Guy was one of four sons and heirs in gavelkind of Thomas Ellis, knight of the shire for Kent in December 1421 and sheriff six years later.
Guy, described as a ‘gentleman’, almost certainly followed in his father’s footsteps in becoming a lawyer, although the details of his education are equally obscure.
Ellis’s first employment in public affairs was not in Kent but in Essex, and did not come until November 1451 when he was among those appointed to a commission of sewers. Shortly afterwards he seems to have entered the service of Archbishop Kemp, who was translated to Canterbury on 6 Sept. 1452 following the death of Archbishop Stafford, for before 6 Aug. 1453 he was appointed bailiff of New Romney, an office in the gift of the archbishop. The nature of Ellis’s connexion with Kemp is unclear and it may be that he had been employed by the archbishops earlier in his career. He was probably already acting as bailiff when he was elected as one of the barons to represent New Romney in the Parliament which assembled at Reading on 6 Mar. 1453. The settlement of his parliamentary wages for this long Parliament (which did not finally close until 18 Apr. 1454) prompted a long and acrimonious dispute with the Portsmen of New Romney, ending in litigation in the King’s bench. In 1453-4 the jurats noted that all Ellis’s wages were outstanding and while in the following year they settled the debt owing to his fellow baron, John Chenew*, they only made a payment of 40s. to Ellis, representing less than half the sum he claimed was due to him. Later on they enlisted the help of John Greenford*, the steward of Dover castle, in presenting their case to the lieutenant of Dover, Richard Witherton, who was responsible for executing the Crown’s writ for the payment of parliamentary wages.
Ellis had no further connexion with the administration of New Romney after the end of his short term as bailiff, and almost certainly returned to Kennington to continue his practice as a lawyer. In August 1456 Richard Essex of Challock, Kent, made a gift of goods and chattels to him and two others but there is no other evidence of his professional affairs.
