The Textus Roffensis in Chancery, A.D. 1633

( 225 ) THE TEXTUS ROEEENSIS IN CHANCERY A.D. 1633. BY A. A. ARNOLD, E.S.A., EX-CHAPTER CLEEK 01? EOCHESTEE CATHEDEAL. IT is within the general knowledge of all who care for Rochester, for its cathedral and its history, that the Textus Roffensis, that "venerable monument of antiquity," as it has well been called, has in its time encountered various perils, by land as well as by water. It was once accidentally submerged for some hours in the river Thames, aud on another occasion was virtually stolen (' conveyed' the wise call it) by a certain physician; Dr. Thomas Leonard of Canterbury, who knew its great value. He detained it for at least two years. The fact itself was notorious, as also that the book was ultimately recovered by the Dean and Chapter and restored to their library in Eochester Cathedral. No details of the painful story have, however, so far as I know, been hitherto published; and the recent discovery of some records of the suit in Chancery, which the Dean and Chapter found themselves forced to institute against the culprit, enables us to throw some light on the circumstances. The book must have been lent by the Dean and Chapter, probably to a learned person who desired to make use of some of its treasures; at any rate, it was in London in or about the year 1630, and, as it happens that Sir Henry Spelman is known to have had access to it about that time, and had been making transcripts for his Glossary which he had just published, and was also taking materials from it for his Concilia^ ei Decreta Ecclesia Britannica which was published a few years afterwards, it is not improbable that he was the individual to whom the book had been lent, voi,. xxx. Q 226 THE TEXTUS KOITENSIS The abstract of the Bill in Chancery and of the Defendant's Answer to it, the only record of the suit which at present has come to hand, and for which we have to thank Mr. P. M. E. Hqlworthy of Bromley, are printed in full after these introductory notes. They shew that the Textus being in London at the time mentioned above, that is about the year 1630, it was desired to get it back to Eochester, and that one Mr. Thomas Somer, described in the Bill of Complaint (in which he was made to take the leading part of plaintiff, or Orator) a,s one of the Clerks of Edward Eobinson, Esquire, then one of the "Six Clerks" of the Court of Chancery, being in possession of it, upon trust to deliver it to the Dean and Chapter, understanding that one John Larkin, clerk, one of the Prebendaries of Eochester Cathedral, was within a short time to go to Eochester, he had desired that gentleman to take charge of the book, which the latter undertook to do, and had appointed Somer to bring it to his lodgings in Fleet Street. Somer accordingly did so, but the Prebendary being away at the time, he left the book with the wife of the landlord of the lodgings, " a haberdasher of hatts," or with his servant—he appears afterwards to be doubtful which of them it was—and then it seems certain that this Doctor Thomas Leonard, happening to be lodging in the same house, found the precious volume lying about, took it up, and either actually stole it, or, which was much the same thing, gave the landlady, or some one in the house, five shillings, or some such sum, and then carried it off. Nothing is known of Mr. Thomas Somer, but I think we may assume that he had been employed by Sir Henry Spelman, or by whoever had the care of the book at the time, to copy from it. He was a clerk in the office of the Six Clerks, who were high functionaries of the Court of Chancery, discharging duties simUar, I think, to those afterwards performed by the Masters of the Court, and, at the present day, by the Eegistrars; no doubt but that being in such an occupation he was an expert in caligraphy, accustomed to copy ancient documents, and just the right IK" CHANCERY A.D. 1633. 22V person to be employed to make the required transcripts from the Textus; anyhow, it would seem that he was engaged in some such way with this book, and so it was in bis lawful possession at the time, and on that ground, I suppose, he was made the plaintiff, as it was he, and not the Dean and Chapter, who had entrusted the book to the landlady of the lodgings, and had made the arrangement for its delivery by her husband to the Prebendary of the Cathedral, who was to take it to Eochester. In the Bill this gentleman is called John' Larkin, but his true name was Lorkin. He was a Prebendary of Eochester Cathedral from 1625 to 1654, when he died. He was also at this time Vicar of St. Nicholas, Eochester.* I t is observable that Somer in his BiU of Complaint, which bears date the 18th November 1633, avers that the transaction took place about