Frankes v. Rock

2 Rec. Co. Ct. 1046
CourtNew York County Court, Suffolk County
DecidedJuly 29, 1679
StatusPublished

This text of 2 Rec. Co. Ct. 1046 (Frankes v. Rock) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York County Court, Suffolk County primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Frankes v. Rock, 2 Rec. Co. Ct. 1046 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1679).

Opinion

Sarah Frankes Widdow or her lawfull Attourny plaint. conta Ioseph Elyot Joseph Rock and Timothy Yeales them or either of them Defend*3 in an action of debt of one hundred & twenty pounds lawfull money of New-England due upon the Forfiture of a bond or Obligation under their hands and Seales bearing date 7th of May. 1678. wherein they stand jointly and severally bound for the payment of sd Summe this with all due damages: . . . The Iury . . . found for the plaint. Forfiture of the bond one hundred & twenty pounds money and costs of Court. Upon Request of the Defend* and hearing of both partys The Court chancered this Forfiture to thirty Seven pounds money and costs of Court m' Rock makeing good his promiss about the Brewing Vessells and m'3 Frankes produceing a receipt from the Collector for the Forty Shillings said to bee paid for excise: The Defend* Rock appealed from this judgem* unto the next Court of Assistants and gave Security for prosecut11 thereof to effect.

[ The first document in this case is the agreement of the defendants about taking over the widow Frankes’ brewing industry (S. F. 1965.8). The inventory of the plant follows.

[1047]*10472\itoto all men by these pursents that wee Ioseph Eliott Ioseph Rock and Timothy Yeales all of Boston in New-England are firmly bound and obliged unto Sarah Frankes of sd Boston Widdow in the full Summe of one hundred & twenty pounds To bee paid unto the sd Sarah Frankes her heires Execrs Admrs or Assignes in lawfull money of New-England To the which payment well and truly to bee made we do binde our selves our heires exects admrs and every of them jointly and severally for the whole and in the whole firmly by these pursents. Sealed with our Seales. Dated in Boston the Seventh day of May Ann0 Dorn' 1678. And in the .30th year of his Majties Reign.
The Condición of this Obligación is such that whereas the abovenamed Sarah Frankes hath rented and Farmed out unto the abovebound Ioseph Elliot for the term of one year next following the 30th day of April last past all her brewing Vessells and the benefit of her licence granted by the County Court of Suffolke for keeping a house of publique entertainm* and retailing of beer & Cider for this pu'sent year. Jioto in case the abovebound Ioseph Elliot shall well and truly pay or cause to bee paid unto the abovenamed Sarah Frankes her heires Execrs Admrs or Assignes at her dwelling house in Boston abovesd the full Summe of Forty ponnds in lawfull money of New-England within the space of one year next insuing the date hereof (that is to Say) Ten pounds of sd Summe at the end of each quarter of the year, and shall also well and truly pay the Rates and Imposts that shall grow due unto the Country according to Law for his draught of beer Cider or Ale by virtue of sd Licence, and all fines penalties or forfitures that may bee inflicted or imposed by Authority for any transgression of sd Licence or non observance of the Laws, and all other dues and charges whatsoever ariseing and growing due for or by reason of the keeping of sd publique house, then this Obliga-ción to bee void otherwise to abide and remaine in full force.
Signum
Joseph Eliott, a Seale
Joseph Rock, a Seale
Timothy Yeales. a Seale
Signed Sealed & Deliurd in pursence of
Simeon Stoddard
Jsa Addington
Ownd in Court 30. July 1679. by mr Rock attests Jsa Addington Cler.
Vera Copia Attest1 Jsa Addington Cler
S. F. 1965.9
An Inventory of sundry Brewing Vessells and household Stuffe belonging to Sarah Frankes widow wcl1 were delivered by mr Simeon Stoddard to Joseph Eliott of Boston in the behalfe of sd Sarah Frankes the tenth day of May. 1678. or thereabouts to bee again at the end and term of one yeare from thence next insuing redelivered to sd Sarah Frankes or her Assignes in as good order and condición as the sd Eliott then recd them
£ s a
Jmprs 16. Beer barrells at 2s per bb.............. 1:12:00
.6. Baggs at 2s.................... 0:12:00
.1. copper ready hung and fix’t............. 12:00:—
.1. mash tubb .................... 1:10:—
.2. great Coolers .........-.......... 1:10:—
[1048]*1048 £ s d
A. troughs...................... 0:18:—
A. tubbs ...................... 0:06:—
.6. Trayes...................... 0:06:—
.2. Brewing tooles and one paile............. 0:04:—
.1. piggin and .1. halfe bushell ............. 0:03:—
.1. large Fatt..................... 3:10:—
.12. quart potts and .1. pint pot ............ 2:08:—
.1. great Funnell with a brass Snoutt .......... one Bedsteed one Bed one Bolster, one Rugg one blankett, one table and one matt in the great Chamber ...... 0:05:— 2:07:—
one Bedsteed one Bed two bolsters one Rugg and one blankett 1:10:—
one Table and one Forme ............... 0:03:—
two Tables and two Formes .............. 1:10:—
two Chamber potts.................. 0:05:—
one paire tongs and a Slyce .............. 0:03:—
three candlesticks and .1. gill pot............ 0:02:06
£.31:04:06
Simeon Stoddard and Jn° Viall Jun* made Oath in Court. 28° Janur° 1680. of the delivery of the above mentioned goods to Joseph Eliott at the prizes Specified
J: Addington Cl*8

The following deposition (S. F. 1965.15) is one of many on file that testify to the “disatisfactory” quality of the beer brewed by Messrs. Eliot, Yale, and Rocks, which led to their abandoning both the business and the brewing vessels:

The Deposition of Richd Collacot aged Seventy five yeares or thereabout testi-fieth and Saith that hee the sd depon* being appointed a Tythingman for the North end of Boston and mrs Frankes having let her licence for retailing of beer and Cider to one Ioseph Elyot, the same was disatisfactory to sundry persons of the Neighbourhood, but in a short time the sd Elyot ran away, and then sd Licence &c was assigned (as wee understood) by mr Rock to one Smith, which was greater occasion of trouble and disatisfaction, upon which complaint was made to the Honble County Court by the Tythingmen, who ordered the Signe to bee pulled down, and the sd Smith to pay as a fine five pounds and the sd Deponent being chosen to bee a Grandjury man, himselfe with sundry others of the Grandjury moved to the Honord Court whither they that kep’t houses for publique enter-tainm* by Assignem* of Licences were not presentable as being contrary to Law and the sd Honbla Court then gave their Judgem* on ye Affirmative and accordingly they were presented and further Saith not.
Sworn in Court .30. July.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2 Rec. Co. Ct. 1046, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/frankes-v-rock-nysuffolkctyct-1679.