HYNDESTON, William

William Hyndeston was the son and heir of an otherwise obscure man of the same name. The elder William was the younger of at least two surviving sons of Richard Hyndeston, but succeeded to his father’s property after the childless death of his brother Hugh.9 C260/146/37, m. 2; KB27/746, rex rot. 41. The family lands included holdings in Hyndeston and Newton Ferrers,10 C142/26/43(1); C116/37, rots. 1, 3. and Richard augmented these with the reversion of a tenement in Bigbury, acquired from the Notedon family. This acquisition became the subject of a protracted dispute between the Hyndestons and the Notedons’ heirs, the Crese family. In 1428 the justices of assize awarded the tenure to Richard Crese† and Matilda his wife, accepting their claim that Richard Hyndeston had falsified a charter. In 1446, however, Hyndeston had turned the tables on his opponents and recovered possession from William Crese and his wife Joan.11 JUST1/1540, rots. 61, 62; C260/146/37. By this date Hyndeston had, in any event, acquired for himself at least the expectation of holdings worth over £17 p.a. in Wonwell, Hokeridge, Whitemore and Modicomb, the reversion of which his father-in-law, John Wonwell, had settled on him and his wife Elizabeth.12 C140/84/33.

The details of Hyndeston’s education and early career are obscure, but by 1447 he had been admitted to the Middle Temple. By this date he had already been practising the law for several years, and was, indeed, a lawyer of considerable repute: in 1435 he had been active in the company of such leading members of the profession from the south-west as Nicholas Radford* and William Boef*.13 CCR, 1435-41, pp. 41, 48; SC6/823/31. By the early 1440s he found employment in the service of the citizens of Exeter who elected him to Parliament on 9 Jan. 1442, a day after admitting him to the freedom of the city without payment of any fine. Hyndeston himself may have actively sought election, for he and his colleague, the leading merchant Thomas Cook I* agreed to serve for a nominal sum of just 40s. between them in lieu of their wages.14 Exeter Freemen ed. Rowe and Jackson, 49; Devon RO, Exeter city recs., receiver’s acct. 20-21 Hen. VI, m. 2d. Hyndeston was added to the quorum of the Devon bench a year later. Remaining a j.p. until his death, he found time to attend the sessions on a regular basis, despite maintaining a sizeable private legal practice, attracting clients from a wide range of society.15 E101/555/29; E199/9/10. They included members of the nobility, like John Cornwall, Lord Fanhope, and greater gentry like Sir William Bourgchier and his wife Thomasine (the daughter and coheiress of (Sir) Richard Hankford* and the Fitzwaryn family), the Carews, (Sir) Baldwin Fulford*, Alfred Corneburgh†, Walter Ralegh*, Walter Reynell*, Robert Hill I*, who appointed him an executor of his will, besides a number of merchants and other lesser men.16 PCC 12 Stokton; Reg. Lacy, ii. 313; Reg. Lacy ed. Hingeston-Randolph, i. 289; The Commons 1386-1421, ii. 622; C47/9/14, m. 1; CFR, xvi. 333; xviii. 148; CP40/734, rot. 100; 740, rot. 403; 756, rot. 309; CP25(1)/293/70/272; CP40/826, rot. 118. For merchants and lesser gentry see e.g. CCR, 1435-41, pp. 41, 48; 1447-54, p. 353; 1454-61, pp. 30, 125, 174; C1/17/237, 315-20; C254/145/2, 126, 274; CP25(1)/46/83/122; 85/151, 164, 166-7; 86/184; 88/245-6, 89/268; CP40/696, rot. 132; 720, rot. 312. Part of his success may have been attributable to his innovative thinking: he was party to some of the earliest known uses of the common recovery and may indeed have been instrumental in the development of this new legal device.17 J. Biancalana, Fee Tail and Common Recovery, 376.

Hyndeston’s expanding legal practice allowed him to sever his earlier ties with the citizens of Exeter, and in 1447-8 he was acting as leading counsel for the bishop of Exeter in the protracted dispute between the city and the ecclesiastical authorities over the privileges of the episcopal and cathedral liberties. The issue had been in dispute for some time, but in 1445 the arrest of a servant of the cathedral’s chancellor within the bishop’s palace had brought it into the open. Both parties employed prominent lawyers. Initially the city’s case was put forward by the mayor, John Shillingford*, but as the judicial process dragged on over several terms, the renowned Nicholas Radford was called upon to mediate. The cathedral authorities for their part produced ‘a greet barre’, which included besides Hyndeston the lawyers John Orchard, John Wood and John More of Cullompton. Much evidently depended on Hyndeston – a skilful negotiator, even if he was on occasion prone to lose his temper under pressure. He clearly prided himself on his first-hand knowledge of affairs in Exeter and was not above citing ‘the comyn voys of the Cite’ in evidence. By December 1447 both sides were actively seeking an out-of-court settlement, and the city brought in William Boef to strengthen their representation, whereas John Copplestone* was added to the bishop’s counsel, but when a date was set for renewed negotiations in early 1448, the dean of Exeter categorically refused to negotiate until Hyndeston himself was present and the discussions had to be adjourned. In April a serious breach occurred between Radford and Hyndeston, who had been negotiating for their respective sides at Tiverton, perhaps as a consequence of an outburst by the passionate Hyndeston, for the dispute was now referred to Radford and Copplestone for arbitration. Yet, by the end of the month Hyndeston was once again in charge of negotiations, which on at least one further occasion had to be adjourned as a consequence of his absence. In the event, his efforts bore fruit, and the agreement reached in December 1448 was in the bishop’s favour.18 Letters and Pprs. Shillingford (Camden Soc. ser. 2, ii), pp. xiv-xvii, 19, 25-26, 46, 67, 136-7.

The Exeter dispute was just one of many cases that occupied Hyndeston in these years. He was among the arbitrators negotiating a settlement between the prior and convent of Plympton and the parishioners of Plympton parish church over the right of burial there, as well as fulfilling a similar function in a quarrel between the abbot of Buckland and James Durneford.19 Reg. Lacy, iii (Canterbury and York Soc. lxii), 271; Cornw. RO, Edgcombe mss, ME971. Like many other prominent Devon lawyers, Hyndeston was soon drawn into the circle of Thomas Courtenay, earl of Devon, who continued to employ him until his death. It is possible that he owed his introduction to the comital household to his friend William Boef (with whom he was frequently associated in their professional activities), who by the late 1440s was serving as the earl’s steward.20 M. Cherry, ‘Crown and Political Community, Devon’ (Univ. of Wales, Swansea Ph.D. thesis, 1981), 273; CP25(1)/46/85/164; 87/224; PCC 12 Stokton. The connexion had probably been established by 1445, when he and Boef were first elected knights of the shire for Devon. Hyndeston would go on to represent the county in every Parliament until 1450, usually paired with another member of the Courtenay affinity.21 C219/15/2; Patronage, Crown and Provinces ed. Griffiths, 130, 142; Cherry, 273, n. 1. It is a measure of the dominance of the earl that in 1453, during the earl’s temporary eclipse following his participation in the duke of York’s ill-conceived Dartford adventure, Hyndeston was not re-elected.

Yet it was then that he climbed a further rung on the legal career ladder, and one that might eventually have seen him elevated to the judiciary. Early in 1453 he was nominated to take the serjeant’s coif that summer, alongside his associate Boef.22 CCR, 1447-54, p. 381; Order of Serjs. at Law (Selden Soc. supp. ser. v), 163, 261-2. He undoubtedly possessed the professional qualifications for this promotion, but he had also attracted some attention in the ranks of the administration, for on 7 July he was named one of the King’s serjeants-at-law and he was almost immediately employed on the King’s business. Thus, in early 1454 he was sent to the north along with the Cornish lawyer and fellow serjeant-at-law Walter Moyle* to assist the duke of York in quashing the duke of Exeter’s rebellion.23 CPR, 1452-61, p. 85; E403/798, m. 7. In the following year, he was summoned to attend the Lords in the Parliament convened in the aftermath of the battle of St. Albans. The duties of the office may have kept him occupied, for in the remaining years of his life he received relatively few additional Crown appointments.

Hyndeston made his will at an unknown date in 1457 and died before May 1458, when probate was granted. He asked to be buried in the parish church of Kingston, to the fabric of which he bequeathed £20. He left the same amount to the church of St. Anne of the Holy Cross at Holwell Cross for the foundation of a chapel dedicated to St. Anne, and assigned the rents of a close situated nearby for its maintenance. Hyndeston’s two daughters were to receive marriage portions of £40 each, by the oversight of his friend Boef. The lawyer’s widow, Elizabeth, and her mother were appointed executors.24 PCC 12 Stokton. Elizabeth went on to marry as her second husband Sir Philip Courtenay† of Molland, and survived until 1482.25 C1/33/86; C140/84/33; CP40/804, rot. 42; 826, rot. 118; 853, rot. 127. Hyndeston’s elder son, William, succeeded to his property, but died childless, leaving his younger brother Robert as both his and their mother’s heir.26 C260/150/43. Robert was in turn succeeded by his two sons, and the death of the younger, Philip, in 1508, brought the male line of the Hyndestons to an end: his four sisters were his coheiresses.27 C142/26/43(1); CIPM Hen. VII, i, 443.