Both John and Mary signed the documents, writing in clear and practised hands - John signed Merywether and Mary spelt her surname Meryweather.³ The witnesses, Thomas Grey and Rose Case had their names written for them and both signed with a 'X', the usual way of the illiterate. Perhaps they were John's servants, John Brickle having gone to the farm to take statements and to discuss the case.

First that ... all who, publickly maliciously angrily wrongfully and slanderously speak and utter and declare assert or publish reproaches ... to the defaming of the reputation and good character of any one ... [is] duly to be corrected punished and reformed ... .

Secondly that ... Henry Matthews, knowing the same well enough, within the town of Shaftesbury ... with an angry and malicious mind ... spoke before credible witnesses certain reproachfull approbrious mischievous and defamatory sounding words tending to the defaming of Mary Meryweather ... .

Thirdly that ... by reason of publishing the defamatory words the good character and reputation of the said Mary is very much grievously injured.

This comprised the questions put to the witnesses. Each was asked if they knew the parties and for how long. If any dispute arose, on what subject and the witnesses were asked to recall the particular words as near as they could remember.

1. ... hath she [Mary] not always been the character of a woman of good reputation - is not the calling of a woman whore ... the same as a charge or accusation of adultery and do you believe that such a charge is the language of mirth or jocose conversation and is it not contrary to good manners and the bond of Christian charity to accuse another falsely of any crime ...?
2. Was you at any time and when in the month of March last past in the company of the parties within the town of Shaston and at whose house or houses and in the presence of what other persons?
3. Was you ... at the house of John Nicholls of Shaston, butcher and in what room and who was present ... did you hear any conversation and on what subject ... did not the said Henry Matthews during such conversation ... vex or provoke Mary?
4. Let John [Thomas, actually] Horder be asked are you related to Henry Matthews or concerned with him in the management or transaction of his business and have you not a greater liking or affection for Matthews ... and would you not rather that Matthews should prevail ... ?

James Brickell of Motcombe, Gentleman where he had lived most of his life, born at Fivepenny Okeford, Dorset aged 36 years on behalf of Mary.

Sometime in the month of March last past in 1756 being on a Saturday, [he] was at the house of John Nicholas [sic] at Shaftesbury being a Public House known by the Sign of Lord Ilchester's Arms in the evening in a certain room there were present ... Henry Matthews, John and Mary Merewether, Farmer Horder and several others ... and that after some conversation had passed between Henry and Mary, [Henry] being angry did utter ... 'you whore, you bitch of a whore don't I know you to be a whore', or to that effect and that Henry repeated the words angrily several times. And that during the time John Nicholas and Betty his wife came frequently into the room ... . [Brickell] had known Mary many years and, never knew or heard but that she is a person of good reputation ... .

[signed] 19 August 1756.

On examination Brickell said he had known Mary since her childhood and Henry several years. He also said that the conversation between the parties was in jest and merriment:

... but on a sudden Henry Matthews grew angry and called Mary, 'whore ...'.

On Mary's behalf he said he was unable to recall Mary and Henry wishing to speak with each other and exchanging promises about refraining from anger but he acknowledged that between the three people there was:

some joking or jesting discourse relating to maidservants that lived or had lived with Henry, being a bachelor and with John whilst he was a bachelor and such discourse was on both sides between the parties [and he] hath not in his mind any idea of the conversation between the parties as set forth in the first Allegation.

Betty Nicholls, aged 30 or more, the wife of John of Shaftesbury where she had lived for about 15 years confirmed in a statement of 19 August 1756 that the parties were assembled and that whilst she and her husband were in the room:

... she verily believes ... Henry Matthews in an angry manner did call Mary, 'whore' several times.

It was not until the 20 October that a statement was obtained from Thomas Horder. He was a yeoman, born at Gillingham who had lived there for about 28 years and was examined on behalf of the defendant, Matthews. As Interrogatory 4 shows, there was a belief that he might not be an impartial witness and whilst his evidence highlighted different detail, his memory, for one so young seemed none too good:

... upon hearing a noise and dispute ... and while in the company of the parties Mary began joking with Henry telling him she would not have him be angry for that she must talk to him, upon which he said he would not, and Henry farther said that he would not have her be angry at what he should say to her, to which she agreed. And then Mary began bantering, Henry being a bachelor, about his and his brother's dealings with their maidservants, to which he made several replies. ... not expecting to be called to give any testimony about the same, he did not charge his memory therewith, [and] could not say if Henry was angry or whether he had any intention to injure Mary's name and character.

... John Merryweather and Mary his wife who then did and still usually do quarter at [his] house ... the Sign of The Bush came to [his] house about eight or nine in the evening. And that Henry Matthews was then in the same house where he also quarters, having come in a little time before them, and that in a short while after they had met together in the kitchen ... he heard Mary and Henry disputing and quarrelling and they both seemed to be angry with each other giving each other abusive language ... . Henry called her, 'bitch whore' and Mary called him, 'a rogue'. And ... during the quarrel, Thomas Horder came into the same room, (but not until after the pair and Mary's husband John were already there); and that his daughter was to and fro ... . And that Bristow had heard John Merryweather propose to Henry, to join or spend a penny to drink [and] he doth believe ... John did also say that he was not angry with him and ... Henry was a good honest man and he would sell him a load of wheat ... .

Bristow's examination showed that he had known Henry for about 12 years and Mary for five or six and that she always bore the character of a woman of good reputation and he was not at any time with the parties at John Nicholls' house.

Betty was John Bristow's 13 year old daughter, born at Shaftesbury and her deposition adds further detail:

Upon a Saturday being Market day at Shaftesbury the day of the quarrel as she heard, about nine o'clock in the evening, Henry Matthews came to her father's house and being in the kitchen, John and Mary came in and that she heard Henry and Mary talk hard to each other, but what particular words or discourse she cannot set forth being to and fro in and out of the room in her father's business and not giving attention to the same. Further she said that when John came to the house, she lighted him in with a candle and in or near the gateway, John asked her if Farmer Matthews was there, and upon telling him that he was, John said Farmer Matthews was a good honest man and that he would go and sell him a load of wheat, and that if he did not then he would another time. Whether Thomas Horder was present she cannot remember. Upon being examined, Betty said that she had known the parties to the action for several years, by reason that they quarter at her father's. [Signed] 11 November 1756.

These include lengthy summaries made by the Clerk of the Court which first sat on the morning of the 23 July 1756. John Brickell Gent. appeared as Mary's Proctor and Henry was instructed to present himself in person from session to session. The Court adjourned until the afternoon when Matthews appeared and contested the suit. On the 19 August John Brickell acting for Mary produced James Brickell, John Nicholls and Betty his wife, whilst Henry Matthews appointed John Tinney, Gent. as his Proctor. On Thursday 16 September Tinney pleaded on Matthews behalf:

1. That Mary was before the alleged defamatory words were spoken, very sarcastical on Henry and his family with some innuendoes of his sly dealings with their maidservants and charged them with acts of incontinency which Henry heard without anger and endeavoured to return as well as he could without lessening Mary's good name.
2. That afterwards when at the Sign of The Bush, John invited Henry, to join or be a peenny [sic] with him to drink and that he was not angry with him and would sell him a load of wheat ... but before any liquor was called for John was called away, from all of which it evidently appeared that Mary's character was not injured.

More sittings took place at intervals until October when Tinney alleged that John Bristow and his daughter Betty had refused to appear on behalf of Henry Matthews, saying that they lived outside the jurisdiction of the Court. No reasons are given for this manoeuvre, but it is suspected that friendship or business was at the bottom of it.

Tinney asked that they be compelled by the Archdeacon of Dorset to appear and Judge William Boucher consented.

At the hearing on 26 October Tinney confronted the reluctant pair as well as Thomas Horder and the Judge then appointed John Pern, Vicar of Gillingham as his surrogate. Further hearings and more adjournments followed until the 1 December when James Brickell was accused of contumacy in refusing to undergo examination. By the following day however, he had his mind changed for him under threat of a charge of disobedience to the Court.

The record of the sittings includes an interesting account of happenings on the 20 January 1757 when the Court was due to sit between 9 o'clock and noon.

The participants assembled and waited near to the Vicar's house, the Vicar being required to act on that day. The Registrar prepared to give notice of the sitting by having the church bell tolled and he went into the Vicar's house for the key to the chancel door only to find that the key was missing. So he went to the parish clerk's house but, 'he was not to be found and contrary to his usual custom carried away the keys'. The door could not be opened until just after the church clock struck twelve when the door was opened by the Clerk. Due to 'these hindrances' the Court was delayed by 15 minutes but the clock, 'from other observations of the admeasurement of time was too fast by something more than that space'. When the Court sat, Tinney protested, in a note in his own hand:

We protest against this Court and all further proceedings in this cause for the Court not being held at the time to which it was adjourned for that the Court was adjourned to be held between the hours of ten and twelve o'clock in the forenoon and it was not held till near a quarter of an hour after twelve.

On the 24 March 1757 in a document of some 800 words, most of them reciting the exalted state of Richard Blackmore and his Court, some of them dwelling on the wretchedness of Matthews and his fate and a few intoning the verdict, the case was found to be proved.

To the Rev. Mr. John Perne.
It is enjoined on Thursday 28 April 1757 that Henry Matthews shall on Sunday 1 May immediately after Divine Morning service in Gillingham Parish Church personally appear in the vestry before the Vicar and Mary Merryweather if she shall think fit to be present, with an audible voice make the following confession. Whereas I, Henry Matthews in an unneighbourly unjust and unchristian manner have lately abused and defamed ... Mary ... I do present and declare my unfeigned sorrow for this my deportment towards her and do beg pardon of Almighty God, Mary and all Christian people whom I have offended and scandalised by this my behaviour, and beg Almighty God that for the future he will be pleased to endue me with a more just peaceable temper ... and desire all present to join me in saying the Lord's Prayer.

William Boucher, Registrar.

Henry was also instructed to produce a signed certificate that he had performed this humiliating act and the document, signed by John Pern is amongst the case papers. Mary's costs were awarded against Henry and a detailed account was presented by Mary's Proctor totalling £25.19.2d but Richard Blackmore taxed them at the lower figure of £18.0.00.⁴