Michael Wood consulted Boyd’s ‘Citizens of London’ Index at the Society of Genealogists in London. This source suggested that John Done, the son of Robert Done (the brother of John Done ‘whitebaker’) was also John Done ‘sayler’:
Michael Wood believed that there was no connection between this John Done ‘sayler’ and the family of John Done ‘whitebaker’. (This was subsequently found to be untrue. John Done ‘sayler’ was the nephew of John Done ‘whitebaker’ as suggested by Boyd)
Boyd referred to ‘Chan Proc 1/59 1631 Jun 23’ in connection with John Done ‘whitebaker’. John Wood attempted to check out this reference by looking at Volume 1, page 59 of Chancery Proceedings Temp. Charles 1 – Class C2, but it did not match.
The first appearance of John Done ‘whitebaker’ in the ‘quarterage book’ of the Bakers’ Company was in 1585/6 when his first quarterage due (membership subscription) was in the fourth quarter of that year.
Cases listed by Michael Wood were:
D 5/35 Done v Done &tc
D 20/63 Done v Dixon
D 22/10 Done v Mountstephens
D 31/60 Donne v Donne
D 38/2 Done v Southcott, Knt
D 51/59 Done v Dixon
D 52/5 Done v Rogers
D 52/42 Donne v Donne
D 53/9 Dowe v Dowe
D 54/42 Done v Rogers etc
D 55/9 Done &tc v Done &tc
D 58/18 Downe v Downe &tc
D 58/48 Downe v Downe
Michael Wood considered that the testamentary case we are interested in was more likely to be D5/35 or D55/9, both Done v. Done, although the ‘&tc’ indicated that persons with other surnames were also parties.
The absence of a will for brother Robert (either in the Prerogative Court of Canterbury or amongst the wills of Londoners proved in a local ecclesiastical court) may be because he left no will, but may also be because he was not a Londoner and his will was proved locally elsewhere.
The document collection at the Society of Genealogists has a photocopy of the first two pages of the will of William Done of East Ham, Essex, dated 1627. This indicated that he was not of the immediate family of John Done ‘whitebaker’.
Michael Wood suggested a search of St Dunstan’s parish register for Done entries not on IGI (letter to John Baker dated 26 September 1988)
Michael Wood noted that the ‘Acts of Court’ books are registers in which are summarised the proceedings before the Prerogative Court concerning testamentary disputes. He listed entries under codes PROB 29/28 and PROB 29/29 that refer to ‘Done v Done’ (letter to John Baker dated 6 July 1989).
This research was inspired by the belief that Deacon John may have had some connection with the aristocratic Done family of Cheshire, centred on the Tarporley area of the county. Hence, in 1973, Marilyn London Winton ‘visited the Cheshire Record Office in Chester and extracted all Done/Donne entries up to about 1610 for the parishes of Tarporley (where Utkinton is located) and Tarvin (where Duddon is located)’. She also followed up sources referred to in Gilbert Doane’s article written for the DFA Reunion in 1976, especially that relating to his fifth clue. On the basis that the ages of very aged persons are frequently exaggerated, individuals born between 1589 and 1594 were considered possible Deacon ‘candidates’. Individuals identified as a result of her researches were:
Only one John Done was recorded as having been born in the area covered by the Tarvin and Tarporley parishes between 1589 and 1591. He was John Done, son of Richard and Jane (Hatton) Done of Stableford (Bruen Stapleford on today’s maps), who was baptised on 9 November 1591. An ‘administration’ was granted for the estate of a John Done of Stapleford in 1679, which if it is the same individual, would rule him out as being the Deacon. However, Ms Winton considered that ‘clarification is needed’ and that further research should be undertaken in the Tarvin Parish Register to establish whether he remained in the Parish or not during the period that the Deacon was in America, and if he did, to rule him out as being the Deacon.
This was the John Done discovered by Gilbert Doane as having taken ‘the oath of allegiance in London in 1635’. Ms Winton was unable to find further evidence of the existence of this John Done, but suggested a search of the Tarvin Parish Register in order to establish whether he continued to live in Duddon at the time the Deacon was in America. If he did, he could not be Deacon John.
This John Done, baptised in 1594 in Tarporley, was the son of Thomas and Jane (Myncho) Done. John had a brother Raphe and a sister Dorothy. Ms Winton also found a will of a John Done of St Pancras, Soper Lane, London dated 1624, probate being granted in December 1625. Legacies recorded to brother Raphe and sister Dorothy and other details in the will make it clear that this John Done was one and the same as John Done - the son of Thomas Done, Gent. He could not therefore have been the Deacon or the ‘John Done of Duddon Esqe’ who took the oath of allegiance in 1635.
John Done, the son of James Done of Tarporley, was baptised in June 1593. He had two brothers, Richard (baptised:1587) and Robert (baptised:1590/ died:1592). Again, Ms Winton suggested further research in the Tarporley Parish Register to establish whether or not this John Done remained in the area.
At the beginning of the 17th Century, the English legal system was extremely complex. Of relevance to our research is the fact that much legal activity relating to wills was conducted through the Prerogative Court of Canterbury (PCC), an ecclesiastical court (dealing only with matters covering the southern half of England and the Midlands) that granted ‘probate’ to the executors of wills or ‘letters of administration’ to others, e.g. where there was no executor, or where probate was revoked. The PCC could pass ‘sentences’ of the following kinds:
a) Granting letters of administration.
b) Confirming the grant of letters of administration
c) Revoking letters of administration
d) Declaring in favour of the validity of a will
e) Confirming a grant of probate
f) Revoking a grant of probate
Many actions relating to disputed wills were also pursued through the courts of equity, including ‘Chancery’ and the ‘Star Chamber’ and the courts of common law including ‘Kings Bench’. Chancery was a court that, in the words of the official Guide to the Public Record Office, ‘promised a merciful justice not bound by the strict rules of the common law courts’. The Star Chamber was ‘effectively the King’s Council sitting as a tribunal to enforce law and order’ but also used to adjudicate on ‘private disputes about property rights.’
It is clear that the legal activity surrounding the contesting of the will of John Done, whitebaker, involved several of these jurisdictions, including the PCC, Chancery and the Star Chamber.
Since the sequence of events is important, this table summarises the documents analysed in chronological order.
|
Date (1) |
Document Description |
Summary |
Reference (2) |
|
22 Jan 1595 (1594/5) |
ADMINISTRATION OF ESTATE OF THOMAS DONE, father of John Done ‘whitebaker’
(in Latin & English) |
Administration granted to Juliana Done widow of Thomas Done. Document confirms his residence as Henley-in Arden, Warwickshire. |
WRO 92b 1594 (Worcestershire Record Office) |
|
24 July 1624 |
WILL OF JOHN DONE of St Pancras, Soper Lane, London
(in English) |
Legacies to: father Thomas Done, sister, Dorothy Widdens, Jane Turner, Mary Lord, Ann Gibson, Mr Money and his wife, Roger Halford, Christopher Salter, Brother Ralph Done’s son Thomas Done, John Crewes and Mistress Elizabeth and brother Hugh Aston
Brother Ralph Done named as executor.
|
PROB 11 147 (Public Record Office - Kew) Register Clarke/ Quire 135 |
|
05 Dec 1625 |
WILL OF JOHN DONE of St Pancras, Soper Lane, London Probate
(in Latin) |
Will proved. Administration granted to brother, Ralph Done |
PROB 11 147 (Public Record Office - Kew) Register Clarke/ Quire 135 |
|
05 Sep 1624 |
WILL OF JOHN DONE ‘whitebaker’
(in English) |
The will makes Agnes Done, his wife, the sole executrix of the will. His entire estate, situated in London (Aldgate and Whitechapel) is bequeathed to her ‘for and during the term of her natural life’. On her death the main part of his estate passes to John Done, William Done and James Done, sons of his brother Robert and his wife Elizabeth, and their heirs. Other small bequests are made to Elizabeth Done, daughter of Robert and Elizabeth Done and to Humphrey Done, Margery Done and Sara Done, children of his brother Edward Done. Witnesses: William Frithe, Phillipp Travors & Robert Stileman. Will proved 13 Sep 1624 (See below) |
PROB 11 144 (Public Record Office - Kew) Register Byrde Quire 82 |
|
13 Sep 1624 |
WILL OF JOHN DONE ‘whitebaker’ Probate
(in Latin) |
Will proved - eight days after it was written, suggesting it was made on his deathbed and proved very rapidly. Administration granted to Agnes Done (later revoked) |
PROB 11 144 (Public Record Office - Kew) Register: Byrde/ Quire: 82 |
|
25 Nov 1626 |
WILL OF JOHN DONE ‘sayler’, nephew of John Done ‘whitebaker’
(in English) |
The will makes Susan Done, his wife, the sole executrix of the will. His estate is bequeathed to her and to his daughter Elizabeth and their heirs. Witnesses: Robert Evans, Oliver Field & Stephen Danske. Will proved 29 Dec 1629 (See below) |
PROB 11 156 (Public Record Office - Kew) Register: Ridley/ Quire: 106 |
|
10 May 1627 |
WILL OF WILLIAM DONE gent, of Eastham Essex |
Legacies to: Anne, his wife/ the poor of the parish of Eastham/ the poor of the parish of Little Illford/ the two sons of brother George/ the two sons of brother Nicholas/ the two daughters of sister Mawer/ brother Edmond/ Sir Nicholas Coote/ Powle Waldegrave/ Sir Richard Heigham/Sir Thomas Fanshawe/ Mr William Fynch of Sereis
|
128 EW 18 (Essex County Record Office, Colchester ) |
|
??? |
WILL OF WILLIAM DONE gent, of Eastham Essex Proved
(in Latin ?) |
Page showing probate not yet found |
128 EW 18 (Essex County Record Office, Colchester ) |
|
??June 1628 |
PREROGATIVE COURT OF CANTERBURY – DONE v DONE
(in Latin) |
John Done, the plaintiff, brought a suit against Agnes Done, the widow and executrix of John Done – whitebaker, contesting the validity of his will. He also claimed, through his counsel, Hunt, to be the next of kin of John Done – whitebaker, through the plaintiff’s father, Nicholas Done of Alvechurch, Worcestershire. Nicholas Done was the son of John Done, also of Alvechurch, who was the brother of Thomas Done, of Henley in Arden, Warwickshire, Thomas being the father of John Done - whitebaker, the testator. (i.e. if true, this makes Nicholas Done, the plaintiff’s father, the first cousin of the testator.)
|
PROB 29 28 - folio 147 & 147 b (Public Record Office - Kew) |
|
?? July 1628 |
PREROGATIVE COURT OF CANTERBURY – DONE v DONE
(in Latin) |
In the case of John Done versus Agnes Done, Agnes Done’s counsel, Rawe, claims that John Done’s allegations are false. |
PROB 29 28 - folio 160b (Public Record Office - Kew) |
|
23 Sep 1628 |
PREROGATIVE COURT OF CANTERBURY – DONE v DONE
(in Latin) |
At the request of Hunt, John Done’s counsel, a commission was set up to meet in Henley in Arden for 6–8 October 1628 to interview witnesses regarding John Done’s allegations. |
PROB 29 28 - folio 177 (Public Record Office - Kew) |
|
?? Oct 1628 |
PREROGATIVE COURT OF CANTERBURY – DONE v DONE
(in Latin) |
Certificate continued in the state it was. |
PROB 29 28 - folio 179 (Public Record Office - Kew) |
|
?? Oct 1628 |
PREROGATIVE COURT OF CANTERBURY – DONE v DONE
(in Latin) |
Results of commission giving witness statements. Hunt, John Done’s counsel, alleged that his case was proved and requested that letters of administration of the goods of the said deceased, John Done – whitebaker, be committed to his party t.a.i.(as if the testator died intestate), and that Rawe’s client be ‘condemned in the expenses’. Certificate continued in the state it was. |
PROB 29 28 - folio 195 (Public Record Office - Kew) |
|
?? Oct 1628 |
PREROGATIVE COURT OF CANTERBURY – DONE v DONE
(in Latin) |
Certificate continued in the state it was. |
PROB 29 28 FOLIO 205b (Public Record Office - Kew) |
|
?? Nov 1628 |
PREROGATIVE COURT OF CANTERBURY – DONE v DONE
(in Latin) |
Agnes Done required to appear before the Court with a Prepared inventory and account. |
PROB 29 28 - folio 220 |
|
?? Nov 1628 |
PREROGATIVE COURT OF CANTERBURY – DONE v DONE
(in Latin) |
Judge fined Agnes Done. Rawe, Agnes Done’s counsel, dissented and exhibited the original will of John Done -whitebaker. Provision made for witnesses (for whom?) to appear in court the third session hence. Certificate continued. |
PROB 29 28 - folio 233b (Public Record Office - Kew) |
|
?? Nov 1628 |
PREROGATIVE COURT OF CANTERBURY – DONE v DONE
(in Latin) |
Judge assesses expenses at £4 to be paid by Agnes Done ‘ before Wolstan next’. |
PROB 29 28 - folio 239b (Public Record Office - Kew) |
|
?? Jan 1629 |
PREROGATIVE COURT OF CANTERBURY – DONE v DONE
(in Latin) |
Judge announced Agnes Done contumacious (refusing to respond to a legal summons) for not appearing in court and for non payment of fine, and announced her excommunication, but delayed implementation until next session. Certificate continued. |
PROB 29 28 - folio 278 (Public Record Office - Kew) |
|
?? Jan 1629 |
PREROGATIVE COURT OF CANTERBURY – DONE v DONE
(in Latin) |
Rawe paid Hunt the £4 due. Hunt accepted it on behalf of John Done and discharged Agnes Done and her executors from the same. Certificate continued. |
PROB 29 28 - folio 287 (Public Record Office - Kew) |
|
?? Feb 1629 |
PREROGATIVE COURT OF CANTERBURY – DONE v DONE
(in Latin) |
Rawe, Agnes Done’s counsel, produced as witnesses William Frith and Philip Travers, with the judge ruling that they be examined before the next session. Certificate continued. |
PROB 29 28 - folio 299 (Public Record Office - Kew) |
|
?? Feb 1629 |
PREROGATIVE COURT OF CANTERBURY – DONE v DONE
(in Latin) |
Witnesses pronounced contumacious. Rawe, Agnes Done’s counsel produced Robert Stileman as a witness, with the judge ruling he be examined before the next session. |
PROB 29 28 - folio 312b (Public Record Office - Kew) |
|
?? Apr 1629 |
PREROGATIVE COURT OF CANTERBURY – DONE v DONE
(in Latin) |
Rawe, Agnes Done’s counsel accused witnesses examined earlier of contumacy. Judge pronounced that they were contumacious, but reserved their penalties to the next session. Certificate continued. |
PROB 29 28 - folio 332b (Public Record Office - Kew) |
|
?? Apr 1629 |
PREROGATIVE COURT OF CANTERBURY – DONE v DONE
(in Latin) |
Penalty of contumacy of witnesses is reserved. Sentence in Next session. Certificate continued. |
PROB 29 28 - folio 346 (Public Record Office - Kew) |
|
?? May 1629 |
PREROGATIVE COURT OF CANTERBURY – DONE v DONE
(in Latin) |
Sentence promulgated in various writings. Royal writ of prohibition introduced. |
PROB 29 28 - folio 358 (Public Record Office - Kew) |
|
06 May 1629 |
PREROGATIVE COURT OF CANTERBURY – ‘SENTENCE’ OF JOHN DONE ‘ whitebaker’
(in Latin) |
Judgment on testamentary disputes still pending and undecided, but judge pronounced that Agnes Done had not proved her case, and that the alleged will of John Done - whitebaker was null and void. John Done, the alleged testator, was pronounced to have died intestate, or in an intestate manner, with no will having been made by him. Costs awarded to John Done against Agnes Done. |
PROB 11 155 (Public Record Office - Kew) Register: Ridley/ Quire: 47 |
|
02-09 Nov 1629 |
PREROGATIVE COURT OF CANTERBURY – WILL OF JOHN DONE ‘whitebaker’
(in English) |
The original will was by order delivered into the Star Chamber |
PROB 11 144 (Public Record Office - Kew) |
|
29 Dec 1629 |
PREROGATIVE COURT OF CANTERBURY – WILL OF JOHN DONE ‘sayler’, nephew of John Done ‘whitebaker’ Probate
(in Latin) |
Will proved. Administration granted to Susan Done – widow |
PROB 11 156 (Public Record Office - Kew) Register: Ridley/ Quire 106 |
|
30 Apr 1630 |
PREROGATIVE COURT OF CANTERBURY – DONE v DONE
(in Latin) |
John Done, Hunt’s party, appeared in court in person, claiming that a year had gone by since sentence had been passed against Agnes Done and requesting that it should be executed, with costs awarded to him and the administration of the estate of John Done - whitebaker given to him. |
PROB 29 29 - folio 207 (Public Record Office - Kew) |
|
05 May 1630 |
PREROGATIVE COURT OF CANTERBURY – DONE v DONE
(in Latin) |
Hunt, counsel for John Done, alleged that Agnes Done was hiding from the personal summons and from the certificate. The judge ruled that she should be summoned to appear at the third session after this. |
PROB 29 29 - folio 208 (Public Record Office - Kew) |
|
?/ May 1630 |
PREROGATIVE COURT OF CANTERBURY – DONE v DONE
(in Latin) |
The judge, at the petition of John Done’s counsel, demanded the execution of the sentence upon Agnes Done, and requested his counsel’s assessment of the expenses in the next session. He decreed that the administration of the goods, rights and credits of the deceased John Done whitebaker ought to be committed to John Done. |
PROB 29 29 - folio 219b (Public Record Office - Kew) |
|
08 May 1630 |
PREROGATIVE COURT OF CANTERBURY – ADMINISTRATION OF ESTATE OF JOHN DONE ‘whitebaker’
(in Latin) |
Administration tanquam ab intestate (‘as of an intestate’) of the estate of John Done - whitebaker - was granted to John Done, the whitebaker’s ‘nearest relative’, the present will, granted probate in September 1624, being revoked.
|
PROB 6 13 - folio 167 (original ref 170/2) Part 1 (Public Record Office - Kew) |
|
?? May 1630 |
PREROGATIVE COURT OF CANTERBURY – DONE v DONE
(in Latin) |
Judge assessed expenses at £8 to be paid before the last session of this term. |
PROB 29 29 - folio 227 (Public Record Office - Kew) |
|
?? May 1630 |
PREROGATIVE COURT OF CANTERBURY – DONE v DONE
(in Latin) |
Expenses not paid. Agnes Done was pronounced contumacious and excommunicated. |
PROB 29 29 - folio 229 (Public Record Office - Kew) |
|
Undated (1630 - 1631?)
|
COURT OF CHANCERY BILL OF COMPLAINT OF AGNES DONE - widow of John Done ‘whitebaker’
(in English) |
Agnes Done maintained that the will of John Done- whitebaker was valid, and that she had fulfilled its terms, paying the required legacies, and taking possession of her husband’s estate for her lifetime. She alleged that ‘John Done of London, Cordwainer, pretending himselfe to be heire unto the said John Done – whitebaker’ had conspired with Richard Kilvert, Robert Stileman, William Cooke and John Betenson’ to divide the estate between them. She also maintained that the reason she had not appeared before the Prerogative Court of Canterbury was that her counsel had advised her that the PCC, an ecclesiastical court, was not the competent authority to decide such matters, which ought to be decided in the Court of Chancery. Accordingly, she ‘did addresse herselfe for the obteyning of his Majesty’s gracious writt of prohibition, out of his highnes courte of Kings Benche to stay the said suite in the said Ecclesiasticall Court’. However, she alleged that John Done - cordwainer and his co-conspirators ‘having notice of the granting of the writt of prohibition and that the said writt would then forthwith be served and executed, did by some undue meanes obteyned sentence to passe in disproofe of the said will some shorte tyme before the said writt of prohibition was or could be served or delivered in or into the said court’. Agnes Done also requested that ‘the Kings Majesty’s gratiuos writt of Subpena be directed to the said John Done - cordwainer’ and his alleged accomplices, commanding them to appear before the Court of Chancery. |
C2 CHASI D5 35 (no folio number)
|
|
23 Jun 1631 |
COURT OF CHANCERY BILL OF COMPLAINT of ELIZABETH DONE - infant daughter of John Done ‘sayler’
(in English) |
Elizabeth Done, the four year old daughter of John Done ‘sayler’, her mother, Susan, and her step father Richard Evans, alleged that soon after John Done ‘ whitebaker’, had made his will, two of those set to inherit the estate, William Done and James Done, did themselves die, leaving John Done, ‘sayler’, as the only person remaining who was due to inherit most of the estate following the death of Agnes Done. They referred to the will of John Done ‘sayler’, which made Susan Done, his wife, the sole executrix of the will, and bequeathed his estate to her and to his daughter Elizabeth and their heirs, and argued that this made them due to inherit the estate of John Done, whitebaker, after the death of Agnes. They also allege that Agnes Done combined with John Done, cordwainer, ‘who pretendeth himselfe to be heire unto the sayd John Done whitebaker’ and with Richard Kilvert, Robert Styleman, William Cook, John Betenson and Sarah Maybank. They accused them of ‘combineing & plotting together to share & devide the said messuages lands & premises betweene them after the decease of the said Agnes Done, and thereby to defraud & defeate the said oratrixes (3) Suzan & Elizabeth and theire heires of theire sayd remainder or reversion of the property & premisses’. The document refers to the Bill of Complaint of Agnes Done (C2 CHASI D5 35) but alleges that ‘Agnes Done appeared and made a slight defence and by the combination and confederacie aforesaid suffered the said John Done, cordwainer, and the said confederates to witness in the Court of Starchamber in disproofe of the said will’ with ‘the intent to debarre the said oratryxes Suzan & Elizabeth and their heires’ whilst ensuring that ‘the said Agnes Done should hold and enjoy the said messuages lands premises unto her the said Agnes Done for and duringe her naturall life.’ It is also alleged that John Done, cordwainer, and his ‘confederates’ sought to have the will of John Done, ‘sayler’, also declared to be ‘voyd & ymperfect’. This Bill of Complaint also names the witnesses to the wills of both John Done ‘whitebaker’, and John Done ‘sayler’, in support of the claim that both wills were valid. There is also a very interesting comment about the difficulty of securing the evidence of witnesses (un-named) who ‘depart this realm, or remayne in foraigne & unknown parts ????? [handwriting illegible] wherby the sayd orators could not or shall not hereafter have or finde them wherby to make use of theire testimonyes.’ The document concludes by requesting that ‘writt of subpoena to be directed to the sayd John Done cordwainer Agnes Done, Richard Kilvert, Robert Stileman, Willliam Cooke, John Betenson & Sarah Maybank’ for them to ‘appear a certayne daie & under a certaine payne to appeare before your Lordship in his Majesty’s high Court of Chauncery’ and that ‘his Majesty’s most gratious writt of injunction to be directed to the said John Done, cordwainer, Agnes Done, Richard Kilvert, Robert Stileman, William Cooke, John Betenson & Sarah Maybank (theire & such of theire counselers, attorneys, & solllicitors) & to the judge or judges and theire surrogate or surrogates deputy or deputies or other in the sayd Ecclesiasticall Courts or the ????? [handwriting illegible] and to all other the officers ????? [handwriting illegible] of or in the said Court or Courts not to concerne prosecute mayntayne or followe any libel plainte or suite in the sayd Ecclesiasticall Courte or Courtes ????? [handwriting illegible] whatsoever for or in proofe or disproofe of the said will or wills, or in anye for & concerning fee ????? [handwriting illegible] will or wills until your Lordship, and your Lordship’s Court of Chancerye shall have given further & other order therein’.
|
C2 CHASI E1 59 - folio 1 |
|
04 Aug 1631 |
COURT OF CHANCERY ANSWER TO BILL OF COMPLAINT of ELIZABETH DONE |
Answer of Agnes Done to the Bill of Complaint of Elizabeth Susan Done and Richard Evans. Agnes Done accepted the family relationships outlined in the Bill. She denied knowledge of any will made by John Done, sailor, but said that that was of no concern to her since the terms of the will of John Done, whitebaker, only gave her an interest in his estate whilst she was alive. She disputed the allegation that her ‘light defence’ indicated a conspiracy with John Done, cordwainer. Her explanation for this course of action was that her counsel advised her that the PCC was not the place for the case to be heard. She also denied being any part of the alleged conspiracy, although admitting that an approach had been made to her by John Done (i.e. the cordwainer) and others. ‘shee hopeth to prove that the saide defendants John Done, Richard Kilvert and John Betenson or one of them, have made offer unto this defendant, and unto some neere friends of her this defendant that if this defendant and her friends would give way to the setling of the said messuages & premises after her decease, unto & upon the said nowe defendant, John Done whom they pretend to be heire at law unto the said John Done, deceased, that yet this defendant, for her part should hold & enjoy whatsoever was given or intended unto her this defendant by the said will without further trouble or molestation.’ She also repeated that the will of John Done, whitebaker, was valid. Another interesting family relationship was referred to in the comment that ‘this defendant further saith that the said John Done this defendant’s late husband in his life time had & did beare greate love and affection unto Elizabeth the wife of the said Robert Done, his brother, by whose onlie meanes shee haveing a portion of Five hundred pounds or thereabouts, as this defendant hath crediblie heard, was married unto the said Robert Done, a man of small or noe estate, and noe way deserveing such or soe great a portion, the said Elizabeth being the daughter of a former wife of the said John Done, baker, & left to the care and tuition of the said John Done, her father in lawe.’
|
C2 CHASI E1 59 - folio 4 |
|
10 Oct 1631 |
COURT OF CHANCERY JUDGMENT IN RESPONSE TO BILL OF COMPLAINT OF AGNES DONE
(in English) |
Excommunication of Agnes Done |
|
08 Nov 1631 |
COURT OF CHANCERY JUDGMENT IN RESPONSE TO BILL OF COMPLAINT OF AGNES DONE
(in English) |
Excommunication of Agnes Done |
|
Undated (1631?) |
COURT OF CHANCERY ‘REPLICATION’ OF ELIZABETH DONE - infant daughter of John Done ‘sayler’
(in English) |
Repetition of matters raised in the Bill of Complaint of 23 June 1631. This replication (undated) was in response to the answers of Humphry Done, Mary Becke, Peter Woodamonne, John Symons, Abraham Seman, Sara Skelte and Thomas Sanitasillia the earlier complaint.
|
|
07 Feb 1632 |
COURT OF CHANCERY ANSWER TO BILL OF COMPLAINT OF AGNES DONE
(in English) |
Answer of Richard Kilvert. All allegations were denied. |
|
07 Feb 1632 |
COURT OF CHANCERY ANSWER TO BILL OF COMPLAINT OF AGNES DONE
(in English) |
Answer of Robert Styleman (his signature?). All Allegations were denied. |
C2 CHASI D5 35 - folio 2 |
|
07 Feb 1632 |
COURT OF CHANCERY ANSWER TO BILL OF COMPLAINT OF AGNES DONE
(in English) |
Answer of John Betteson. All allegations were denied. |
C2 CHASI D5 35 - folio 3 |
|
Undated (1632?) |
COURT OF CHANCERY ANSWER TO BILL OF COMPLAINT OF AGNES DONE
(in English) |
Answer of John Done. He disputed the need to respond to the allegations since Agnes Done had long been excommunicated. He referred to the documents dated 10 Oct and 8 Nov 1631. |
C2 CHASI D5 35 - folio 4 |
|
Undated (1632?) |
COURT OF CHANCERY ANSWER TO BILL OF COMPLAINT of ELIZABETH DONE
(in English) |
Disclaimer and answer of John Betteson. John Betteson denied all allegations, and also denied that John Done, cordwainer, had entered into any conspiracy. |
C2 CHASI E1 59 - folio 2 |
|
Oct 1632 |
COURT OF CHANCERY ANSWER TO BILL OF COMPLAINT of ELIZABETH DONE
(in English) |
Disclaimer and answer of Richard Kilvert. Similar response to that made by John Betteson, also denying that John Done, cordwainer had entered into any conspiracy. |
C2 CHASI E1 59 - folio 3 |
|
22 Jul 1633 |
WILL OF AGNES DONE - widow of John Done ‘whitebaker’
(in English) |
Legacies to: Anne and Margarett Crouch, sisters of daughter in law Leycrofte/ Cousin and Godson Raphe Bradwell son of brother Richard Bradwell/ godson Thomas Leycrofte son of William Leycrofte, when reaching the age of twenty one/ goddaughter, the daughter of Mary Leycrofte now wife of one (blank) Eater, Taylor when reaching the age of twenty one or when married if before then/ son Richard Leycrofte
Son Robert Leycroft named as executor
Bequests to the poor of the Parish of All Saints Steyninge (where I dwell) and to the poor of the Parish of St Peter upon Cornhill in London (where sometimes I dwell and where I doe appoint my bodie to be buried) Robert Leycroft to have the balance of the estate
Witnesses: William Frithe, Sir John Frithe, George Downes, William Powell and Richard Phillips
Will proved 17 April 1635 (See below) |
PROB 11 167 (Public Record Office - Kew) Register: Sadler/ Quire: 37 |
|
17 April 1635 |
WILL OF AGNES DONE - widow of John Done ‘whitebaker’ Probate
(in Latin) |
Will proved. Administration granted to Robert Leycroft - son |
PROB 11 167 (Public Record Office - Kew) Register: Sadler/ Quire: 37 |
|
19 May 1636 |
WILL OF JOHN DONNE - Rector of St Benet, Gracechurch, London
(in English) |
Legacies to: son Daniell and his wife/ son Nathaniel/son Benjamin/ grandson John (son of Robert Donne)/ granddaughter Elizabeth Donne (daughter of Robert Donne)/ Ellen Done (daughter in law)/ residue of estate to Elizabeth his wife.
Witnesses: John Squire and James Jenkins
Will proved 17 January 1637 (1636/7) (See below) |
Source unknown No reference except Folio number 257 |
|
17 January 1637 (1636/7) |
WILL OF JOHN DONNE - Rector of St Benet, Gracechurch, London
Probate
(in Latin) |
Will proved. Administration granted to Elizabeth Done - widow |
Source unknown No reference except Folio number 257 |
|
28 Oct 1648 |
PREROGATIVE COURT OF CANTERBURY – ADMINISTRATION OF ESTATE OF JOHN DONE ‘whitebaker’
(in Latin) |
Administration granted to William Hide & Marjorie Hide (nee Done). (This is the Margery mentioned in the will of John Done, whitebaker). Administration de bonis non Administrates (where estate has been abandoned by an administrator) was granted to William Hide and his wife, Margery Hide, née Done, niece of the whitebaker, on 28 October 1648 |
PROB 6 13 - folio 167 (orig ref 170/2) Part 2 (Public Record Office - Kew) |
|
Oct 1648 |
PREROGATIVE COURT OF CANTERBURY – ADMINISTRATION OF ESTATE OF JOHN DONE ‘whitebaker’
(in Latin) |
Administration granted to William Hide & Marjorie Hide (née Done) |
PROB 6 23 - folio 112 (orig. ref 122) (Public Record Office - Kew) |
NOTES: (1) Calendar years
(2) Unless otherwise stated, these are UK Public Record Office reference codes
(3) Orator/ oratrix = plaintiff
Derek Done - July 2004