The second count brought against him by his mutinous prisoners was
"Remouing a prisoner out of his chamber, hauing 51 lib. 1 s. hid vnder
his bed, which the prisoner required he might go to his chamber to
dispose of, which was denied, and he thrust vp in another roome close
prisoner, vntill the Warden and some of his seruants rifled his bed of
that mony."
Hear the Warden's defence:--"By this is pretended that one Coppin (who
euer did beare the name of a poore fellowe) lost 51 li., with takeing
whereof, if he dare charge any person or persons the Lawe is and hath
beene open for him theis two yeares past. But his abettors haue putt
it here rather to infame, then that they can think it true, as by the
ensueing answeare appeares.
"For Edward Coppin, liued as a poore prisoner in the Fleete for
breach of a decree, and continueing above six yeares, would never be
drawen to pay the Warden one penny for meate, drinke, lodging, or
attendance; but at last he ran away, and was upon the Warden's pursuite
taken againe, but before he ran away, he was sometymes restrayned of
the libertye of the Fleete yards and walks (as is the custome of all
prisons in England); and he lodging in the three Tower Chambers with
sixteene persons, they often thretned their keeper to stabb him, to
take away the keyes of the prison, to bind him, to hang him; lastly
they fortefied that prison, soe that the Warden could not dispose or
order them. And with two malletts and steele chissells they had cutt
the stone workes of the dore, soe as noe locks or bolts could shutt
them; and while they were thus doeinge Coppin came downe to fetch
a mallett, wherewith he was taken beneath, and presentlie put into
another warde aparte from his fellowes, about three a clock in the
afternoone 15 July 1619, not speakeing of any money."
Master Coppin was one of Boughton's gang, but even that _malfaiseur_
could not back up his claim, for "A rumour was spredd in the Fleete
that Coppin had lost 50 li. The Warden heareing thereof, sent for
Coppin, and asked him: he said he would say nothing except Sir Francis
Inglefield were present. Then the Warden said, Nay, Coppin, if you have
nothing to say to me, you may depart againe.
"Then the Warden was informed by Mr. Boughton and Wall, that the day
before it happened that Coppin was removed, they had made meanes to
borrowe some money upon a pawne, and Coppin professed and swore he had
not so much (being fower (4) pounds) as they demanded. Then the Warden
caused Coppin's trunck (being new and well locked) to be opened in
Coppin's presence, and delivered it to him, in which Trunck within a
Bagg put in a Box (as they said) there was about xxix^s; and then was
sett on foote this rumour when Coppin had advised with Mr. Rookwood to
doe it.
"About January 1620, Edward Coppin confessed that he never receaved any
money since he came to Prison.
"Mr. Williams saith that he hath heard that Coppin hath confessed that
he lost noe money."
So we may acquit the Warden on this count. Poor Man! he had a rough
lot to deal with, but it is to our advantage that it was so, for
his refutation of the charges brought against him throws a flood of
light on the domestic manners of the time, and of the Fleet prison in
particular.
The third count against the Warden was one of robbery, "11 lib. 6 s.
taken out of the Trunk, and by violence, from the person of a close
prisoner sicke in his bed, by the Warden and his seruants." And
Harris meets this, as all others, fairly and straightforwardly. Says
he:--"This toucheth money taken from one Thraske, then a Jewdaiser, or
halfe Jewe, committed close prisoner by the Lords of the Councell, from
whom, and such like, though in the Gatehouse, King's Bench, Fleete,
&c., it hath beene used to take away and keepe their money, yet the
Warden tooke not his until he abused it very dangerouslie, and whether
this takeing away may be said Robbery, let the answeare followeing
decide.
"And although the complainte be used with a Circumstance, as if the
Prisoner were sick, thereby to make a shewe as if the Warden gaped at
his death and money; that was most untrue for Thraske was in perfect
health."
This prisoner was sent to the Fleet, to be put in the pillory, whipped
and branded, and, besides, to suffer solitary confinement, but he found
means to write letters to the King and the Lord Chancellor, and the
Warden was much blamed for allowing him so to do. But poor Harris,
who must have been plagued almost to death by his very recalcitrant
charges, could not find out whence his prisoner procured his writing
materials, and at last came to the correct conclusion that he was
bribing the gaoler who waited upon him. So, with some servants, he
personally searched Mr. Thraske's apartment and person, and found his
pens, ink, and paper, and also £11 6s. in money, together with a bag
and cord with which he used to receive supplies from outside, and by
means of which he disseminated his pernicious literature. All of which
the Warden very properly confiscated, but the money was kept, and used
for the prisoner's benefit. "When Thraske had worne out his cloathes
and desired other, the Lord Chauncellor bid the Warden buy for Thraske
some cloathes, which was done accordingly, even soe much as Thraske
desired; the Warden alsoe gave him money to buy wyne for his comforte
at tymes." And, in the long run, the poor Warden declares that he was
about £80 out of pocket by his prisoner.
The last charge we will investigate, is that of "Excessiue rates of
Chambers." (No. 13 on the list of 19) "Whereby orders no man ought to
pay for any Chamber, the Warden allowing bed and bedding, aboue 2s. 4d.
a weeke, he exacteth 8s., 10s., 13s. 4d. and of some twentie shillings
a weeke without bedding." The Warden replies to this that "the Orders
of the Prison are, That noe Parlor Comoners and Hall Comoners must lye
two in a Bedd like Prisoners, They of the Parlor at ijs. iiijd. the
weeke. They of the Hall at xiiijd. If any such will lye in the Prison
then there is noe question of their payment, nor any more required. But
the missery is this that none there will pay at all, but stand upon it
that they should pay nothing, which is contrary to right, to Custome,
and to usage.... An^o 1597. The Prisoners then Articling against the
Warden Sett forth that one Prisoner paid xxxs. others xxs., xvs.,
xiis., xs. a weeke for Chamber without Bedd. The Warden then made his
Answeare to the Comittees that he took xs. a Chamber, and the rest was
for more chambers than one, and in respect of Dyett, though they had
none, but fetched it abroad.
"Soe if Prisoners will have more ease than ordinarie, and a Chamber or
two for themselves and theirs in the Warden's howse, they are by the
orders and Constitutions to Compound with the Warden for it, it being
the Warden's freehould, and demyseable.... To such prisoners as lye two
in a Bedd, the Warden is to find them Bedd, and for Bedd and Chamber
they are to pay. Whether by Bedd is meant all furniture of Bedding,
that is to be doubted, for it was never put in practise; but as for
those which lye in the Warden's freehould by agreement he is not bound
to find them Bedd or Bedding except it be so conditioned. And such
will hardly vouchsafe to lye on the comon Bedding which passeth from
Man to Man; And the Warden can as hardlie buy a new Bedd for every new
prisoner which cometh, and therefore the lodgings of ease were provided
for men of quality and not for the mean sorte of prisoners, as the
accusation would seeme to inferre; And when Mr. Chamberlayne informed
against the Warden touching Chambers, All the cheife gentlemen in the
Fleete certified under their hands that they held their Chambers by
agreement to have a Chamber alone to each, and were contented with the
rates."
That the Wardenship of the Fleet was an onerous position, may be
inferred from Harris's statement that "he hath had at one tyme the
King's prisoners for two hundred thowsand[108] pounds debt, besides the
affayres of State."
That the office of Warden of the Fleet was of very ancient origin we
have seen in the case of Nathanael de Leveland, and he also proves
that it was heritable, for he, and his family, had held it for 130
years, and more. And it had a far-reaching jurisdiction, for in the 3
Eliz.[109] we learn that "Upon an adjournment of the term to Hertford,
several prisoners were committed to the Castle there. This Castle was
part of the Duchy of Lancaster. The Queen had granted a patent to A. of
the Custody of this Castle for his Life; resolved by the Judges that
the Warden of the Fleet shall have the Custody _there_ of the Prisoners
committed by the Chancery, Common Pleas and Exchequer: For he is the
Officer of those Corts; and although the Patentee has the Custody of
the Castle, and though it be the Prison of the County, yet his interest
ought to give place to the public weal, and common justice."
In course of time, the Wardenship became a position which was openly
sold; and our old friend Harris makes no secret of it. "They likewise
alledge that I^o Elizabeth it was purchased by Tirrell at the rate of
160 li. per annum and that long after it was held at 100 li. per annum,
and refused for 200 li. But now that (thorough extortion) there is made
4,000 li. per annum by the relation delivered to one Mr. Shotbolt.
"To which is answeared, that the purchase paid by Tirrell, (as appears
by the deed inrolled) was 6,000 markes or 4,000 li. which, if it be
devided at tenne or twelve yeares purchase, being more than an office
of that nature was worth in those dayes (which is above three score
yeares past) it will bring 400 li. tenne yeares purchase, and therefore
here is _sutor ultra crepidam_, for 160 li. at that rate would yeild
but 1,600 li. in money, and there was not then the fift part of the
buildings and lodgings which now are.
"Mr. Anslowe (as is credibly informed) held it by fyne (and otherwise)
at 600 li. per annum, and had but some part of the benefitts of the
prison, nothing of the pallace at Westminster. And as for this Warden's
valuation of it at 4000 li. per annum, it might be, supposeing that if
the benefitts of the pallace were had &c. But what if the one with
the other cost in expences 4,000 li. per annum, what will be then
advanced?" &c.
This selling of the Office of Warden, led to a great squabble in the
early days of Queen Anne's reign, and it seems to have arisen in this
way. A Warden of the Fleet, named Ford, in the reign of William and
Mary, was found guilty of suffering one Richard Spencer to escape,
but was acquitted of some minor charges, and a certain Col. Baldwin
Leighton obtained a grant of the Office on April 6, 1690. On June 25,
1691, this grant was quashed, and Leighton soon after died. A Mr.
Tilley, in the fifth year of William and Mary purchased the Inheritance
of the said Office, together with the Mansion and Gardens thereto
appertaining, but on Dec. 23, 1704, judgment was given in the Queen's
Bench that the Office be seized into her Majesty's hands, and this was
affirmed in Parliament.
The discipline in the prison at this time seems to have been very
bad, so much so that many witnesses who could have spoken of Tilley's
misdeeds were hindered from giving evidence, some by being put into
dungeons; others, by violence, bribes, or other artifices. Take a case
in point, which happened about this time. The case of Robert Elliot and
others. "One Francis Chartyres was Arrested at the several Suits of
the said several Persons, about the 4th of May last, all their Debts
amounting to 140 l. and upwards, which cost them 20 l. to effect: And
the said Francis Chartyres being a stubborn and an obstinate Man, and
dangerous to Arrest, he having killed several Persons upon the like
attempt, and at this Arrest run the Bayliffs through. And after he was
taken, he by _Habeas Corpus_ turned himself over to the said Fleet
Prison. And Mr. Tilley, and the Turnkey, and one Whitwood, an Officer
of the Fleet, were acquainted, by the persons above mentioned, what a
dangerous Man he was, and what it cost them to take him; but they took
no notice thereof, and declared they would let him out for all of them;
and so they did, and the next Day the said Persons Arrested him again,
and he went over to the Fleet a second time, and was immediately set
at liberty; who coming to the Persons aforesaid, at whose Suit he was
Arrested, bid them defiance; saying, _He was a Freeman, for that he had
given 18 Guineas for it_, and they _should never have a farthing of
their Debts_, which they now doubt of, the said Chartyres being gone
for Scotland."
Hatton, in his "New View of London," 1708, gives, the boundary of the
_Rules_, and also descants on the pleasantness of the Prison, as an
abode. "Fleet Prison, situate on the East side of the Ditch, between
Ludgate Hill and Fleet Lane, but the Rules extend Southward on the
East side of Fleet Canal to Ludgate Hill, and thence Eastward to Cock
Ally on the South side of Ludgate Hill, and to the Old Bayly on the
North, and thence Northward in the Old Bayley both sides the Street, to
Fleet Lane, and all that Lane, and from the West End, southward to the
Prison again. It is a Prison for Debtors from any part of the Kingdom,
for those that act or speak any thing in contempt of the Courts of
Chancery and Common Pleas; and for the pleasantness of the Prison and
Gardens, and the aforesaid large extent of its Rules, it is preferred
before most other Prisons, many giving Money to turn themselves over to
this from others."
[Footnote 108: Equal in our currency to about three times the
amount.]
[Footnote 109: Reports of Cases, &c., by Sir James Dyer (ed.
1794) vol. ii. p. 204 a.]
[Illustration]
[Illustration]