Mary the Vir­gin then last past, for the terme of 88. yeares, for the yearely Rent of fourtie eight shillings.

That William Thomas by his last Confessed by the same Decree, Nu­mero 8. Will, Da­ted Anno Domini 1556. did bequeath the said Lease and residue of the Terme of 88. yeares, vnto Alice his wife and Executrix for her life, and after to Grace Daughter of the said William Thomas and A­lice, and after to the Children of the said Alice by Iohn Moore her former Husband, and to the surui­uor of them, which children were Richard, Wil­liam, Katherine, Elizabeth, Mary, and Ioice, and dyed. Alice proued that Will vnder Seale. will, and entred into Warrens Court as a Legacy, and so left the same after her death to Grace, who at the suite of the said Richard Moore, and the rest of his said Brethren and Sisters being plaintiffes, against the said Alice and Grace, [Page] were by an 2. Orders. order in Chancery (where that suite was commenced) in the 26. yeare of the reigne of Queene Elizabeth, compelled to bring the said ori­ginall Lease into that Court, where it was by con­sent of Alice, and all the said Legatees to An Exemplifica­tion of the Answers of Alice and Grace. remaine and safely there be kept for the vse of them all; that they might take the benefit thereof one after ano­ther, vntill the expiration thereof.

8. That the said Lease was so kept the space of 18. yeares, and vntill Smith married the said Grace, which was in the 39. yeare of the reigne of Queene Elizabeth, and then Smith (perceiuing that all other the ancient Leases of the Schoole lands were come to an end, except the Lease of Warrens Court) began his endeuours and practices to get all the said Schoole lands, and to that purpose did by diuers practices and vntrue suggestions in Chancery (there being then none to oppose him) Order. obtaine the said Lease out of Chancery vnduly, and the same de­teyned in contempt of the Order. Orders of that Court.

9. That Smith (hauing so gotten that Lease) delt and practiced with one Henry Duport, that Du­port should Copy of Smiths Answer to Bishops Bill in the Exche­quer, and of the Bill. pretend some tytle to the Patronage of that Schoole, and to the inheritance of the Lands thereto belonging; whereupon Smith and that Duport gaue forth in speeches, that the said Duport had good tytles thereunto, and Smith also practiced with Iohn Duport, and Iames Duport (who then had possessed themselues of the said Schoole and Lands as masters and owners thereof) to set on foot ano­ther tytle; and so Smith for some small matter to those three Duports got possession of all the Schoole-Lands as his owne Fee-simple, and likewise the Pa­tronage, and the better to colour that his practice Counterpart of the Conueyance, razed in the summe let downe for considera­tion. tooke conveyances from the Duports.

[Page]10. That Smith Anno 6. Regni regis Iacobi vnduly placed one Edward Cowper Master of that Schoole, vpon whose induction Smith caused Cowper to Copy of Smiths Answer in the Ex­chequer, and of the Bill. conuey all the Schoole Lands in Fee to one Iohn Browning father to Smiths wife, and to one Bolton, which Browning and Bolton soone after conueyed the same and leuied a Fine to Smith and his heires for euer, and so Cowper continued as Schoole-ma­ster, but neuer exercised the place, or had any thing there to doe, but others as Deputies there were pla­ced by Smith, and so Smith made Cowper but as his stale.

11. That Smith (by colour of the said seuerall conveyances, and vpon expiration of all the anci­ent Leases about that time, viz. about Anno 6. Regni regis Iacobi worne out, sauing the said Lease of Warrens Court) Copy of Smiths said Answer in the Exchequer, and of the Bill. entred Smiths Patent. vpon 38. Tenements belonging to that Schoole, hauing possessed him­selfe of Warrens Court before, and did let those Tenements for long termes vpon Fines, and the Tenants tooke Bonds of Smith for the quiet enioy­ing; Witnesses. and shortly after Smith Witnesses. called a Court Baron in his owne name, as Lord and owner of all the Schoole lands, and summoned all the Tenants of the Schoole lands as belonging to Warrens Court, and kept Courts Baron in the Schoole-house.

12. That the said Ioice was last suruiuor of all the said Legatees, as Smith hath Smiths Decree in Chancery. confessed, and the said Ioice (so being lawfully intytled vnto all the re­maine of 88. yeares in Warrens Court, which was 21. yeares then to come) did for diuers considerati­ons duly Assignement from [...]oice to Crokey and [...]ant of Attor­ney. assigne the same Lease to Crokey her Ne­phew (which Crokey, was sonne of the said Kathe­rine one of the said Legatees) and dyed intestate, and Crokey Letters of Admi­ [...]ation. administred, and this was about 12. [Page] yeares since, whereupon Crokey (being interessed in Warrens Court, and Smith being in possession thereof, and the said Grace his then late wife being dead, and by her death Smiths interest in Warrens Court ending) Crokey commenced a suite in Chan­cery against Smith, and made his entry thereinto, and depending the said suite in Chancery Smith (still to colour his bad tytles to outface the world, and to vex Crokey with suites) brought an action of trespasse against Crokey for that his entry; in which suite Smith proceeded to tryall without Crokeyes priuity, and so that Tryall passed by default, where­by Smith recouered of Crokey 7. pounds for costs, though Crokey at the beginning of that suite obtai­ned an Order. order in Chancery for stay thereof, or to shew cause to the contrary which Smith did not, but in contempt went to tryall as aforesaid.

13. By these suites with Smith for Warrens Court, Crokey tooke knowledge of the foundation and state of the Schoole, and withall of Smiths said practices against the same, which practices of Smith stirred vp Crokey more for defence of the Schoole, then for his owne tytle as may well appeare by that which followeth.

14. That there haue beene 33. seuerall Seuerall Records exemplified, and Co­pies of Record. suites touching the said Will of the said William Thomas, whereupon there were Virdicts, Decrees, Non-suites, and Dismissions: and the question in all which suites was, whether that the remainder of yeares in Warrens Court should goe and be to the Legatees, or to the Executors by the said Will, in all which suites Iudgement was alwaies for the Le­gatees vnder whom Crokey claymes, and Crokey hath an approued good and lawfull tytle to Warrens Court during the remainder of 88. yeares, and [Page] Smith hath no right thereunto, nor had since the death of Grace his said wife; howbeit Smith by his vntrue reports ordinarie with him, and by some false colours hath so shadowed the matter, as that he hath made all men beleeue, that all the said seue­rall suites were in affirmation of his vniust clayme, vnder a pretended tytle from one Sprint, coloured by a Decree in Chancery 19. May, 43. R. Regine Elizab. obteyned by Smith deceitfully, as also by a dismission caused by colour of that Decree, which Decree and dismission were against one Moores Ty­tle, not against Crokeyes; which Decree and dismissi­on last spoken of, or his said pretended tytle from Sprint, Smith in all his suites with Crokey, or in any of them could neuer make good: though Smith hath laboured therein all he might, but the same were alwaies held and deemed deceitfull and fraudulent.

15. That Crokey (for his owne right, but especi­ally in his tendernesse and zeale for preseruation of the Schoole and inheritance thereof) prosecuting the before mentioned suite in Chancery against Smith, Smith (further to colour those his practices before spoken of for maintenance of his iniurious dealing against the Schoole and Crokey) exhibited an Exemplification of the Triall. Information against Crokey and the said Ioice Crokeyes Aunt to the court of Common pleas vpon the Statute of Maintenance and Champerty, which suite was commenced 20. Iuly Anno 12. Regni regis Iacobi; in which Information. Information, he the said Smith set forth, that the first day of Ianuary in the 11. yeare of his Maiesties raigne, and by the space of two yeares next before he was, and then was seized in his de­measne as of fee of and in one capital messuage cal­led Warrens Court, and of and in 60. Acres of land, 20. acres of meddow, and 30. acres of pasture, [Page] and 20. Acres of Wood, scituate and lying in North-Nibley in the County of Glocester, and the Rents and profits of the same Tenements with the appurtenan­ces, to his owne proper vse for all the said time of 2. yeares had and receiued, Smith pretending further thereby, that Ioice not hauing any right or title, and notwithstanding pretending right and tytle to the premises conueyed the same to Crokey, and so both Ioice and Crokey within the Statute of Maintenance and Champerty; to which Information Ioice and Crokey pleaded, and the cause came to tryall at the Bar. 26. April Anno 13. Regni regis Iacobi, & vpon full euidence Smith was The same Exem­plification. nonsuited, and yet vpon ope­ning of the said suite in Chancery (which was but 3. dayes after the said tryall) Smith by his indirect pra­ctices procured a Order. dismission to the Law without any further hearing.

16. That vpon the said Dismission in Chancery, Crokey sealed a The Lease for try­all of the tytle. Lease for 5. yeares to one Thomas Bodham whereon to bring an action of eiectione firme, for tryall of the tytle, and thereupon Crokey com­menced a suite in the Court of Common pleas a­gainst Smith; In which suite the Iudges of that Court (perceiuing the many vniust suites and sinister pra­ctices raised and prosecuted by Smith against Crokey & against the Schoole) made seueral The Rules. Rules in Court (but with the assent of Smith and his Councel) that if the verdict vpon that Tryall should passe for Crokey, that then Crokey should forthwith haue pos­session, and no writ of Error should be granted, al­though the said Lease for the eiectment should be expired.

17. That Smith (to weary Crokey in that suite with vexations and delayes as before in the rest he ende­uoured) in May Anno Regni regis Iacobi 13. commen­ced a new suite in Chancery against Crokey for the [Page] same cause, which was Order of Dis­mission. dismissed in Iuly, Anno 15. Regni regis Iacobi: And also another suite by English Copy of Smithes Answer to the said Bill. Bill in the Exchequer Chamber Termino Paso: An. 14. Regni regis Iacobi in the name of one Edw: Bishop a friend of Smiths, and his chamber-fellow in the inner Temple, which suite though it seemed to bee com­menced against Smith (for therein he made himselfe defendant and answered the said Bill) yet that Bill was exhibited by Smith himselfe fraudulently, & the same Bill Smith The said Copy of Smiths Answer. answered, and in that his Answer stood vpon all his fayned tytles, and Smith likewise tooke out a Order. Commission for examination of wit­nesses, and s [...]ed diuers witnesses to proue that Bill, and so proued the Bill, and thereby, that all the lands belonging to the Schoole were concealed and within the Statute of 1. Edw: 6. and so that suite cea­sed, and all that suite was at Smiths charge, for there­in he made himselfe both plantiffe and defendant; whereupon Smith (for little or nothing) bought Bi­shops tytle, but withall tooke letters Copy of the Let­ters Patents. Copy of Certificate and Decree vpon the Commission for Cha­ritable vses: and Witnesses. Patens thereof vpon the Commission of defectiue tytles to him and his heires for euer, for which he paid to his Maiestie 5. pound, and was to pay xi. s. Rent per annum, by which tytles Smith meant to hold the Schoole lands as he holdeth other Note from the Rolls. land in Sussex by those tytles to this day; And further about the same time (still to delay Crokeys said suite vpon the Eiectment) Smith commensed (or rather but reuiued his other foyled suite of Maintenance and Champerty, which before he had brought in the common pleas) a suite in the Starchamber against Crokey, and foure others, Cro­keyes friends for maintenance and Champerty, therein surmising forgerie, and periurie, wherein Smith also pretended a tytle of inheritance to Warrens Court, whereupon, and vpon other false suggestions, Smith obtained an Order. Iniunction for [Page] stay of Crokeyes said tryall vpon the Eiectment, and by that meanes the said Tryall was stayed foure yeares to Crekeyes great vexation and trouble, and to his expence of foure hundred pounds or therea­bouts in that proceeding, Crokey being inforced to attend that Court euery Terme with councell for de­soluing that Iniunction, but could not, but in the end was inforced to labour for a hearing, for which he procured foure seuerall peremptorie 4. Orders. Orders in foure seuerall Termes for hearing of the said Star­chamber cause so commenced by Smith, during which delay Smith gaue forth in Affidauit. speeches, that he would weary Crokey by suites in Law, and that it was as possible for Crokey to remoue a Mountaine, as to preuaile against him the said Smith.

18. That after foure yeares toyle and suite in the Starchamber, that cause there depending by Crokeyes great trauaile and cost was heard, and Crokey, and the rest of the Defendants were absolutely Order. dismissed with good costs, but when the costs should haue beene taxed; Smith so practiced and wrought, as that Crokey could not get them to be taxed, but was inforced diuers times to moue that Court for order therein, whereupon in the time of the Lord Chancellor, the Lord Mandevile, and the [...] Lord Keeper, Crokey obteyned diuers Orders in open Court for the Costs Seuerall Orders. to be taxed, with increase of Costs for Smiths delayes: which costs were drawne vp to Bills of Costs. 297. pound, and (notwithstanding the said Dismission and Orders) Crokey could not obteine Costs to be taxed; whereupon Crokey in May 1623. Petitioned the [...] Lord Keeper therein, but so farre was his Lordship abused by the false sugge­stions and practices of Smith, and so much incensed against Crokey, that his Lordships Answere Crokeyes Peti­tion, and the Lord Keepers Answere thereto. to that Petition was, and so subscribed it, that Crokey [Page] deserued to haue his eares cropt off for abusing him, in that his Lordship neuer refused to taxe Costes at the end of euery Terme: And yet Grasvenor Crokeyes Attourney did Affidauit. affirme, that hee often had presented the Bill of Costes to his Lordship to bee taxed, and that hee was ne­uer more wearied then with vrging his Lordship therein, and for that his Lordship had deny­ed to doe it, hee durst not moue the same againe; But shortly after vpon vntrue suggestions by one Master Trotman of Smithes Councell, and by Smithes practices together, and without the pri­uitie of Crokey, or his Councell, or Attourney Smith obtained Order. Order for remitting all the said Costs, which Order Crokey could not get to be re­uersed.

19. That (the said Starchamber cause being dis­missed) Crokey laboured very earnestly many Termes for a Tryall vpon the said Lease of eiect­ment according to the said Rules in Court, and to his great trouble and charge brought vp his Wit­nesses (some of whom dwelling one hundred miles from London) and divers Termes fee'd his Coun­cell and Copy of the Panell and Distringas. 48. Iurors were summoned before a Iury did appeare, And so after foure yeares delay and more, the said cause was tryed at the Common Pleas Barre, viz. Termino Pase: Anno 18. Regnire­gis Iacobi, And vpon the sayd Tryall it was found for Thomas Bodham Crokeyes Lessee in the eiectment, as is more at large related in the 28, 29. & 30. . and how Crokey was delayed in the Iudgement and altogether defeated.

20. That depending the said suites, and Crokey ha­uing fully informed himselfe of the estate of the Schoole, and of Smithes practises for supplanting thereof, and getting all the said Schoole lands, Cro­key [Page] (to restore the said Schoole, and to reduce all things into their former being, according to the said foundation) Anno 1617. obtained a Commission to inquire of the whole matter concerning the said Schoole and the lands thereto anciently belon­ging, according to the said Statute of Charitable vses; And for execution of the said Commission, Crokey The Commissio­ners Warrants. procured a day to bee appointed, and prouided his Witnesses and all matters incident thereto, and also got a Witnesses. Iurie to appeare, but all was defeated by the practices and power of Smith, and a second time in like manner: Where­upon Crokey peticioned to his late Maiestie, and his Maiestie (being gratiously inclined to the fur­therance of the charitable and good course of the Lawe and Statute in that case prouided) was pleased according to his Maiesties Commission vnder the great Seale of England before granted, that the Bishop of Glocester and any 4. of the Com­missioners in that Commission named, should with conuenient speed enter into the examination of this cause, and according to the authority giuen to them in the same Commission finally determine and effect the same, so as there should be no cause giuen of any further trouble to his Maiestie, as by his Maiesties Petition and Di­rection. direction signified by Sir Daniel Dun 5. September 1617. may appeare; which said Commission, and that his Maiesties direction notwithstanding, by like practices of Smith was interrupted and defeated a third time, and so Crokey lost that Commission, and all his labour and charge, and nothing done there­in. And in the yeare 1618. Crokey procured a Warrant. War­rant for a second Commission from the Lord Chan­cellor for the same purpose; which Commission. Commission being ingrossed in the Crowne office, and ready for the Seale ( Crokey hauing then paid the charge there­of) [Page] was by like practices of Smith there kept from Crokey for 2 moneths and more. And whilst the said Commission was so stayed in the Crown office Smith Witnesses. practiced with one Iohn Hunt to alter the Com­missioners names, contrary to the Warrant deliue­red in by Crokey, and so that Commission was in­grossed of new, and some of the Commissioners names in the Warrant were left out in the Commis­sion, Commission vnder the great Seale. and others of Smiths friends put in: howbeit Crokey took that Commission as it was, and laboured for the execution thereof, and a day Warrant for day of Sitting Witnesses. was appoin­ted, and Crokey with Iurors and Witnesses, and all things else ready on his part to haue beene done, but by the like practices of Smith there did come to the place assigned for execution of the said Commission but three Certificate of the Commission. Commisioners of 7. that had signed the Warrants, when no lesse then foure could execute it, whereby that Commission was also avoided, and all Crokeyes labours and charges lost.

21. That in the meane time the Commission was so kept back, Smith practiced with Sir Iohn Pointz Knight, and one Henry Minors to take a Commissi­on forth of the Exchequer, whereby to finde the possessions of the said Schoole to be Witnesses. concealed as Chantry lands giuen to superstitious vse, and within the Statute 1. Edward 6. wherein Smith so handled the matter, as that Sir Iohn Pointz and Mi­nors did take such a Commission forth of the Ex­chequer, and being Patentees Bond from Sir Iohn Pointz and minors to Crokey. were also therein made Commissioners.

22 That the said Sir Iohn Pointz and Minors, about August Anno 1618. went to Tidbury in the said County of Glocester for execution of their said Commission, where (hauing a Iurie Witnesses. of simple men, some whereof being of Smiths kindred) yet that not­withstanding they would not proceed at that time, [Page] because Crokey was there ready with all things for de­fence of the Schoole and possessions thereof, and a­mongst other things with a Case Cas drawne and resol­ued on [...] by Sir Henry Yelverton and Sir Thomas Co­uentry his late Maiesties Councell at Law vnder their hands, affirming that the said Schoole and pos­sessions were free from superstitious vses, and no way within the said Statute of 1. Edward 6. whereupon Sir Iohn Pointz soone after laboured Crokey very ear­nestly for a composition, which Crokey vtterly refu­sed, and soone after that Sir Iohn Pointz and Minors met againe vpon their said Commission at Wickware in the said County of Glocester, viz. the 13. of Witnesses and Warrant from Sir Iohn Pointz and Minors. October 1618. At which time Crokey likewise at­tended, but before they sate both Sir Iohn Pointz and Minors earnestly pressed Crokey to a composition, which Crokey againe vtterly refused as before, where­upon they proceeded with a like simple Iurie as they best pleased, notwithstanding Crokey stood in Witnesses. de­fence of the Schoole in all he might, and so it was found, that the said Schoole and lands thereto be­longing were giuen to superstitious vses, and within the Statute of 1. Edw: 6. and yet the said Sir Iohn Pointz and Minors laboured againe at that time with Crokey for a Composition, and offered their Bond. Bond of 2000. pound to Crokey with condition for the assu­ring of Warrens Court to Crokey and his heires in Fee farme, and to set him in possession thereof; And albeit Crokey well did know that all their offers were but to intrap and to draw him from defending the Schoole, and that by Smiths plot and practice, yet Crokey also perceiuing that they profered him some aduantage whereby they might afterwards intrap themselues, was content to take such a Bond, so as he might haue the drawing of the Bond and Condition which they assented gladly vnto, and so Crokey did cause the [Page] Bond and Condition to be drawne, wherein he cau­sed Sir Iohn Pointz and Minors to bee mentioned both Patentees and Commissioners, which was all that thereby Crokey Witnesse Master Hart. sought, to the end the practices by them and Smith might the better appeare; Crokey then knowing no other, or better way for discouery of their said practices, neither did Crokey so much as promise, much lesse assure to them any thing at all, but forthwith shewed to the Lords grace of Canter­bury the said Bond, and fully acquainted his Grace therewith, and of all their other practices against the Schoole, as formerly he had done.

23. That thereupon his Grace sent his Soliciter Witnesse. Master Hart. M ^r. Hart with Crokey to the Lord chiefe Baron of the Exchequer for trauersing of the said vndue pro­ceedings, & reuersing of the said Inquisition, and (ac­cording to the Lord cheefe Barons direction) Crokey moued that Court of Exchequer by his Councell, whereupon a day was giuen to Sir Iohn Pointz and Minors to come in for maintaining their said Inquisi­tion which they refusing to doe, the said Inquisition, and Commission by an expresse Order. order in that Court were suppressed and made voide.

24. That Smith (to manifest his craft in dawbing) did then also moue the Court of Exchequer by his Councell for making voide the said Inquisition, and Commission, whereupon in the said Order. Order the name of Smithes Councell was foisted, in stead of Crokeys Councell, as if Smith had beene the chiefe and onely opposor, and not the procurer of the said last mentioned Commission and Inquisition, where­by Smith did not onely delude the said Court of Ex­chequer, but the Country also for when he perceiued that Plot with Pointz and Minors would not take, then Smith began to make a shew of a pious intent, to make and erect a new foundation of that Schoole [Page] but yet in his owne name, and for his owne glory, whereby to outface and blindfold the world, that his former practices for supplanting thereof might not be seene. And to that purpose indowed the Schoole with Confessed in Smiths Decree in Chancery, Sect. 41. num. ibid. 13. 12. pound Rent per annū out of her possessions of 300. pound per annum all being in the hand of him and his Lessees. And for divulging of that dis­sembled pietie and bounty therein, ordeyned 25. Fe­offees for establishing of that his new false foundati­on of the Schoole and possessions, wherein hee had not, nor hath any interest lawfull at all.

25. That Smith (knowing his owne guiltinesse) doubted that one Prichard, then as Master of that Schoole, placed there by Smith did incline to the assistance of Crokey for righting the Schoole, And in that doubt Smith set Witnesses. vpon Prichard with diuers high and threatening speaches, and warned Prichard that at a certaine day by Smith peremptorily prefix­ed, Prichard should depart from the Schoole as a professed maintainer thereof against Smith, or else that Prichard must expect to be by Smith thrown out by violence, insomuch that (vpon Prichards sligh­ting of Smiths threatenings) Smith (in outragious & violent manner being accompanied with some 20 Witnesses. men) came to the Schoole and threatened to vn­tyle the Schoole-house, and to throw Prichard out if hee would not presently depart, and by those meanes, and by frighting Prichards wife (being then in childe-bed) Prichard was inforced to leaue the Schoole to Smith, and so vpon composition left it.

26. That Crokey moued the Lord Chancellor for a third Commission vpon the said Certificate from three of the Commissioners in the said second Com­mission, which notwithstanding, and though Crokey had obtained diuers Commissions before, yet upon Smithes vntrue suggestions and like practices, it was [Page] so ordered the Order. 16. of Iune Anno 17. Regni regis Ia­cobi, that thereby Crokey was not onely debarred for obtaining any further Commission in behalfe of the Schoole, but also thereby disgraced, and all his pro­ceedings therein as much as might be; and Crokey (be­ing so stopped and preiudiced) petitioned his Maie­stie to referre the finall hearing and determining the cause for the Schoole to the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury, the Lords Bishops of London and Winton, and to the Lord Hobart, or to any 3. or 2. of them, whereupon his Maiestie was gratiously pleased, that the said Lords should take the contents of the said Petition into their speciall consideration, and after hearing & examining all particulars incident there­unto, should make report in writing vnto his Maie­stie what they should finde fitting to be done, aswell for awarding such a Commission as was petitioned for, as for the certefying and determining the whole cause according to Iustice and good conscience; as by the said Petition and Petition and Re­ference. Reference signified by Se­cretary Naunton of the 24. of Iune 1619. appeareth, which Reference Crokey diligently prosecuted, but Smith would not by any meanes appeare before the Committees assigned by that Reference, vntill Crokey had procured foure seuerall The Warrants. Warrants, Smith well knowing that Crokey had brought vp to London ma­ny Witnesses. Witnesses, some of whom 100. miles distant from thence to his great trouble and charge; and that Crokey had them in a readinesse the first day ap­pointed by the said committees, and had feed his Councell diuers times therein for the better informa­tion of their Lordships in the behalfe of the Schoole.

27. That vpon the fourth Warrant Smith appea­red, and the cause vpon the said Reference came to be heard before the Lord Archbishop, and the o­ther [Page] 2. Lords Bishops; & vpon opening the cause; & arguments and proofes before their Lordships made by the Councell on both sides, their Lordships Certificate. cer­tified his late Maiestie of the powerfulnes & indirect practices of Smith for getting the inheritance of all the Schoole lands worth 300. pound per annum for 5. pound Certificate. In which Certificate their Lordships held fit, that Crokey should petition the Lord Chanceilor, for a third Commission to settle the said Schoole in her ancient estate Crokey accordingly Petitioned, and therevpon obtained an Order Order. in Chancery of the 21. of Ferbruary, Anno [...]. Regni regis Iacobi, that a Commission should be awarded to the Bishops of Glocester and Bristoll and others: Whereupon Cro­key laboured for another Commission according to the said Order, but could nor prauaile vntill he com­plained to the Parliament, which was about 16. mo­neths after the said Order, and then he obtained ano­ther Order in Parlia­ment. Cōmission which was duly executed as more particularly appeareth in the 37. Section of this Re­lation.

28. That Crokeyes Tryall vpon the said Lease of Eiectment by Smithes indirect dealing, was delayed 4. yeares and Copy of the Ver­dict and Iudgement. more, but after that delay it was try­ed at the Common pleas Barre, viz. in Easter Terme Anno 18. Regni regis Iacobi, though Smith ear­nestly laboured by himselfe and others to haue auoy­ded that Tryall, and Smith then laboured to seduce the said Bodham Crokeyes Lessee to Witnesses. release, vpon which Tryall, the matter was so strongly defended by Smithes Councell, that the Tryall continued from 9. in the morning to 1. in the afternoone, which was by reason Smith and his Councell stood so mainely and so confidently vpon his said seuerall bad tytles and practices.

29. That at that Tryall the Lord Hobart and the [Page] rest of the Iudges of that Court vsed all good and iust endeuours for discouering of the truth whereby Smithes bad tytles (so strongly vrged and insisted vp­on) were confuted, which Smith perceiuing, and that the Tryall must needs passe against him, and thereby all his practices come to light, and bee brought to naught to his vtter disgrace and infamy: Smith cryed Witnesses. out with a lowd voyce in most earnest and pittifull manner to the Iudges that he was vndone, if they would not haue compassion on him, and with­all besought them in all he might to draw Crokey to some composition, or to referre the cause to them: Whereupon the Iudges in compassion of Smith ear­nestly moued Crokey to referre the matter to them, but Crokey refused so to doe, telling the Iudges that the cause concerned the Schoole more than him­selfe, and for which he had vndertaken, and was in­gaged both in his duty to God, for the common good, and by his profession to his late Maiestie, the Archbishop of Canterbury, and others; And these motions by Smith to the Iudges, and the Iudges to Crokey were betweene the time of the Iuries going from the Barre, and giuing vp their verdict which was not giuen vp vntill the next morning, and then it passed for Copy of the Ver­dict and Iudgement. Crokeyes said Lessee.

30. That a day or two after the virdict, Crokey by his Councell moued the Court for Iudgement and possession according to the aforesaid verdict and Rules, made by the assent of Smith and his Councell as aforesaid, which Rules and verdict notwithstan­ding, and notwithstanding also the 4. yeares delay and more of that Tryall by Smithes meanes, and the Statutes of Ieofaile made 32. H. 8. C. 30. 2. Edw: 6. C. 32. 18. Eliz. C. 13. by which (as Crokey conceiued) Smith was debarred from vsing any further delay af­ter the Verdict, yet Smith (still p [...]secuting his im­portunity [Page] [...] to the Iudges, and vpon his false suggestions to them) was permitted to speake in arest of Iudgement, whereby Crokey was delayed both the Easter and Trinity Termes next after the Verdict, and the said Lease of Eiectment (which was for 5. yeares) being then well-nigh expired, Cro­key in the latter end of August then next following Copy of the Peti­tion and direction. Peticioned his Maiestie for his Maiesties direction to the Iudges in that behalfe, whereupon his Maie­stie was pleased to signifie his pleasure by Sir Iohn Sucklyn then Master of Requests 3. Sept. 1620. which was, that the Lord Hobart, and the rest of his Maie­sties Iudges of the Common pleas should cause the said Rules of the said Court, so made in open Court by consent of both parties, to be performed accor­ding to the true intent and meaning of the same; In regard the Lease for tryall of the tytle in the premi­ses made to the said Bodham, was that moneth of September to expire. Which directions from his Maiestie Crokey presented to the Lord Hobart before the expiration of the said Lease for the eiectment, which Directions notwithstanding, & notwithstan­ding also the said Rules, and the Statutes of Ieofaile & 4. yeares delay, before the said Tryall, Crokey could not obtaine Iudgement, vntill the said Lease for Try­all of the Tytle was expired, and then Iudgement was awarded; But the said Lease being by the said delayes worne out, Crokey could not by Law haue any Writ for possession according to the said Ver­dict Rules, and his Maiesties most gratious Directi­on and intention in that beholfe so signified, or the said Statutes of Ieofaile; All which delay and stay of iudgement, seeming onely to be but vpon a meere suggestion by Smith, which Affedauit to proue Tippets name so to be. was that one of the Iu­rors names called Tippets was mistaken, and in the Record written Tripets, and though Crokey did [Page] often during that delay of Iudgement offer to Witnesses. proue, and to produce the Record to shew the contrary, and in the end did proue so much.

31. That during the said delay of Iudgement, and betweene the said Verdict and Iudgement Smith (to crosse all former proceedings of the Schoole and the Verdict) vpon diuers vntrue suggestions compi­led in a Petition to his late Maiestie procured a Re­ference from his Maiestie signified by Sir Sidney Mountagu Master of Requests 25. Iunij 1620. The effect of which Petition and Reference; Copy of the Peti­tion and Reference. As also Cro­keys Answere thereunto next follow, viz.

32. That Smith vsed the said Petition and Refe­rence to the intent aforesaid, and as an Instrument to moue the Lord Hobart further to presse Crokey to a composition, and to delay the Iudgement, and so it came to passe, for at the hearing vpon Smithes said Petition and his Maiesties Reference thereupon, the Lord Hobart pressed Crokey to referre the matter to him and the other Iudges of that Court, which Crokey refusing could not obtaine Iudgement (as be­fore is said) vntill the Lease was expired, and then obtained Iudgement, but no possession notwithstan­ding the said Rules Verdict, and his Maiesties said expresse directtions for the same: But Smith procu­red one Gayre one of Master Brownlows Clerkes to al­ter the said Rules of Court, by razing and interly­ning the Rules. Record; Whereupon, and vpon proofe made and Gayres confession in Court, the Lord Ho­bart and that Court committed Smith to the Fleete, for not yeelding possession. But Smith shortly after obtained his libertie, and so was at large vntill Cro­key complained that Smith had not yeelded possessi­on [Page] according to the said Rules, whereupon Smith was committed againe, but shortly after was released without performing the said Rules, and so Crokey cannot obtaine possession to this day.

33. That shortly after the Tryall vpon Smiths said Petition and his Maiesties said Reference thereup­on, ( viz. in Michaelmasse Terme Anno Regni regis Iae­cobi 18.) his Maiesties Attourney Decree hereafter. following, Sect. 41 Generall by direction of the Lord Hobart, exhibited an Informa­tion in Chancery against Smith and Crokey, thereby supposing a confederacy Order. between Smith and Cro­key to take away or peruert the possessions of the said Schoole, and to supplant the same. To which Information Crokey answered, Crokeys An­swer. and thereby cleared himselfe of that suggestion, vtterly disclayming all other interest in or to the Schoole or Lands other­wise then by his said right to Warrens Court, and his zeale for preseruation of the said Schoole and pos­sessions thereto belonging, and withall by his said Answer charged Smith with his seuerall practices a­gainst the Schoole, and thereby also shewed in how many cases he had defended the said Schoole against Smith and others, that had gone about to supplant it. But Smith by his Smithes Answer. Answer to the said Informa­tion set forth all his bad tytles herein before mentio­ned, and thereto added many vntrue suggestions, howbeit vpon the said Information [...] an Order Iniunction. Iniunction against Crokey, and thereby stopped all Crokeys proceedings in Law or Chancery in be­halfe of the Schoole, or in his owne behalfe euer since against Smith, which Iniunction Smith himselfe serued upon Crokey, and which Crokey obeying, Cro­key forbore any further proceeding in Law, or Chan­cery in that behalfe; and by that meanes all Crokeys endeuours which he had so faithfully, and zealously followed in behalfe of the Schoole were vtterly de­feated, [Page] contrary to his Maiesties said directions, and contrary to the Honourable and Charitable ende­uours of the said Lord Archbishop, the Lord Chancellour, and of the Lords Bishops of London and Winton.

34. That vpon the motion Confessed Smiths Decree in Chancery. Lord Hobarts War­rant. of Master Attorney Generall (according to the direction of the Lord Hobart) the Lord Chancellour awarded a Commis­sion vpon the Statute of Charitable vses, leauing the nomination of the Commissioners to the Lord Ho­bart, Witnesses, who nominated Commissioners, Crokey not as­senting thereunto, But that Commission (though sealed) was neuer put in execution, for the Parlia­ment was then at hand.

Not to be denyed.35. That Smith procured himselfe to be made a Burgesse in that Parliament for Midhurst in the County of Sussex 130. miles distant from his resi­dence, and this was anno 16 [...]0.

36. That neuerthelesse Crokey presented a Bill Bill in Parlia­ment. in that Parliament against Smith on behalfe of the Schoole, and thereupon obtained an Order in Parlia­ment. order of Par­liament for another Commission vpon the Statute of charitable (vses so long before sought for by Cro­key) to inquire according to the Statute of Charita­ble vses, and withall ordered that the Lords Bishops of Worcester and Glocester and Bristoll, and their Chancellours, and others should bee Commissio­ners.

Witnesses.37. That Crokey sued forth that Commission, and going on in the execution thereof, and hauing [...] before had [...] losses, at Sea and other wayes, and Crokey being indebted to one Augustine Haruy 50. pound, for which Haruy had Crokeyes Bond of 100. pound, Crokey was arrested vpon that Bond, and detained, and when Crokey offered to Witnesses. satisfie the debt Haruy had made ouer that Bond to one Ash­man, [Page] & Haruy, and Ashman Order declaring the same. together, had made ouer the same to one Fisher, and so Crokey could not know with whom to deale, which intricasie (as it seemeth, and as Crokey is verily perswaded) came by the meanes of Smith, or some of his Agents and confe­derates, for that Smith had before by himselfe and others his confederates dealt with others of Crokeys Creditors to buy Witnesses. Crokeys debts, and Crokey is the rather so perswaded, for that at the time Crokey was so arrested, one Bird (whom Smith hath long vsed and imployed in his affaires) and one Archer a seruant of Smithes were at that his arrest, and for that also Smith hath beene very inquisitiue to know what matters were against Crokey in the Kings Bench, and for that also Crokey hath since endeuoured by all meanes to giue satisfaction whereby to release himselfe but can­not, Orders of the Chan­cery. as may appeare by that which immediatly fol­loweth; For Crokey when he had so offered satisfacti­on, and was notwithstanding so put off, and sued at Law in the name of Haruy, Crokey cōmensed a suite in Chancery against Haruy and Ashman in point of e­quity, & there Crokey hauing obtained an An Iniunction vn­der Seale. Iniuncti­on to stay the said suit at Law, Haruy & the rest with­out any notice to Crokey, or any for him by vntrue suggestions obtained a Affedauit. Report, and so the cause was dismissed and that Iniunction was dissolued, and which was at the very time when Haruy or Ashman should haue shewed cause, why they should not haue accepted the 50. pound Order. principall. Whereupon Crokey vpon his Petition obtained a Petition Refe­rence. Reference from his Maiestie anno 1620. to Sir Edm: Boyer, and Sir George Paul Knights to mediate, but Haruie though Affedauit. serued with their Warrant would not appeare; Vpon that Crokey obtained an Iniunction vnder Seale. Iniuncti­on in the Court of Requests for stay of Haruies pro­ceedings at Law which Haruy also contemned and [Page] proceeded to a Iudgement, Crokey vpon that obtai­ned a Protection. Protection of the Parliament; At which time Crokey going on in the execution of the said Commission so awarded by order in Parliament was notwithstanding his said Protection taken Witnesses. in Exe­cution when the Iudges were gone their Circuit, and the Parliament proroged. And the said debt being so made ouer, Crokey was so intangled, as that when Crokey and his friends tendered the whole hundred pounds, and 7. pound more for costs for his release of imprisonment, no other matter being against him no penny would be accepted, and so Crokey lay fiue moneths in Prison vntill the Parliament sate againe, and then Petitioning to Petition to the Parliament and dis­charge. the Parliament, was re­leased. And all this trouble came vpon Crokey when he was to haue followed that Commission so awar­ded by order in Parliament and by Smithes meanes, as Crokey is verily perswaded for the reasons afore­said; yet did not Crokey neglect that Commission, but to his great Witnesses. charge of threescore pounds and vpward imployed others therein; And so the said Commission was executed at Glocester by the said Bishops and others, and an Inquisition was found 19. Regni regis Iacobi by the oathes of 17. Iurors all substantiall and men of good estates of the County of Glocester. Whereupon the said Commissioners returned the said Commission and Copies of the Com­mission, Inquisition, Certificate and De­cree. Inquisition, to­gether with their Decree and Certificate thereupon, the same being Dated 19. September Anno Regni re­gis Iacobi 19. which said Certificate and Decree was to the effect following, viz.

38. That shortly after the returne of the said Commission so executed as aforesaid by direction of the Parliament and Inquisition, Certificate and De­cree; thereupon Smith, (perceiuing that the Parlia­ment was soone after to be dissolued) notwithstan­ding [Page] he had formerly wayued all exceptions to the aforesaid Inquisition, Certificate and Decree, which is by the said Commissioners certified as aforesaid, yet Smith vpon the ending of that Parliament, ob­tained an Order. Exceptions. Crokeys Answer to those Exceptions. Order in Chancery of the 3. of December, to put in new exceptions to the said Commissio­ners said proceedings, which Crokey in defence of the Schoole answered. And the Parliament (be­ing then ended) Crokey applyed himselfe to the Chancery for a day of hearing, not doubting a confirmation of the said Inquisition, Certificate and Decree, which day of hearing after much labour Crokey obtained, And so the cause was by the Lord Keeper ordered Order. to be heard before his Lordship and Iustice Hutton, wherewith Crokey was well satis­fied, but when the cause came to bee heard, Iustice Chamberlaine who married with the Lady Berkley (Smith being her chiefe Steward) in stead of Iustice Hutton sate in Court, and so the cause was heard Order. 17. Iuly anno 20. Regni regis Iacobi. At which hea­ring Smithes exceptions were argued, and being found friuolous, no resolution was thereupon, yet was not the said Decree so made by the said Com­missioners in that Commission vpon the Statute of charitable vses confirmed, as Crokey expected; but at that time the Lord Keeper granted Order. another Com­mission vpon that Information which was exhibited by Master Attourney Generall two yeares before not prosecuted, by reason the same cause was exhibi­ted by Crokey in a Bill to the Parliament, where the same was Order in Parlia­ment. ordered and proceeded vpon, as before is said, Sect. 36. Which proceeding last spoken of in Chancery, quite tooke away all Crokeys prosecution for the Schoole a second time. And in which Com­mission diuers of Smiths Witnesses. friends were made Com­missioners, some of whom had declared themselues [Page] open opposors of the Schoole, and Crokey by their demenour against the due execution of former Commissions sued out by Crokey in the behalfe of the Schoole, which Commissioners Crokey much Witnesses, Petiti­on, and Answer. laboured both by Petition and motion in Court to haue altered, but could not therein preuaile. And yet the Lord Keeper at that hearing very sharply re­proued Smith plainely telling him that he had left no practice vnatempted to supplant the Schoole as in­deed is true.

39. That Smith (going on with that Commission vpon the said Information) practiced againe with Haxuy, Ashman, and Fisher, or some of them to im­prison Crokey a second time for the said debt of 50. pound, for which Crokey was before discharged by Parliament, whereupon Crokey commenced another suite in Chancery against Haruy and Fisher. That cause was referred to Sir Iames Hussey, Report. who repor­ted that it was reasonable Fisher should accept of the principall, which was 50. pound. which Fisher refu­sed, whereupon Crokey obtained a Warrant from the late Lord chiefe Iustice and others his Maiesties Commissioners appointed to heare the causes of Prisoners for their reliefe, directed to the said Haruy and Fisher for their appearauce before the said Com­missioners for Prisoners; But the said Haruy vpon the first summons appeared not, nor did Haruy ap­peare at all, but vpon the second summons Fisher ap­peared. And the cause being heard Certificate of the Commissioners, and their opinions. Fisher would not conforme himselfe to any order; Whereupon the Commissioners gaue him further day, and then appearing also, would by no meanes or mediation conforme himselfe, but stood out in contempt of that Commission, then affirming that he would haue the extremity of the Law against Crokey, and which the said Commissioners haue The same Certi­ficate. certified, and of their [Page] opinions therein. And further, Fisher gaue forth in speeches, that he cared not for his debt, nor for the whole money vpon the Execution, for hee would make dice Affedauit. of Crokeys bones. And therefore, and for the reasons aforesaid declared in the 37. Section. Crokey is verily perswaded, that Smith had his hand in all these matters betweene Crokey and Haruy, Ash­man and Fisher, Crokey doth know that one Not to be denyed. Farrer a Clerke in Chancery, was a chiefe Agent in this confederacie.

40. That the said Commission. Order. Commission so awarded vpon the said Information, did beare Teste, 24. Iuly anno 20. Regni regis Iacobi, and was grounded vpon an Or­der in Chancery of the 23. of Nouember. Anno Reg­ni regis Iacobi 18. which was before the Parliament. And which Order was granted vpon his late Maie­sties Reference vpon Smiths Petition, wherein were diuers vntrue suggestions, as before Section 31. and which are also there answered. And that his Maie­sties Reference vpon so false a petition, should be so farre extended in the behalfe of Smith, that sought to supplant the Schoole, and to doe all wrong, and that not onely his Maiesties former References, but also his seuerall directions vpon seuerall true Petitions presented by Crokey in behalfe of the Schoole, and Crokey, before mentioned Section 20. 26. 30. should be altogether neglected and slighted, as also the di­rections by Parliament betweene the time of the said Order, and the time of the hearing (whereupon the said Order of the 17. of Iuly, Anno 20. Regni regis Iacobi, which was some 22. months after) Crokey most humbly submitteth himselfe to the consideration of his Maiestie, and this high and Honourable assem­bly. And whether Smith in this businesse hath shew­ed his power, his subtilty, and vnconscionable pra­ctices, and consequently his abuses both to his late [Page] Maiestie, and his Magistrates and Iudges. For the manner of the execution of the last mentioned Commission: It was as Crokey before imagined it would be, when he laboured to haue had an alterati­on of the Commissioners names; But as to that Cro­key hath fully spoken in his answer to the Decree, grounded vpon the said Information and order of the 23. of Nouember, and vpon the said last men­tioned Commission thereupon, Sect. 42. number 4.

41. That for diuers indirect practices and misde­meanours done by the said Smith and his confede­rates, tending to the supplanting and ouerthrow of the said Schoole, Crokey (being incouraged by the Archbishop of Canterbury, who had well informed himselfe of the cause on the behalfe of the Schoole) exhibited a Bill into the Starchamber against Smith and others, and serued Smith with a Subpena before the Parliament in anno 1619. But Smith hauing at­tained the place of a Burgesse in Parliament as be­fore is said, Crokey was delayed for the time of Parli­ament, and long after (which was about 16. moneths) before Smith could be brought to Answer; In the end Smith answered. But so it was with Cro­key, that by that delay of Smithes, and Smithes other said practices together, Crokey was disabled and de­cayed in his estate, and imprisoned in manner and by Smithes meanes as aforesaid, Sect. 37. And yet Crokey (hauing a constant care for restoring the said Schoole and possessions thereof, and being desirous to discouer the practices and misdemeanours by Smith and his confederates, opposors, and declared enemies thereto set forth by and vpon his said Bill in the Starchamber) tooke out 5. Subpenaes against the other Defendants. Dated 30. Ianuary, Anno Reg­ni regis Iacobi 20. vpon which day the cause vpon the said Information in Chancery came to be heard the [Page] second time before the Lord Keeper, Iustice Cham­berlaine, and Iustice Iohnes Assistants. Whereupon the Court decreed not onely contrary to, and against the said Commission so awarded by Parliament vp­on the Statute of charitable vses, and against the said Inquisition, Certificate, and Decree, vpon the said Commission, but also against Crokeys particular right. At which hearing, Crokey was not admitted to produce any matter in behalfe [...] of himselfe, but was inioyned to forbeare all further suites against Smith; Nor was there any further time spent vpon the said hearing, then opening the said Information, Suruey, and Certificate vpon the said Commission so awarded vpon the said Information; which Decree was in effect as followeth, And where­to Crokey hath particularly Answered, which he (for your better information in all humility as becom­meth) doth present to the consideration of your Maiestie and this Honourable assembly.

❧ May it please this High and Honourable Assembly to obserue, that the said last recited Decree is grounded vpon a Commission of Suruay without examination of any Witnesses vpon Oath as the Commission required, neither are any depositions of Record in that cause nor the Suruayers sworne.

Which Commission of Suruay and Decree, proceeded by vertue of Smiths cautelous Petition to his late Majestie and Reference.

Whereupon the late Lord Keeper granted the sayd Commission of Suruay as aforesaid, which is meerely repugnant to the directions of the Lords Grace of Canterbury, and proceedings of the late Lord Chancellor and diuers other Reuerent Bishops, and contrary to the directions of the most Honorable the higher House of Parliament, and the proceedings thereupon by Reuerent Bishops and others, ac­cording to the Statute of Charitable vses, as by the inquisition De­cree and Certificate found for the sayd Schoole appeareth.

Whereby Crokey humbly prayeth this Honourable Assembly to take in consideration.

had little expectation of any good successe by that suite in Starchamber, being so foyled by that Decree in the ground and maine of all his suites against Smith. And yet Smith (vpon Crokeys forbearance in that Starchamber cause) pro­cured 52. pounds costs to be taxed against Crokey, though Crokey proceeded no further then to Bill and Answer of 3. Defendants, with which 52 pounds Costs Crokey is now al­so charged in the Kings Bench.

Matters thus standing, and being in this conflict betweene Crokey and Smith.

May it please your Maiestie, and the rest of this high and Honourable assembly to consider by how many waies, all in places Iudicature and authority may be deluded, and abu­sed in the administration of Iustice, by Impostors, practices, plotters, and deceiuers, that bend their mindes and indea­uours wholly to iniurie and oppression, without regard whom they delude, deceiue, and abuse, for their owne im­pious ends, seeming not to dread any punishment either in this life, or in the life to come, most impiously outfacing and deluding all Iustice and authority, as in this man Smith, your Maiestie and the rest by this plaine Relation may discerne.

Crokeys most humble suite wherefore, is in the conclusion as in the beginning: And that the matters before spo­ken of, and wherewith Smith is charged, may be exa­mined by this high and Honourable Assembly that the right may appeare, and so be adiudged and deter­mined, and in such sort as shall seeme most fit, where­in Crokey vnder reformation particularly offereth to consideration the particulars insuing, viz.

That the Commission, Inquisition, Certificate, and De­cree, vpon the Statute of charitable vses by direction of Parliament 16. may be maintained and prosecuted; and that the said last recited Decree in Chancery to euery point whereof Crokey hath answered, may bee made voyde by [Page] authoritie of this present Parliament.

That the Schoole and possessions thereto belonging may be reduced according to the meaning of the Foun­ders, with such other additions as this high Court shall hold meet and agreeable to the time.

That [...] Peter Bird, placed vpon part of the Schoole lands by Smithes meanes, and Cowper now pla­ced as Schoolemaster may be remoued, for that they haue beene, and are practicers with Smith in all or most of his designes for supplanting the Schoole, and his instruments alwayes ready to execute any euill act for Smith.

But what order it shall please your Maiestie and this high Court to award for Crokey, in respect of his long and great expence of his whole estate and more, to the value of 2200. pounds for the rectifying of the said Schoole, and defending the tytle of the Schoole, to the vtter neglect of all his owne affaires, being before a Merchant of good cre­dit and trading.

And for Crokeys right and possession to and in Warrens Court according to his [...]ence, and according to the Finall triall, Verdict, Iudgement, and Rules in Court, and according to his Maiesties directions mentioned in Section the 30.

And for the meane profits of Warrens Court worth 80. pound per annum, by Smith wrongfully kept from him since Crokeys first entry, which is 12. yeares.

And for the 297. pounds Costs which Smith was to pay Crokey for wrong vexation in Starchamber some 7. years detained, as by the Dismission and seuerall Orders, and Bill of Costs mentioned, Section 18.

For the remitting of the 52. pounds Costs obtained by Smith vnduly in Starchamber against Crokey vpon Bill and Answer mentioned in the 41. Section, for Crokeyes great labour and toyle both of his body and minde [Page] 12. yeares together, with the wasting and consuming of his vitall spirits in bearing the assaults and insufferable wrongs of Smithes impietie, and improbiety in the pre­seruation of the said Schoole being moued thereunto for Gods cause, and no benefit to himselfe without con­tribution of any, with the blame of many of his dea­rest friends for so great earnestnesse in a common cause generally neglected and violently opposed, that vnlesse the speciall mercy and great goodnesse of God had as­sisted and strengthened his weakenesse in so sore a con­flict, in so iust a cause, which Crokey holdeth to be more pretious then life it selfe, (as in the 4. Chapter of Ecclesia­sticus the 28. verse) Striue for the truth vnto death, and de­fend Iustice for thy life, and the Lord God shall fight for thee against thine enemies.

Vnto all which Crokey most humbly submits himselfe.