Coventry's reports

The Journal of Legal History

Volumn 16, Issue 3, 1995, Pages 281-303

  Ibbetson, D J ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 79957722575     PISSN: 01440365     EISSN: 17440564     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/01440369508531135     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. I have attempted to give an analysis of the state of law reporting at this time in ‘Law Reporting in the 1590s’, in C. Stebbings, ed., Law Reporting in Britain, London, 1995, 73
2. ‘Southcote v. Bennet’ (1899) 13 Harvard Law Review 43.
3. ‘New Light on Slade's Case’ [1971] Cambridge Law Journal 51, 54–59, 60–66, 66–67.
4. English Legal Manuscripts, Zug, 1975, vol. 1, 55
5. The latest references are to Coke's Eleventh Report, published in 1615: ff.62, 144, 146v.
6. Spencer V. Stanger (H.1603, f.82v); Whetstone v. Mintam (H.1603, f.84v).
7. English Legal Manuscripts, 1, 55.
8. For references to Coventry as a reporter, see E.M. Wells, Common Law Reporting in England, University of Oxford, D.Phil thesis, 1995, 380, 382.
9. Ibbetson, ‘Law Reporting in the 1590s ’, 77.
10. A.W.B. Simpson, ‘Keilwey's Reports. temp. Henry VII and Henry VIII’ (1957) 73 Law Quarterly Review 89.
11. It may be more than coincidental that the younger Coventry was a protégé of Edward Coke. According to Francis Bacon, he was ‘bred by my Lord Coke and seasoned in his ways’: Works, ed. J. Spedding et al., 1872, vol.13, 97.
12. Calchin V. (P.1599; MS A f.58), cited at Coventry MS 115 f.85v. as ‘fol. 50’.
13. Pilkington V. Winnington (H. and P.1600; MS A ff.155, 163v, 171v), cited in Coventry MS 115 f.89v.
14. Ibbetson, ‘Law Reporting in the 1590s’, 76–80.
15. Andrews V. Cromwell (Coventry MS 115 f.69 (H.1599 (the reference to H.1598 in the MS is transparently an error)); Coventry MS 115 f.71v (H.1600)).
16. MS E ff.26v-29v.
17. MS E, ff.31 v-36.
18. Coventry MS 115 f.88 v.
19. Above, nn.33 and 34.
20. Cro. Jac. 16, 17.
21. Ff.213-372, ff.395-554, f.563 et seqq. Curiously, the fit is not absolutely exact.
22. See further below, text at n.61.
23. Stroud V. Willis MS A f.214.
24. For example MS K f.5-13 v.
25. Similar theories have been put forward to account for similar regularities and irregularities in the manuscripts of the early Year Books: G.J. Turner, Year Books 4 Edward, Selden Society, vol. 26, 1911, Ixiii-xcv
26. W.H. Dunham, Casus Placitorum Selden Society, vol. 69, 1952, XLIX-LVI.
27. Above, 288–9.
28. Above, text after n.38.
29. Above, n.24.
30. Above, text at n.48.
31. Above, text at n.50.
32. For example the sequence of cases in M. 1600 from Thornton v. Wikes to Aldersey v. Ragge, MS O ff.30-32.
33. His own abridgment (MS X) seems to have been derived from a manuscript in which the different reports of cases tended to be so joined together: above, text after n.63.