Memorandum, that Charlys Nowell is baly of Brayston, and hath ther ijd. on the day, and of that mater growyth his malys.
Item, memorandum of them that for fer of disclosid of her falsenes acusid odyr that they shuld not be thowth gilti hemself, and labour to have the mater handlid be her frends that the trowth shuld not be triid owt.
[273.1] [From Paston MSS., B.M.] This paper bears upon the same matters as the last, and must be attributed to the same date. The MS. is a draft, with corrections in John Paston’s handwriting.
[273.2] The Duke of Norfolk.
[273.3] Mountford was disseised of Brayston by Daniel in the spring of 1450, but recovered possession on the 23rd September. I find no note of his having been disseised again, but I should think he must have been, as this paper is certainly two years later.
[220]
EDMUND WYCHYNGHAM TO JOHN PASTON[275.1]
To my ryth trusty Cosyn, John Paston, escwier.
1452–3
OCT.
Ryth reverent and trusty Cosyn, I recomande me to zow, thankyng zow of zour good wil and counseill. Like zow to wete, I cam hom be myn Lord of Oxeford and told hym of the greet labour of Sir Thomas Tudenham and Heydon for schirevez of owr schire, and namyd the personez quom thei laboryd fore, and myn Lord agreeyth not to tweyne of hem; to the knyth he seyd not moch to, but I felt my lord he wold labore for William Dorward, myn neview.[275.2] And thanne I answerd, Sir, he may not profite me in myn matere for he hath weddyd myn nece. Also I felt myn Lord that myn Lord Crumwell laboryth for Stonham of Huntyngton schire, Sir John Tirell howe [who] weddyd hese modir, hese sone executour to my Lady Clyfton, with Heydon and othir memento, &c. And to fore I cam to Framyngham myn lord of Norffolk hadde wrytyn for Sir Robert Conyers, takyng promys of hym to be rewlyd in alle matterez as myn Lord of Norffolk wil avyse hym, and as an undirschireve ze schall be acounseill therof. And as touchyng Lee, as I am enformyd, ther ys no man that he wil do lesse for thanne for Sir Thomas Tudenham. And as touchyng myn seyd Lord of Norffolk, he hath wrytyn, or I cam, be Debenham, as he may not wel returne, and the personez ben Sir Robert Conyers, Henry Gray, Thomas Brews. And I suppose as for Thomas Brews he schall be translate in to myn brothir John Blake, but myn seyd Lord of Norffolk hath previly (?) wrytyn to the Kyng for Sir Robert Conyers promisyd[276.1] be the seyd Sir Robert that he schall non undirshireve, ne non othir officer make, but be the avyse of myn seyd Lord of Norffolk counseill, to qwhom ze schall be prevy to And I have no dowte zour owyn materez schall ben speed aftir zour entent myn seyd Lord of Norffolk wil with alle hese herte that Blake schuld be it, or ellez the seyd Sir Robert with alle hese herte. And yf myn Lord of Norffolk, to for myn comyng, hadde be a vertysyd, he wold a do hese trew parte ther to, as I suppose he schall have vere knalich from myn Lord. I preye zow remembre William Bury for myn venire facias. And yf it likyd myn brothir Blake to remembre my welbelovyd mayster Sir John Bawryte (?) of myn mater I trust he wold remembre the Kyng ther of atte hese leyser; for he knowyth the matere, and that Debenham hath greet charge to labore myn seyd Lordys materez of Norffolk, levying the favour of Sir Thomas Tudenham. Aftir I here I schall send zow be wrytyn. I preye zow in like forme. God preserve zow to Hese grace. Wrytyn atte Framyngham the Fryday next to fore the feste of Simon and Jude. E. Wychyngham.
[275.1] [Add. MS. 33,597, f. 1.] The year when this letter was written is not exactly certain, but seems to have been either 1452 or 1453. It might be 1450, except that one would have expected in October of that year to hear something about the parliamentary election, as well as the election of sheriffs.