Jonas Pinsent: 1575 – 1637 DRO0028 (Lawyer and solicitor in West Country and London)
Elizabeth Unknown: xxxx – xxxx
Married: xxxx: xxxx, xxxx
Children by Elizabeth Unknown:
Jonas Pinsent: 1609 – 1658 (Married (1) Katherine Langworthy; (2) Grace Langdon)
Edward Pinsent: 1611 – 1652 (Married Amy Bennett, Chudleigh, Devon, 1634)
Amy Pinsent: 1613 – 1615
Thomas Pinsent: 1615 – 1690 (Married Thomasine Smerdon, Exeter, Devon, 1641; (2) Joanna Berry, Woodland, Devon, 1663)
Elizabeth Pinsent: 1616 – 1693 (Married William Collings, Woodland, Devon, 1650)
Ellis Pinsent: 1619 – 1681 (Married Joan Felling, Exeter, Devon 1651)
John Pinsent: 1622 – 1648
Johanna Pinsent: xxxx – xxxx (Married Nicholas Burchill, xxxx, xxxx, xxxx)
Family Branch: Combe
PinsentID: DRO0028
Jonas was the eldest son of Hugh Pinsent, a successful yeoman farmer who lived at Horridge in Ilsington. He acquired numerous brothers and sisters and got to watch this father sorted through his legal entanglements as he grew up. His father saw that he was educated well and we find that “Jonas, late of New Inn, gent., son and heir of Hugh Pinsent of Ilsington, Devon, gent. was admitted to Middle Temple on 1st August 1598” (Middle Temple Admissions Register). Perhaps his father thought it a good idea to have a lawyer in the family!
Jonas later switched to Lyons Inn – one of the smaller Inns of Chancery that was then associated with the Inner Temple. According to a submission he made to the Court of Chancery in 1631, Jonas clerked under Robert Henley and Samuel Whighwick, “the Chief Clerks and their predecessors” at the Court of Common Pleas for twenty-seven years – in other words, since around 1604 (C2/CHAS/P18/13). Jonas was a clerk of the “supersedeas office in the Court of Common Pleas” at Westminster and James Coleman’s “Catalogue of Deeds and Books on Sale: Vol. 222, #183 (Society of Genealogists) refers to a document made by Bartholomew Fowke, Jonas Pynsent and Justinian Povey, of London, gent., and others, relating to land in Langhamton in Northumberland in 1608. It had the “signature and seal heraldic of Jonas Pynsent, gent.” The seal harks back to Jonas’s grandfather, John Pinsent of Combe who was probably the first to have had coat of arms. Jonas’s would have been slightly different from his grandfather’s, as Jonas’s father Hugh, was a younger son. I would have loved to have seen it!
Jonas joined the Western Circuit of the Court of King’s Bench, and was made an “Associate” when Simon Spatchurst became “clerk of assizes” in 1618. He has been described as: “a popular attorney at Devon and Somerset assizes for more than twenty years after 1610” (A History of English Assizes: 1558-1714; J.S. Cockburn). Jonas and Simon became friends, and Jonas stood as surety for a loan that Simon took out in 1631. Unfortunately, it had not been fully paid when he died intestate! To further compicate matters, Jonas died shortly afterwards, and it fell to Jonas’s son, another Jonas, to accept the administration of Simon’s estate and look after Simon’s son, Simon Spatchurst “junior” until he reached maturity (C2/CHASID41/61: 1638 & C2/CHASI/D58/9: 1640). Jonas Pinsent “junior’s” life is discussed elsewhere.
Most of Jonas’s legal work was done in either the Court of King’s Bench (which primarily dealt with criminal matters), or the Court of Common Pleas (which dealt with civil law). Some of these cases are catalogued but most are still hidden from view – among the thousands of unscanned court documents in the National and County Archives. Presumably, some of them will come to light eventually.
Fortunately, Jonas also intermittently interacted with the Courts of Star Chamber and Chancery (which dealt with issues of equity) and their records are more readily available for inspection – at the National Archives in Kew, London and elsewhere. These records are often incomplete, in poor shape, and/or difficult to read – and many are, well, just plain confusing! The “complaints”, “interrogatories” (questions) and “responses” (answers) are at least written in English and somewhat intelligible (unless they happen to be in fine “clerk-script”) – which helps. The depositions are, of course, biased for or against the plaintiff and/or defendant. Nevertheless, they give some idea of the underlying dispute. The disagreements, or “causes,” addressed in the Chancery Court had frequently made their way there via other lower courts (Stannary, Ecclesiastical etc.) through the King’s Bench and/or Common Pleas and not arrived in Chancery until several years later. The witnesses frequently refer to events that are poorly described and encased in the legal language and jargon of the day. Clerks seem to have been paid by the page. I refer the reader to the original documents for a more perfect understanding of the disagreements described below and elsewhere in this database. Many of the disputes, whether over issues of inheritance, land or money, seem mundane today; however they were extremely serious for the people concerned!
One record shows that Jonas represented William Moulton, whose family held a lease on a tenement in Plympton Earl, in Devon, from Queen Elizabeth I but lost it when King James I came to the throne. The new owners assigned the reversion of the tenement to Nicholas Mayne in 1612, and he, being concerned about its physical condition, forcibly entered it to check for evidence of disrepair. William Moulton was much offended by this, and had him charged with breaking and entering and also with debt. The case was referred to the Assize Court in Exeter and, after considerable legal wrangling, Nicholas Mayne counter-sued William Moulton and Jonas Pinsent (who was his lawyer) in the Court of Star Chamber for perjury and falsification of documents (STAC8-213-13: 1613). Jonas denied wrongdoing. He claimed that he had not done anything beyond what was then considered “acceptable practice” under the law.
Jonas may have been willing to stretch the law now and then. In 1617/8 he was arrested for conspiracy in a case that involved William Bastard. However, he was found to be “not guilty” (Acts of the Privy Council; 1618). The same year, Jonas acted as attorney for one John Prowse, who had been committed for trial by the Commissioners for Ecclesiastical Causes for “riding his horse into Brixham Church, offering to have his horse christened and hanging up his dead grandmother’s hair in the marketplace as that of an old witch” (Calendar of State Papers Domestic: Vol. XCVII p540: 1618). The English church had changed considerably over the past century and the protestant compromise then in effect may not have been universally popular. Presumably Prowse was trying to make a point.
Prowse failed to attend a hearing and Jonas, as his attorney, was called to testify. He said that he had acted for John Prowse several times – “but served him in no other way”. He had “obtained a prohibition for him, on the grounds that his offenses being committed before the general pardon were included therein” (State Papers Domestic, 1618). What that was all about, I do not know.
In 1616, Sir George Southcott of Shillingford lent Henry Wade of Coppleshaw, £100, subject to conditions that were then applied to James Lowman, gent. and his heirs and were later broken. Sir George hired Jonas, a “Clerk of the King’s Bench,” to recover his money and gave him the relevant documents. He also asked Jonas to proceed against several other people for other reasons. It did not go well for him. Sir George was later to testify that he had heard that Jonas had not taken Henry Wade to court but, he had, without Sir George’s authorization, compounded with him for £20 – and taken the money for his own use! Mr. Wade now had the bond back in his hands and he was, naturally, refusing to discuss the matter. Sir George asked the Chancery Court for subpoenas to call Jonas to account for his legal actions and financial arrangements, and for Henry Wade to explain what had happened to the bond, and to pay him what he was owed. Jonas said he acted on the instructions he had been given and he had billed Sir George accordingly (C3/415/18). I wonder how it worked out.
Jonas was not above using the law to his own advantage. At one point he agreed to purchase the reversion of some land in Bovey Tracey, West Ogwell and Hennock from John Wolcott, who was the son of Agnes Wolcott, the widow who owned it. However, William Hore – a relative of John’s, felt he had an interest in the property and he challenged John’s right to sell Jonas the reversion. After a considerable time and much litigation in the lower courts, Jonas filed a complaint that made its way through to the Chancery Court in 1618 (C3/328/48). Disputes like this could, and often did, drag on for years.
It may have been the same William Hore who sued Jonas’s executor over a disputed debt after his death in 1637. William admitted that he borrowed £40 from Jonas in 1623, and he understood that the arrangement came with a penal cost of £80 for non-repayment. However, he said he repaid the £40 on time, and asked Jonas to return the bond. William claimed that Jonas had agreed to send it down from London but had failed to do so, and the issue had been put aside and forgotten about.
The two men were neighbours, and it appears that they frequently borrowed money and bought items (a horse, casks of cider, faggots of wood etc.) from each other. In fact, William felt that he was owed £18 when Jonas died in 1637. He told the court that Jonas’s widow, Elizabeth, agreed to pay him – but then found the old bond in her husband’s effects and, although she knew it was now void, charged him in Court of Kings Bench for the penal amount of £80.
William claimed that she and “Mr. Jonas Pinsent, the testator’s son, who is attorney for his said mother” knew that they would lose the case on its merits, so they arranged for the time of the trial to be changed without giving him notice, and he missed his day in court! William then appealed to the Chancery Court for subpoenas for Elizabeth and Jonas Pinsent “junior” (as he had been at the time) to testify to the truth of the matter (C2/CHASL/H46/13). Elizabeth deposed that she had heard her husband speak of the debt, and she had an undated note from him saying that William owed him at least £19. Book-keeping left a lot to be desired back then, and handshake deals often fell apart! Time and time again we see executors finding old bonds and/or claiming debts on behalf of the departed, and the other party claiming the debt was paid. When it came to distributing a man’s estate, the honour system that friends relied on in life frequently broke down in death (C2/CHASI/H34-3).
The penalty for defaulting on a debt was, typically, twice the face amount of the bond, and borrowers usually provided one or more surety, who would vouch for their ability to pay. These sureties sometimes took out loans themselves – to spread the risk. For instance, when Peter Wolcott appeared to default on a £10 debt, it fell to his sureties to pay the twenty-pound penalty, and one of them, Thomas Sweet, wound up in Court of King’s Bench. He said he had negotiated with Jonas Pinsent and John Lurkis, and they had agreed to cover his bond which (with costs) now amounted to £28. He felt that it was up to them, not him, to try to recover the money from Peter Wolcott – if they could. Peter, meanwhile, had gone to the Court of Chancery and claimed that he had repaid the original amount demanded (C2/CHAS1/74 & 58). Life was complicated!
Jonas Pinsent “senior” was “one of the Ancients” (senior members) of The Society of Lyons Inn, in 1626, when he made the mistake supporting a fellow Devonian member of the Inn, John Pearce “Junior”, in this quest to become Treasurer of the Society. He agreed to join John Pearce “senior” (John’s father) and a Mr. Eaton (a brother-in-law) as sureties in a bond for £300 for John Pearce “junior’s” “true dealings” (C2/CHASI/L65/160; C2/CHASI/ L67/150; C2/CHASI/H34/3 etc.). John Pearce, embarrassingly, proved to be far from true in his dealings, and he and his father and Jonas Pinsent “senior” were sued for compensation by the “Ancients, Fellows and Students of Lyons Inn” in the Court of Chancery in 1637.
It was a complicated case, but the main issue for Jonas was his right and title to two tenements, North and South Preston, in Warkley parish, near South Molton, in Devon, that the two Pearce’s had used in 1633 to cover Jonas Pinsent “senior’s” surety bond. Jonas and John Pearce senior both died in 1637, so the “Ancients, Fellows, and Students of Lyons Inn” directed their claim to the two tenements against Jonas’s wife and son, Jonas “junior,” who inherited them. Just to complicate matters, Jonas “senior” had left several other debts and other people had, or felt they had, a right to the tenements. Mr. Crosse, and Mr. Germyn and others working on behalf of Lyons Inn filed several complaints in the Chancery Court and the complexity of the issue can be seen from the various depositions and interrogatories (C3/CHASI/C123/125, C22/618/53 & (C2/CHASI/G52/49)). They are discussed elsewhere.
Jonas decided to call in some of his debts and he made a deposition in 1631 in which he claimed that William Newcombe of Drewsteignton, gent., had retained him to provide legal counsel in a dispute he was having with Messrs. Logis and Hill in 1615. He said he was supposed to receive £10 for the legal work, along with full reimbursement of court costs etc. Jonas also claimed he had undertaken other legal tasks for Mr. Newcombe. He said that “William Newcombe did promise to pay unto your Lordship’s testator and to give unto him reasonable content for his pains therein.” He then provided an itemized list of disbursements amounting to around £6 9s 4d that he said was still due. Jonas then acknowledged that he had received £15 from Mr. Newman, but he pointed out that the acquittance that he returned for receipt of it and the £15 he acknowledged in a letter sometime later were for the same money – not for £30, as Mr. Newcombe contended.
Jonas admitted that because of “being long familiarly acquainted with the said William Newcombe and relying much upon the reputation and confidence that your Lordship’s testator had of the fair and just dealing of the said William Newcombe, he did not take any warrant under his hand, of or for the foresaid several retainers … … but relied on … the word of the said William … or personal messages sent unto your testator by the servant of the said William Newcombe.” Clearly, whatever his skills in court, his paperwork was poor! Would the Court please issue a subpoena to force Mr. Newcombe to come and testify (C2/CHASI/P18: 1631)?
William Newcombe responded that Jonas’s complaint was designed to “weary, impoverish and terrify this defendant.” He felt it was unreasonable to expect him, “being an aged man and subject to infirmity of body and dwelling almost 160 miles distance and remote from Westminster,” to make an appearance in court. Nevertheless, although he admitted he had retained Jonas in the matter with Logis and Hill and had asked for his help in a case against William Oxenham the elder, and James Knapman -the latter in a case of slander – and had asked him to seek subpoenas for James Knapman and others to appear in the Chancery Court, he had never sought his input in many of the other cases referred to in Jonas’s complaint.
As for the 50s Jonas paid to James Knapman, it was to cover a failure in the Court records that Jonas was responsible for and not him! If that were not enough, a year ago Jonas had William arrested on the same grounds. Oh, and, as for the £15, – that was a separate loan to Jonas, who needed it to pay off a debt to Mr. William Burgoyne of Zeal in Devon! (C2/CHASI/P18/13). Besides, he had given Jonas “divers great sums of money.” Who does one believe? They lived in a relatively paperless world, and they were both getting on in years. Perhaps their recollections were fading.
Jonas, in addition to serving in the Courts of Kings Bench in London and on the Western Circuit, was the steward of several manors that the Earl of Bath owned in Devon, and it was likely through this connection that he acquired the reversion of a property in Holne from the Earl, in 1632. Perhaps he purchased the reversion for his son, Jonas “Junior” who had come of age and was contemplating marriage around then [C6/124/109].
Jonas had, himself, found time to marry a girl named Elizabeth sometime in the early 1600s. I do not know exactly when or where. They moved to a place called “Henstreete” (presumably in or near what is now Hind Street) in Bovey Tracey and had eight children between 1609 and 1622. They had five boys who (perhaps surprisingly for those times) all lived to maturity and four of them, Jonas “Junior”, Edward, Thomas and Ellis went on to marry. The youngest, John, died, unmarried. Jonas “junior” seems to have stayed on in Bovey Tracey and spent a fair portion of his life sorting out his father’s (and his own) legal issues. Edward was to become a well-respected clergyman and the Vicar of Loddiswell. Thomas moved to a farm in Woodland parish, and Ellis became a merchant in Exeter. Their lives are discussed in more detail elsewhere.
Edward married Amy Bennett in 1634, and as part of their marriage settlement Jonas either gave or sold them, a property on a “street leading into Market Street “in Plymouth, a house in St. Sidwell’s Parish in Exeter, and a house called “Hill End” in Bovey Tracey. Interestingly, he employed John Bennett – who was, presumable, one of Amy’s relations, and John Pinsent, of Chudleigh – a by now relatively distant relation who was on his way to becoming a “Prothonotary,” or senior official in the Court of Common Pleas – to make the arrangements (Calendar of Devon Deeds Enrolled: #1681).
Jonas also held other property. On Easter Monday, 1630, he met up with three brothers, William, Henry, and Ambrose Wills to discuss the purchase of a tenement with some land attached in Bovey Tracey that they had recently inherited from their father. They agreed on a price of £37 10s and William and Henry signed the relevant documents in October 1631. Ambrose refused to sign the transfer documents and – as discussed elsewhere – he took Jonas’s grandson to court some thirty years later in a bid to regain it (C5/538/98).
Jonas’s youngest son John Pinsent “gent’s” Will, dated 1648, has survived as it was processed through the Prerogative Court of Canterbury (PCC Fairfax Vol 207 #22) and not through one of the local courts. John left 40 shillings to the poor of Bovey Tracey; £5 to his brother Jonas; £2 apiece to his brothers Thomas and Edward; £20 to his brother Ellis and 40 shillings to his sister, Johanna Burchill. He left the residue to his other sister, Elizabeth, save for £5 he gave to his “dear mother to be aiding and assisting my said executrix (Elizabeth) in performing this my last will and testament”. Johanna Cove and Roger Langworthy witnessed the signing of the will. Roger was probably a relation by marriage as John’s brother Jonas was married to Katherine Langworthy. Jonas probated his brother’s will. John left an impressive estate for a young man!
A few years prior to this, in 1627, the Reverend John Burchill had made a nuncupative (i.e. word of mouth) Will in the presence of several people, including Jonas’s wife, Elizabeth Pinsent. Apparently, the Reverend gentleman left his goods and chattels to his son, Nicholas (PRO: Catalogue Reference: Prob/11/157) who later married Jonas and Elizabeth’s daughter, Johanne.
Jonas Pinsent “senior” was a wealthy man when he died. He too made a Will, but alas, it was destroyed when a bomb landed on the probate office in Exeter during the Second World War. Nevertheless, we know that he named Thomas Orchard as his executor and that he asked that his son Jonas, his principal beneficiary, give £150 apiece to each of his sisters, Johanne Burchill, and Elizabeth Cullinge. He also made Mr. Orchard responsible for Jonas’s mother’s jointure, that, presumably, included a lifetime interest in the family home.
Jonas, “junior” (as was) “was seized in a messuage in Henstreete including three orchards, three gardens and twenty acres in Bovey Tracey, as well as Hynes land, Prowse’s land, Park and right of pasture and turbary on Bovey Heath. Some of which property was conveyed to Thomas Pinder (now deceased) for 99 years on 20th June 1651, for £250 pounds” posted a bond to cover the cost of the bequests he was to make. However, nothing in his life went smoothly. In 1658, a Mr. Orchard accused him of confederating with his mother, Elizabeth and with his sisters and brothers-in-law over the extent of Elizabeth’s Jointure (C6/159/103).
As for Elizabeth Cullinge (Collings), she and her brother Jonas were later to be sued by Ellinor Churchwell over the estate of a man named Jeffrey Christopher, who may have been an illegitimate son of Jonas “senior.” He died in 1646, however, that story comes later. (C2/CHASI/P24/50 & C10/28/65).
Family Tree
Grandparents
Grandfather: John Pinsent: xxxx – 1575
Grandmother: Johanna Unknown: xxxx – 1570
Parents
Father: Hugh Pinsent: 1540 – 1626
Mother: Johanna Woodley: xxxx – xxxx
Father’s Siblings (Aunts, Uncles)
John Pynsent: 1532 – 1615
George Pinsent: xxxx – 1598
Thomas Pinsent: xxxx – xxxx
Elizabeth Pinsent: xxxx – xxxx
Hugh Pinsent: 1540 – 1626
Margaret Pinsent: 1542 – xxxx
Walter Pinsent: 1544 – xxxx
Mary Pinsent: 1546 – xxxx
Johanna Pinsent: 1549 – xxxx
Male Siblings (Brothers)
Jonas Pinsent: 1575 – 1637
Peter Pinsent: 1576 – 1597
John Pinsent: xxxx – xxxx
William Pinsent: 1580 – xxxx
Thomas Pinsent: 1586 – xxxx
Hugh Pinsent: 1591 – xxxx
George Pinsent: 1593 – xxxx
Matthew Pinsent: 1596 – 1616
Please use the above links to explore this branch of the family tree. The default “Next” and “Previous” links below may lead to other unrelated branches.