Clement Paston to John Paston

627

CLEMENT PASTON TO JOHN PASTON³

To hys rythe worchypfwll mayster, John Paston, Sqwyer.

      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
Chawncelerer⁴ 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 suster¹ 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,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.

———————————————

     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.                                                  ⁴So in MS.

     ¹ Elizabeth, widow of Robert Poynings.                  ² 23rd March.

MARCH 18

1466
MARCH. 18