case earl OF bath and other appellant William Sherwin and other respondent  January after five several trial at bar and the verdict all the same way the  court of chancery will grant a perpetual injunction to restrain all further  proceed at law by the litigant party or any claim under they upon the same  title decree of Lord chancellor Cowper reverse see post can and the note there  prece in Chan pale yellow Rep viner vol p can in n vol p d can in n Eq can ab  d can can can No notice be take in any of these report of this appeal which  reverse the judgement George duke of AIbemarle be in his lifetime seize in fee  of diverse manor land and hereditament in the several county of York Lancaster  Lincoln Middlesex Essex Hertford and Berks and in December he settle the same  after his own death to the use of his son Christopher for life remainder to  his first and other son in tail male remainder to his own right heir on the d  of January duke George die whereupon duke Christopher his son by virtue of the  settlement enter and enjoy during his life and die in without issue after who  death part of the estate revert to the crown other part to one Thomas pride as  grandson and heir of Thomas monk the elder brother of duke George who  afterward sell the same to John earl of bath the grandfather of the present  appellant the earl and as to the residue of the estate Elizabeth duchess of  Albemarle the widow of duke Christopher who afterward intermarry with Ralph  duke of Montague be entitle to great part thereof during her life and the  appellant be several entitle under duke Christopher to most of the say real  estate part in possession and the rest in reversion expectant on the duchess  death several year after the death of duke Christopher a pretence be set up by  Thomas pride that Ann duchess of Albemarle duke brown Christopher mother who  have former be marry to one Thomas Radford be never marry to duke George or if  she be yet that her first husband be then alive and be also live at the birth  of duke Christopher on the that of August and consequent that duke Christopher  be not the lawful issue or heir of duke George but that pride as the real heir  at law of duke George be entitle to the whole estate on this title pride cause  a ejectment to be bring on his own demise for part of the estate against the  say John earl of bath Ralph duke of Montague and other and this cause be try  at the bar of the court of queen bench on the that day of February by a  Hertfordshire jury a verdict upon full evidence be give for the defendant  after pride be death Thomas pride his son upon the same title cause another  ejectment to be bring on his demise for other part of the estate against the  same party and upon the trial of this cause at the bar of the same court by a  Essex jury on the that of April a verdict be again give for the defendant upon  full evidence Thomas pride the son afterward die leave three child who have  all die without issue Elizabeth the late wife of the respondent Sherwin become  his heir at law and thereupon she and her say husband on the same pretence of  title cause a ejectment to be bring on their demise for a different part of  the estate against sir Walter Clarges and other and this ejectment be also try  at the bar of the court of king bench by a Yorkshire jury on the that day of  may a private verdict on full evidence be give for the then defendant and  Sherwin and his wife be duly call suffer a nonsuit but notwithstanding this  they soon afterward think proper to bring another ejectment on the same title  brown er p for the same land and against the same party and this be try in the  same manner on the that of November a verdict be give for the defendant upon  full evidence but Sherwin and his wife still restless and uneasy make use of  various practice and contrivance to prevail upon the tenant of sir Walter  Clarges to attorn to they and in part succeed whereupon sir Walter Clarges  cause a ejectment to be bring against Sherwin and his wife and their tenant as  well on his own single demise as on the demise of the executor of duke  Christopher and this cause be try at the bar of the same court by a Yorkshire  jury on the that of may a verdict be give for the plaintiff the single  question upon all these trial be whether duke Christopher be the lawful son  and heir of duke George or not the juror upon each of they be gentleman of  quality and character in the say several county and the judge who try the  cause take great time and pain in the trial and express themselves well  satisfy with the verdict brown notwithstanding the uniform event of these five  trial Sherwin and his wife cause other declaration in ejectment to be deliver  for different part of the estate in the possession of the appellant and they  also take upon they to borrow money and to grant several derivative interest  in this estate to the several other respondent whereupon the appellant in  Michaelmas term exhibit their bill in chancery against the respondent pray  that all question touch the legitimacy of duke Christopher or concern his be  the son and heir of duke George may be quiet and extinguish and to that end  that a perpetual injunction may be award to stay all further proceed at law  upon the say pretend title and to prevent multiplicity of suit and endless  vexation on the that of June this cause be hear before the Lord chancellor  Cowper when his lordship be please to decree that the bill shall stand dismiss  with cost but from this decree the plaintiff appeal and on their behalf it be  insist t powys e Northey that a perpetual injunction ought to have be grant  upon the circumstance of the case and because the matter and only point in  question have undergo so many and such strict examination and have be so full  settle by no less than five trial at bar all the same way and in the most  solemn manner possible that such pretence of title ought the rather to be  silence because duke Christopher live near twenty year after the death of his  father and during all that time enjoy as well the paternal estate of the  family as the honour of it in the capacity of heir male of the body of duke  George and can not have enjoy the same have he not be so that neither Thomas  pride the father or Thomas the son or Elizabeth Sherwin in all this period  ever set up or pretend to have any title to any part of the paternal or other  estate but on the contrary own duke Christopher to be as he real be the lawful  son and heir of duke George and so he be also acknowledge by king Charles two  king James two and king William be receive and sit as such in the house of  peer and under that title be appoint Lord lieutenant of several county in  England and also generalissimo of the western plantation that there seem a  still high reason for a court of equity after so many solemn trial to  interpose in this matter since it be to silence a odious question touch the  legitimacy of a noble person start and prosecute after his death and by the  present method of proceed in ejectment the appellant unless relievable in  equity will be liable to perpetual suit and vexation upon the same question as  to the objection that the commonlaw have fix no bind to the number of trial in  ejectment person be at liberty to prosecute in that way as often as they  please and therefore a court of equity ought not to restrain their right it be  answer that the method of try the title to inheritance by ejectment be of no  very long stand for the ancient way of try such right be in real action and  there the wisdom of the commonlaw brown have fix proper limit to such  prosecution for prevent vexatious and endless contest and as so great a  inconvenience and even abuse of the law be practice in this case it be high  reasonable that a court of equity shall interpose and obviate the mischief by  grant a perpetual injunction after the right and the only matter in question  have be try so often and fair settle by so many solemn brown er p and concur  verdict that there be many precedent where court of equity have grant  perpetual injunction for quiet inheritance after two trial and where only one  of those trial have be direct by such court and it be conceive that the reason  in this case be full as strong where the respondent by their own choice have  try the single point in question by five several jury in three different  county on the other side it be contend t Parker I Pratt that where any person  have a right of entry into land he may by law enter whenever and as often as  he please and when in possession may make a lease and if the lessee be disturb  a ejectment may be bring in his name and this right the law have not think fit  to limit or restrain but look upon the party bear his own charge and pay his  adversary cost to be a proper penalty on the one and a sufficient compensation  to the other so that upon these term he may bring as many ejectment as he  please and therefore to reverse the present decree will be direct to make a  new law that the title of the respondent be the title of a heir at law who be  the favourite of the law but that of the appellant be at best but the title of  a volunteer and therefore not to be protect against the heir that for some  part of the estate no ejectment have yet be try and the respondent be in  possession of other part of it which the appellant can not recover without a  trial so that the question can not be consider as close while with respect to  any part of the estate it remain untried and that the matter in question be  pure a matter of fact triable by a jury without involve any one point proper  to give a court of equity jurisdiction nor be there any one precedent of such  a decree as the appellant seek for in this case where the question be single a  point of fact between heir at law on the one side and person claim under a  voluntary conveyance on the other but after hear counsel on this appeal it be  order and adjudge that the decree of dismission complain of shall be reverse  and that the court of chancery shall forthwith issue a perpetual injunction to  stay the proceed at law of the defendant in chancery and all claim under they  against the now appellant and all claim under they upon the pretend title of  the say defendant ground upon the allege illegitimacy of Christopher late duke  of Albemarle jour vol p