[Footnote 154.2: [From Paston MSS., B.M.] As this letter refers to
Paston’s disputes with the Duke of Suffolk and his officers, the
date must be 1465.]
[Footnote 156.1: _i.e._, the dead man’s goods.]
[[To my ryght wyrshipfull husband
_text has “husbana” (italic a for d)_]]
591
[JOHN PASTON] TO MARGARET PASTON AND OTHERS[156.2]
_To my cosyn Margret Paston and to John Dawbeney and Richard Calle._
[Sidenote: 1465 / JUNE 27]
I recomande me to yow, and have received a letter from yow and a nother
for Richard Calle be John Colman, and . . be Roos; and I have received
of Colman the plate and mony acording Richard Callis letteris. Item,
I con yow thonk ye send me word the prise of corn. Item, as for yowr
sone,[157.1] I lete yow wete I wold he dede wel, but I understand in hym
no disposicion of policy, ne of governans as man of the werle owt to do,
but only levith and ever hath as man disolut with owt any provision, ne
that he besiith hym nothinge to understand swhech materis as a man of
lyvelode must nedis understond; ne I understond nothing of what
disposicion he porposith to be, but only I kan thynk he wold dwell ayeyn
in yowr hows and myn, and ther ete and drinke and slepe.[157.2] Therfor
I lete yow wete, I wold know hym or he know myn entent, and how wel he
hath ocupiid his tym now he hath had leyser. Every pore man that hath
browt up his chylder to the age of xij. yer waytyth than to be holp and
profited be hes chylder, and every gentilman that hath discrecion
waytith that his ken and servantis that levith be hym and at his coste
shuld help hym forthward. As for yowr sone, ye knowe well he never stode
yow ne me in profite, ese or help, to valew of on grote, savyng at
Calkot Hall whane [he[157.3]] and hes brothir keptid on day ayeyns
Debenham, and yet was it at iii. [times[157.3]] the coste that that ever
Debenham sones put hym to. For be her police [_by their policy_] they
kepe Cotton at my cost and with the[157.4] profitis of the same. Wherfor
geff hem no favor tyle ye feel what he is and will be.
Item, Calle sendith me word that Master Phylip[157.5] hat entrid in
Drayton in my Lord of Suffolk’s name, and hat odir purpose to entre in
Heylisdon, and he askith my avyse; whech is that ye confort my tenantis
and help hem til I com hom, and lete hem wet I shall not lese it, and
that the Dowk of Suffolk that last diid wold have bouth it of Fastolff,
and, for he mygth not have it so, he claymyd the maner, seying it was on
Polis [_one Pole’s_], and, for his name was Poole, he claymed to be eyr.
He was ansueryed that he com nothing of that stok, and how
somever[157.6] wer kyn to the Polis that owth[157.7] it it hurt not, for
it was laufully bowth and sold, and he never kleymid it after. Item,
I am in purpose to tak assise ageynse hem at this tyme, and elles I wold
have sent thedir streyt be a letter of attorney to entre in my name;
never the les ye be a gentilwoman, and it is worshep for you to confort
yowr tennauntis; wherfor I wold ye myth ryd to Heylisdon and Drayton and
Sparham, and tari at Drayton and speke with hem, and byd hem hold with
ther old master til I com, and that ye have sent me word but late,
wherfore ye may have none answer yet, and informe hem as I ha (_sic_)
wrete to ye within; and sey oupinly it is a shame that any man shuld set
anny lord on so ontrwe a mater, and speciall a preste; and lete hem
wete, as sone as I am com hom I shall see hem. Item, that as for
distreyn for rent of ferm, thow the Dewk had tytill, as he hath not, he
may non ask til the next rent day after his entre, that is Michelmes,
and seye that ye will be paiid everi peni and asken hem it. And make
mech of men of Cossey, becawse they wer owr welwillers when we wer
neyboris ther; and lete hem wete that the begyningis of shech mater had
never worchip nor profite of me, ne shall, and desyr god will of yowr
neyboris, &c., and suyn all othir menes that ye kan to plese the pepill.
And lete yowr tenaunts wete that the Dewke may never be lawe compel hem
to torn from me; and do all so well as ye can, and if any entyr be made
in Heylisdon shuff him owt and set sum man to kepe the place, if ned be,
not withstandyng it longith not to the manere. Item, I wold fayn have
sum man to be bayle of Heylisdon and Drayton, &c., that myth go amongis
the tenauntis. And elles I wold han Richard Chyllins (?) to go amond
[_q._ among?] hem tyl I com hom and also Richard Calle whan home. Item,
he sent me word that the tenauntis of Drayton wold not come to the
Dewkis cort and that they will be stefast to me and kepe hem straunge
and froward from the Dewkis cowncell; all this mater shall turne to a
jape and not hurt hem; ner, and if ye be wavering it shall hurt hem.
Item, I let yow wete this is do to cause me to loose my labor ayens hym
for Dedham, which I wil not for it. God kepe yow. Wret the Thursday
befor Sent Petres day.
Item, tel Richard Calle to have wittenses redy. I wol spede this mater
spirituall befor Estern.
[Footnote 156.2: [Add. MS. 34,889, f. 9.] This letter, which is in
the handwriting of John Paston, refers to the proceedings of the
Duke of Suffolk to enforce his claim to Drayton and Hellesden, and
was clearly written in the summer of 1465 on Thursday before St.
Peter’s Day, _i.e._ before the feast of SS. Peter and Paul (29th
June).]
[Footnote 157.1: Sir John Paston.]
[Footnote 157.2: A later hand has here written in the margin: ‘Hic
postea fuit Sir John Paston senior, miles.’ But the _postea_ is
wrong.]
[Footnote 157.3: These words omitted in MS.]
[Footnote 157.4: _the_ repeated in MS.]
[Footnote 157.5: Philip Lipgate, the Duke of Suffolk’s bailiff.]
[Footnote 157.6: ‘How somever’ for ‘whosomever,’ or ‘whoever.’]
[Footnote 157.7: ‘Owth’ for ‘ought,’ _i.e._ owned.]
592