for one whole year then next ensuing & untill Etc for preserving the Peace Etc And that Deft on sd. 22d. Decr. Etc
had notice thereof & was required to appear before the Mayor & Aldermen at Guildhall on the Monday next
after Epiphany to take his Oath Etc & to execute his Office Nevertheless Defendant not regarding Etc
altho often requested hath hitherto refused & still refuses to take sd. Oath or execute sd. Office In Contempt
Etc To the bad Example Etc and agt: the Peace Etc

Plea

To which Indictment Deft has pleaded Not Guilty and given Notice to Try his Traverse this Sessions

Case

NB there are & parishes
in this Ward

This Prosecution is in order to try What hardly soon as to be Question vizt. Whether yeWarder Parish of St Botolph Bps Gateareintituled
to the fine or Commutation for Ward Offices in the Ward of Bpgate
The Deft is a Housekeeper in the Parish of St. Botolph Bishopsgate which is Co-extensive with the Wardwhich is we extensive with yt parish ye Ward called Bps Gate within And on ye 22 of
Decr. 1740 was at a Wardmote duely elected Constable for the Precinct of St. Botolph without Bishopsgate in ye sd. Ward as sett out
in the Indictment

As soon as ye. Election was over Mr. Thomas Emmerton< no role > Upper Church Warden of ye sd. Parish told the Alderman in an
insulting Manner that the Ward could not hold Deft to Serve for he had fined to him that he had got the Money in his
Pockett & would not part with it

The Alderman not looking upon this Payment as a legal Excuse order'd Notice to be given to Deft of his Election
which was accordingly done

But Deft not appearing to take upon him the Office at the Usual time he was Summoned to attend the Court of
Aldren To Show why he did not

Deft not being able to attend in person Mr. Scott his Attorney & the Parish Officers attended for him & proved the Paymt.
of the fine to Mr. Emmerton & then produced several Old Church Wardens Accots. out of wch. they read several Entries to prove
that the Ward fines had for above 100 Years past been paid to the Church Wardens of St Botolph & that the sd. Church Wardens had in
some Instances issued Money for the Expences of the Courts of Warmote And this they insisted was Evidence of a Custom
that the Ward fines belonged to ye Parish of St Botolph And therefore Deft was legally exempted from serving the Office to which he
had been elected at ye Warmote.

But the Court of Aldren not being Satisfied with the Validity of such pretended Custom were pleased to direct this
Indictment to be preferred in order to try the Right And Deft is supported in his Defence by Sevl. Gentl of the Parish
out of more opposition to ye Aldran & Comon Council of ye Ward thereby in some degree insinuating that they are not as
fit to be trusted with the Money as the Parish Officers.

The Defts Attorney has Spad the Prsent Church Warden of St Botolphs parish Mr. Wm. Hookham< no role > & given him Notice to produce ye following
Book Vizt.

The Two large Books of Churchwarden's Accounts
The Three Registers or Vestry Books
The Books of Accounts as Churchwardens of

John James< no role > 1683,
Robert Roberts< no role > 1686,
Abraham Garnage< no role > 1691,
Joseph Huntman< no role > 1696,
Richard Turner< no role > 1700,
Mathew Betts< no role > 1704,
John Beale< no role > 1712,