chancery files

This page is part of a website based on the life and achievements of eighteenth-century inventor Henry Cort. Please email site controller Eric Alexander with any comments or queries.

CHANCERY FILES

A warning to anyone wishing to view any of these files. You need patience and dexterity.

The files are composed of large sheets of paper, rolled together in bundles. Separating the sheets you want can be a problem. So can reassembling the bundles.

Reading from the sheets can also be a problem. Partly physical: sheets sometimes get crumpled, so it is difficult to follow a line of text across the width of a sheet.

But the big trial is following the narrative. It is written in the most appalling legalistic jargon, with heaps of repetition and few, if any, punctuation marks.

After viewing a number of files, you will probably get into the habit of skipping certain areas. Occasional passages are worth copying verbatim, but it is usually better to make notes on relevant points.

That said, there is a lot of useful information to be found, and occasionally something really juicy comes up.

Norbury suits

C12/1698/55 1787 Penrice v Fisher

C12/1713/30 1790 Penrice v Fisher

C12/453/19 1794 Norbury v Hill

C12/208/9 1794 Norbury v Meredith

C12/218/5 1796 Norbury v Attorney General

To appreciate the story of the three wills of Coningsby Norbury, you need to read the whole sequence. If you're just studying Cort, you can make do with two.

Norbury v Attorney General is quoted elsewhere as one of the three major sources on Cort. It arose because Coningsby's brother Richard, who had to administer the estate, suspected Cort owed it money.

But Cort's assets were forfeited to the Crown, so the Attorney General had to tell Richard he was second in the queue. The file includes an affidavit from Cort explaining his involvement in Coningsby's financial affairs.

The value of Penrice v Fisher (1787) is that it contains one of the few passages shedding light on Cort's character: generous, at least where his friends were concerned.

I went to a House in the Neighbourhood and found Maid Betty who I saw and got every Information I could wish She told me he was this winter seized with an apoplectic fit and lost his speech for some time She sent out for a Doctor to attend him and after his Attendance for some time he enquired who was to pay him Mr Cort was sent for from Gosport and paid the Doctor and told him he would see him paid for further Attendance He has had no Coat on since but some Cloak or Gown that Mr Cort gave him.

From account of Coningsby Norbury’s illness by Robert Penrice (Penrice v Fisher, 1787)

Attwick suits

C12/707/20 1751 Attwick v Attwick

C11/2517/3 1753 Attwick v Peachy

C12/540/17 1770 Becher v Dawson

C12/552/9 1770 Becher v Kentish

These suits deal with disputes within the Attwick family. The last two bring Cort into the story.

C12/2220/7 1724 Macartney v Attwick

C11/666/7 1739 Macartney v Attwick

C12/1487/7 1764 Getheridge v Attwick

C12/1664/50 1781 Neal v Attwick

C12/2122/3 1781 Attwick v Wickham

C12/2122/3 1781 Attwick v Adams

These suits deal with disputes outside the family, and are largely of academic interest. The last three involve William Attwick, disproving a fanciful notion that his niece, whom Cort married, inherited the Attwick business in 1775.

Navy agent suits

Five groups of actions involving Cort illustrate the legal wrangles in which navy agents became involved.

C12/1922/33 Duez v Kidd(?)

C12/1922/32 1758 Duez v Hankey

C12/1570/13 1759 Duez v Hartley

C12/1923/33 1765 Duez v Kidd

C12/1922/33 1772 Duez v Cort

This sequence covers the attempts made by Ann Duez to recover money she thought was due on an investment made by her brother, and involves navy captain Dandy Kidd, who names Cort as executor in his will.

C12/565/35 1775 Parry v Cort

E140/65/12 Parry v Cort

E140/1/23 Cort & Guyon v Parry

The two Exchequer (E140) files should help anyone interested in Cort's relationship with David Parry.

C12/1034/17 1771 Clarke v Cort

C12/2404/40 1778 Waller v Cort

C12/1685/2 1784 Cort v Seibert

Cort's agency involved him in related activities that could lead to disputes such as these.

Other suits

C12/940/8 1774 Delmé v Missing

Sheds light on some of Cort's contemporaries in Titchfield

C12/591/19 1784 Bacon v Homfray