ABBOT, John II

Nothing is recorded of Abbot before 1407, when he obtained the freedom of the city of London as a mercer. He had originally been apprenticed to Thomas Dyster, a wealthy member of the craft who had died in July 1403, but it is unclear whether Abbot was apprenticed to someone else for the remainder of his term or whether he obtained the freedom by redemption. He rose rapidly within his Company, and although the dates of his admission to the livery are not recorded, he had certainly achieved that rank by July 1415 when he was chosen for the first time as one of the wardens of the craft. He went on to be elected to this office on another three occasions during his career.4 Mercers’ Co., Biog. Index Cards; Guildhall Lib. London, commissary ct. wills, 9171/2, f. 33v.

Abbot’s relations with Thomas Dyster had been close, for shortly before his master’s death, he was chosen as one of the executors of an estate in which the goods and chattels alone were valued at some £4,336. In July 1411 he appeared before the mayor and aldermen to answer questions about how legacies of £400 might be paid to each of Dyster’s three children. At their request he rendered his accounts in November that year, and a small committee was appointed to look at his administration of the estate. In December 1413 it was reported that he had carried out his duties well and faithfully, and that only £5 3s. 4d. remained to be paid to Dyster’s creditors, although more than £600 was still owed by various debtors. The involvement of the city government appears to have had its origins in a protracted dispute between Abbot and John Hertwell, a fellow mercer who had been appointed guardian of Dyster’s children. In February 1412 Hertwell claimed in the mayor’s court that he was owed 100 marks by Abbot from the sale of property in Oxfordshire and Northamptonshire. Abbot appeared in court later the same month and reported that he had received £67 10s. from the sale of the lands which, allowing for expenses, left a residue of £64 8s. 4d. By this time, however, Dyster’s two sons had died, and so the money was adjudged to his nephew, rather than to Hertwell. Not discouraged by this, Hertwell made another attempt to defraud Dyster’s estate, this time by taking the drastic step of abducting and marrying his young daughter and now sole heiress, Ellen. This led to Hertwell being imprisoned by the mayor and aldermen in early January 1413, first in the sheriff’s compter and later in the Tower. Abbot, along with John Mitchell I* and the sheriff of Buckinghamshire, was then granted Ellen’s wardship. This only served to spur Hertwell on, for following his release from prison on bail in March that year he and Ellen sued Abbot for the £400 which had been left to her by her father. It transpired, however, that Hertwell had already received the money from one of Dyster’s other executors, a man named John Bally. Rather than coming from the estate, this money had been raised from bonds of 800 marks which Bally had entered into with various individuals at Dyster’s request. He and another executor, Robert Domenyk, had agreed to keep these transactions secret from Abbot. Bally confessed to his part in the attempted fraud in the following December, but the matter was not finally cleared up until November 1415, when it was confirmed that Hertwell had received the £400 and should not trouble Abbot again. However, the dispute between the two men continued to rumble on, and early in 1416 they both agreed to submit to the arbitration of some of their fellow mercers and entered into reciprocal bonds in £300. In the event, the recorder of the City was forced to deliver the final judgement, ruling once more that Hertwell had no claim against Abbot for the £400, and that Abbot should be entirely exonerated. Hertwell almost certainly knew that the decision would go against him: it was noted that he was absent ‘because he did not care to attend’.5 Cal. P. and M. London, 1413-37, pp. 10-11, 15-16, 18-23, 42; CPR, 1408-13, p. 472.

In spite of the judgment of the mayor’s court, there was still considerable uncertainty about the administration of Dyster’s estate. An inquisition post mortem into Dyster’s Northamptonshire lands was eventually taken in March 1419, almost 16 years after his death. It was reported that although his three children had been minors property and rent worth a total of 45s. 4d. p.a. in Plumpton and Farthinghoe had not been taken into the King’s hands on Dyster’s death, but had remained concealed. William Harrowden was found to have received the profits of the Plumpton lands, but the jury was unable to determine who was receiving the 13s. 4d. from a messuage and virgate of land in Farthinghoe.6 CIMisc. vii. 325. The most likely suspect is Abbot himself, for of the executors appointed by Dyster only he and Domenyk had actually been granted administration of the estate. Further evidence is provided by Abbot’s will of 1444, in which he revealed strong links with Farthinghoe and, moreover, left an unspecified amount of property there to the Mercers’ Company and to one of his daughters.7 PCC 34 Luffenham. In all likelihood, therefore, Abbot had somehow gained possession of some of Dyster’s Northamptonshire lands, property which, as the inquisition pointed out, should by right have passed to Ellen and John Hertwell.

Abbot’s business dealings did not, on the whole, involve him in similar controversies. His close links with Dyster may well have enabled him to establish a successful business earlier than most: in a petition submitted to the Parliament of 1415 he and Everard Flete* were among a group of merchants who asked for the return of £585 17s. 4d. which they had given to the master of the royal mint, Richard Garner, to be re-coined. Their attempt was unsuccessful so they tried again during the subsequent Parliament which met in March 1416. On this occasion they were told that all the goods and monies held by Garner and his deputy had been seized by the treasurer, Thomas, earl of Arundel, who had died following the siege of Harfleur.8 PROME, ix. 125, 192. Little is recorded of the nature of Abbot’s dealings at this stage in his career, although debts arising from business transactions came to be owed to him by individuals from several counties outside London, such as John Pierson of Kenilworth in Warwickshire who was outlawed and later pardoned in respect of a debt of £10. He also had dealings with men from Rutland, Staffordshire and Somerset. On the whole, however, he appears to have been most closely involved with fellow mercers as far as domestic trade was concerned, and on two occasions was a recipient of ‘gifts’ of goods and chattels made as security for debts incurred in the course of his business activities.9 CPR, 1413-16, p. 311; 1416-22, p. 290; CCR, 1405-9, p. 514; 1413-19, p. 429; 1429-35, p. 467, 1435-41, p. 362; Cal. P. and M. London, 1413-37, p. 245; CP40/636, rot. 290. More evidence is available for his trade with the continent: he occasionally exported cloth through the port of London, but appears to have been most active as an importer: by the mid 1420s, for instance, he was importing linen and other items, presumably goods which would then be sold through his shops in the capital.10 E122/76/13; 203/2, f. 6. Later in his career he forged some kind of trading partnership with Henry Frowyk I* which centred on the port of Southampton: in April 1437 both men were granted royal licences to buy any merchandise coming into the port from abroad as long as the goods were not from Flanders. The following year they imported a variety of goods into Southampton, including linen, canvas and napery.11 CPR, 1436-41, p. 45; E122/209/1, f. 21. In the meantime Abbot and Frowyk had served together on a royal commission which was charged with determining an appeal made to the King by Thomas Freeman*, a merchant from Salisbury, who was charged with arresting a ship and carrying off the goods it was carrying. Their dealings also extended to property transactions, for in 1439 they were listed among the former feoffees of lands belonging to Mercy, widow of Nicholas Carew†.12 CCR, 1435-41, pp. 264, 270; CPR, 1429-36, pp. 441, 446.

Like many London citizens, Abbot seems to have used his apprentices to help with the retailing of his goods in the capital. In May 1421, however, William Palmer, described as ‘factor and apprentice’ to Abbot was examined in the mayor’s court on a charge of usury. This was one of a number of cases of this kind which were heard by the mayor in the early 1420s. Palmer, it transpired, had entered into a contract with Rowland, then Gloucester Herald, in which the latter was bound in £49 3s. 5d. to Abbot. According to the contract the sum represented payment for goods including white linen cloth and linen thread from Cologne, which Rowland was supposedly buying from Abbot. In reality, however, Palmer was using the contract as a cover for a loan of £40 which Rowland would then repay with interest of £9 3s. 5d. Palmer admitted the offence, and Abbot was then summoned before the court to explain the actions of his apprentice. In his defence he claimed that he had no knowledge of the false contract, although he admitted that he would have made a profit out of the transaction. The mayor, considering that masters as well as apprentices should be ‘afraid to tolerate and perform evil counsels’, fined Abbot the hefty sum of £10. Palmer was imprisoned for a time but was released when Rowland repaid the £40 and was exonerated by Abbot from the obligation.13 Cal. P. and M. London, 1413-37, pp. 96-97; Corp. London RO, jnl. 1, f. 91v.

In other instances, however, Abbot’s relations with his apprentices were rather more fraught. Thus, one Aleyn Martyn complained to the chancellor that whereas he had apprenticed his brother Nicholas Wallere to Abbot, and had paid him ten marks to have the boy ‘trewely and dewely enformed and tawht’, the mercer had turned the boy out on to the street within the first two years of his seven-year term, and had threatened to have him imprisoned. To protect his brother, Martyn agreed to seal a bond for £20 to Abbot, and paid half of this sum in hand, but the mercer nevertheless began proceedings against him in the London sheriffs’ court, and detained a sum of cash and two rings, one set with a sapphire and another with ‘thre ymages’ worth seven nobles as security.14 C1/72/66.

Abbot’s trading activities were clearly profitable, for in 1436 his lands in London, Northamptonshire and Essex were assessed at £47 p.a. for the purposes of the income tax which was raised that year.15 S.L. Thrupp, Merchant Class Med. London, 378. By this time he had already made two loans to the Crown: £10 in August 1426 and £40 in May 1436. He advanced further loans in 1437 and 1442. In each case Abbot was quickly able to secure an order authorizing repayment by assignment. In November 1438 assignment of £186 6s. 11d. was made to Abbot and ‘other citizens and merchants of London’ by advice of the council as a gift ‘for certain causes moving the King’.16 E401/713, m. 16; 747, m. 6; 752, m. 15; 778, m. 8; E403/675, m. 13; 723, m. 2; 727, m. 7; 733, m. 4; 745, m. 5. Relatively little is recorded of the extent or location of his holdings, apart from those in London where it is clear that he acquired property in several parishes. His main residence appears to have been in Catte Street in the parish of St. Lawrence Jewry which, in December 1433, was conveyed by Thomas Knolles† to John Fray† (one of the barons of the Exchequer), Abbot, John Carpenter II* and Alexander Anne*. This property was later left by Abbot to the Mercers’ Company in his will for the purpose of endowing a chantry at Farthinghoe. His will also indicates that he had property in the parishes of St. Katherine Cree and St. Michael Wood Street, and once again deeds enrolled in the husting court show that he was able to draw upon the prominent figures of Fray, Carpenter and Anne to act as feoffees.17 Corp. London RO, hr 162/49, 163/42, 164/11; PCC 34 Luffenham; C1/150/6. It was, however, in the parish of St. Lawrence that Abbot was serving as churchwarden in the autumn of 1422, when the planned installation of a new bell was marred by an unfortunate accident which saw the ropes used to pull the bell up into the belfry snap, leaving the heavy bell to plummet to the ground where it crushed a watching skinner from Pontefract.18 E159/199, recorda Easter rots. 18-18d.

The involvement of Carpenter and the others in Abbot’s property dealings shows the extent to which he had become a prominent figure in his own right in London. His political career can be said to have begun in earnest in 1420, by which time his troubles with Hertwell over the Dyster estate were behind him. In July that year he and William Estfield* were appointed by the mayor, Richard Whittington†, to help resolve a serious internal dispute between the wardens and commonalty of the Cutlers. They were to present their report by 13 Oct., by which time Abbot had been chosen as one of London’s four auditors, the traditional stepping-stone to higher office in city government.19 Cal. Letter Bk. London, I, 249; jnl. 1, ff. 81, 85v. In Abbot’s case there is every indication that he was considered by many at this point to be a suitable candidate for advancement to the highest levels of the City’s administration: he was regularly employed by the mayor as an arbiter in disputes during the 1420s, and, in September 1428, three months after being elected once more as warden of the Mercers, he was the mayor’s choice to serve as sheriff for the coming year. His term of office appears to have been uneventful: the only minor criticism of him surfaced four years later, in 1433, when a fellow mercer, William Maltby, claimed that he had still not received a certain sum of money which Abbot, as sheriff, should have paid him.20 Jnl. 1, ff. 44, 54v, 85v; jnl. 2, f. 119; Cal. Letter Bk. London, K, 79, 169. By 1430 Abbot had attested the parliamentary election in London on two occasions, and in December that year he was himself elected by the commonalty to represent the City at the assembly which was to meet at Westminster on 12 Jan. Although a clear reflection of his standing in London, his election to Parliament did not lead on to greater things in the City itself. He was still a prominent member of the common council, however, serving on several committees during the 1430s and early 1440s, and he attested the parliamentary election on a further three occasions. In 1432 he was elected for a final term as warden of the Mercers’ Company, and the following year was admitted to the Tailors’ fraternity of St. John the Baptist, whose members included many leading London merchants. His experience as a former auditor and sheriff stood him in good stead in the autumn of 1440 when he was one of the special auditors chosen by the mayor and aldermen to investigate the accounts of William Whetenhale, a former warden of London Bridge. However, despite his undoubted prominence in the City, Abbot never became an alderman. This was not for want of trying: on 6 July 1442 he was beaten by John Norman* to the vacant aldermanry of Cheap ward, although the election was probably an amicable affair as Abbot himself was one of those who nominated Norman for the position.21 Cal. Letter Bk. London, K, 248; jnl. 3, ff. 76v, 131v, 116, 140.

This was Abbot’s final appearance on the civic stage, and less than a year later he began to make arrangements for the disposal of his estate. In a memorandum dated 19 June 1443 and included after the probate copy of his will Abbot left all his property in London, Farthinghoe and Althrop, Northamptonshire, to the Mercers. His house in Catte Street was to be used by his Company to endow a chantry in Farthinghoe. To his wife, Agnes, he left his tenement in Lad Lane in the parish of St. Michael Wood Street for her lifetime, while his daughter, Elizabeth, who had married Walter Mauncell, was bequeathed other unspecified property in Northamptonshire, with remainder to his other daughter, Alice (already the wife of William Cotton*, destined to be an important figure in the Household). Other lands and tenements in the parish of St. Katherine Cree were to be sold. In the event, Abbot did not make his final will until 27 Feb. the following year. He asked to be buried in the church of St. Lawrence Jewry and made substantial bequests of £10 to the altar and £20 for the window at the east end of the church. Agnes was left the usual widow’s portion, plus £80 in cash and all the contents of their house, while his daughters and grand-daughter also received significant bequests. Abbot’s links with Northamptonshire were clearly expressed in the form of gifts to local men and to poor residents of Farthinghoe and King’s Sutton. He also left 100s. for repairs to the road between Banbury and Warkworth. Among the servants who received bequests were William Pratte and William Heende, two of Abbot’s apprentices who were each left £20. Heende was also appointed as one of his executors. The will was proved on 5 Mar. 1444 and it is likely that Abbot died on either 28 or 29 Feb. for the last day of February was the date on which the Mercers subsequently celebrated his obit in St. Lawrence Jewry. This obit, funded using the Catte Street property, was established despite the fact that, as the Mercers themselves later pointed out, it was not specified in Abbot’s will. In March 1476 the court of the Mercers determined that the will should be studied before funding of the obit could continue; in the meantime Heende was ordered to pay for it himself as Abbot’s executor. Two years later the obit was granted a reprieve, but in 1503 the Mercers finally anounced that ‘we can not knowe wherfore we shulde mayntene it for the bokes of Seint Laurens shew no thynge wherfore we owe to do it’.22 PCC 34 Luffenham; Med. London Widows ed. Barron and Sutton, 134; Acts of Ct. Mercers’ Co. ed. Lyell and Watney, 93, 108-9, 144, 238, 262, 453; A.F. Sutton, ‘Caxton was a Mercer’, in Eng. in the 15th Cent. ed. Rogers, 123n.