Richard Hoborn was a shipbuilder of Kent during the 17th century.

The first reference in the ‘Declared Accounts’ of payments to a Mastmaker at Chatham Dockyard, in Kent, England is in 1619, when Richard Hoborn and William Wyborne were paid ‘for making with HM materials a new mast, etc., for the ‘Defiance’, at a cost of £20/5s. As well as a Master Mast Maker, Hoborn was churchwarden of St. Mary, Chatham maritime parish in the 1660s.

Proof of his kinship with the Petts is evident from an item in his last will and testament:

“ Item, to William Pett, the sone of Joseph Pett, deceaced, the somme of five shillings to be paid within twelve months after my decease. Item, to my grandsonne Peter Pett, the son of the aforesaid Joseph Pett after the decease of me and my wife all that ground which I hold by lease by Master Robinson of Rochester to whom I give all the remainder of the yeares unexpired he paying yearly four pence if it be demanded to him and them that shall hold the lease of the said ould house (in) which I now dwell . .”

Proved: Westminster, 25th April 1654, on oath of Margaret Hoborn, sole Executrix.

The Kentish Rebellion of 1648.

Richard was also mentioned as one of the Dockyard workers involved in the ‘Kentish Rebellion ’ of 1648, in opposition to the king, Charles I. During the affray “at Rochester the rebels set a guard on the bridge” and ‘armed the streets in a manner of a court of guard at every door’, at the Dockyard they secured possession of the King’s Ship’s: the ‘Fellowship’, the ‘Sovereign’ and the ‘Prince’ removing the arms, ordinance, ammunition and victuals from them and confronting Commissioner Pett and his fellows.

Commission of enquiry in 1651/2, Chatham Dockyard.

The occasion of the Commission of enquiry in 1651/2, referred to as the ‘Adderley Inquest’, headed as it was by Lord Adderley , then the Minister at Chatham, was set up to enquire into activities at Chatham Dockyard, and discovered that Richard had coffins built for himself and his wife, out of Dockyard timbers, and a bedstead that was most probably made for the Commissioner.

In his defence, Hoborn declared that he had himself paid for the workmanship of the said coffins, and bedstead. Initially orders were issued for his discharge, together with a number of other Dockyard Employees, Hoborn and the Petts denied all the charges made against them and the Commissioner brought counter charges against Adderley claiming that he had been negligent in his duties, in failing to preach to the Sailors and Dockyard men and had threatened to ruin the Petts.

The Committee concluded that the charges were without foundation and in February of 1652 they so reported to the Council of State, with the outcome of the investigation being that all the accused retained their positions and employment.