Thomas Hall and Thomas Salmon alias Miller c. Denise Pogger

In 1489, two men competed for the hand of widow Denise Pogger of Leyton, Essex, a woman who had her own house and perhaps more property. Both men presented a set of witnesses, each with a familiar-sounding story, the first of love thwarted by the materialist motives of the woman’s relatives and friends, the second of an opportunistic manipulator harassing a widow committed elsewhere. Of the two suitors, Thomas Hall was evidently the poorer, but his witnesses suggested that Pogger loved him better than his rival Thomas Salmon; one said she had told him that she would rather have Hall with only his shirt on his back than Salmon with all his goods. In the narrative Hall’s witnesses told, Pogger and Hall had exchanged vows of marriage in late August 1489 with several witnesses. The witnesses noted that she was under heavy pressure from her son and other men to marry the wealthier Salmon and that she was trying in vain to escape their control. But Pogger herself came to the court about two weeks after Hall’s witnesses and absolutely denied their claims. She said Hall had been bothering her for almost a year but that she had told him repeatedly she was already committed to Salmon. Two witnesses appeared in addition to support a counter-claim from Pogger and Salmon, that they had made a binding contract of marriage in June 1489, thus predating Hall’s claimed contract. One of the witnesses also testified that Hall had undertaken a campaign of legal harassment against him, falsely accusing him of trespass to stop him from testifying in the marriage case. As always, it is hard to say which of these stories is more reliable; there are a few inconsistencies in Pogger’s examination, for instance, such as her admission that Salmon had tried to pay Hall off with ten shillings to drop his marriage claim. The reality was likely messier than either of the stories the two plaintiffs present. One interesting presence is the figure of John Gosnell or Gosnol of Leyton, mentioned by three of the witnesses; he had appeared previously in another marriage case from 1487, Waltham c Heth, similarly supervising local relationships.

LMA, MS DL/C/A/001/MS09065, fols. 58v-59v, 64-65v

Testimony of Robert Osbern, Witness for Plaintiff Hall, 19 Oct. 1489

In the year, etc., [14]89, in the Faith term,[1] eighth indiction, sixth year of the pontificate of the lord Pope Innocent VIII

19 October, by the lord Official in the cathedral church of St. Paul in my, Richard Spencer’s, presence

Robert Osbern of Finchley [Middlesex], London diocese, where he has lived for twenty years, illiterate, of free condition, thirty years old and more, as he says. Inducted as a witness etc., he says that he has known Thomas Hall of Finchley for two years, and Denise Pogger he first knew about the feast of the nativity of St. John the Baptist [24 June] last past. To the first and second articles of the libel, he says that on Sunday before the feast of St. Bartholomew last past [23 Aug.], this witness was present in Denise’s dwelling-house in the town of Leyton [Essex] in the afternoon, together with Denise, Thomas Hall, John Hewis, and none others, when Thomas Hall asked Denise, “Be ye the same woman ye were last day?” and she answered, “Yea, by my troth am I.” And immediately then and there she took Thomas by his right hand and said to him, “I Denise take thee Thomas unto my wedded husband, and thereto I plight thee my faith and troth.” And then Thomas took Denise by her right hand and said to her, “I Thomas Hall take thee Denise unto my wedded wife, and thereto I plight thee my faith and troth.” And they unclasped their hands and immediately then and there Denise filled a cup with ale and brought it to Thomas. This witness deposes these things from his own sight and hearing, as he says. To the third article, he says that on Thursday following the contract, Denise told this witness that many men had urged her to take another man as her husband, and because of this she asked this witness to tell Thomas to hasten the solemnization of the marriage between them, saying “I had lief it were done this day than tomorrow.” And otherwise he knows nothing concerning its contents. To the fourth article, he says that the things he said above are true and that public voice and fame circulated and circulate concerning them in the parish of Leyton, as he says.

Testimony of John Hewis, Witness for Plaintiff Hall, 19 Oct. 1489

John Hewis of Finchley [Middlesex], where he has lived for seven years, illiterate, of free condition, twenty-six years old, as he says. Inducted as a witness etc., he says that he has known Thomas Hall for two years, and Denise Pogger for a year and more. To the first and second articles of the libel, he says that on the day and in the place specified, after Thomas had said to Denise, “Be ye the same woman ye were when I spoke last with you?” and she had responded, “Yea, by the faith of my body,”Denise immediately took Thomas by the hand and said, “I forsake the men in the world and take you Thomas to my wedded husband, and thereto I plight thee my troth.” And in a similar fashion Thomas said to her, “I forsake all the world and only take you to my wife, and therto I plight you my troth.” This witness deposes these things from his own hearing and knowledge, as he says. To the third article, he says that on the Sunday immediately following, Denise in the presence of Thomas and in Denise’s own dwelling-house, said to Thomas, “I am so teased and so edged [irritated] that I cannot abide here; I pray you therefore take me and let me go with you.” And otherwise he knows nothing concerning their contents. To the fourth article, he says that the things he said above are true, and that public voice and fame circulated and circulate concerning them at Leyton and in other neighbouring places, as he says.

Testimony of Thomas Danyell, Witness for Plaintiff Hall, 19 Oct. 1489

Thomas Danyell, king’s esquire,[2] of the parish of South Mimms [Middlesex], London diocese, where he has lived for seven years and more, illiterate, of free condition, fifty years old or thereabouts, as he says. Inducted as a witness etc., he says that he has known Thomas Hall for three years, and Denise Pogger for eight weeks or thereabouts. To the first, second, and third articles of the libel, he says that on the Saturday after the issuing of the banns between Denise and a certain other man, a miller, this witness at the desire of Thomas went to Denise and to her dwelling-house and there asked her about the cause of the issuing of the banns and why she had changed her mind, and she said that it was not her intention to issue the banns, but that her son and Gosnel[3] procured the issue against her will. And then this witness asked her whether she was willing to have Thomas as her husband, and she said yes, that she would rather have him in his shirt than that miller with all his goods. And in a similar way he asked Thomas whether he would have her as his wife, and he said yes. This witness said that he wished to hear a new contract of marriage between them, and he said to Denise that she should take Thomas by the hand, which she did, and she said to Thomas, “I take thee Thomas to my wedded husband, and forsake all other for your sake, and thereto I plight thee my troth.” And unclasping their hands, Thomas took Denise by the hand and said to her, “I Thomas take thee Denise to my wife, and thereto I plight thee my troth.” And immediately Denise asked this witness and Thomas to take her to the house of Giles Eustas[4] of Highgate [Middlesex], until such a time that the marriage could be solemnized between them. This witness deposes these things from his own sight and hearing, as he says. There were there at the time a man named Fan and another called Richard Brewer, of whom he cannot recall more. To the fourth article, he says that as regards the fame, he agrees with the first witness examined above.

Response of Denise Pogger, Defendant, 30 Oct. 1489

Responses personally made by Denise Pogger, penultimate day of October, in the church of St. Paul, before the lord Official in my, Richard Spencer’s, presence

Denise Pogger sworn etc. on the positions etc. To the first position, she says that for about three weeks following the feast of St. Thomas the Martyr [29 Dec.], Thomas Hall often urged this witness to take him as her husband, and she always responded that she had otherwise precontracted with another man and because of this she would not agree to his wish in this matter, as she says. To the second position, she does not believe its contents to be true. To the third position, she does not believe it nor that its contents are true, but she says that after Hall and Salmon had had a discussion, Hall received ten shillings from Salmon after agreeing that he would not vex Thomas, nor this witness, on the pretext or strength of any contract of marriage. To the fourth position, she admits what she has confessed, and denies what she has denied and does not believe the fame. And questioned by the Official, she says that on a certain night on a feast day in the last month, Thomas Salmon passed the night with this witness and knew her carnally within her dwelling-house, and she promised, giving faith, to pay twenty shillings for the redemption of the penance within the next two weeks, otherwise the Official warned her to appear the following day to receive her penance under pain of excommunication.

Testimony of John Smyth, Witness for Plaintiff Salmon, 30 Oct. 1489

On behalf of Thomas Miller alias Salmon c. Denise Pogger

Penultimate day of October

John Smyth of Leyton [Essex], London diocese, where he has lived for sixteen years and more, illiterate, of free condition, fifty years old as he says. Inducted as a witness etc. on the submission etc., he says that he has known Thomas Salmon for ten years, Denise Pogger for eighteen years, and Thomas Hall for a quarter part of a year or thereabouts. To the first part of the submission, he says that on the feast of St. Leonard in Pentecost week[5] last past, this witness was present in Denise’s dwelling-house in the parish of Leyton, between the hours of one and two p.m. of that day as he recalls, together with Denise, Thomas Salmon, John Gosnol, and others whom he does not now recall. After Denise and Thomas discussed many things, Thomas took Denise by her right hand and said to her, “I Thomas Salmon take thee Denise Pogger as my wife, and thereto I give you my faith.” And then Denise said to Thomas, “I Denise Pogger take thee Thomas Salmon as my husband, and thereto I give you my faith.” And they unclasped their hands and kissed one another, in his own sight and hearing, as he says. And otherwise he knows nothing concerning its contents. To the second part of the submission, he says that the things he said above are true, and that public voice and fame circulated and circulate about them in the parish of Leyton and other neighbouring places. To the first interrogatory, he says as he said above. To the second interrogatory, he says he is a friend to Thomas and Denise as to his other neighbours, and not otherwise. And to its other contents, he responds negatively. To the third interrogatory, he responds negatively to all its contents. To the fourth and fifth interrogatories, he says that this witness was present in the church of Ham at the time of the court held there on a certain day five weeks ago, and he did nothing there against Thomas Hall, and he responds negatively to its other contents as regards himself. To the sixth interrogatory, he says as he said above, and he says that no one taught him but rather he deposed the aforesaid as he says as his conscience moves him to do, and not otherwise. And to its other contents, he responds negatively. To the seventh interrogatory, he says that he loves Denise more than Thomas Hall because Thomas caused him to lose money by suing a certain writ of supersedeas[6]because of this case, and he said that recently since this case was brought, Thomas tried to take an action of trespass and breaking of the peace against him and eight other people of his parish, and for no other reason than the bringing of this case as regards this witness, as he says. To the eighth interrogatory, he says as he said above. And he says that he did not hear of any marriage contract between Denise and Thomas Hall on the day of the contract had between Thomas Salmon and Denise, as mentioned above, nor before that day. And otherwise he knows nothing concerning its contents. To the ninth and tenth interrogatories, he says as he said above, and otherwise he knows nothing concerning their contents.

Testimony of Henry Gosnol, Witness for Plaintiff Salmon, 30 Oct. 1489

Henry Gosnol of the parish of Leyton, London diocese, where he has lived for a year, and before that time in Walthamstow[7] from the time of his birth and there was born, illiterate, of free condition, twenty-five years old, as he says. Inducted as a witness etc., he says that he does not know Thomas Hall well, he has known Thomas Salmon for two years or thereabouts, and Denise Pogger for eight years. To the first part of the submission, he agrees with John Smyth, examined above, with this added, that just before those words, Thomas asked Denise then and there whether she could find it in her heart to take Thomas as her husband, and she said yes, by her faith, if he would have her as his wife. And adding that John Gosnol was similarly present there, as he says. [8] He says that on the day and at the place about which John Smyth deposed above, Thomas asked Denise, “May ye find in your heart to have me to your husband?” And she said, “Yea, by the faith of my body, and thereto I plight thee my troth.” And then Denise asked Thomas, “May ye find in your heart to have me to your wife?” And he responded, “Yea, by the faith of my body, and thereto I plight thee my troth.” And he heard no other words concerning marriage between them, as he says. To the second part of the submission, he says that the things he deposed above are true, and that public voice and fame circulated and circulate in the parish and in other neighbouring places, as he says. To the first and second interrogatories, he says that he is a friend to the parties as to his other neighbours. And he responds negatively to their other contents. To the third interrogatory, he responds negatively to all its contents. To the fourth and fifth interrogatories, he says that he was never present at this examination, nor did he hear the threats and menaces specified in the interrogatories. To the sixth interrogatory, he says as he said above. And he responds negatively to its other contents. To the seventh interrogatory, he says that he does not favour one party more than the other, nor does he care about victory as long as justice is done. And to its other contents, he responds negatively as far as this witness knew or understood, as he says. To the eighth interrogatory, he says as he said above, and he says that the contract was begun and made as he deposed before, between the hours of one and two in the hall of the house. And otherwise he knows nothing concerning its contents, but he says that nothing was said there about Thomas Hall, nor before that, as far as this witness understood. To the ninth interrogatory, he says that he heard from many people since the day of the contract that Denise contracted marriage with Thomas Hall, but not from any men who claimed to have been present at the contract of marriage, as he says. And to its other contents he responds negatively. To the tenth interrogatory, he says as he said above. And he responds negatively to its other contents as far as this witness ever knew or understood, as he says.

---

[1] The fall term of business at the ecclesiastical court, normally called Michaelmas term but here sometimes called Faith, began on the day following the feast of St. Faith, 7 Oct. Cheney, Handbook, 73.

[2] MS: valectus corone domini Regis

[3] This may be the Henry Gosnol who testified two weeks later in this case, or the John Gosnol mentioned by both John Smyth and Henry Gosnol (Henry was possibly John’s son, given his age). See remarks above.  

[4] Giles Eustas featured two years later in a Consistory court tithe case. He was a brewer and may (as this reference suggests) have operated an inn; records indicate that he lived in the “Cornerhouse” in Highgate, beside the High Street at the junction with South Grove, from 1490. VCH Middlesex, 6:122-135. Giles Eustas’s will, from 1495, is printed in an appendix to Survey of London, vol. 17, The Parish of St. Pancras part 1: The Village of Highgate, ed. Percy Lovell and William McB. Marcham (1936), 138-48.

[5] In 1489, Pentecost week fell on 7 to 13 June; the feast of St. Leonard (of Noblac), however, was 6 Nov. and I have not been able to find an alternate St. Leonard with a feast in June.

[6] A writ of supersedeas: a writ commanding the stay of legal proceedings which ought otherwise to have proceeded (OED, s.v. supersedeas).

[7] Walthamstow, Essex.

[8] This passage is deleted in the manuscript.