Explore the catalogue
The use of the legal procedure called Common Recovery was abolished in 1833, but previously it had been used for several centuries. It was basically a legal fiddle, a method of removing entails from deeds and covenants on lands and property placed there by Wills upon the death of owners. The most common was where an owner had placed a stipulation that certain property could only be passed on to members of a specific family. Common Recovery cleaned up property deeds and removed troublesome entails.
It was likely to have been a similar situation that Thomas Cox used in 1759 when he started the procedure. The Lease was dated 19th April and was between Thomas Cox of Bourton, Gent, son and heir of Thomas Cox, but formerly of Sennington (Sevenhampton), Wilts, Yeoman, deceased, begotten of the body of Mary his late wife, formerly called Mary Bunce, Spinster, on the one part; and John Stirling of Pump Court in the Middle Temple, London, Gent, on the other part (An Attorney at Law). Thomas Cox let to John Stirling, the house he then lived in and all his lands in and around Bourton. This is the start of the procedure.
In the Release Indenture dated 20th April 1759, the names are as above, but added to the list is William Towsey of Wantage, Gent on the third part. Stirling and Towsey had agreed to act as Vouchee and Demandant. At some later court date under a writ of 'Sur disseissin en le post' Towsey claimed that he owned all the property that was illegally taken from him some years previous. As tenant, Stirling disputed it and vouched that it was owned by Thomas Cox. The Judge asked Towsey to prove his claim by producing his documents. Cox asked for a break in the proceedings to leave for a short while for discussions. Thomas Cox returned but William Towsey did not. The Judge ruled he was in contempt of court, therefore could not prove his case, and awarded ownership to Thomas Cox, thereby wiping the deed slate clean.
The Release document that is part of the collection called Bourton House papers, (BHP) explains most of this so it could be useful to the historical researcher, who should beware of names where Recovery has been used. In this case Stirling or Towsey never did own the property even though legal documents will say they did.
We are always on the look-out for more information about Shrivenham and district. If you have old photos, know of historical facts, old documents (especially deeds) please contact us...
If you would like to view any item please email us to make an appointment, details on the Home page.