'I shalle send word in writing': lexical choices and legal acumen in the letters of Margaret Paston

Medium Aevum, Fall-Winter, 2008 by Alison Spedding

Even before these relatively minor matters at Sparham, Margaret's experience of the legalities of property ownership had entered a more serious phase, one in which her role went beyond the secretarial to embrace the more complicated activities of distress and counter-distress of goods. The Pastons had been expelled from their manor of Gresham (29) in February 1448 by Lord Moleyns, and in May Margaret reported to John that 'The Lord Moleyns man gaderyth up pe rent at Gresham a gret pace' (129.46). The Pastons subsequently returned to take up residence on the estate (though not in the manor house itself), but in January 1449 Margaret was personally driven out once again. (30) Writing from John Damme's home at nearby Sustead in February she recounts how the tenants were being pressured by Moleyns's men. It seems probable to her that should they not comply with his wishes Moleyns would 'distreyn for pe mersymentys er pe nexst hundred' (131.14f.). Indeed Herry Goneld has already been 'dystreynyd ... for rent and ferm, and he must pay it to-morn ... or ell lesyn his dystresse' (131.16-18). Margaret's efforts were not confined to encouraging the Gresham tenants, however. Once again she undertook negotiations on her husband's behalf, this time with John Barrow, Lord Moleyns's agent at Gresham. Although this was the first time that Margaret had dealt personally with such a situation she appears to have been familiar with its legal ramifications, and the vocabulary she uses in describing the encounter is, typically, specific and appropriate. She points out that the Pastons had been 'dissesyd of her lyvelode', and that Moleyns had 'no tytyl of r[??]t ... to pe maner of Gressam' (131.69 and 79). (31)

By the time the Duke of Suffolk began to assert a claim over the manors of Drayton and Hellesdon some sixteen years later Margaret had become even more self-assured and businesslike in dealing with the distress and counter-distress of goods. Perusing the sequence of letters of 1465 in which the struggle to retain command of these manors is recounted, it is clear that she was very well informed of every move that was made and perfectly at home not only with the correct legal terminology bur also with the procedures necessary in attempting to make use of the proper judicial channels.

Only three months later we find another example of the way Margaret's understanding of the finer points of property law went deeper than just the correct use of the technical vocabulary to include an appreciation of the possibility of using the available legal procedures to compensate for the problems of judicial bias caused by local political manoeuvring. Her handling of the situation shows not just confidence in her own ability bur also the extent to which her social status, position of responsibility, and technical understanding are accepted and allow her to speak with her own voice to those outside the domestic circle. The high sheriff's officials had failed to serve a replevin in respect of sheep distrained on Paston land by Yelverton, having been told by his men that their master had a claim to the manor in question. Since the sheriff had accepted this reason unquestioningly Margaret sent him word advising him that unless Yelverton was present on the manor in person he could not claim it and suggesting that the sheriff 'be ware what retorne he made pat he were not hurte by it' (189.72f.), or in other words, that it would reflect badly on him if his report showed him to be ignorant of the law. There is no indication that Margaret is acting on advice received rather than on her own initiative based on prior knowledge. Indeed, when she is advised that it would be best to serve an alias and pluries on Yelverton, so that the sheriff would then be obliged to make a report justifying his actions, (32) she is quick to point out that such a course was what 'councell thynketh' (189.75), although she does not name the individual in question, and does not claim the idea as her own. The high sheriff subsequently seemed well disposed towards Margaret when she complained to him about the anti-Paston bias shown by the under sheriff. She reported that 'he hat wretyn to hym that he choulde be indeferent for both partyes acordyng to the lawe ...' (192.14f.).