4(X) Wellington Administration, Star-Chamber, [^Oct. 



" Anno 1633. Webster versus Lucas. — The defendant (a woman) 

 procured a libellous and scolding letter to be written to the plaintiff, 

 subscribed Joan Tell- Troth, calling him Scoggin, and other disgraceful 

 names, and his wife, Jezebel, and the daughter of Lucifer ; and caused 

 another like scandalous letter, subscribed Tom Tell- Troth, to be sent to 

 the plaintiff. The defendant was committed, fined 40/., bound to her 

 good behaviour, to be to be ducked in a cucking stool at Holborn dyke, 

 acknowledge her offence at the vestry, and pay the plaintiff 201. 

 damage." 



Here, it would seem, it was considered that his majesty was more 

 aggrieved than the plaintiff, for he took 40Z. to his own share, and gave 

 only 201. to the latter. 



" Anno 1633. Att. Regis ver. Bowyer. — -The defendant, for reporting at 

 Reading that the Archbishop of Canterbury, was under confinement for 

 four points, which he called high treason, viz., Ai-minianism, writing 

 to the pope, and two odd opinions about the Virgin Mary and her mid- 

 wife ; and for spreading some other reports about the archbishop's 

 corresponding with the pope, and procuring him several yearly remit- 

 tances out of England, with a great deal of such stuff, was committed 

 to Bridewell, there to be set at work during life, never to go abroad, fined 

 3,000Z., to be set in the pillory at Westminster, in Cheapside, (there to 

 be burned in the forehead with the letters L. and R.) and at Reading, 

 where both his ears were to be nailed thereunto, to have a paper on his 

 head, and to acknowledge his offence at aU three places." 



" Anno 1633. Att. Regis, ore tenus, ver. Apslei/, Armigero. The de- 

 fendant writ a scandalous and libellous letter to the Earl of Northum- 

 berland, containing a challenge, but appointed neither time nor place ; 

 he subscribed the letter with his name, sealed it up, and sent it to the 

 earl, without acquainting any one with its contents. The court ad- 

 judged it to be both a libel and a challenge ; and the defendant was 

 committed to the Tower during his majesty's pleasure, fined 5,000/., to 

 be bound to his good behaviour during life, never to come within the 

 verge of the king's household, saving during his imprisonment, dis- 

 abled to have or execute any office, to acknowledge his offence upon 

 his knees to his majesty and this court, and make such submission to 

 the Earl of Northumberland in the presence of the earl marshal and 

 such others as his lordship shall caU to him, and in such sort, as the said 

 earl shall direct." 



The following case, though not one of libel, may serve to shew what 

 punishment impended over the man who dared to behave uncivilly to 

 any one connected with the court. 



" Anno 1634. Att. Regis, per Rel. Sir George Theobald, versus 

 Morley. The defendant, in the dining hall of his majesty's palace of 

 Whitehall, (whither the king and queen were then coming to dancing) 

 shaked his head and bent his brows at the relator (or plaintiff) being 

 one of the gentlemen pensioners then attending, laid hands on his cloak, 

 shaked him, caught him by the throat, called him base rascal, base 

 dunghill rogue, swore he would be revenged on him, and cut his throat, 

 threatened to kick him, and challenged him to go out and fight ; and, 

 being advised by the treasurer and the comptroller to consider where he 

 was, he answered them very intemperateiy and called the relator base 

 fellow ; and after the dancing was over, and the king gone, he chal- 

 lenged the relator, and, in the court yard, took him by the throat and 



