C3/404/43

Sir Arnold Harbert c. Richard Ballard, Abraham and Elizabeth Heynes and Caleb Whitefield

Bill of Complaint of Harbert, 31 January 1637/8

He and Thomas Morgan stood surety for a debt of William Harbert of Cardiff. A bond of obligation for 200 pounds was entered into on 18 November 1618 whereby they became bound to Thomas Ballard, then of Woodhouse in Essex for repayment of the debt of 100 pounds. The bond became due on the following 27 May. William Harbert did not perform his part of the bond and Thomas Ballard obtained judgement against the plaintiff as surety in the Court of Common Pleas in 1623/4. An amicable agreement was eventually reached between the plaintiff, William Harbert and Thomas Ballard and the latter never pursued the matter further in his lifetime. They were all solvent men and well able to pay the debt. William Harbert died possessed of a great personal estate, which came into the hands of William Harbert, his son. Thomas Morgan also died with a large personal estate. This went to his son, William Morgan at whose death, it came down to Thomas Morgan.

Richard Ballard was executor of the will of Thomas Ballard. He along with Elizabeth Heynes, the daughter of Thomas Ballard and her husband, Abraham along with Caleb Whitefield have pursued the Common Pleas judgement against the plaintiff (which Thomas Ballard had not done), having found the uncancelled bond with his papers. Maintains that the debt has been honoured and the bond ought to have been cancelled.

 Answer of Richard Ballard,

30 March 1638,

Not sure of the details of the parties who entered into the bond in question, not whether any payment was ever made to Thomas Ballard or whether the bond should have been cancelled or that Thomas rested ‘quiet and content’ with satisfaction received. But believes it to be true that Thomas Ballard received judgement upon the bond and did not proceed with it because he died shortly afterwards. Denies all knowledge of the affairs of the Harberts and the Morgans. Thomas Ballard made the defendant, as his brother, executor of his estate. He died about 14 years ago and Richard found the bond in question amongst other bonds still in force and not amongst loose papers as is alleged in the bill. The defendant (being aged and unable to travel much) determined to put in a suit (ie employ a legal representative). Notes that a portion of any debts were due to Martha, the wife of Abraham Heynes and Elizabeth the wife of William Cleggett, daughters of Thomas Ballard, for whom his personal debts and estate were intended when they came of age. He put over to them such bonds as were in his hands, which would make up their portion. He delivered the bond in question about two years ago to Abraham Heynes and authorised him by Letter of Attorney to pursue the claim in law and Caleb Whitefield was instructed by Heynes to do this. Denies he refused to pursue the matter in the lifetimes of William Harbert and Thomas Morgan because they knew that the bond had been satisfied or that he did not pursue it because he knew the bond was satisfied.