1466
MARCH 18
Rythe worchypfwll broder, I recomawnde me to zow. And as for zour letter to my Lorde Chawnceler I have not delyveryd it; for I askyd avysse there in, and I was aunsweryd there in that sythen he was takyn to baylle, the Chawncelerer[217.4] cowde not compelle the swertes to bryng hym in befor hys day. Also me thowte zour letter was not most plesauntly wrytyn to take to swyche a lorde. And as for the tresorer, hys name is Sir John Fooge, but he is not in London nor wythe the Kyng, so I kan [not] have the letter sent hym but if I hyeryd a man to bere it. And as for zour question of the patentes, Grenfeld and Catesby and Sterkey holdyn it a good question, for the statute is, Patentes dez tenements dount null titill est trouve pur le roy de recorde sount voydez, anno xviij. H. VI. ca. vj. But I trowe in zour cas that be ther opiniounis the Acte of the Parlement is a tytyll of recorde. It is said to the contrary intent, thow the londs be forfetyd of record, yet ther is no certificacion of recorde qwat londes they be, nor wer [where] nor in qwat place they lye; but and thys clawse be in the patents, Non obstante quod nulla inquisicio pro nobis inde est inventa, by Grenfelde is consayle the patents xwld be clerly goode. But me semythe that amendyt not the mater, for be for the makyng of the statute above sayde, patents graunttyd of londs be fore inquisicion were goode and effectuell and the statute is generall:—Patents dount null tytill, &c. sount voydez. Thanne it folowyt well if the Acte of Parlement be no tytyll for the Kyng thann is ther no tytyll for the Kyng of recorde, for that clawse in the patente is no tytyll; than if ther [be] no tytyll, ergo the patents voyde.
My suster[218.1] standythe in the same casse with my Lord of Kent.
Broder, I pray zow send mor mony for my nevew John, for he mwst ellys com hom azen; for the Kyng gothe into Scotlonde, and he is nowther horsyd nor harneysyd, for his grett hors is lykly to dye; and if ze wyll sende it to me or to Christofyr Hanyngton it xall be save for hym. I send zow a letter from hym closyde herin. And I pray spek to my moder that my hors faylle not on Passyon Swnday,[218.2] for thann xall I be redy and thanne xall ower redyng be don. Wrytyn on Twesday nexst after Seynt Gregory is Day. Zowr broder, Clement Paston.
On the back.—The man wold not tak my letter but I wass fayen to gyve hym ijd. for the beryng.
[217.3] [From Paston Letters, B.M.] The reference to the dispute between Elizabeth Poynings and the Earl of Kent, which is alluded to in a subsequent letter, proves this letter to have been written in the year 1466. The earl in question was only so created on the 3rd of May 1465, and John Paston, to whom the letter is addressed, died in May 1466.
[217.4] So in MS.
[218.1] Elizabeth, widow of Robert Poynings.
[218.2] 23rd March.
I wass fayen to gyve hym ijd. for the beryng.
“d.” printed in roman (non-italic) type