brown case lord viscount Lanesborough and other appellant Eleanor elwood widow  respondent that April Mews dig seven a injunction be award by a decree to put  the plaintiff into possession of the premise in question and at the same time  the party be direct to try the title at law this decree be repugnant and must  be reverse as to the injunction decree of the Irish chancellor reverse in part  viner vol p can Eq can ab c can Philip hoar be seize in fee of a piece of  ground in highstreet Dublin on part whereof stand a building contain one shop  fit for a haberdasher mercer or draper and two room over it and be mear and  bind in manner follow videlicet southward to the highstreet contain in front  from east to west foot and adjoin westward to the house of Jonathan clark  eastward to the house of John Dickinson and extend in depth northwards to  saint audeon church wall in length foot and a half or thereabouts on the d of  October the say Philip hoar be attaint of high treason for be concern in the  Irish rebellion by virtue of a clause in the act of explanation sir George  lane Knt afterward Lord viscount Lanesborough be entitle to hold and enjoy to  he and his heir for ever part of the estate of the say Philip hoar in  pursuance of this clause Lord Lanesborough on the that of march exhibit his  claim before the trustee of the Irish forfeiture and upon the hear thereof on  the that of may the trustee adjudge and decree that the say ground and shop  thereon by the description of one shop or room in highstreet Dublin under the  house wherein Robert Dowling former live and then hold by John jordan have be  seize and sequester on account of the pay rebellion and therefore they give  their certificate and decree the same to the Lord Lanesborough and his heir  without any save on the that of July follow Lord Lanesborough accord to the  direction of the act of settlement and explanation procure letter patent to be  pass under the great seal of Ireland whereby king Charles two grant the say  ground and shop in highstreet to his lordship and his heir together with all  other the say Philip hoar estate and interest in the city and liberty of  Dublin Lord Lanesborough have have the possession and receive the rend of  these premise from John jordan by the hand of Arthur Harvey and John Elwood  the tenant under he from the year till he on the that of December grant a  lease thereof to one James Nicholson for the term of year at brown brown er p  the rend of pound per and in which lease the premise be describe by the name  of one shop in highstreet in Dublin former belong to Philip hoar and then in  the occupation of Arthur Harvey or his undertenant John Elwood haberdasher and  bind in the front southwards to the say street northwards to saint audeon  church wall westward to the house of Jonathan clark and eastward to the house  of John Dickinson but Harvey and his undertenant Elwood refuse to deliver the  possession to Nicholson the Lord Lanesborough cause a ejectment to be bring in  the court of exchequer in easter term to which Harvey and Elwood be make  defendant and the cause be try a verdict be find in favour of Lord  Lanesboroughs title and a judgement be thereupon obtain which be afterward  affirm on a writ of error in the exchequerchamber soon afterward upon the  submission and importunity of the say John Elwood and in consideration of a  fine of pound Lord Lanesborough on the saint of February make a lease of the  say premise to he for year at the rend of pound per and and in this lease the  premise be describe by the name of one shop in highstreet in Dublin former  belong to Philip hoar of Killsalloghan then in the occupation of Arthur Harvey  or his undertenant John Elwood bind southwards to highstreet northwards to  saint audeon church wall westward to the house of Jonathan clark and eastward  to the house of John Dickinson the say shop and two room over the same be  become ruinous and Elwood have get in nicholson lease pull down the shop and  build on or near the place the house now in question call the three hat in  part whereof he make a shop fit for one of the best sort of tradesman and also  build a backhouse on part of the say ground near to saint audeon church wall  and he quiet enjoy the say premise and pay the say rend of pound per and to  the appellant father during his lifetime and afterward for some year to the  appellant as his son and heir but Elwood suffer the rend to run in arrear the  appellant cause he to be sue at law for the same and have obtain judgement in  the court of king bench in Hilary term Elwood be take in execution and  imprison whereupon his son David Elwood represent the poor condition of his  father and himself and request that pound per and part of the say pound per  and may be abate the appellant mere out of compassion condescend provide they  will pay pound per and punctual accord the say John Elwood and his son David  for some time pay the say rend of pound per and but run again in arrear they  to avoid payment set up a pretence that the mayor and corporation of Dublin be  the true owner of the premise brown the appellant therefore cause a distress  to be make on the premise for the say rend and the say David Elwood have  replevied the issue try in that cause before the Lord chief justice pine in  the court of queen bench in Michaelmas term be whether George Lord viscount  Lanesborough or the mayor and corporation of Dublin be seize in fee of the  premise at the time of make the say lease to John Elwood and upon the trial  the jury give their verdict that the Lord Lanesborough be seize in fee thereof  in may the lease to John Elwood expire but David Elwood who claim under his  father refuse to deliver up the possession pretend a title under the city of  Dublin whereupon the appellant cause a ejectment to be bring and for avoid all  question and doubt touch the description of the premise the appellant cause  the same to be butt bind and describe in his declaration in the same manner as  in the above several lease to this ejectment the mayor and corporation of  Dublin procure themselves to be join as defendant with the say David Elwood  and in Trinity term the cause be try at the bar of the court of queen bench  when the jury on full evidence give a verdict for the title of the appellant  against the city of Dublin and the say David Elwood and thereupon judgement be  obtain execution be sue out by which the possession of all the premise  videlicet the say house shop and backhouse be deliver to the appellant but the  say David Elwood be dissatisfy move the court to set aside the execution as to  all the premise except the shop contain foot in length and foot and a half in  breadth but the court be of opinion that there be no reason for it deny the  motion brown er p the appellant Lord Lanesboroughs title be thus establish by  four several verdict at law whereof one be on a trial at bar he on the that of  September make a lease of the premise to the other appellant Laurence Eustace  for year at pound per and rend whereupon David Elwood on the d of April  exhibit his bill in the court of chancery in Ireland against the appellant to  set aside all the say verdict judgement and proceed at law allege that the  mayor and corporation of Dublin be seize in fee of the say premise make a  lease thereof date in for a fine of pound to his father John Elwood for year  at the rend of pound per and and in which the premise be thus describe  videlicet all that ground or tenement in highstreet contain in front from east  to west foot and in length from the street in the south to saint audeon church  in the north foot and a half that sir mark ransford executor of alderman I be  a creditor by judgement of the say John Elwood procure the say city lease for  year to be sell by the sheriff upon a become facias for pound and afterward to  be assign to he the say sir mark that the say sir mark make a lease of the  brown premise except the shop to the say David Elwood for year at the rend of  pound per and and that the appellant Laurence Eustace be only a trustee of the  say term of year for the say David Elwood the bill therefore pray that the say  lease from the appellant Lord Lanesborough to his tenant Laurence Eustace for  year at the rend of pound per and may be decree to be so make in trust for he  the say David Elwood and that he may have a account of the profit from the  time he be turn out of possession by the execution of the last ejectment to  this bill the appellant put in their answer and insist on their title so often  verify by verdict and judgement at law and that the pretend title of the city  of Dublin to who the say John and David Elwood endeavour to betray the  possession have be sufficient evict and defeat on the that of may the cause be  hear before the Lord chancellor of Ireland who be please to decree that the  say David Elwood shall be at liberty to try his title at law under the city of  Dublin in the then next Trinity term by a jury of that city at which trial the  appellant shall not insist on any temporary bar and that the say lease make by  the appellant Lord Lanesborough to Laurence Eustace for year shall be in trust  for the say David Elwood and that he shall have the benefit of it but upon the  appellant Laurence eustace petition the cause be reheard on the that of  February when the Lord chancellor be please to decree that the say lease for  year from the Lord Lanesborough to Laurence Eustace as to so much of the  ground build or unbuilt upon of which Roland Eustace Christopher nugent Henry  Plunkett and Laurence Eustace be in possession by virtue of the lease from sir  mark ransford at the time of execute the say judgement in ejectment be take by  the appellant Laurence Eustace in trust for the say David Elwood that a  injunction shall be award to put the say David Elwood into possession and to  quiet he in such possession and that the appellant Laurence Eustace shall  account with the say David Elwood for the profit of the premise from both  these decree the present appeal be bring but while it depend David Elwood die  leave the present respondent his widow and sole executrix in support of the  appeal it be insist r Raymond S Cowper that the bill ought to have be dismiss  and Elwood leave to try his title at law there appear to be no impediment to  such trial or that the appellant have any temporary bar by which it can be  avoid that the decree have establish the city of dublin lease to John Elwood  and invalidate all the verdict and judgement at law without any apparent  reason for so do that the lease for year be decree to be in trust for David  Elwood whereas there be no proof in the cause of any such trust but on the  contrary direct proof that there be not nor can be any such trust inasmuch as  Lord Lanesborough brown have take care to have a covenant insert in the say  lease on the part of the appellant Eustace that he or his assign shall not  permit or suffer the say John Elwood or his son David Elwood or their or  either of their family or any other person or person whatsoever claim any  right or title by from or under they or either of they brown er p to live or  abide in the say premise or any part thereof which covenant be so insert  industrious and with intent that the premise or any part thereof shall never  come into the possession of so dangerous a adversary as the say David Elwood  who have do his utmost to defeat the appellant Lord Lanesboroughs title  thereto and to give and transfer a title to the city of Dublin that the latter  part of the decree whereby a injunction be award to put and quiet David Elwood  in the possession of the premise and whereby the appellant Eustace be compel  to account with and pay he the profit without any provision be make to secure  to the appellant Lord Lanesborough the payment of the say yearly rend of pound  or to secure he the possession at the expiration of the lease be repugnant to  the former decree whereby the question touch the title be direct to be  determine by a trial at law and this repugnancy be the more apparent for that  Elwood can have no occasion to bring a ejectment to recover the possession  accord to the former part of the decree when the latter part of it have not  only decree he the possession and a account of the profit but have secure that  possession to he by direct a injunction to quiet he in it on the other side it  be contend t Lutwyche S mead that the appellant Lord Lanesborough can not with  any colour complain of the decree or pretend that he be thereby in any wise  aggrieve when his counsel have in open court propose and consent as a just and  equitable measure that the title shall be fair try in ejectment without set up  any temporary bar or impediment to hinder the merit from be try that the  appellant Eustace come into possession of the premise under the say David  elwoods title by colour of a lease make to his brother Roland Eustace and of a  assignment of a lease from sir mark ransford for countersecuring he from a  engagement and his say brother not be in any respect damnified by reason of  that engagement he ought to have act therein as a trustee for David Elwood and  the appellant Eustace have in breach of such trust betray the say elwoods  possession and treat for himself he ought not to profit by such proceed and  therefore the court right and equitable decree that the lease take by the  appellant Eustace from the appellant Lord Lanesborough shall be deem in trust  for the say David Elwood the respondent late husband but after hear counsel on  this appeal it be order and adjudge that so much of the decree of the that of  February as declare the lease take by the appellant Laurence Eustace to be in  trust for David Elwood the respondent late brown husband and as order  injunction to put the say David Elwood into and quiet he in the possession of  all or any part of the premise in question shall be reverse but that so much  of the decree of the that of may as order a trial at law whereby the say David  Elwood be at liberty to bring his ejectment to try his title as lessee under  the city of Dublin against the appellant the Lord viscount Lanesborough shall  be affirm and after a trial have pursuant to the say decree or upon neglect of  the party to proceed thereon the court of chancery in Ireland be to make such  further order and decree as shall be just jour vol p on the that of may Lord  Lanesborough petition the house pray that the above order and judgement may be  alter in the follow particular videlicet that the appellant be restore to  their former possession and to the profit of the premise and that the trial at  law if any be may be by a jury of the county of Dublin whereupon it be order  that the house will hear one counsel of a side upon the matter of the say  petition on Friday the that day of June then next jour vol p but this hear be  afterward adjourn to Wednesday the that of June when counsel be hear accord it  be order that the appellant shall be restore to their former possession and to  the profit of the premise in question and that the respondent Eleanor Elwood  shall account to the appellant for he profit receive under the decree of the  court of chancery in Ireland reverse by the house on hear the appeal and that  so much of the say petition as pray that the trial at law if any may be by a  jury of the county of Dublin shall be dismiss ibidem p brown er p