bright versus addy a action of trespass quare enclosed space to break in  pieces be bring by baron and feme pollexfen chief justice be of opinion that  the feme can not be join though it be her land Ventris contra for this action  will survive and they have election either to join or to bring it alone Browl  Ro Abr hob cro cro Tregniel and reeve more in a action of forcible entry upon  the wife land after the coverture she be join with her husband Adjornatur
bright versus Cowper Trin James rotulo action of covenant bring upon a  covenant make by the merchant with a master of a ship videlicet that if he  will bring his fraught to such a port then he will pay he such a sum and show  that part of the good be take away by pirate and that the residue of the good  be bring to the place appoint and there unladen and that the merchant have not  pay and so the covenant break and the question be whether the merchant shall  pay the money agree for since all the merchandise be not bring to the place  appoint and the court be of opinion that he ought not to pay the money because  the agreement be not by he perform judgement arrest for default in the  declaration
Brightman against parker pasch car two rot custom error of a judgement in  Norwich in debt on obligation on cognovit accionem here by custom a writ of  inquiry be award de yes debt is owed which per curian have be rule a good  custom and be so in London and Bristol and it be fit to be enact by parliament  to save chancery suit that the plaintiff may take what be just due such great  debt be often pay in great part and hereby they will have only what be due  judgement affirm nisi
Brightwell against DOWTY covenant in a action of covenant to pay money I when  it shall be raise out of the estate of whether Dowty the plaintiff set forth  that livre be raise by the defendant out of her estate and that yet he have  not pay the livre to which the defendant plead non to break off assembly to  which the plaintiff demurrer per curian this be no answer nor a good plea but  the raise livre must be answer but after verdict it be good enough as have be  rule and judgement pro plaintiff
Brightwell and Robson pasch banc sup arrest of judgement in a action upon the  case a action upon the case be bring for deliver in a false note of good for  which excise be to be pay into the office of excise whereby he be compel to  pay to his damage c upon not guilty plead style report and a verdict for the  plaintiff green move in arrest of judgement because that the declaration do  not set forth the Act of parliament which give authority to the commissioner  of excise and that the damage be not couple with the fraud nor be it express  how he be compolled to pay the and the court be not bind to take notice of the  ordinance of style report er p parliament touch the officer of the excise  because it be not a general law but roll chief justice answer that the fraud  be the ground of the action and all the other matter set forth in the  declaration be but matter of inducement to the action and it be not requisite  to be so punctual in set that forth as be surmise and we be bind to take  notice of the ordinance and the action bring be to recover damage cause by the  fraud and it be no more necessary to set foril all the circumstance occur in  act of the fraud than for one to set forth all process in a action ground upon  a fraudulent judgement obtain against he by which he be damnified judgment  nisi c pro to express grief
BRIKHED against wilson to a action of debt for twenty quarter of malt tender  and refusal be a bad plea without say uncore priest see Trin h rot one Brikhed  bring a action of debt against Wilson for forty quarter of malt and declare  upon two bill Obligatory by which the defendant acknowledge himself to owe to  the say plaintiff twenty quarter of good and proper malt to be deliver on such  a day in London in a house c and if he fail at the day dyer that then he shall  lose and forfeit forty quarter and the plaintiff aver that he do not deliver  the twenty quarter at the day c by reason whereof a action accrue c and the  defendant plead a tender at the day and place aforesaid of the twenty good and  sufficient quarter and that the plaintiff then and there refuse to receive  they and this c upon which the plaintiff demurrer and adjudge for the  plaintiff and he remit twenty quarter c for he ought to have say that he be  still ready to deliver the twenty quarter c Wherever a debt or duty be  discharge by a tender and refusal the defendant needs not plead uncore priest  but where it be not actual discharge the plea be bad without it but Lord coke  Inst a and Rep agree with this general doctrine have however particular except  the case of corn as be good to pass away and a charge to the obligor to keep  it which reason seem applicable to the present case of malt and be against  dyer a dyer a er p
brill against Richard Monday Nov joinder error of a judgement in Colchester  Symson except in arrest of judgement that the action below be trespass against  nine whereof five be find notguilty and four guilty and now all join in the  writ of error and all assign infancy of some find guilty and per Twisden and  raynsford so they may and judgement reverse nisi post
bring against Brecknock in disms Br Tyths bigland pray a prohibition to the  official of Litchfield on title make by letter patent and the dissolution of  monastery as impropriator in suit for tithe on seize deal abbot which the  court deny on   whisker case this be nothing different
bring and Adam pasch W m skin in trespass of assault battery and false  imprisonment the defendant justify under a judgement and execution in the  court of Bristol as a officer of the court the plaintiff reply and plead the  statute of W m for erect a court of conscience for relief of the poor  inhabitant of Bristol in action of debt c under S and show that the same  person who be judge of the court of record be judge of the new court c but he  do not show that the judge or plaintiff there have notice of the Act or that  the defendant be a inhabitant of Bristol and upon a demurrer holt CJ say  though it be a private Act of parliament of which the court here can take  notice without its be plead yet as to Bristol it be become law loci and all  party concern there ought to take notice of it the bylaws of a corporation be  more private than such a Act of parliament but if any man come into a  corporation he ought to take conusance of their bylaws at his peril therefore  he think that the judge of the court of record of Bristol ought to take notice  of the Act for erect the court of conscience and he say the Act make a nullity  of their proceed so that the defendant may have such a action against a  plaintiff who proceed against the Act but be herd clear that as to the officer  he shall be acquit in another term the court give judgement and rule that he  ought to have plead this matter and show that holt KB he be a inhabitant if he  will have the benefit of the Act but if the party have plead it and after they  have proceed there he may have a action Inst the case of the outlawry be cite  by holt CJ as a case in point
bring case Brigs bring a prohibition against another and allege that the dean  and chapter of d be seize of the manor and the defendant be vicar sue to have  tithe in winch er p court Christian and show that time beyond memory c they  have hold that discharge of tithe for they and their tenant and that they let  that to the plaintiff and it be move by Hendon sergeant that the dean and the  chapter be a body politic and temporal which be not capable of this  prescription in non decimand Coo the bishop of Winchesters case Hobert say  that the dean and chapter be a body spiritual andare annex to the bishop  throughout all England and if the bishop be capable of that as it be plain be  be then the dean and chapter be also capable of that which be grant by Hutton  but winch doubt for winch say he may be a lie man and for that the plaintiff  ought to aver that he be a spiritual person Hutton confess that the dean may  be a lie man as be the dean of Durham by special licence and dispensation of  the king but that be rare and a special case and be not common and general and  therefore not to be bring as a example which be also grant by Hobert chief  justice and upon that day be give winch over to the defendant to show cause  wherefore the prohibition shall not be grant
bring versus Adam and Wilkins hill W m Com c in trespass assault and false  imprisonment the defendant justify the imprisonment for that Bristol be a  ancient borough and that upon the fifteen day of July W m the defendant Adam  levy a plaint in the court there hold before the mayor and alderman of Bristol  de plea trans super case ad dam against the plaintiff bring and declare for l  S to which bring plead non assumpsit and the jury give S damage but the cost  be l for all which the defendant Adam have holt KB er p his judgement and  thereupon sue out a can sa by virtue whereof the defendant Wilkins take the  plaintiff bring in execution c the plaintiff confess the plaint judgement and  can sa and set forth a private Act of parliament make Feb I W m erect a court  of conscience in Bristol to determine debt under S from which there shall be  no writ of error or appeal c and if such person begin or prosecute any suit in  any court at Westminster c against any inhabitant of Bristol for damage c  which shall appear at the trial to be under S no judgement to be enter and if  any be enter to be void and the defendant to have cost aver that holt KB at  the time c the plaintiff and defendant be inhabitant of Bristol and therefore  the judgement void the defendant rejoin that at the time of the plaint the  defendant below be indebt to he in that at the trial and before judgement  neither the plaintiff nor any other on his behalf do pray the benefit of the  say Act or give notice to the court thereof the plaintiff demurrer holt CJ  deliver the opinion of the court that the action do not lie and that the  judgement be only voidable so that the execution be lawful and cite Inst for  construction of statute take the same case as report by Skinner
bringar vers Allanson a to know facias on the recognizance against bail may be  in here part the omission of show where the court of king bench be at the time  it give a particular judgement can only be take advantage of by a special  demurrer in to know facias against the defendant as bail c the defendant  demurrer and Mr Carthew take exception to the to know facias that it be in  here part where it ought to be in she part but per holt chief justice in case  of a to know facias against bail here part be the most proper Exc that it do  not appear in the to know facias where the court be at the time of the  judgement which ought to be show because it be a ambulatory court and if it be  not show one can know to what place one ought to send a certiorari h b cro et  Yelv but holt chief justice say that he always think that exception very  slight videlicet to say that one do not know where the court be but it have be  hold cause of demurrer in both old and new book but yet it be but form and  therefore shall have be show as cause of demurrer judgement for the plaintiff  ex relation mri Jacob
BRINGLOE versus morrison hill car B R plea not answer the declaration but only  part of it yet good Wilson ante t r in trespass for take his horse and ride he  immoderate the defendant plead that he take the horse by licence and give no  answer to the immoderate ride yet adjudge good for the gist of the action be  the take and the immoderate ride be only a aggravation of the trespass
BRINLEV and tailor judgement in c b reverse for variance inter the writ and  declaration error of a judgement in c b pollexfen the original be quare  enclosed space to break in pieces the declaration be enclosed space house  which be a variance and that be assign for error levinz contra that this shall  not be suppose to be the very original roll pollexfen cro stainer S case and  Johnson and Davies judgement reverse per cur
BRINSDEL and sir John Tompson February when or order be obtain for the  amendment of a bill and new engrossment make under those order the rule of the  court be if the plaintiff move for far liberty to amend his bill he shall pay  full cost to be tax the plaintiff have obtain three order at several time for  liberty to amend his bill on payment of twenty shilling cost and under these  order have amend his bill accord after this he move for a four order to amend  upon the like term at the time that motion be make the defendant counsel  oppose it submit it that he ought to pay full cost but the court incline to  allow of the amendment Barnardiston he consent to it upon the plaintiff agree  to wave the exception which he have take to the answer as soon as this last  order be obtain the plaintiff amend his bill by add a new ingrossment of  fifteen sheet it be now move that this last order may be discharge or else  that the plaintiff may pay full cost for the amendment to be tax by the master  Lord chancellor say when three or four order be obtain for the amendment of a  bill and new engrossment make under those order that the rule of the court be  if the plaintiff move for far liberty to amend his bill he shall pay full cost  to be tax but here at the time the last order be make the motion be defend and  there be a consent for which reason his lordship do not think proper to  discharge the order which have be make or to require that full cost shall be  pay accord the motion be refuse Barnardiston er p
Briscoe against richardson sheriff debt on obligation to the plaintiff sheriff  county not say of what county it be to appear and answer which on Mildmay and  case case be hold ill be intend general to answer any action and the writ be  of trespass hale chief justice this be on writ direct to the sheriff of  Cumberland and the obligation by r and S of Carlisle in the county of  Cumberland it must be presume it be to the sheriff of that count no other be  name to answer be well enough Cr but the party agree to appear and pay cost  and amerciament and plead in chief report date Norton against the churchwarden  OF kenilworth poor on special verdict in trespass the question by sander be  only whither the castle end of the town may prescribe to be discharge of the  payment of rate to the poor of the other part call the Hightown per curian  this be a void prescription against Elizabeth cap of the poor Keble er p
Bristol all v Dickon trin geo I cap outlaw not good be test after defendant  death BORRET the court hold that no capias utlagatum can be sue out after the  death of the defendant note in this case the writ be test after the death of  the defendant
Bristol and tito venue refuse to be change from one county to another where it  be swear that the cause of action arise in a three fortescue move to change  the venue from wilts to Dorset upon a affidavit that the cause of action if  any arise in the town of pool which be a town and county of itself per cur we  never chair e a venue but into the county where the cause of action be swear  to arise nor even then neither if it be a place where the judge do not go that  be if the cause will be delay in Michaelmas or Hilary term for instance it can  be change to either of the four northern county or to city or town have no  local assize see the authority cite I Tid edit bring Dict title venue S two so  you can take nothing by the motion but however if you can find a instance of  its have be do you may move it again
bristols case in the case of one Bristol the suit be in the court of request  for that that the plaintiff and the father of the defendant have make such a  agreement to pay money c and it be move for a prohibition and by the court it  be grant for that that a mutual agreement be a sufficient consideration upon  which a action upon the case will lie and that notwithstanding that there be a  decree in the court of request against the defendant there and for that the  suit be against the heir which be against the rule of law that the heir shall  be charge in the place of his father whatsoever agreement the father make be  nothing to the purpose to charge the heir although he have asset either by law  or equity and the court of equity ought to give relief in such case for this  agreement although it be in write be without seal it be not but a  ecclesiastical agreement
britain and HAUKINSON execution after execution make out the defendant  attorney show a writ of error to the plaintiff attorney after which execution  be do per curian its well do the writ of error not be allow with the chief  justice within four day after make but if it have be allow though the sheriff  may be excuse of the contempt yet a supersedeas be grantable but per curian  keep a writ of error in the pocket be of no value after the four day and the  court will not undo the execution
britain vers Greenville Pauper vin Abr pl S c the defendant in ejectment  obtain a trial at bar on consent to pay bar cost and receive nisi prius cost  after this the lessor be admit in form poor man and have a verdict against he  and now have bring a new ejectment it be move that the master may tax cost in  order to ground a further motion to stay his proceed in the second ejectment  but the court refuse to make any rule say every man have a right to a second  trial before ejectment be introduce and may bring a writ of right after a  verdict in assize and they can not construe the rule as a consent on his part  to pay cost in all event but only as term put upon the strange defendant that  the regular way when a pauper be vexatious be to dispauper he tailor v low  ante send for and see noaks v Watts ante but they can not think he be so in  the present case
BRITMAN against Stanford upon a special verdict the case be a house stable and  hayloft be demise to one for year render four and twenty pound rend per annum  and four and twenty pound for a income quarterly by equal portion upon  condition that if any of the rend or income be behind at the time it ought to  be pay that then the lease shall cease and determine the lessee make a lease  of the stable to the lessor and after part of the income be behind and unpay  and the lessor enter for the condition break into the house and if this be a  good entry be the question and judgement be give that the condition be go and  void by reason of the lessors take part of the thing demise because a  condition be special and entire and not to be sever and in this case Fenner  say that a grantee of a reversion can take benefit of a collateral condition  as in case of a gross sum but in case of a rend waste c it be otherwise Owen  er p mich and Elizabeth rot
briton against barnet Britton deliver money to b to deliver to c who do not so  Br bring a action of debt against b and by the court well bring and Glanville  say at saint Alban term in a case between dowse and Cawley dowse deliver money  to c to dispatch his business in the exchequer and he do not do it and a  action of debt be well bring for that and so adjudge and also in the common  bench the countess of Lincoln against Topcliff t make a bill testify that he  have receive of the earl to buy bellows but do not do it a action of debt in  that case lie and so it adjudge
briton and Griffith execution ex motion creamer against the Baily of  Westminster to return a writ against the defendant who be in prison by a  warrant from secretary Coventry for misdemeanour the gaoler refuse to charge  he with a warrant of the sheriff of Middlesex at the plaintiff suit the court  conceive that the gaoler can dispute this though the court may give leave or  refuse it per curian on pain of l Mr Montague head baily be order to return  the writ
briton who as well c against pierce mich geo this be a action bring on the  statute Elizabeth for set up a fraudulent judgement wherein plaintiff on trial  obtain a verdict for the penalty of beside which corporal punishment and  imprisonment for six month be inflict by the statute agar for plaintiff move  for leave to compound pursuant to statute Elizabeth ch but per cur that  statute extend only to action bring by common informer this action be bring by  the party injure the defendant be convict by the verdict and after conviction  leave be never give in any case to compound No rule the judgement to be enter  under the court be direction vide cook entry foe
britten who as well c against TEASDAILE trin geo this be a action bring on a  penal statute that Elizabeth against defendant for enter a fraudulent  judgement and the suit be by original and capias ad to answer defendant who be  a attorney of this court rectus in curian move to stay the proceed insist that  he ought to be sue by bill on show cause it be urge that this be a prosecution  for the crown and that defendant if entitle to privilege may plead it but per  cur these who tam action be never consider as the king cause in prosecution at  the suit of the crown defendant though acquit can have no cost but in action  who tam it be otherwise the proceed by original be irregular rule absolute to  stay proceed prime for defendant will and agar for plaintiff
brittle versus dade will c b ld raym S C name brittle v bid ancient demesne  ejectment the defendant plead that the land be hold of the manor of d which be  ancient demesne the plaintiff reply quod bene yes be that the land aforesaid  be hold de celebrate by singing little head de Wigornia ut de manor c which be  ancient demesne but that the land be copyholdlands the defendant rejoin ex quo  predict the plaintiff cognovit the land to be ancient demesne it be no matter  whether they be copyhold or frankfee plaintiff demurrer et per cur Salkeld  saint the replication be repugnant for land hold ut de manor must be frankfee  for copyhold land be parcel of the manor and can be hold ut de manor and  therefore the replication by say they be hold ut de manor and yet they be  copyhold be repugnant dly the rejoinder be nought for if they be copyhold a  ejectment lie saint because copyhold be of so base a nature that a writ of  right will not lie n b a dly it will be inconvenient because copyhold be  parcel of the demesne of the manor so that if they be triable in the lord  court the lord may be judge and party and therefore per Treby c j the  jurisdiction of the lord court extend to land hold of the manor only and not  to land parcel of the manor judgement quod breve empty lev
broad against hall November Monday in incumbent Br quare hinder Sinderf pl  Twisden deny the opinion in Bosvills case   b and conceive that h that recover  in quare hinder as Hub pl shall remove the incumbent whoever he be unless the  presentation of h be obtain pendent plea but the incumbent if he have a better  title may have spoliation which the court agree Adjornatur
broad contra broad vide post decree form of enter a decree a bill of review on  the decree be bring to hear the d of Feb and the decree be read and objection  make against it saint that the decree be find on a trust arise on a agreement  by the husband but the decree mention no such agreement but recite it recital  case in chancery er p of the plaintiff bill and then proceed to recite the  answer and then proceed to the decree on this manner whereupon and read the  proof the court decree the trust and redemption but do not say that such  agreement be prove therefore the plaintiff counsel insist that the decree be  make on the bill and answer case in chancery Mr solicitor and other say that  it be the course and a hundred decree be so and when it be say on read the  proof it be decree it be intend that the matter put in issue be prove but the  it be say that a decree ought to be ground on fact ex facto law be born and  else by the clerk course the defendant shall be bare of a review in all case  for the plaintiff in bill of review can allege matter of fact contrary to what  be state in the decree to be prove and it may be many issue be join in the  bill and answer if this course shall hold all must be admit and no man can  true know on what fact or case the decree be make nor any appeal bring the  Lord north declare accord and be clear of opinion that it be not enough to say  on read the proof it be decree but on read the proof it appear thus and thus  and therefore decree c and on this reason say that he look no notice of the  agreement but yet affirm the decree because when the wife join in the fine sur  to go away of her jointure in order to a mortgage or security it be not a  absolute depart with her interest but there result a trust for her when the  security or mortgage be pay to have her estate again as if it have be a  mortgage on condition and the money pay at the day case in chancery de term  sanct trin year king car two in cancellar
broad versus Owen mich and Elizabeth the plaintiff bring a action of debt upon  the statute of Elizabeth for perjury against the defendant the case be thus  one low be plaintiff against Brownlow goldsborough broad in the high court of  chancery and upon bill and answer such matter appear to the Lord keeper that  he order that one labourer shall become party to the bill against broad and  afterward one commission issue out of chancery between labourer and broad to  examine witness by which commission Owen the now defendant be examine on the  behalf of labourer and do depose direct for labourer against broad by reason  whereof one order and decree be make in the chancery against broad and for  that cause broad bring his action of debt against Owen upon the statute of  perjury Elizabeth for one party grieve by the oath and deposition of another  and Owen demurrer in law and by the opinion of gaudy and Yelverton justice the  action will not lie for the word of the statute be where a man be grieve and  damnified by a deposition in one suit between party and party and in this case  it appear that labourer be no party to the suit but come in by a order and no  bill depend either against he or bring by he and so out of the statute for it  be penal and to be take strict and quaere if he in reversion join in aid and  be grieve and prejudice by a oath and deposition may maintain a action of debt  upon this statute for he may undoubted by the commonlaw have a attaint  outlawry plead in bar and nul tiel record plead and in the mean time the  outlawry reverse judgement that the defendant shall answer over
broad versus piper Mod mortuaries due by custom only suit in spiritual court  for S as a mortuary the party decease leave a personal estate of l and after  sentence there it be move here for a prohibition upon suggestion of the stat  of h and that there be not any custom in the parish to have a mortuary roe  show cause that there ought not to be a prohibition after sentence and  especial where the spiritual court have original conusance of the cause vide  roll   hob that where it appear not that the spiritual court have not  jurisdiction no prohibition shall go after sentence and a mortuary be of a  spiritual nature although it be a customary duty Inst stat de circumspect to  put in motion if one sue for money due upon a modus or for a ancient  composition in the spiritual court there shall not go a prohibition hob Inst  cro where the court be divide raze Entr side a prohibition deny in the case of  a mortuary but there the question be who solvendo vide cro a prohibition grant  where the suit be for a mortuary the rule give by the court in this case be to  declare in a prohibition but that the sentence shall stand as to the oblation  for which there be a suit as well as for the mortuary and the reason why it be  insist that the sentence shall stand for the oblation be because for that the  plaintiff shall recover his cost
broad versus piper Mod prohibition after sentence for a mortuary comb S c  parson piper libel in the consistory court of exon against one broad for a  mortuary and now it be move for a prohibition upon suggest the statute h cap  concern mortuaries allege also that there be no peculiar custom within the  parish of c to have mortuaries and that a prohibition will lie in such case  see cro Elizabeth on the other side that the plaintiff in this prohibition  come too late because it be after sentence give in the spiritual court and as  to the matter in law it be argue that a prohibition will not lie in this case  because a mortuary be mere of spiritual cognizance of which this court have no  jurisdiction and for this purpose the case in the cro car hind v the bishop of  Chester stat articuli allotment of land stat circumspect to put in motion raze  Ent side mark v Gilbert margin be cite moreover a prohibition shall not be  grant after sentence except it appear that the spiritual court have no  jurisdiction of the cause nay it will not lie after sentence where it will lie  before and for this purpose the case likewise in the roll ab hob margin  footnote be cite the court upon the whole matter be doubtful whether a  prohibition will lie for a mortuary therefore for settle this point they  advice the defendant to accept of a declaration upon the prohibition and  thereupon to demurrer that the matter may be solemnly debate
BROADBELT against peters hill car rot execution in trespass of take cattle the  defendant plead recovery in the county court of York of cost and damage in  several promise general and that the defendant as bailiff by become facias  take the cattle to which the plaintiff demurrer and per curian this be no bar  in any court without the particular original suit c and judgement pro  plaintiff
Broadbent against Wilkes easter geo defendant mistake a fact and set out a  custom wrong he apply to Mr justice Parker for leave to amend but plaintiff  not consent the judge make no order plaintiff sign judgement and before  enquiry execute defendant give notice of motion defence be make on the enquiry  per cur let the judgement and enquiry be set aside and let the plea be amend  on payment of cost and defendant bring damage find by the inquisition into  court Bootle for the defendant draper for plaintiff
Broadbent against wilks verdict for defendant on two issue join upon not  guilty and a justification by the special plea the trespass be confess  judgement be order to be enter for the plaintiff notwithstanding the verdict  the trespass be confess by the special plea the true method be not to stay the  entry of judgement upon the verdict by rule but to enter the verdict upon barn  record and then judgement for the plaintiff non to stand before veredicto  prime and agar for plaintiff Bootle for defendant
Broadhurst versus richardson all S C Chan Rep a man have issue three daughter  and devise to his three daughter l equal to be divide between they that be to  say l apiece but if any of they die without a child her part to go to the  survivor one of the daughter marry Broadhurst and before the portion pay she  die without issue Ventris er p Broadhurst exhibit his bill against the  executor and the two survive sister and have a decree for the l for a sum of  money can be entail
Brocas vers to cause to go London practice per curian it be settle in sir  Peter Delmes case and have always be the course of the court that when either  party will to sew be any special matter about award the venire out of the  common course a copy must be give to the opposite party and they must have a  reasonable time to consider it before you enter a nient dedire
brock against vernon Trin banc sup arrest of judgement in debt upon a bind  brock bring a action of debt against Vernon as a executor upon a bind enter  into by Vernon unto the testator of the plaintiff the defendant acknowledge  the bind but say that he give another bind in satisfaction of that bind unto  the testator which the testator do style report accept of in satisfaction the  court hold this plea ill and that the party may have demurrer upon it and need  not to have join issue and put it to the jury for it be no good plea to say  that one do accept of one thing in action in satisfaction of another thing in  action and here the defendant confess the debt and therefore his plea be ill  judgement ought to be against he and judgement at another day be give accord  style report er p
BROCKENBURIES case the king debtor suffer a to manure his land and therefore  the sheriff seize the good of a for this debt whereupon a to the intent to  have his good again pay the fee to the sheriff and make a bind to the king to  pay the sum due and now upon a motion and affidavit that the debtor himself  have sufficient to satisfy the debt due it be order by the court that the fee  take by the sheriff shall be restore to a and that the bind remain in the  office here and if this debt can be levy of the land or good of the debtor the  bind shall be deliver to a but if it fall out that it can be levy of the  debtor then the king shall resort to a upon this bind and he shall have the  assistance of this court for his relief against the say Brokenbury the debtor
BROCKER v hamilton Dec the bill be to be pay a sum of money on a note of hand  from the defendant the plaintiff obtain a writ of ne exeat royal power upon  put in their answer they apply to discharge the writ Lord Hardwicke c say he  will not have grant the writ have the application be make to he for the court  will never grant the writ when the demand be at law but say this court will  grant it in case of alimony recover in the spiritual court Vid ex part  Whitmore above dick and the party be suspect to be go abroad to avoid payment  and accord discharge the writ Mews dig ne exeat royal power
Brockhurst v cotton injunction for defraud the queen of her fine a action upon  the case commence in the king bench to the defendant damage one hundred mark  be stay by injunction for that her majesty be hinder of her fine which shall  have be pay upon the original Brockburst plaintiff cotton defendant year Eliz  Mews dig title crown d crown grant
BRODDECK versus briggs the martial immaterial traverse be but matter of form  salk comb show escape against the marshal who plead that the plaintiff be a  alien enemy bear beyond sea at such a place in France Carthew er p the  plaintiff reply that he be a denizen bear in England and traverse that he be a  alien bear modus form c and upon a general demurrer to this replication it be  hold by the court that the traverse be ill because no venue can arise from a  place beyond sea therefore the plaintiff ought to have rely upon the first  part of his replication videlicet that he be a denizen and then a place of  trial may be lie here c but the defendant have demurrer general no advantage  can be now take of this immaterial traverse which be but matter of form and if  the defendant have take issue upon the plaintiff be a denizen as he Carthew  may it shall be try where the action be lie because this but a transitory  matter the plaintiff have judgement
brodie against tickle hill geo after a nonsuit motion by plaintiff against  John grey Esq for a attachment for not attend as a witness at the sit at nisi  prius it do not appear that a subpoena be personal serve but notice by receipt  of a subpoena ticket be admit by Mr grey who on plaintiff application before  the subpoena ticket leave at his lodging have inform plaintiff barn that he  know nothing of the matter in question between the party and can not give any  testimony for plaintiff advantage Mr grey for this reason in his affidavit  endeavour to excuse his nonattendance and say that he will have attend the  trial notwithstanding he can not give any material evidence have he not be  hinder by other urgent business the court enlarge the rule for Mr grey to show  cause why a attachment till after barn er p a new trial have and declare that  in some case they will grant attachment against witness for not attend trial  though hitherto the same have not be do prime for plaintiff will for grey
BROMEFIELD and sir IOIIN Williamson hill banc sup mich rot demurrer to a  replication in debt upon a obligation Bromefield bring a action of debt upon a  obligation to perform the covenant of a lease for year against sir John  Williamson the defendant plead that he have perform the covenant the plaintiff  reply and set forth a breach and upon this the defendant demurrer and upon the  demurrer the case be this a lease be make for one year the lessee covenant for  he and his assign to pay the rend so long as he and they shall have the  possession of the thing let the lessee assign over his term the term expire  the assignee continue the possession after the term expire and for rend behind  by the assignee after the expiration of the term the lessor bring the action  and the question be whether here be such a assignee that the action will lie  against or not roll chief just hold that though here be not a assignee strict  accord to the rule of law yet that he shall be account such a assignee as be  to style report perform the covenant make between the party and rule the  defendant to show cause why the plaintiff shall not have judgement notam style  report er p
BROMEFIELDS case it be agree by all the justice that if tenant in tail by  indenture upon consideration of marriage covenant with a other that certain  person shall be seize to his use for term of his life and after his decease to  the use of his son and heir apparent that by that covenant there be not any  use change unless only during the life of tenant in tail
Bromehead and Spencer plaintiff Roger defendant where a action of debt be  bring by the plaintiff against the defendant Brownlow goldsborough as  administrator during the minority of one I S and the plaintiff show in their  count that the say I S at the time of the writ bring be and yet be within age  of one and twenty year and verdict passes against the defendant and crew move  in arrest of judgement that the declaration be insufficient for they have  declare that the executor be within the age of one and twenty year and the  administration during the nonage shall cease when the infant come to the age  of seventeen year so that he may be of the age of or year and yet the  administration cease and so of action against administrator and so be the  opinion of all the justice and the judgement be stay upon that accord to the  resolution of Piggotts case coke Brownlow goldsborough er p a marry wife can  make a letter of attorney
Bromfield and TIEGE custom in trespass the defendant justify by custom for  drift in a manor and to have recompense c and that thereupon he destrained  whereupon the plaintiff demurrer because no custom be allege to distrain for  this fine on the mark the cattle per curian he ought to allege a custom but in  the case of teukesbury it be adjudge that custom to tax for repair bridge be  sufficient without a special custom to distrain and judgement for the  plaintiff nisi
BROMHALL against Norton trespass trespass for burn of the plaintiff turf the  defendant justify that the turf be on land where he have common and show title  to it and for damage pheasant he burn the turf the plaintiff thereupon  demurrer and have judgement for the defendant can not burn the turf for that  cause Jones t er p
Bromle v child may the plaintiff exhibit interrogatory before the master  pursuant to the decree and examine the defendant he afterward apply for and  obtain a order as of course to exhibit new interrogatory motion on this day to  discharge the order Lord Hardwicke c say this court will not let party exhibit  interrogatory as of course for it will occasion the lengthen of suit and  vexation as for instance amend bill but on special application it may be do  Mews dig account and inquiry c d
Bromley contra Hamond march remainder man son of the mortgagee lend more money  on a second mortgage the first be bad the father and mother tenant for life  the remainder to the son in tail by marriagesettlement on great consideration  the father and mother mortgage the land to I S in trust for one marshal a  scrivener the father as be allege make oath before the mortgage that he be  seize in fee the father die marshal doubt or find his security bad give to one  to procure the son to borrow pound of he but do not at all discover that the  pound be his the son do borrow the pound and mortgage his land or it and this  be convey to I S who have the father be mortgage and the pound not be pay a  bill be exhibit to foreclose the son of redemption which be decree then dr  mill purchase by way also of mortgage the son after the day appoint by the  order to pay the pound tender it with damage but be refuse the decree be enrol  but that be do with such speed that the advantage thereof be waive and now the  matter insist on be that the first mortgagee have a defective assurance now  have gain a good Title in law to the land and the plaintiff have no Title at  law ought to redeem both mortgage and pay the money of both mortgage or not to  redeem it at all as in sir John Faggs case who have purchase on a defective  Title for a small sum obtain into his hand the deed of entail against he  chancellor the son be a stranger to the father and all one as a stranger and  differ from Faggs case and decree a redemption on payment of the pound damage  and cost the mortgagee do oppose the redemption by his answer but as to the  practice in gain the second mortgage it be not material for he do nothing but  to secure a just debt
BROMLEYS case hill James in the exchequer Hutton sergeant come to the bar and  show that one Bromley have before this time make a lease for year in county  palatine of Durham of certain coalmines in that county render rend per annum  which rend be arrear for diverse year and that Bromley become outlaw here in  the common plea for debt at the suit of Cullamour a merchant and that the king  have grant this debt due upon this lease for year as forfeit for outlawry unto  he and Hutton for the bishop say that it belong to he because he have all the  good of man outlaw within his county and if this debt belong to the king or  the bishop it be the doubt the party be outlaw in the county of Northumberland  which be out of the county palatine of Durham Tanfield chief baron say that  the debt shall follow the person and he say that in Elizabeth veer and  jefferies case it be a question if debt upon a bind shall be forfeit to he who  have such a privilege where the bind be and he say that in this case lane it  be resolve that he shall have the bind and debt who have good utlagatorum  where the bind be and so it be resolve as be say in a case refer out of the  realm of Ireland but here be a debt which accrue by reason of a real contract  of good in the county palatine and he who be debtor be the party outlaw but  not in the county palatine of Durham and Hutton sergeant say that he have the  roll of a case in this court in the time of e that the bishop of Durham be  allow a debt in a more strong case then this be for there a creditor be outlaw  in London and his bind be also in London and the creditor be only a inhabitant  within the county palatine yet the bishop be allow this debt curian put in  your claim and we will allow that which be reasonable and it be adjourn
BROMLEYS case if a man steal good and be arraign upon a indictment of felony  and the good be value to S and the jury upon their verdict say that he be  guilty of the say good but that the value be but d that be a good verdict and  the justice shall punish he as for petty larceny in the same manner it be if a  man be arraign for wilful murder and the jury find it but manslaughter that be  a good verdict by all the justice
BROMWOOD against EASTWICKE ante in error Br execution roll Yelvert Tococks  case Cr pl Cr pl sir Richard Greenvils case by Twisden be express that on  become facias sue out and then return as bawd against Metholds case dyer that  the good remain pro diminution empt by error or supersedeas sue out after that  the vendition be not hinder but if the error be allow before then though the  sheriff be unpunishable yet supersedeas notwithstanding execution do shall go  because improvident and per curian if the good be sell the money may be bring  into court to be restore to the party but if not the good may be in specie  restore
BRONKER and monpesson trin car two rot officer in covenant set forth grant of  office of register to the plaintiff intestate and the defendant and that the  defendant declare his name be use only in trust for Waldron the intestate and  yet have take the whole profit against the covenant not to intermeddle without  appointment of Waldron to which the defendant demurrer because the defendant  be the legal officer and its not say what the profit receive be though the  party be not tie to it in precise evidence and this the court conceive ill say  adjornatur
brook against Bainton in a writ of error to reverse a judgement give in the  court of common plea in trespass for assault battery and wound it be assign  for error by Maynard that there be variance betwixt the original and the  declaration for the original be only of battery and wound of himself and he  declare of battery and wound of he and his horse also for he say that a  certain horse upon which the plaintiff equitavi percussi ita quod to fall c  and that be not help by the statute but roll contrary and here be no variance  for the allege of strike of the horse be only inducement to allege the battery  of himself for he do not bring the action for the march report beat of his  horse for it be not allege that it be his own horse but a certain horse and  for that reason by the whole court the judgement be affirm
brook against brook mich banc sup mich car rot error to reverse a judgement in  trespass quare enclosed space to break in pieces brook bring a action of  trespass quare enclosed space to break in pieces for eat of his grass with  cattle c against brook upon not guilty plead a issue be join and the plaintiff  have a verdict and a judgement the defendant bring a wonder it of error to  reverse this judgement and assign for error that the declaration be incertain  for the plaintiff declare of break his close and eat his grass cum style  report er p a certain averiis and do not say what cattle and so he may recover  damage in this action and bring another action for the same trespass because  it can be know what cattle do the former trespass hale of council with the  defendant say the declaration be good enough for it be good in substance  although it may have be better in form and it be after a verdict the  incertainty be help and the defendant if the plaintiff shall bring a new  action for this trespass may plead by averment that he have satisfy the  trespass do already and aver with what cattle it be do Jerman justice say the  beast ought to be name particular for averia be a large word and signify  cattle of diverse kind and it be too general a word to declare upon but roll  chief justice answer where the thing it self be in demand and a action be  bring for it as it be in a action of trover and conversion the thing ought to  be particular name but here the action be bring for damage for break his close  and eat his grass and if you have demurrer to the declaration it have not be a  good demurrer but now it be style report after a verdict which make it strong  against the defendant Nicholas and ask justice concur with roll so the  judgement be affirm
brook against dean condition to deliver good such a day plea a delivery accord  to the condition be not good Q I Ke Mod Lutw NelsonsLutw debt on a obligation  condition to deliver good upon such a day the defendant plead that he deliver  they accord to the form of the condition aforesaid levinz er p whereupon the  plaintiff demurrer for that he ought to have plead express accord to the word  in the condition that he delivered the good upon the say day and not general  as here and the court seem of the same opinion but it be adjourn
brook against HANCHIF February in error Br entry of it at any time before  exception take be good by Edward b or b pl Brownl pl Goldsb pl Cr pl Brant pl  Hitch b pl Cr pl Brant b pl hill car Brownl pi want of a warrant of attorney  be not aidable but if ever there be any or a bill the court will cause it to  be file though it be lose
brook against lake covenant in debt on obligation the defendant plead covenant  perform the plaintiff reply by breach in not delivery up of house the  defendant rejoin that before the end of the term the plaintiff give he leave  to continue it long to which the plaintiff demurrer and by Twisden curian it  be a departure but the case be the condition be for delivery up of the house  and the parole agreement plead in the bar which per curian be well enougb and  not like Cr Hayford against Andrews say adjornatur
brook against sharp amendment Scrogs pray a amendment of release plead make I  march for February which by Allen for the plaintiff its needless as its plead  that such a day he release whereon he may give evidence at any day before or  after contra where h plead that by release bear date march that be precise to  the day and though the record be make up the court award a amendment in debt  on a bind king b xil Keble er p
brook against smith Entr h James b r rot in debt against a executor the  plaintiff recover and a become fac de good known on good evidence and upon  that the sheriff return that the defendant have not any good of the testator  tempore judgment nor after the plaintiff come to the court and surmise that  the defendant have wash the good and pray a writ to the sheriff to inquire but  after the very matter be move at the court by the court a supsedeas be grant  for it be out of the court and without precedent justice William be only of  the contrary and cite the h that he may have a special writ and also the case  between Haworth and peel Noy er p
brook against ware a write will snag be revoke by parole one effete of ken by  his will in write devise his land of gavelkind to one Harrison in fee and five  day before his death he revoke his will in this point by parole only in the  presence of three witness require their testimony of his present revocation  and say to they further that he will alter this in his write will mich  Elizabeth b r cro e more askew against Hollingworth that if in this case the  obligation have be enter b in heec word the plaintiff will never have have  judgement by Popham Penner and gawdy this custom be take strict for if the  father be outlaw or abjure the son shall not have the land Stath Custonne e  and so it be holder Elizabeth in a case in chancery between one Brocas  plaintiff and savage knight and his wife defendant robin gavelk a after  verdict the court will suppose everything to be right unless the contrary  appear on the record will b if the defendant have crave oyer do not set out  the whole deed plaintiff may sign judgement as for want of a plea or the court  will quash the plea term rep dyer a er p when he come to town c and before his  come thither he be murder bit the say Harrison and Harrison cause the will in  write as it be at first to be prove and by colour thereof enter into the  devise and then be attaint of murder and hang and his son enter by the law of  gavelkind S the father to the bough the son to he plough this matter come out  in evidence to a jury of ken this term in ejection strong between brook and  warder and this manner of revocation by a parole as above be affirm for  sufficient revocation at bar and bench although it be not in write nor the  first will in that point cancel or deface idem bone
brook againt hog mich banc sup hill car rot judgement in a account reverse for  error in it a judgement give in a action of debt upon a account in the court  of Knaresborough be reverse here because the venire facias be style report  venire facias c which in a inferior court be not good but it ought to say  venire facias duodecen Probus et regales man de c so express all at large in  word and not with a c note many judgement give in inferior court have be  reverse upon the same exception but I only mention this for a authority to be  cite upon occasion
brook and brook mich car banc Reg Trin car rot demurrer to a plea in debt upon  a obligation brook bring a action of debt upon a obligation against brook the  condition be that the obligor shall make a estate of inheritance to the  obligee in such land at such a day and place and for not do it he bring his  action the defendant plead that he be ready at the day and place to make the  plaintiff a estate of inheritance in the land the plaintiff demurrer to the  plea and for cause show that the defendant do not show that he give notice to  the plaintiff of his be there to a this roll justice say it be not necessary  to give notice of the day or place a second exception be that he have not show  that he save the plaintiff notice what estate of inheritance he will make he  to this roll justice say he ought to have show that be give notice what estate  he will make he and therefore let the defendant show cause why the plaintiff  shall not have judgement
brook and else error upon a judgement in c b where judgement be give against  green and his wife and brook and his wife and a to know facias and inquiry  grant upon a suggestion that the defendant be executor have waste and the  sheriff return that brook and his wife devastaveru but as to green and his  wife nothing be say and upon this judgement be give against green and his wife  de good testator and against brook and his wife de good testator si so much si  non de good not common with others upon which error be bring and assign that  nothing be return as to green and his wife the judgement be give without  warrant and the writ not be execute accord to the suggestion of it which be of  a joint devastavit and the return be only of a devastavit by brook and his  wife this be a void return as a verdict be void which find but part of the  issue and say nothing as to the residue and though it be object that this be a  misreturn aid by the statute of Jeofails and I Cr eyres and Taunton S case and  other case cite to this purpose yet the court seem the and that there be no  warrant to give judgement upon this return against green and his wife and  therefore the Skinner judgement against they not good also per curian there be  a discontinuance for there be no continuance enter from mich James to hill I  will mark for though the statute aid the discontinuance of the term and supply  it yet the party when the term be continue by the statute ought to enter his  continuances and for default of it the action be discontinue dyer Br  attachment
brook and Gregory case in a replMn the defendant do avow the take of the  cattle damage feasants and upon issue join it be find for the plaintiff in the  court at Windsor be a threeweeks c u t and the defendant bring a writ of error  and assign for error that the entry of the plaint in the say court be the day  of may and the plaintiff afterward do declare there of a take of the cattle  the day of may and whether the same be error be in a threeweeks court be the  question and e be allege by Harris that it be no error but the court hold the  same to he error because no plaint can he enter but at a court and this entry  Godbolt er p of the plaint be mesne betwixt the courtday and so the  declaration be not warrant no custom be allege to maintain such a entry it be  hold by the court in Godbolt this case that after in nullo be erratum be plead  the defendant can allege diminution because there be a perfect issue before it  be hold that a man can allege diminution of any thing which appear in the  record to he true and because the defendant do allead e diminution in this  case of the record and by the record it be certify that the plaint be enter  the day of may the same be not good after issue join and after judgement be  give upon the say record upon the first declaration and plead in the say court  of Windsor and therefore the judgement be reverse by the opinion of all the  justice hill James in the king bench
brook and man it be time enough to file warrant of attorney any time before  final judgement error of a judgement by default in c b the error insist on be  the want of a warrant of attorney from the defendant in the action upon  diminution allege a certiorari issue whereupon a warrant of attorney be return  file in Trinity term whereas the interlocutory judgement be enter in the  easter term before though the final judgement upon the return of the writ of  inquiry be not before Trinity term and it be insist the warrant return be as  no warrant in that cause because FitzGibbon er p it be give at a time when the  defendant be out of court whereas it shall be pendent plea Ro Rep Noy mich Geo  b r rot and though error will not lie before the final judgement enter yet the  plea be determine by the interlocutory judgement for the reason why error will  not lie before the final judgement be because the court above will not examine  a judgement by parcel the court upon Fitzherbert Gibbon the second argument  affirm the judgement and say that the plea be depend till judgement final be  give and if the warrant be enter and file any time before that it be enough et  per page just the warrant be to be intend previous to the appearance though  not file lee just cite a case between Noke and Cotligate where this point be  determine
brook and turner modern pl baron feme sander pray prohibition on plea that the  wife of the plaintiff who be covert on article before marriage with two of her  friend be to be permit so to do and the husband to pay legacy devise and that  the husband ought to have administration there be a surplus of thing in action  the plaintiff claim by virtue of the will per curian her will be void and the  husband bind only by the article to permit it and prohibition nisi
brook and webster stop a way case for stop a way and declare that he be  possess of two ancient message c and that he have a way lead to they and that  they be burn d and that he have erect a new house super quandan parten the  same messuagiorum Thompson after a verdict for the plaintiff move in arrest of  judgement that it can not be upon part of the say message for he have show  before that they be burn to which it be answer d that the ground be part of  the message and so it shall be intend that he build upon the ground to which  the other side reply d that that intendment will not consist with what be say  before for then the same word must have two intendment holt this will have be  bad upon a special demurrer but cur be of opinion that it be good after  verdict judgement pro quer
brook case Godfrey move for a prohibition and surmise that the parishioner  have compound with the parson for the tithe but yet the due tithe be sever and  expose and the parson take and carry they away the parishioner meet he and  take they from he and upon that the parson sue in the spiritual court and a  prohibition be award
brook case he be a false knave and keep a false debt book for he charge I with  the receipt of one piece of delver which be false not actionable mics and  Elizabeth
brook otherwise Cobham case in piracy the defendant stand mute shall have  judgement of Seine fort et dare memorandum that after the end of this term one  brook atlas Cobham be arraign in Southwark before the commissioner of oyer and  terminer for a heinous piracy and murder do to a Spaniard and stand mute and  will not answer direct the question be move by the attorneygeneral whether he  ought to have judgement of pieme fort et dare in this case and as it seem to  sander chief baron brown and dyer justice their opinion be ask in it he shall  have it and this by the word and good and reasonable intendment of the statute  h c and accord to the above opinion judgement be give by sergeant Carus a  michaelmas term queen Elizabeth
brook v APPRICE the plaintiff have execution for and order to take execution  for pound only the plaintiff have judgement in the king caryi bench against  the defendant upon a bind of two hundred pound and another judgement for three  hundred pound upon a action of debt of arrearage of account in the king bench  and order they may proceed with execution upon the bind of pound and also to  take execution of pound parcel of the pound provide always and it be order the  plaintiff shall not in anywise proceed nor take execution of the pound residue  of the recover upon the account without special licence of the court John  brook and Catherine his wife plaintiffs Thomas Apprice defendant year  Elizabeth foe
brook v ersus brook trin car rot debt in debt upon a bind of I with condition  that if the obligor at or before the Feast of saint John baptist next fob a  low the date shall make a absolute estate of inheritance to the obligee of  such land then c the defendant plead that after the make of the bind at all  time before and at the say Feast of saint John baptist he be readv upon the  land to make such a estate to the plaintiff c and upon demurrer it be adjudge  for the plaintiff because the defendant ought to have give the plaintiff  notice that he will make he such a conveyance to the make whereof the presence  of the plaintiff be necessary but if the condition have be for the make of a  feoff then for that a day certain be appoint the plea have be good for the  plaintiff at his peril ought to attend at the day vide   g
brook v STRADTLANDER suit for price of ballast supply to the orange tree  decree for amount due No appeal ad et assign book rd march owner Martha brook  alias Tomlinson recently owner roberti brook baronetti relict et  administratrix will do you much good et Burrell christopheri Tomlinson death  contra naven the orange tree de Bremen pron  interrog  be Stradtlander be  magister ejusque c ac contra dictum Stradtlander et associate pro interest  nest to come between dominus of w interloquend pronounce there be five tun of  ballast more than be pay for and condemned Robert client in d for each tun  Pleydell to stretch out billam to weigh out dominus more severely punished the  same ad pound c c Burrell er p
brook versus bishop hill Ann B R ld raym S c salk trespass with a continuando  not good skin Mod Mod Mod Jon Le lev skiff show side salk trespass quare way  et arms die April the defendant enclosed space of the plaintiff to break in  pieces et to go into et herban svan foot ambulando to tread upon et to use up  and also for Salkeld er p cut down his underwood and tree transgression breed  a predicto good luck die April usq the same month to visit a day et turn  continuando upon not guilty plead the plaintiff have a verdict and entire  damage it be move in arrest of judgement that the cut the tree do not lie in  continuance et per holt Ch just that be very true but then the continuando be  void as to that trespass and damage shall be intend to be give by the jury for  those trespass of which there may be a continuance but then it be object that  the plaintiff at the trial give evidence of the defendant cut tree and  Underwood at several time which per curian can not be upon Salkeld this  declaration at least it ought not to have be and therefore shall not be intend  but the way to declare for such trespass which lie not in continuance and if  the plaintiff will give evidence of several trespass be for he to set forth in  his declaration that the defendant between such a day and such a day cut  several tree and not to lie a continuando transgression from such a day to  such a clay and upon such a declaration he may give in evidence a cut on any  day within those day so be the yearbook h in trespass for thrift the defendant  between such a day and such a day per to visit vice take and carry away so  much corn quod notam for the right way of declare et per Powell justice the  practice be to give in evidence several trespass upon the way of declare as in  this case but that it be wrong and if the plaintiff have do so at the trial as  it be allege he ought not to have judgement h lev
brook versus bishop hill Ann h r ld raym S c comb trespass in cut down such a  number of tree can be continue but a general continuando shall be apply to  what may be continue after verdict vide ante pl Faresl ld raym skin Sho t Jon  Cowp trespass quare way arms the defendant on the d of April break and enter  his close and tread down his grass nec non arbores urge videlicet poplar tree  subboscum suum videlicet carectatas subbosci leg of meat to take in hand to  carry away transgression prd usq April to visit a day turn continuando and  after verdict and entire damage it be resolve saint that the continuance as to  the poplar and underwood be impossible and can not be dly that no part of the  damage shall be intend to be give for that but shall be apply to such trespass  as may be continue accord to vent continuando transq prd general shall only  refer to so much as lie in continuance but if it be continuando such and such  particular and they lie not in continuance it be nought after verdict
brook versus bishop hill Ann salk Comber action of trespass be bring quare way  arms the defendant on the d of April break and enter the plaintiff close and  tread down his be grass and also his tree and underwood cut take and carry  away and he say trespass until the that April at diverse day and time continue  the plaintiff who take a verdict and entire damage and it be move in arrest of  judgement that the cut the tree do not lie in continuance holt c j that be  very true but then the continuando be void as to that trepass and damage shall  be intend to be give by the jury for those trespass of which that the  plaintiff at the trial there may be a continuance indeed it be here object  that the plaintiff give evidence of the defendant cut tree and underwood at  several time which can not be upon this declaration at least it ought not to  have be and therefore that shall not be intend but the right way to declare  for trespass which lie in continuance where the plaintiff will give evidence  of several trespass be for he to set forth in his declaration that the  defendant between such a day and such a day cut several tree and not to lie a  continuando of the trespass from such a day till such a day and upon such  declaration the plaintiff may give in evidence a cut on any day within those  day and Powell I say if corn c be take away t several day it be best to lie it  tali die to visit a day turn inter ankle diem ankle diem for otherwise if it  be lie on a certain day with a continuando you can give in evidence but one  day though you may choose your day because what be do on one day can be  continue and the chief justice agree it must either be so or the plaintiff  must make several count for the several day holt KB er p
brook versus clerk pasch James rotulo action bring for these word his son  brook have deceive I in a reckon for ware and his debtabook which he keep for  sale of ware in his shop be a false debtabook and I will make he ashamed of  his call Hubbart and Nichols against the plaintiff and Warburton for the  plaintiff pasch James rotulo action of the case bring for a nuisance for  building the defendant house so near the plaintiff that a great part of it  superpends and the plaintiff in theaconveying his title show a lease for year  make to he if the lessor shall so long live and do not aver the life of the  lessor but say that by virtue of the demise the plaintiff have be and then be  thereof possess and adjudge sufficient
brook versus cook mich W m show debt upon a escape against the marshal set  forth a judgement recover by her as executrix and the party in execution and  let at large fresh pursuit plead verdict for the plaintiff move in arrest of  judgement that the plaintiff have bring the action in the debet and to hold  off in her own right whereas the recovery which be the foundation of the  action be as executrix holt CJ where a executor bring a action in the debet  where he ought not it be help by the statute but the quaere be whether this  action be bring as executor or in her own right if this be so and remain  uncertain it will remain uncertain still whether this judgement be in her own  right or not in trover or trespass if it appear the wrong be in her own time  though she be call executrix in the declaration yet it may be in her own right  so here it appear uncertain dolben I if executor bring debt and recover and  then a escape of the party the suit for the escape must be as executor and so  it be agree in Holman and Chute S case cro per cur judgement be arrest
brook versus else Pas W m B R insufficient return of devastavit aid by verdict  lev Mod c Lut cro Jon skin S c upon a devastavit suggest against both executor  videlicet a and b the writ be to the sheriff to inquire of waste by both the  sheriff return a devastavit as to a but say nothing as to b this be assign for  error after judgement upon a verdict be hold to be aid by the verdict be but a  insufficient return or a misreturn by reason of the omission otherwise if no  return at all vide     Noy cro car Salkeld er p
brook versus ewer and ux see r v London JJ Q b mandamus in nature of a  procedendo ad judgment a judge of a inferior court can grant a new trial York  move for a mandamus to the judge of the court of Sandwich to give judgement  upon a verdict though he have grant a new trial for excessive damage without  payment of cost and for the mandamus he quote vent raym ebb and he likewise  insist that a judge of a inferior court can grant a new trial as be hold by  holt c I mich Ann hall v hill Mod can salk and likewise by Parker c I Pas Ann  page v bind and to that opinion the court incline and grant a mandamus unless  cause and upon that the judge below as well advice to rest king v urling fort  Bayley v Boorne post and the case there cite king v day say Rep Blacquiere v  Hawkins Doug per Lord Mansfleld S p but he may set it aside for irregularity  king v Peter burr jewel v hill post
brook versus grove brook bring a quod permitter against grove and after  imparlance the defendant demand the view and rule by the court that he may and  vide h accordant vide e and the plea videlicet the view be de property  preceding which be as well of the land to which the nuisance as of the land  which be the nuisance and the view in this action be but for fifteen day
brook versus hague assumpsit case salk James cap the plaintiff count special  as attorney for several fee and sum of money by he expend in several suit for  the testator of the defendant and that he demand they and neither the testator  nor the defendant have pay they the defendant plead the statute of James cap  and that the plaintiff have not give to the testator nor to the defendant  himself before the writ bring any bill of charge accord to the statute upon  this the plaintiff demurrer and adjudge for the defendant that it be a good  plea Raymond sir t term hill car c b
brook versus hustler hill Ann B R vide record page amercement may be general  quod sit in pity and afeard to a certain sum show raze Entr hob Rep a Q S C  law man bee debt for a amerciament in a courtleet it be lie in the declaration  that the defendant be amerce per cur not say in what sum and that it be afeard  by affeerors to such a sum it be object that the court ought to impose a sum  certain and that by affeerors be after to be mitigate vide hob lev say cur  content the amerciament ought to be general quod sit in pity and that be to be  ascertain by affeerors b b vide ac and ancient demesne
brook versus smith hill James rotulo two tenant in common make a lease and  reserve a rend and covenant that neither shall release and one of they release  his part this be a breach for that in debt they both shall join and now by the  release the action be go a executor by wrong shall not by his plea prejudice a  rightful executor
brook versus smith Pas W m in person holt c I at nisi prius Middlesex where  upon non assumpsit condemnation in foreign attachment may be give in evidence  and where it must be plead and how post vide post pl contra   light b a skin  vide ld raym Bl will in assumpsit evidence be give that the debt be attach by  the custom of London before the action bring and condemnation have there  before plea plead and it be urge that this shall relate to defeat the action  but per cur it be rule that if a attachment and condemnation he before the  writ purchase it may be give in evidence on the general issue because that be  a alteration of the property before the action bring but if the attachment  only he before the writ purchase it ought to be plead in abatement of the writ  and if the condemnation be after the action commence and before the plea plead  then it may be plead in bar but shall not be give in evidence on non assumpsit  for that the property be not alter until condemnation and the plaintiff have a  verdict
brook versus smith pasch W m salk in assumpsit evidence be give that the debt  be attach by the custom of London before the action bring and condemnation  have there before plea plead and it be urge that this shall relate to defeat  the action but the court rule that if a attachment and condemnation be before  the writ purchase it may be give in evidence on the general issue because that  be a alteration of the property before the action bring but if the attachment  only be before the writ purchase it ought to be plead in abatement of the writ  and if the condemnation be after the action commence and before the plea plead  then it may be plead in bar but shall holt KB not be give in evidence on non  assumpsit for the property be not alter until condemnation the plaintiff have  a verdict
brook versus webster mich I W m Com case for stop a way and declare that he be  possess of two ancient message c and that he have a way lead to they and that  they be burn and that he have erect a new house super quandan parten eorUDdum  messuagiorum verdict for the plaintiff it be move in arrest of judgement that  it can not be upon part of the say message for he have show before that they  be burn to which it be answer that the ground be part of the message and so it  shall be intend that he build upon the ground to which the other side reply  that that intendment will not consist with what be say before for then the  same word must have two intendment holt c j this will have be bad upon a  special demurrer but cur be of opinion that it be good after verdict judgement  pro quer
BROOKE who tam v day Jan information of seizure so mend as to make a new  offence upon a motion to discharge a order make at the side bar for mend a  information of seizure the information at first be for import brandy and rum  in cask not contain sixty gallon at least the amendment be as to the rum to  make it in cask not contain twenty gallon which as be object be make a new  offence for brandy import in cask under sixty gallon be forfeit by the stat W  m cap S but rum in cask under twenty gallon by the stat oh Geo cap ill S which  be a different offence from what be first charge but notam though the court  admit that a new offence can not be create by a amendment yet they think that  this be only a mistake and make the rule absolute quod admire
broom against Cunningham assumpsit in special action upon the case the  plaintiff count on discourse betwixt the plaintiff and the defendant concern  the rectory of p and of a lease make thereof by Poulton to the defendant and  agreement betwixt they concern reparation the defendant be to make on the  premise and a judgement have by one hull under who the plaintiff claim one  moiety of the manor and rectory whereupon the plaintiff and the defendant  agree the defendant shall enjoy discharge of rend till he be satisfy for his  money so to be lie out and the plaintiff assign breach in that such a day rend  be arrear and all the disbursement before satisfy for which cause the  defendant demurrer the agreement be to allow quod to weigh out the count only  quod to weigh out which per curian be well enough judgement for the plaintiff  Keble er p
broom and evering hill car banc Reg hill car rot error to reverse a judgement  give in a to know facias to revive a judgement in debt a judgement be give  against the testator of the defendant in a action of debt for rend and this  judgement be revive by a to know facias against the executor and a verdict  thereupon and a judgement be give against he in the common plea upon this a  writ of error be bring in the king bench to reverse this judgement and the  error assign be that the trial be insufficient because the venire facias be  not good and be not help by the statute of jeofails and to prove this Baynagns  case in the that report be cite but hale answer that the venire facias be  award before it ought be to be account as if no venire have be award and say  it be like to a dedimus to take a fine before the writ of covenant issue forth  to levy the fine and so conclude that it be help by the statute of Jeofails  but the court take a difference where in truth there be no venire facias at  all and where there be a ill venire facias as it be here for though it be as  bad as may be yet be it be a venire facias it be not help by the statute of  Jeofails but if there have be none the statute have make the trial good  without it and thereupon day be give to show cause why the judgement shall not  be reverse pasch car the judgement be reverse
broom and knight Encumbent action upon the case by the curate of Woodbridge on  discourse to leave the place and of Mr Sackford the impropriators intent to  settle the maintenance in consideration the plaintiff will continue there the  defendant be a inhabitant promise to pay S quarterly yearly upon demand after  nonassumpsit and verdict and judgement error be assign in want of demand as Cr  water and bridge be only although often c say per curian here be a debt by the  promise and there needs no demand as Cr peck and Methold and leech and Bromsal  style pl in consideration of marriage to pay l upon request needs only  although often but otherwise to pay in consideration of promise of marriage  upon request and not Keble withstand Cr selman and king here be a debt by  serve the cure assumpsit lie but however want of this be aid by verdict non  assumpsit and judgement affirm Keble er p
broom and pine tout temps priest not pleadable after imparlance cro  Indebitatus assumpsit the defendant imparls and afterward plead a tender tout  temps priest in bar of the action holt Ch I the case in dyer be good law a  tender be not material in any case but where there be a penalty in debt upon a  single bill or for rend the plaintiff declare that the defendant have not pay  he although often require the defendant Comberbach er p may plead that he be  always ready and still be ready and pray judgement of damage then the  plaintiff if he will have damage must reply and show a special request a  special request en Le nar come jeo intend be as hob say a matter allege d out  of time and need not be regard tout temps priest after imparlance be a  contradiction tender and refusal be no plea in assumpsit but the defendant  must pay the plaintiff when he l have it indeed a tender may excuse from  damage for the delay but not as to the principal damage judgement pro quer
broom v uvoodward and other mich geo ill judgement set aside because the  plaintiff do not stay till the open of the office the afternoon after the rule  be out Vid Buckmaster Troughton ante p cook a motion to set aside a judgement  sign the next morning after the rule to plead be out the plea be call for in  write two day before the rule be out the court say the plaintiff attorney may  call for a plea instant upon the rule be give but it be the stand rule cook c  p of the court not to sign judgement or nonpros till the open of the office in  the afternoon after the rule to plead be out and for that reason they set the  judgement aside
broom versus roberts No discontinuance after verdict nisi new trial the court  will not give leave to discontinue after a verdict unless the verdict be set  aside as a ill verdict but in the principal case the verdict be not blame how  ever for full satisfaction a new trial be grant
broth against archer upon evidence it be hold by Anderson that if a feme  covert eject one and that afterward the husband assent that yet the husband be  not a ejector for a ejectment be make in a instant and have not a continuance  otherwise of a seize
brother and hence notice to a purchaser the case be a be a copyholder in fee  mortgage his copyhold by surrender to b who be admit by I S be steward of the  manor afterward a mortgage his say copyhold to d in the same manner who be  admit by the same steward and afterward this copyhold come to be mortgage to  the steward himself who then purchase in the first mortgage and ray Lord  chancellor decree that I S the steward by the purchase in of the first  encumbrance shall not postpone the middle mortgagee but that he shall be  satisfy in order of priority after the first mortgage discharge since I S must  have have notice of this mesne mortgage at the time of the mortgage make to he  he be steward of the manor when d be admit
Brotherton executor of lady coke Winford against hellier by his guardian  prerogative court Trinity term June that a party who have no interest can be  permit to intervene in a cause see on another point lee dr bettesworth Samuel  hellier Esq decease leave a widow lady coke Winford and a son a minor age or  year he choose Sarah Harris to be his guardian and she be appoint such to  propound decease will on behalf of the son which lady Winford oppose the minor  have a grandmother live Sarah Huntback who be a witness in this cause she and  dean Littleton be appoint guardian for his person and real estate in chancery  the grandmother now pray that she may intervene to see justice do the man or  in this cause if the minor shall die she be his next of kin the proctor for  lady Winford may have lee er p object to Harris be guardian the only objection  in the act be that her intervention will increase expense dr hay for Samuel  hellier the cause be now lee ready to be hear Sarah Huntback the grandmother  pray to intervene Harris be appoint guardian in upon the minor election nobody  oppose her be guardian the grandmother may then have interpose Huntback have  be examine as a witness in the cause no reason for her intervention the cause  be conclude she can plead no other effect can arise from her intervention but  burden the cause with the expense of counsel and proctor for her and more copy  of the deposition if she will appear at her own expense we will not oppose it  judgment sir george lee I be of opinion this motion be new it do not appear to  I that her intervention can be of any use it be not suggest that the guardian  be colluding with the adverse party that it be unprecedented to admit any  person to intervene that have no interest in the cause and therefore I reject  Sarah Huntbacks petition
Brotherton v chancy Jan cost plaintiff accept a d answer before he receive  cost for the d answer do not waive they if a man put in his second answer cost  be thereupon due to the plaintiff and though the plaintiff accept a three  answer from the defendant he noth not thereby waive his title to his cost on  the second answer but may take out a subpoena for they
broughton against randal father tenant for life the remainder to his son in  tail the remainder to the right heir of the father after the father and son at  a certain time be attaint of felony and execute likewise at one time the son  not have any issue of his body if now the father shall be say to be seize of a  estate in fee that dower c be the matter and there because it be prove by  witness that the father move his foot after the death of the son it be find by  the jury seisie and dower c and upon that the wife of the father have  judgement to recover note after error be bring and the error assign in the  process we Tr Elizabeth rot
broughton vers harpur if a man marry a second time before his first wife die  his first wife be not a competent witness to prove her marriage in ejectment  the plaintiff make title to his lessor to the land in question as son and heir  of Jerome Jacques and Hannah his wife in right of Hannah the defendant a e in  evidence that Jerome Jacques be marry before he wasmarried to Hannah and the  woman to who it be suppose he be marry before be produce at the Lord Raymond  er p trial summer assize will at Maidstone to prove this marriage the counsel  for the plaintiff oppose her testimony because she swear for her advantage  videlicet to have a husband the husband then be live but nevertheless gold  justice of the king bench then judge of assize admit her testimony but  afterward the same cause upon the same title between the same party be try  before holt chief justice at the assize in march at Maidstone Ann Reg and he  refuse after debate to admit the former wife to be witness for this purpose  but upon other evidence the former marriage be prove to the satisfaction of  the jury be gentleman whereupon they find a verdict for the defendant but in  the former trial before gold justice the jury find a verdict for the plaintiff
broughton versus langley hill Ann salk h vent a man seize of land in fee  devise they to trustee and their heir to the intent and purpose to permit a to  receive the rend and profit for his life and after that the trustee to stand  seize of the premise to the use of the heir of the body of a with proviso that  he by consent of his trustee may make a jointure for his wife and it be  question whether a have a estate in tail execute holt c j he have such a  estate for this will have be a plain trust at commonlaw and what by the  commonlaw be a trust of a freehold or inheritance be execute by the statute  which mention the word trust as well as use and the change of expression in  this case by use the word permit in the first clause which show a trust and  afterward make mention of a be immaterial in regard trust at commonlaw and use  be by the statute equal execute holt KB vagrant
brown against atkins prerogative court Michaelmas term November that a  creditor have a right to call for a inventory but the prerogative court have  no jurisdiction at the suit of a creditor to examine the particular of a  account dr Harris for brown brown be a creditor of William Weston who die in  the namure in decease make his will and appoint his daughter residuary legatee  she choose Atkins her guardian who take administration cum testament Robert  brown the creditor cite he to a inventory and account saint July a declaration  instead of a inventory and a account give in the court order Atkins to be  dismiss if brown proctor do not object we now offer a allegation plead  exception to the account dr pinfold for Atkins we have give in a fair  declaration instead of a inventory to which no objection be make brown as a  creditor have no right to object to the account and therefore we object to the  whole allegation as plead a matter not cognisable by the court lee  judgment sir george lee I be of opinion a creditor have a right only to a  constat of the estate by a inventory but that I have no jurisdiction at the  instance of a creditor to examine the particular of the account and therefore  reject the allegation as it except only to the account and not to the  declaration
brown against bank in a ejection firm the defendant plead that locus in quo c  and by the court it be a good plea for a writ of to have fac possess out of  the court can be execute there we Rep a b of ancient demean note a writ of  error be direct maiori Recordatori cap Aldermanno of Evesham c and the mayor  and the recorder only return it and certify videlicet placita be in person  mayor recordatore without say cap aldermanno and for that the writ be abate  and the party put to a new writ of error c quod in person thou to sit back c  by the court
brown against barnet ante audit complaint by Windham by judgement in hearing  complaint bring before the former execution do h shall be restore to whatever  he lose by execution which the court agree be find on a release f n b  Adjornatur
brown against berkin agreement in action sur case on agreement by the  plaintiff possess of three house burn wherein the defendant be tenant that the  plaintiff shall demise his interest and the defendant redemise on payment of  money quarterly and that the plaintiff be ready and tender a indenture to  which the defendant plead the statute car of indicature and that after the  agreement he petition the judge to build who decree the plaintiff to demise  for long term under certain rend and that the defendant shall build the house  where he dwell to Keble which the plaintiff demurrer because by the decree the  former agreement be not determine send non allocatur per curian they set aside  all do before and judgement pro defendant
brown against Berwick error be bring upon judgement in a account because the  judgement give to recover damage but not allow for the defendant have delay  the plaintiff and plead to the issue which be find against he so occasion  interplacitandi be shall recover damage but otherwise if the defendant come  the first day and enter in the account take for to make account r account e  Noy er p error be assign because upon the first judgement quod to sum up it be  enter defendens in pity and upon the second judgement also defendens in miser  and so twice punish but that be not allow because there be two several  judgement and manwood say that so it be adjudge between brown and marsh
brown against Brinkley in a action of the case for word the declaration be  that the plaintiff be produce as a witness before the justice at the assize at  Derby where he depose in a certain cause and the defendant say brown be  disprove before the justice of assize at Derby before Mr Kingsley innuendo  that he be disprove in his oath that he take before the justice and adjudge  against the plaintiff for although he be disprove in his oath yet it be not  actionable in this case for that disproof may be in any collateral matter or  any circumstance but otherwise if the word have be that he be perjure and the  innuendo will not help the matter and so be it adjudge the chief justice and  Fenner be only in the court trin Elizabeth
brown against brown ante pl non be factum Allen for the plaintiff have there  be such a covenant quod only c the defendant may have plead non be factum but  can plead it without show the indenture have not demand oyer of the indenture  when produce by the plaintiff Adjornatur
brown against brown covenant Cr pl Cr pl in a action of covenant upon  conveyance of a feefarm rend by the father to the son and his wife covenant he  have good right the plaintiff say he have no good right the defendant say that  the covenant be beyond that the son shall enjoy it notwithstanding any act do  by the father and that he do no act which by Allen for the plaintiff be ill  Jones for the defendant this late covenant do restrain the Keble er p former  and be plead to be in the same indenture all the part whereof shall be take  together as Nokes   and the particular shall qualify the general the covenant  be that the covenantor only warrantizaret c which Wyndham agree but by Allen  they ought to have set forth the indenture Keble but by Twisden and Wyndham  that be confess by the demurrer the plaintiff desire leave to discontinue be  after demurrer join post pl
brown against brown covenant general restrain by a particular covenant  subsequent covenant on a indenture whereby the defendant grant a feefarmrent  to the plaintiff which he have purchase of the late trustee for the sale of  the king tenement and covenant that he be seize in fee and bad good right to  sell and assign a breach that he have not good right the defendant plead that  it be further agree in the same indenture that all the covenant in the  indenture shall not extend further than to act do by the vendor and his heir  whereon the plaintiff demurrer and there be a remote agreement in the end of  the deed far distant from the other covenant it be adjudge that it have  qualify the first covenant and restrain it to act do by the covenantor himself  only as in mokes case   whereupon it be adjudge for the defendant
brown against Burdet Thursday April Siderf pl audit complaint in hearing  complaint by the course of the court the plaintiff enter into recognizance to  discharge himself if the suit go against he by Twisden but by Hern secondary  that be only when execution be supersede or the party take out of prison but  if the money be on the first judgement pay to the party there be no remedy for  it but if to the sheriff the court upon the hearing complaint may order it to  remain there till the suit determine if the plaintiff have judgement in  hearing complaint he shall only be discharge of execution but shall have no  restitution wherefore because the plaintiff can not have be take in execution  on the first judgement but only upon the judgement in the hearing complaint  the court order the money to be bring into court and remain till a end make
brown against Charlton slander b thou rogue will thou murder my sister as thou  do your wife innuendo a then defunct adjudge actionable per curian for the  great scandal if she be not dead and be a deception falsehood they shall be  intend scandalosa
brown against coke in cur ware where the wardship of the body and land be  sever the land can be retain for the value of a marriage refuse by the heir  and the statute for the erection of the court of ware give it power to retain  only for livery the queen grant the wardship of the body and marriage of the  heir of her tenant to another reserve the land and he tender a marriage to the  heir who refuse and yet make a offer to the grantee of the value of the  marriage which he dislike and afterward the heir come of full age and offer to  sue out livery and the grantee in the court of ware pray that the land may be  reserve to he and his use as a gage or distress until satisfaction be make c  and by the opinion of dyer and sander assistant counsellor to the court it  shall neither to one use or the other for the interest of the queen in the  marriage be out of and go from her and sever from the court and so will it be  if it be the case of a common guardian in chivalry when the wardship of the  body and marriage be sever from the wardship of the land the retain of the  land be not give by the statute of marlebridge and no power give in the  statute for the erection of the court of ware and livery in h g and c of  retain the land until the heir will compound with the queen for his marriage  but only for the livery but Kayleway and Nowell think otherwise in the case  above and that their practice have be always otherwise quod non credo but the  grantee shall be drive to his writ de valve maritally or forisfactur as the  case be
brown against collins executor waste and die his estate be not Chargeable for  this devastavit SC I vent the sit after the term this case be try before hale  at guildhall a executor waste the good of his testator and die leave asset and  this defendant his executor and whether the defendant shall be charge quoad  these asset be the question and hale hold the devastavit to be a personal tort  which die with he that do it but upon the importunity of sander of counsel for  the plaintiff be suffer it to be find special and afterward pasch car it be  adjudge by the whole court accord to this opinion of hale
brown against expense ante Siderf pl incumbent in evidence to a jury it be  prove that dr Geery lessor of the plaintiff have read the article in several  church hamlet of the mother parishchurch have only send his servant to demand  the key of the defendant without any personal endeavour to read they at the  cathedral church which the court incline be not sufficient the acceptance of a  second benefice after sequestration of the former in time of war be not  plurality within h it be press to be special find by sir I palmer the king  attorney for the plaintiff also presentation make from the king full jure well  wherever elsewhere distinction when there be one in due possession be void  unless title be make to the king as Greens case for the king can usurp by  Windham and hide against Twisden and Keeling for although the institution be a  judicial Act yet the foundation thereof be go as Cr the confirmation of a  parson to the latter live by the Act of minister car do not make the former  void without proof that the parson be institute and induct to the second and  do make his election to continue in it but the counsel for the plaintiff not  attend to draw special verdict as they ought at their peril there be a general  verdict for the defendant
brown against expense read the article in the porch of a chapel of ease well  enough where he be keep out of the church and chapel SC I side keb on a trial  at bar in a quare hinder the plaintiff prove that he read the article on the  five of November where his induction be September thefifth and it be rule  insufficient because not within two month after the induction compute  twentyeight day to the month but then be prove that be read they in the porch  of a chapel of ease within the same parish within a month after his induction  the key of the church avid of the chapel be detain from he by the defendant  and this be admit by the court to be a sufficient read of the article within  the statute of Elizabeth
brown against godfrey defendant attorney take out a summons from Mr justice  fortescue for time to plead in the beginning of Trinity vacation last and  attend thereon plaintiff attorney do not attend and before the summons be  renew or discharge sign judgement defendant attorney offer to plead issuably  and take notice of trial time enough for plaintiff to have try his cause at  last assize but plaintiff refuse to accept the plea and insist on his  judgement per cur the judgement sign without discharge the summons be  irregular and must be set aside Eyre for defendant Parker for plaintiff
brown against godfrey mich geo if barn S c judgement set aside because the  judge summons be not first discharge thomson a judge summons for time to plead  the defendant attorney do not attend and the plaintiff attorney sign judgement  but the court set aside the judgement because the plaintiff attorney shall  have first discharge the summons river and another against Plumlee prac Reg  the like resolution
brown against Hammond easter geo after writ of capias ad satisfaciend execute  agar move to amend the writ by the record of the judgement barn make defendant  name Edmund instead of Edward and obtain a rule to show cause which on  affidavit of service be make absolute
brown against Haywood tithe in devise Br Baldwin pray a prohibition on  customer that all the occupier of Longford have use to pay to the parson  proprietor of the tithe all their hay in shock which bath be in lieu of all  broom and other benefit of the tenement which the court deny as a unreasonable  suggestion for a modus of labour of one kind will not serve for another also a  modus pay to the parson per Keeling Ch just be no discharge against the vicar
brown against HERCEY in c b rot it be find by office that I S who hold the  manor of d of the king do die without heir whereupon W S as heir to he do  traverse the say office and hereupon be at issue with the queen if be be heir  or not and depend this suit he make a feoff in fee with a letter of attorney  to make livery and after it be find for he against the queen and judgement  give Owen against the queen but before the writ of to move away shades of dead  the attorney make livery and adjudge good for it can be say that the heir at  the time of the feoff have nothing or that the queen at the time of the livery  be in possession for by the judgement give the possession of the queen be  utter defeat and possession in the party before any to move away shades of  dead sue out for that serve but to compel the escheator to avoid the  possession if he hold the land after judgement Vid Stanford preasked ass  Edward and the difference be where the king be seize by title and where  without title for when the kin be seize by title and his title be determine he  ought to make livery to he that have right but when he be seize without title  and be who have right have judgement against he he may enter without livery  Edward quare hinder but it be here say by Owen justice that if a man make a  feoff of Whiteacre with a letter of attorney to make livery and then he  purchase Whiteacre this be not a good feoff for Whiteacre michaelm Elizabeth
brown against HOLYOAK east geo this be a action of debt for rend upon a parole  lease defendant have by his plea set off a debt by simple contract to which  plaintiff demurrer per cur a debt of a inferior nature can be set off against  a superior demand judgement for the plaintiff debt for rend be equal to a  action upon a bind Eyre for plaintiff chapel for defendant
brown against james in replevin rule make give defendant leave to withdraw his  former avowries c and plead the same again with two other plead add on payment  of cost after issue join twelve month ago plaintiff to be at liberty to plead  in bar de to make new and to proceed to trial next assize pool for defendant  Wilson for plaintiff
brown against kidney east geo a feoff passes or at least extinguish all  collateral right and a right to a way be extinguish by it hold per cur on  demurrer
brown against lidden hill car rot assumpsit Siderf pl style pl Cr pl error of  a judgement in the c b in a action sur case against the executor for money due  on account indebitatus of the testator the executor plead non assumpsit modus  Keble form as the case of Blundell and Coleman on a collateral promise not  aver to who the promise be make which be say in arrest of judgement in c b and  here in error to be void which twisd agree but say that in such action where  the law make the promise as in a indebitatus it be good without allege who  promise or to who and so per curian here the count be that the testator assume  and none else appear to be name it can be otherwise intend after a verdict but  that the testator assume as baker case latch and judgement affirm
brown against litton a executor defendant plead non assumpsit and do not say  who yet good SC side keb law witness assumpsit against executor on a promise  by the testator who plead non assumpsit whereon be a verdict and judgement for  the plaintiff and error be assign that it do not appear by the plea who do not  assume c for it be not plead that the testator do not assume c the court on  the contrary say it shall be intend the testator for bear be no charge of any  assume by the executor but of the testator only and latch baker case be cite  where in debt against executor on the testator bind the plea of non estfaclum  suum it be adjudge that suum shall be intend of the testator and they affirm  the judgement
brown against London ante merchant in indebitatus for money receive and on  bill of exchange winnington pray judgement because after verdict this be bring  by he to who the money be to be pay against the merchant that accept the bill  shall be intend that the defendant have before receive the money hale Ch just  conceive that the bare acceptance of a bill of exchange make no debtor but if  b receive money of a and a draw a bill on he to c in this case indebitatus lie  by a or c not on the bill of exchange but on the other circumstance of come to  his use for the plaintiff as indebitatus pro wine not say a sale or deliberate  be here aid after verdict style pl et adjornatur
brown against London ante merchant modern pl Indebitatus of livre on bill of  exchange accept winnington pray judgement be after verdict as Hub speak and  Richard it be now intend he have value so in debt on a tally and in Milton  case it be find by special verdict that there be no effect and on demurrer it  will be ill but on general verdict it shall be intend but per raynsford debt  lie not and in b r or in guildhall not one precedent can be find that it lie  et adjornatur
brown against London ante merchant the court conceive a indebitatus will not  lie on a bill of exchange unless money be deliver to pay over for then the  indebitatus be ground on the lend not on the bill of exchange and though the  custom be lie so and acceptance yet be in the exchequer settle on great debate  the court award a nil to take in hand per billam a indebitatus for the money  receive may be after a bill of exchange protest the bare acceptance of the  bill be no ground of assumpsit but the receive to another use or nonpayment  accord as direct
brown against London merchant action sur case on custom of merchant general  that on bill by one direct to another that on acceptance he on who the bill be  draw be Chargeable and indebitatus for the same money winnington pray  judgement albeit no value be lie to be receive be a agreement to pay the money  which be by custom be sufficient assumpsit also the action be lie also as  indebitatus which imply value receive which be find and a general verdict of  both and per raynsford it be late adjudge in Milton case in the exchequer that  a indebitatus will not lie upon a bare acceptance of a bill of Keble exchange  and whether the party have effect in his hand or not all be one so be void as  to this it be ill as to all but Twisden and Moreton contra that it be well  enough now and intend that he have effect and value in his hand and the party  have election to charge drawer or acceptor and in default of the latter may  resort to drawer et adjornatur
brown against marten detinue Br assumpsit Cr pl a indebitatus assumpsit the  defendant say that the money promise be but a pledge for his appearance which  amount to the general issue for which cause the plaintiff demurrer and well
brown against marten in detinue Br trover action upon the case Br in  indebitatus the defendant plead delivery of a pledge and it be say in a trover  and conversion such a plea be not good and Twisden doubt here but be a special  demurrer for that cause the court conceive it to amount but to the general  issue judgement for the plaintiff nisi
brown against martin post detinue Br maintenance in indebitatus for deliver by  the plaintiff to the defendant the defendant plead the plaintiff be accuse  before I S for coin and l be to prosecute and this be only deliver to the  defendant as a pledge to save he harmless if l do not prosecute upon which the  plaintiff demurrer because it amount but to the general issue of non assumpsit  be deliver as a pledge but he can plead non to hold off Adjornatur
brown against michel Tr Elizabeth rot c b a action upon the case for these  word Mr brown have deliver untruth upon his oath in answer to I S bill in the  chancery and adjudge for the plaintiff but by a writ of error in the king  bench the judgement be reverse and that the word be not actionable because  that he do not say he deliver untruth in matter of substance and in chancery  there be many frivolous discourse in matter of form it be adjudge that as a  executor may release a debt so he may give a obligation which be the  instrument of the debt so two joint lessee of a term by indenture and the one  give the indenture to a stranger and die all the entire term survive to the  other yet he shall not have a action for the indenture
brown against morris church in custom Br roll pl carpenter pray a prohibition  to Hereford on Abr roll tax for his land to repair the church and be a  inhabitant in another parish send non Keble allocatur for per curian Jeoffreys  case   b be express that all that have land within the parish be inhabitant  wherever they live and per curian a prohibition be deny
brown against nelson hill banc sum p Trin hill rot whether a judgement give  against one of two defendant be good a action of debt upon the statute Edward  for sell of wine without licence be bring against defendant they both plead  nil debet whereupon issue be join a special verdict be find videlicet that as  to one nil debet and that as to the other he have draw a pint of style report  wine without licence and upon this judgement be give against he that be find  culpable it be question whether this be a good judgement but roll chief  justice conclude it be a good judgement and cite many case adjudge in point to  prove it and one in particular i n a action upon the statute for die with  logwood and he take a difference between a action ground upon a joint contract  or a joint trespasser and a action bring joint upon a statute against two or  for a tort do by two as this be upon the statute in the first case judgement  can be give against one of the contractor in the other it may
brown against purchase Siderf pl administrator in debt on obligation against  administrator she plead that judgement before be have against her by I S in  declaration on obligation make by the intestate smith and do not aver that the  intestate come to bind for which cause wile demurrer because the recovery  plead must be of as high a nature as the action now bring but it be aver that  it be have for just debt and that it be not pay by the testator the court  conceive it be well enough   Entr as Small peece against Smallpeece and by  Windham the administrator can know the date of the bind nor need demand oyer  and therefore need not say come to bind however the precedent both way be well  enough and if there be no bind although the debt be just on simple contract  yet it be evidence of fraud judgement for the defendant nisi Keble er p
brown against shipman upon a common enclosed space to break in pieces  plaintiff declare against defendant as administrator and he plead that  administration be never commit to he plaintiff attorney move in the treasury  that plaintiff may amend his declaration upon payment of cost by declare  against defendant as executor which upon hear defendant attorney be order
brown against stanes ante bar pe Symson pray judgement in trover against the  husband and wife for conversion ad use suum proprium which be distributive and  not like Yelvert Cr ad damnum Keble Self send non allocatur for per curian all  be one and thereupon simpson pray for expedition a nil to take in hand per  billam and so it be
brown against STRELLY Michael James rot in debt the margin of the count  contain Nottingham and the count it self contain that the Brownlow  goldsborough obligation be make at the town of Nottingham which be a county of  it self and the defendant plead non be factum and the view be of the town of  Nottingham and it be try by a jury of the county of Nottingham and this be  move in the arrest of judgement after verdict for the plaintiff by Nichols  sergeant and it be agree by all the justice that judgement shall be give  accord to the verdict insomuch that notwithstanding that the town of  Nottingham be a county of it self yet it may be that some part of the town may  be within the county and for that possibility they will not arrest the  judgement
brown against TALDERBY ante covenant in debt on obligation of livre condition  to pay so much yearly for a instrument of weave and to deliver it up at the  end of the term to which the defendant plead a general performance to which  the plaintiff demurrer and per curian the thing to be perform be special they  must be special answer it be except that it be centam libras which be no word  send non allocatur and judgement pro plaintiff
brown against TALDERBY covenant in Cond Br in debt upon a bind conditional to  perform covenant of payment of rend and another particular to which the  defendant plead covenant perform general to which Jones demurrer because he  shall have plead to each particular performance or other particular plea which  the court agree and so wherever particular be Keble er p specify but when it  be to perform covenant in a indenture performance accord to the indenture be  sufficient and judgement pro plaintiff nisi post see condition Br mancer v  Symth Keble er report date mancer against smyth execution in action sur case  lie in Middlesex against the sheriff of somersetshire for do execution there  on become facias and not return his writ sander pro plaintiff pray a amendment  to lie the action in somersetshire in regard there be no act do in Middlesex  but only a non fesons he doubt the action will not lie here send curian contra  and that the plaintiff have election in regard the writ of execution which be  the Keble foundation of all issue hence but upon his prayer be plaintiff on  his election to pay cost or give a imparlance the court give leave to amend  and also order that unless the sheriff return his writ by a day he shall not  afterward do it secret to nonsuit the plaintiff which he as be say intend to  do
brown against tender covenant Br dell Fitzherbert in debt on obligation on  oyer demand the condition be that if a stranger pay money in the temple hall  that then the bind shall be void he plead a tender by the stranger and do not  say uncore priest for which cause the plaintiff demurrer and by sander pro  defendant it be good but the court conceive it no bar say adjornatur for the  court say if they be joint bind it will be well enough clear see tout temps  priest Br Keble de boundary pasch a in b r car two Wednesday April Keeling c j  Twisden Windham Moreton justice
brown against tripe ante bar pe in a action of battery by the husband and wife  for imprisonment of the wife till he have pay livre exception be take that the  husband and wife can not join nor conclude ad damnum Self send non allocatur  it be show a latitat be take out against the defendant and three more and it  be not continue down to the action bring which be no good repeat to the bar of  the statute of limitation send non allocatur for this be only to bring he in  custodian which be now out of door judgement pro plaintiff Keble er p
brown against VERMUDEN for tithe of lead Oar a modus kill decree Ant brown  parson of Worselworth exhibit a bill against Vermuden to have performance of a  decree obtain against certain person worker and owner of lead i in Derbyshire  whereby a certain manner of tithing of lead Oar be decree not only against the  particular person name defendant but all other owner and worker Vermuden plead  inter alian that he be a stranger and claim not under any party or privy to  the bill and therefore insist he ought not to be prosecute by a bill not  ground on the fact and Title but on the decree in the nature of a to know  facias this plea be former overrule by the Lord chancellor vide fol but a  Commission grant to examine the quantity and value of the Oar and the  plaintiff Title if parson c the six clerk appoint rhyme and place but the  defendant witness be so age that they can not come to the place and therefore  a new Commission pray Lord chancellor the time and place be only for the fix  meeting of the commissioner but after they may adjourn to another time or  another place note tithe of Oar be not due in general except there be a  special custom for payment of it vern case in chancery the Lord keeper finch
brown against wade Tuesday Nov accord in indebitatus assumpsit the defendant  plead a accord to pay livre and deliver silkstokins which be pay and a  preparation to deliver the other and that the plaintiff accept the defendant  promise in satisfaction to which the plaintiff demurrer and per curian it be  no plea not only because it be not execute but because there be only a action  give and that be no satisfaction no more than one bind against another and  judgement pro plaintiff
brown against WELMES Monday Nov tender in dell Br in action sur case for three  hogshead of vinegar and a roundlet Jones pray that be may deliver money for  the roundlet as be agree or as the secondary shall tax and that the plaintiff  may go on for the rest and the court order the plaintiff to show cause why the  roundlet shall not be strike out or he go on for the rest at his peril so  where the cause of action be real small in comparison to the declaration
brown all and langley all before the master of the roll Tuesday Feb how far  parole evidence shall explain a will this be a bill bring by the plaintiff as  next of kin to the decease against the defendant as executor in order to have  a distribution of the residuum of the personal estate among they the defendant  set forth in their answer a clause of the will whereby the testator give the  residuum of this estate to the poor of the parish of Kettering in the county  of Lincoln upon this the party join in commission and now the fact disclose  upon the commission and state by Mr will as counsel for the defendant be that  this parish of Kettering be not in the county of Lincoln but in the county of  Northampton and likewise that the witness Barnardiston king b for real think  that this residuum of the personal estate will not amount to above and that he  declare so at the time of make his will whereas in truth it amount to near  upon which Mr will submit it that the parish can not claim any thing under  this will but if it can at least not above what the testator think the  residuum will amount to but the master of the roll declare his opinion to be  that parole evidence ought to be admit to help out the description of the  parish in this case and that this be a settle rule in equity for which reason  he be of opinion that the parish of Ketering in the county of Northampton be  well entitle under this will but he be of opinion that no parole evidence  ought to be admit in relation to the quantity of the thing devise and  therefore he think the parish well entitle to the whole accord dismiss the  bill ex relatum Barnardiston king b LENTASSISES geo two
brown and collins administrator in debt on obligation against the defendant  and his wife as administrator of b de good non administer by c executor c  after general judgement de good testator on non be factum a be made fa be take  out with know f and a devastavit procure to be return Pemberton the king  sergeant pray to set it aside because no asset be ever in question and hereby  the party will be put to a aftergame send non allocatur for till h there be no  other way as now use by be made fa with know fa and albeit this be a false  return yet the court can help it but its at peril of the sheriff and this be a  trick by the defendant attorney to wave his first plea of plene to manage to  plead non be factum whereby to hold the plaintiff out long in the enquiry and  traverse of asset but who cheatat cheatabitur and judgement for the plaintiff  affirm and execution well do
brown and denham ante pl day in indebitatus of pasch last the defendant plead  that post present bill a videlicet the that of February which be before that  here be a accord that the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff on the say that  of February which he have pay on the say day to which the plaintiff demurrer  Keble per curian though the videlicet be void yet the plea in bar be ill for  the accord can never be execute on a day precedent to the make c and judgement  for the plaintiff
brown and denham Saturday June accord in indebitat assumpsit for ware sell the  defendant plead that post present billea there be a accord that the defendant  pay which he pay and the defendant receive to which the plaintiff demurrer and  by Richardson for the plaintiff this be a ill plea be after the bill exhibit  and not say post ult encounter say non allocatur be plead in bar the same term  of the declaration deliver its well enough and a good bar without say action  non say adjornatur pl
brown and gilbert the time which a person shall be allow to plead this be a  proceed by way of special latitat but the plaintiff have add a new count and  therefore the court say this be not within the meaning of their new rule  accord will not tie the defendant to plead within the four day but allow he  the ordinary time and the same they say they do in the late case of Robert and  mounford
brown and hatch when a action be bring upon a special agreement how far the  evidence shall be say to support it sit at guildhall the plaintiff bring his  action upon a special agreement enter into by the defendant who brother be in  execution in the fleet for run of good the agreement give in evidence upon the  open of the cause be only verbal that the plaintiff shall endeavour to procure  the defendant brother a pardon and that in consideration of this the defendant  shall give the plaintiff if he succeed and what his labour be worth if he  shall not the defendant upon this pro Barnardiston king b duced a bind of in  evidence with condition that the defendant shall give the plaintiff and one  mrs Hattenville if the pardon shall be procure in six month this bind indeed  be since cancel but the counsel say it drown the first agreement and a  agreement be in its own nature a thing entire and therefore it shall not be  intend that one part of it be put into write and the other not the plaintiff  however desire to give far evidence that the intent of the bind be only to  reduce one part of the agreement into write as it be the chief and to bring  mrs Hattenville to witness this the defendant counsel object against her  evidence as she be one of the coobligees and therefore interest with the  plaintiff however the court allow the plaintiff to give both these matter in  evidence
brown and Haywood ante warranty covenant on the word grant in a feoff the  defendant demurrer per curian this be no warranty of a freehold   S a lease  for year and judgement for the defendant Spencer case but only in case of  Keble er p
brown and Honywood covenant in covenant on feoff and grant of bishop land  breach assign that the defendant have no good title and demurrer thereon the  court conceive this will not make any express covenant but to give away will  and so reservand and judgement for the defendant nisi administrator darly have  issue Susan and Ann by one venture and b a son by another venter Susan marry  water and have issue John Ann marry Haddon the plaintiff in Keble er p the  spiritual court water make Susan executor and give her the tuition of the son  John Susan die and then administration be commit to Haddon and the son of  darly sue to repeal it and Wingfield pray a prohibition but per curian this be  but a administration during minority be not within h cap they conceive brother  of half blood near of kin than uncle or aunt of the whole and unless the  ordinary commit to the near first no prohibition lie but in equali step it may  but deny here be only during minority
brown and kendal how far the court will stay proceed in a action on bring into  court what be good fide due in a action of covenant wherein there be two count  one for rend the other for repair Mr draper move to bring the last three  quarter rend into court and that proceed may be stay upon that count he say  that more rend indeed be due but not from the defendant for he be only  assignee from that time and cite the case of Risley and Barnardiston king b  Jones Pas of the late queen where the same rule be make the court will not  make that rule but upon debate they make another Barnardiston king b er p that  upon bring into court what rend be demand it shall be refer to the master to  see what be due by the defendant and that upon payment of that with cost all  proceed shall be stay upon that count
brown and pell case in a ejectionefirme upon a object of hope cial verdict  find the case be this brown have issue two son and devise his land to his  young son and his heir and if it shall happen his say young son to die without  issue live his old son that then his old son shall have the land to he and his  heir in as ample manner as the young son have they the young son suffer a  common recovery and die without issue live the eldestv son the question be  whether the old son or the recoverer shall have the land Montague Haughton and  chamberlain justice the same be a feesimple conditional and no estate tail in  the young son Doddridge justice contrary mich James in the king bench
brown and tailor in a action upon the case for common Peachell pray  restitution of cost there be but d damage and be no certificate on the trial  that the title be in question send non allocatur for per curian it have be  resolve by the majorpart of the justice of England that the statute car cap  sect extend only to trespass and assault and battery and not to action upon  the case or assumpsits or such like which the court now agree and deny  restitution the rather here because the title must be in question see Poult  Abridg damage
brown and the countess OF huntington privilege on bill of Middlesex to take  the body of the defendant call countess of Huntington on   finch pray a  supersedeas which by Rainsford chief justice and Jones ought to be grant  because improvident but in case of sir Thomas Savil on who title of honour  descend after arrest the court will not grant supersedeas until plea but that  be because it do not appear on the writ as here t but by Twisden the defendant  ought to plead her privilege this day be at the return of the writ and so be  discharge and in the mean time the sheriff to let her go and so it be in Lord  h of Escricks case but the plaintiff attorney agree to supersedeas and yet be  commit to prevent a worse danger c
brown and wait dignity ejectment by the plaintiff lessee of the heir of sir  John Danvers tenant in tail the defendant claim by forfeiture and vest car cap  of those of the king judge that be dead which be word as large as in h cap  Edward cap and Mr attorney pray it may be save that the entail by the earl of  Denbigh car be forfeit in Trin the use of which be by covenant precedent to  sir I d in tail the remainder to he in fee with power to lease for year for  payment of debt and Mr attorney conceive the whole feesimple forfeit because  in plead it must since the fine be say sir I d be seize in fee and convey to  himself c which though a instantaneous seize and but for payment of debt be in  the king case forfeit albeit not as to have dower c on the clause of except  estate good fide to any of the child this tail be less than the fee except be  by conveyance since as well as to let in a statute make by sir I d the  plaintiff rely on this that there be no attainder and the bare forfeiture no  more than in Trugeons case Elizabeth Inst roll pl on the statute of r cap of  praemunire be no bar where though the party be attaint yet no estate tail be  forfeit all which the court hold to be point very considerable and it be find  special see more pl Keble er p
brown c and daniel ante pl Saturday may poor sir James butler pray to set  aside order of session for payment of coachmens wage be not within Elizabeth  cap or if they be two it must be return they be hire for a year and that the  session asset the wage which per curian be both fatal exception and the party  have remedy at commonlaw as for boardwages which be not within the statute per  curian it be quash
brown case ante Tuesday Jan Coron Coleman except to inquisition for a deodand  the party be under and all the precedent be express ultra stat existent and on  this Edward Coron Fitzherbert Stanf lib cap be ground and Inst c of deodand  Poult de pace CrumptJurisd which Twisden agree but Moreton doubt et adjornatur  Keble er p
brown case hill will B R Philizers c lev lev Lutw will a philizer de b b be  arrest per breve but discharge on common bail for he ought to be sue by bill  as prsens in curian per cur absent holt c j a a the officer of the common plea  have not the privilege of be sue there by bill as atorneys have but have the  privilege of be sue there by original writ baker v Swindon ld raym salk barn  Cromp bring
brown content thetford car l a foe tithe modus kill the bill be to maintain  the prescription of a modus kill to which bill the defendant demurrer and say  it be proper for the commonlaw or ecclesiastical court this court allow the  demurrer and dismiss the bill but note the time c such bill have be often  allow both before and since
brown contra Hamond January fen unreasonable sale not relieve the plaintiff  set forth that he be seize of acre of land in the fen which he demise to  Allison at pound rend for two year and after at pound rend the lessee covenant  to pay all tax tax be impose and pound penalty incur the lessee have  sufficient rend in his hand to pay the pound combine with the defendant one of  the conservator to defeat he of his inheritance and forbear to pay the pound  the officer appoint to sell by the law of the fen sell acre of the for the  pound to the defendant a commissioner whereas the acre be worth pound to be  sell the defendant deny combination and plead to the rest the statute of drain  and that the sale be make accord to and by virtue of those statute the Lord  chancellor allow the plea for he can not relieve contrary to a Act of  parliament and if he shall it will destroy the whole economy of the  preservation of the fen and compare it to the case of a mortgagor of house in  London of great value that shall be settle by the judge accord to those act  make concern London to be rebuild this court shall not examine any sale on  pretence of equity case in chancery note the sale be make four month after  default of payment twice in the year and their use be to expose first ten or  few or more acre for the sum in arrear and so increase till a chapman offer c  and never sell for more than what be in arrear of the tax and penalty and it  seem can sell for no more case in chancery er p
brown contra williams Feb purchaser of bankrupt without notice not bind to  discover bankrupt the assignee of a bankrupt exhibit his bill against the  defendant to discover good of the bankrupt that come to his hand after the  bankruptcy the defendant by way of plea set forth that he have no good of the  bankrupt or that ever be his but what he buy for full and valuable  consideration and good fide and that at the time of the sale and payment of  his money he have no notice either of the Commission or of any Act of  bankruptcy commit by the bankrupt on long debate the plea be allow by the Lord  north and to take what remedy they can before the commissioner or at law  Hutchins counsel for the defendant cite a former precedent but be not produce
brown et ux vers gibbons SC salk Mod in case for word which be only actionable  in respect of some special damage the plaintiff shall have full cost though  the damage be under S vide post Str burr Bl case for word speak of the wife by  the defendant videlicet mrs brown be a whore and have do as all whore do per  quod the plaintiff be a tradesman lose such and such videlicet a b c from be  his customer who be his customer before c upon not guilty plead the defendant  at nisi prius give evidence by way of mitigation of damage that mrs brown be a  whore and the evidence be very strong upon which the jury give damage but S to  the plaintiff and now Mr Montague move that the plaintiff may have their full  cost which be oppose by sergeant Darnall and the court hold that this action  be not a action for slanderous word within the meaning of the statute of James  c because the special damage be the gist of the action without which it will  not lie and therefore such a action lie for the husband alone without join the  wife which be otherwise in a common action for word and cro car law v Horwood  be cite and allow by the court to be a case in point and Powell chief justice  say that if the master bring a action of battery against I S for a battery  commit upon his servant per quod slavery to send away if the jury upon not  guilty plead give damage under S the plaintiff shall have full cost  notwithstanding the statute of car c which allow in common action of battery  no more cost than damage where the damage be less than S and the plaintiff in  the principal case have full cost
brown plaintiff against crashaw defendant a prohibition uppna modus kill in a  prohibition upon a suppose modus kill Yelverton solicitor move the court for a  consultation to be grant for that the plaintiff in the prohibition have not  sufficient prove his suggestion the same be only prove by he by two person  which be both of they attaint of felony and so can be no good and sufficient  witness in law coke chief justice it appear by h fol b that if one be attaint  of felony and pardon he shall not afterward be swear of a jury for that he be  not Probus of a human being for pC6Da become void to be able offense last many  years to be and therefore such a one shall not be swear of a inquest and this  be a good challenge to a juror return to serve that he have be before attaint  of felony and though pardon for the same yet he be not a fit person to serve  of a jury nor yet to be a indifferent witness and by the same reason the  testimony of such a one for a witness in all case be to be reject and upon the  same reason I will not take the testimony of a recusant convict for a witness  for by the statute of James cap a Popish recusant be convict for the same be  to be excommunicate and so to be take as a excommunicate person in this  principal case upon examination it be find that the witness which prove the  suggestion for the probibition have be attaint of felony and therefore  Bulstrode by the rule of the court the prohibition be disallow the suggestion  be undue prove and a consultation be grant
brown plaintiff against full defendant a writ of error to reverse a judgement  c Cr side sir John savage case Cr hob in a writ of error to reverse a  judgement give in a action of debt bring by a executor as executor the error  assign be for the omission of this clause in the end of his declaration S et  profert hic in curian litter forger of wills whether this omission be error or  not be the only question for the determine of which it be question whether  this clause be matter of substance or but only matter of form will justice  clear this be matter of substance so be it adjudge in one sir John savage case  that this clause be matter of substance for the omission of which in a action  of debt bring by a executor a writ of error bring to reverse the judgement  this be the only error assign and for this error the judgement be hold  erroneous by the court and reverse and so in this principal case here by the  opinion of the whole court this be very clear and apparent error and for this  error by the rule of the court the judgement be reverse Bulstrode er p
brown S case order of bastardy two justice of the peace in Northamptonshire  make a order upon he as father of a bastardchild he appeal to the next session  save one holt Ch I first say Comberbach er p that the appeal ought to be to  the next session but it be say that he have no notice till after next session  holt incline that the appeal may lie to the next session after notice  wheresoever it do appear that there may be a intervene session by law it lie  upon the party to prove that he have not notice till after the next session  nay it seem it shall appear so in the order of session note the justice can  order a sum for put out the child a apprentice both the order be quash
brown S case pasch Ann No prohibition to the admiralty till after sentence by  to the spiritual court libel in the court of admiralty for seaman wage and the  defendant there plead that b that the express agreement there be no  landingport till the ship return to London for that the ship be to go to the  coast of guinea with good and to return back to London the ship sail to the  coast of guinea and in her return be take by the French all this be plead  below and the court there do award we to deposit the money in court to attend  the success of the cause and we have a affidavit of this and pray a  prohibition which be deny per cur because this be judge of their proceed below  in their jurisdiction and your remedy be by appeal hoit c j say you can have  prohibition to the admiralty court before sentence by to court Christian
brown v brown Feb person appoint to hold the court of manor and the court roll  c order to be deliver to they for the purpose similar order Davy v Acland Feb  Compton v Compton Jan
brown v derby a commission of rebellion the bind make to thecommissioners the  defendant this day make his personal appearance upon a commission of rebellion  for save his bind make to the commissioner in that behalf brown plaintiff  Derby defendant year Eliz
brown v Farndale Comberbach er report date brown versus brown and brown versus  FARNDALE show stat of distribution in this case three point be resolve that a  brother of the halfblood shall have a equal share in the distribution of the  good of the intestate within the statute accord to the case of story and  Hawkins and smith and Tracy Mod and where it have be say that he shall not  have a entire share but only a moiety of it that be explode as a fancy and  dolben say the Lord hale be of the same opinion in that point Comberbach er p  each party have such a interest in his share before distribution that if he  die it shall go to his executor for the Act have make it as if the intestate  have make his will and by such word in a will without doubt a interest vest  although the party to who distribution ought to be make die within the year  that shall not alter the case for the proviso which give time to make the  distribution be only for the administrator and creditor to the end that the  debt shall be the better know note in this case the case of palmer and Alicot  be cite where it be debate whether a interest vest in case of a only child and  the judge be of different opinion there but a consultation be grant on another  point Comberbach also the case of Burrell and Newton in the exchequer in on  the equity side where the son take administration to his father and make his  executor and die another take administration de good non of the father and the  question be whether mortgagemoney shall go to the executor of the son or to  the administrator de good of the father and the court there be of opinion that  it be out of the statute but holt say he be of a contrary opinion for be hold  a interest vest as in the case of a only child quod notam and in the principal  case a consultation be grant
brown v Higden march S c atk it be a constant rule that matter subsequent to  the original bill must come by way of supplemental bill and revivor see Jones  v Jones atk a original bill be now bring by a creditor against mrs Higden as  administratrix of a who be a marry woman her husband be also make a party  before the cause be hear the wife die and the husband take out administration  to his wife and also de good non c of a upon which the plaintiff amend his  bill against the husband to which amend bill the defendant demurrer for any  matter which happen subsequent to the original bill can be put into a amend  bill but a bill of revivor and supplemental bill ought to be bring Mr Verney  for the plaintiff insist that in equity the suit abate only against the wife  and cite the case of Humphreys v Humphreys p wms there the bill charge by way  of amendment matter which arise after fill of the bill and therefore seem a  proper case for a supplemental bill and though this be plead to the bill yet  the plea be overrule for that such matter may be charge either by way of  supplemental or by way of amend bill west tempt Hardwicke Lord chancellor I be  of opinion that the demurrer ought to be allow Reg lib a foe for I take it to  be the constant rule that matter subsequent to the original bill must come by  way of supplemental bill and revivor beside the suit abate entire by the death  of the wife for the husband who be before join for conformity only have a  interest now and though by the statute of the that will rd a suit shall not  abate upon the death of one defendant but shall west tempt Hardwicke er p go  on against the other yet it must be take with this restriction provide the  subject matter of the bill be not hurt by the death of such defendant there be  no mention of this case in Lord hardwicke notebook but the above report in  atkins correspond in every respect with a manuscript report of Mr forester
brown v Kingswell parole agreement without livery by tenant for life that the  reversioner shall have his interest render rend be not a surrender the tenant  for term of life be content and agree with he in reversion that he shall have  the land and his interest therein a seize of land in d grant it by fine to b  also seize of other land in the same will of d who grant and render all his  land in d to a the land whereof b be seize passes to a by Yelverton east  Elizabeth c b cite to have be so adjudge in Elizabeth and crew in the argument  of do and Burcrells case m James cite this case also to be so adjudge but note  what difference there be between this and the case of taverner cite in the sd  report fol b and a like case put acerbating between kelly and Downham hill  Elizabeth Poph on a reference out of chancery to the two chief justice and the  chief baron and the master of the roll and by they resolve that the land which  the conusee himself have in this will shall not pass to supply the small  number of acre of which the conusance be make for this render be as a release  to the conusor and no intent appear to pass the land of the conusee himself  cruise on fine dyer a er p for the annual rend of twenty shilling but no a  write or livery of seize be make of it this be no surrender by the opinion of  all dyer the justice of the bench although itwas otherwise hold by the justice  of assize in the county of Surrey in a assize as be say in a attain bring this  term but the case be render more clear by the evidence for the agreement be  that the tenant for life shall have back the land if he survive c and then it  can be intend a surrender
brown v smith a order for bring evidence into court sir Humphrey brown Knt one  of the judge of the common plea be plaintiff against the defendant and a order  be make for bring in and deliver into the court of certain evidence sir  Humphrey brown Knt plaintiff Thomas smith defendant year Elizabeth fol
brown v STOYCK cost for want of a bill the billet lose the defendant make oath  that he be serve with a billet in paper at the plaintiffs suit which billet he  lose by misfortune and upon caryi his appearance no bill be in court against  he therefore cost be award brown alias Garris alias Pawdy plaintiff Stoyck  defendant year Elizabeth
brown v STUIT cost for want of a bill the billet be lose brown alias Garris  alias Pawdy plaintiff Stuit defendant make oath that he be serve with a billet  in paper and upon his appearance no bill in court and the defendant have lose  the billet of paper and yet cost be award year Elizabeth
brown v YERROWAY July the opinion of counsel read as evidence the object of  the bill be that the defendant may complete his purchase and pay the residue  of his purchase money and that the defendant ford a mortgagee may execute on  be pay what be due to he dickens er p at the hear of the cause the opinion of  counsel be offer to be read and object as improper sir Thomas clarke m b it be  not usual to read the opinion of counsel but in a case circumstance as this be  it be proper therefore let they be read and the opinion of Mr rivet and Mr  Robert Bicknel be read accord
brown vers benn et elsewhere a motion be make for a prohibition to the court  of admiralty in a suit there by seaman for their wage upon a suggestion that  the court refuse to allow the defendant allegation that the place upon the  arrival at which the plaintiff entitle themselves be not a port of delivery  and that they refuse to receive the allegation unless the defendant will bring  the money demand into court but the chief justice and Powell hold that the  admiralty court be the judge of that matter and that if they do not do the  defendant right his only remedy be by appeal but it be no ground for a  prohibition that the jurisdiction of the court of admiralty in case of seaman  wage be a ancient concurrent jurisdiction as ancient as the establish Lord  Raymond cion of the admiralty court here that you can appeal in the court of  admiralty before definitive sentence for a gravamen as you may in the  ecclesiastical court the suit here be for wage upon the arrival of the ship at  guinea Powell justice say he remember a case of the like nature where a suit  be commence in the court of admiralty by seaman for their wage upon the  arrival of the ship at Newfoundland and though the merchant all hold it no  port of delivery yet the court of admiralty hold the contrary and so do the  court of common plea upon a prohibition
brown vers berry a plea in abatement be good though it conclude in abatement  to the jurisdiction and in bar it be no plea in abatement that the defendant  be a prisoner in the fleet bring to the bar by habeas corpus and there charge  with a declaration and that there be no original against he case the defendant  plead in this manner et predict the defendant go for sale et petit judgment de  narration prediction because be say that he be a prisoner in the fleet and  bring to the bar by habeas corpus and charge with the declaration et beyond  pro plea to say that there be no original sue against he therefore petit  judgment quod narrative empty et quod curian understand non lightarmed  footsoldier et quod to seek ab action svan prediction praeludatur the  plaintiff demurrer and the defendant join in demurrer and conclude his joinder  in demurrer in the same manner as he have conclude his plea but per curian  though where a plea in abatement be plead in bar final judgement shall be give  yet in this case the defendant have conclude in abatement bar and to the  jurisdiction it shall be take as plead I abatement but it be not a good plea  in abatement and therefore to answer beyond be award
brown vers Cornish S C salk matter which may be give in evidence on the  general issue may be plead special if it admit the plaintiff have once a cause  of action a plea which admit the plaintiff have once a cause of action ought  not to begin with a of burden non Indebitatus assumpsit the defendant plead  payment accord to the promise c the plaintiff demurrer special because the  plea as he conceive amount to the general issue say non allocatur for per holt  chief justice it be general true that no plea which admit that there be once a  cause of action amount to the general issue the second exception be that the  defendant do not pray judgement of the plaintiff action but say quod of burden  non c and per holt chief justice the defendant shall not plead in this case of  burden non c because the discharge be by matter ex post facto and there be  once good cause of action but in debt upon bind if the defendant plead non be  factum or if it be bring against a heir and he plead riens per descent the  defendant may plead of burden non because be do not admit any cause of action  but in this case it can not be plead and therefore judgement be give for the  plaintiff Jacob a draw a bill of exchange upon b Payable to c or order b  accept it b pay the money to c c endorses the bill Payable to d d bring case  against b who plead payment to c before the endorsement d demurrer special and  adjudge that this amount to the general issue Lord Raymond non assumpsit  adjudge mich will B R tercera Dimater and Hooper report to I by Mr place Lord  Raymond er p
brown versus brown and brown versus FARNDALE Trin W m Com show in this case  three point be resolve that a brother of the halfblood shall have a equal  share in the distribution of the good of the intestate within the statute  accord to the case of story and Hawkins and smith and Tracy Mod and where it  have be say that he shall not have a entire share but only a moiety of it that  be explode as a fancy and dolben say the Lord hale be of the same opinion in  that point each party have such a interest in his share before distribution  that if he die it shall go to his executor for the Act have make it as if the  intestate have make his will and by such word in a will without doubt a  interest vest although the party to who distribution ought to be make die  within the year that shall not alter the case for the proviso which give time  to make the distribution be only for the administrator and creditor to the end  that the debt shall be the better know
brown versus BuRLAcE W salk skin c a arrest be make upon the defendant in the  temple and he move b that his counsel that it may be set aside for that the  temple be privilege from arrest by the king grant as appear by Dugdale and  stow chronicle holt c j it be a question whether the king have make any such  grant but if he have it be void in law they have no court of justice within  themselves there the temple it be true be a place extraparochial and not  within any parish nor within the city so as to be under the custom of it but  it be within the count that of the city and Whitefriars be within the  jurisdiction of the city of London in this case the court will not set aside  the arrest so the defendant be hold to special bail yet they seem not to  countenance arrest in the temple especial in term time
brown versus BURLACE will B R the temple be extraparochial but a arrest there  be not set aside postea privilege S c in this case it be hold that the temple  be extraparochial and not within any parish that it be not within the city of  London so as to come within the custom but it be within the county of the city  but that the white friar be within the jurisdiction of the city that both  Dugdale and stow tell we that the temple be privilege from arrest by the grant  of the king send per holt Ch just if the king have make such a grant it be  void because the templar have no court of justice within themselves yet the  court incline not to countenance arrest in the temple in termtime but will not  set aside the arrest of the defendant who be arrest in the temple and so he be  hold to special bail
brown versus collins lev keb note per hale debt do not lie against the  executor of a executor upon a surmise of a devastavit by the first executor  for first it be a personal tort for which his executor can be charge Ventris  er p second it be such a action of debt as will have admit wager of law and  therefore lie not against the executor it be difficultly bring in that debt  shall lie against the executor upon a surmise of a devastavit by himself but  that point be now settle but no reason to extend it further and he cite a case  where debt be bring against a executor of b executor of c who plead that he  have not of the good of c in his hand to which the plaintiff reply that b have  waste the good of c to the value of the debt demand upon which issue be join  and find for the plaintiff and he have judgement to recover de good b in the  hand of a but that judgement be reverse
brown versus Cornish pasch will B R ld raym S c of burden non debet proper  only where there never be a charge Indebitatus assumpsit and quantum to  deserve for the defendant plead of burden non debet because he pay the money  at the time c et hoc a preparation be verify the plaintiff demurrer et per  holt c j saint this plea do not amount to the general issue because it admit  the cause of action a dly of burden non of burden non debet because riens per  descent dly the plea be misconcluded for he ought to conclude to the country a  vide ante skin cro Elizabeth
brown versus Crowley pasch James action of trespass bring against Crowley for  wound the plaintiff upon the hinder part of the leave leg be render in Latin  super posteriorem parten levis tibice and the jury find for the plaintiff and  Harris move in arrest of judgement for he say that these word levis flute a  make the declaration vicious for the incertainty for he say that levis signify  light and it be a improper word for leave and that judgement ought to be  respite for the incertainty and Yelverton argue that judgement ought to be  give for the plaintiff for he say the declaration be not vicious for if the  plaintiff have declare general that he have wound break or evil entreat he and  have omit those other word it have be sufficient and then the add of those  word which be not material but for damage do not make the declaration vicious  and he say that lmvus levan loevuln be Latin for leave and whereas he have say  that he strike he super posteriorem parten levis tibiae where it shall have be  left hand tibiae it be but false Latin and the declaration shall not be make  nought for false Latin and Popham say that he show upon which part of the body  the will be be lie only to incense damage for the declaration have be  sufficient though they have be omit and justice Fenner agree to Popham and he  say it have be judge that where a man bring a action against another for call  he strong thief and the jury only find that he call he thief but not strong  thief yet the plaintiff recover for this word strong be to no other purpose  than to increase damage and judgement be give for the plaintiff a man can  prescribe to be a justice of the peace
brown versus Dunri hill James rotulo the defendant make cognizance c as  bailiff M Walker widow administrator c r W for one rend charge of grant by one  Warner to the say r and m his wife for life of the wife and the say r by the  say write grant c that if it shall happen the say yearly rend to be behind and  not pay in part or in all by the space of ten day next after any feast c be  lawful demand that then c the say Warner c ten shilling nomin Carthaginian for  every default and that then it shall be lawful to the say W and m and their  assign to enter into the premise and distran as well for the rend as for the  nomin pceme and show that the rend be behind in the life of the husband and  that he die intestate and that administration be commit to the woman and make  cognizance for the rend due at such a feast in the life of the husband and be  then behind and the issue be that the grantor be not seize and be eager or  anxious to a trial diverse exception be take one be for that a demand be not  allege another be that the cognizance be make as bailiff to the administrator  when as the woman by the survivorship shall have the rend another be that it  be not allege that the rend be behind ten day next after the feast and the  exception upon debate at diverse day be overrule first the demand be not  necessary for the distress be a sufficient demand as it be adjudge in jace  case the second be because the cognizance as administrator be void idle and  superfluous and for the ten day it be good because the prediction tempore quo  c it be behind and adjudge by the whole court for the advowant
brown versus dyer hill Ann the court give this day judgement for the plaintiff  and holt deliver the opinion of his brother videlicet that the old son be in  of the feesimple for there be no admittance upon the surrender which be make  car and therefore the surrender do continue seize as he be before Powell say  there can be no admittance by implication to the second point he say that the  wife have this customary freehold after the death of her child and she die  then the old son shall take as heir to the father accord to estate at  commonlaw and he say that where the custom be doubtful this the best way to  follow the rule of the commonlaw as this court do in the case of clement and  Scudamour coroner
brown versus evering hill car rot debt in a action of debt for rend after a  verdict and judgement for the plaintiff in the common plea upon a writ of  error bring and diminution allege it appear that the issue be join Paso car  and the venire facias certify to be in plea prmdicto inter part preadictas  bear testae Paso car and this be move for error but it be adjudge to be help  by the statute of el cap as if there have be no such writ for it be impossible  that this shall be the writ in that action
brown versus gibbons hill Ann B R ld raym S c far S C in case for word with  special damage the plaintiff shall recover full cost though the damage be  under S post keb the plaintiff bring a action on the case for slanderous word  speak of his wife videlicet that she be a whore per quod he lose such and such  customer upon not guilty the jury find for the plaintiff and give damage under  S and the question be whether the plaintiff can have full cost notwithstanding  the James c et per cur the plaintiff shall have his full cost for it be not b  the word but the special damage which be the cause of action in this case and  upon evidence it be not sufficient to prove the word but he must prove the  special damage also and this be the reason why the action lie by the husband  alone without the join of his wife and the court hold that if a man bring  trespass for beat his servant per quod slavery to send away it be not a action  of assault and battery within Salkeld car c but this be a action find upon the  special damage so in the principal case the action be for the damage and not  for the word for they alone be not actionable and the court agree the case cro  that in a action for slander his title the plaintiff shall have his full cost  notam mich car c b it be say by Richardson to be the resolution of all the  justice of B R and c b that in a action upon the case for slander though the  court be bind by James c and can increase the cost where the damage be under S  yet the jury be not bind by that statute and therefore they may give cost  where they give but d damage b r send for Str andr upon the same principle it  be hold that the statute of limitation do not attach where special damage be  the gist of the action but where the word be in themselves actionable special  damage will not take they out of the statute vide bull Ni Pri vide also ld  raym Bl Rep Str burr
brown versus Goldsmit b Trin James rotulo a court of pipowders be incident to  a fair and a court baron to a manor and a court baron can not be separate from  a manor for it be annex to a manor the like of a court of pipowder to a fair  by the grant of a manor with cum appurtenance the court passes for it be a  incident inseparable to the manor and a man can grant his court but he may  grant the profit of his court instructress associate college Emanuelis in  Cambridge the writ be adjudge nought in replevin because they have distrain in  their proper name for a corporation as mayor and commonalty can distrain in  their own person but by their bailiff the court hold that the sheriff can not  take a bind in replevin but must take pledge accord to the old custom Juid  versus Bungory Trin Jacob rotulo the defendant show that one be seize of land  in fee and hold it by knightsservice of a manor and for the rend of two cock  and two hen and the lord grant the three part of the manor to another who avow  for the service and the cock and hen and hold he can not alone avow for that  jointservice but the other shall join with he a lease for life to three to  hold successive nought
brown versus hedge Trin Ann B R declaration of a trover in Middlesex and proof  of one in Ireland good cro Elizabeth side Mod Mod Carth Mod cro et   light b  Com dig action n tenant c can bring trover against his companion but may  against a stranger and it be only pleadable in abatement skin Mod Com dig  abatement e vol d edit pa t r Cowp in trover upon not guilty plead it appear  in evidence that the defendant be tenant by the courtesy of land in Ireland  and have cut down and sell the tree off the estate and that the reversion  belong to the plaintiff and two other in coparcenary upon a case make for the  opinion of the court it be resolve saint that in local action as in trespass  quare enclosed space to break in pieces the plaintiff can prove a trespass but  where be lie it nor lie it in any other place than where it be but it be  otherwise in action transitory as trover ergo here he may lie the conversion  here and prove it in Ireland vide style dly one jointtenant or tenant in  common or parcener can bring trover against another because the possession of  one be the possession of both if be do it be good evidence upon not guilty but  if one jointtenant bring trover against a stranger in that case the defendant  may plead it in abatement but can take advantage of it in evidence lev cro et
brown versus hook pasch James rotulo action of the case for these word brown  be a good attorney but that he will play on both side and it be move in  Brownlow goldsborough er p arrest of judgement that those word will not hear a  action but the court hold theyawere actionable but do not give judgement  because the plaintiff do not show in by declaration that the word be speak of  himself the defendant justification adjudge nought because he justify for word  that be actionable
brown versus London lev Mod hard keb before in a action upon the case the  plaintiff declare upon the custom of merchant that I S draw a bill of exchange  upon the defendant to pay to the plaintiff which he accept and have not pay he  and declare further sur indebitat upon such a sum for that the defendant  accept a bill of exchange from he c Ventris upon non assumpsit a verdict be  find for the plaintiff and entire damage give and it be move in arrest of  judgement that a assumpsit sur indebitatdid not lie upon this matter but only  a action upon the case as it be lie in the first part of the declaration where  the custom of merchant be set forth and that the defendant by reason thereof  be Chargeable and this be not to be involve in a general indebitatus assumpsit  and of that opinion be hale and Rainsford who say it have be so adjudge in the  exchequer since the king return but they say if a deliver money to b to pay to  c and give c a bill of exchange draw upon b and b accept the bill and do not  pay it c may bring a indebitatus assumpsit against b as have receive money to  his use but then he must not declare only upon a bill of exchange accept as  the case at bar be so by their opinion the judgement be stay to stick fast  Twisden for be conceive that the custom make it a debt for he that accept the  bill
brown versus mugg mich W B R ld raym S c king chaplain extraordinary be not  capable of a plurality within h c salk S c holt trespass for take his tithe in  Inkborow by a special verdict it be find that the defendant be possess of the  benefice of Stockton and a chaplain extraordinary to the king be present  institute and induct to the rectory of Inkborow be above the annual value of  per annum that the benefice of Stockton do thereby become void and continue so  for two year when the defendant be present to it again by the king as upon a  title of lapse and thereupon institute and induct and that Stockton be above  the value of per annum et per cur saint a presentation of the king of his own  chaplain do import a dispensation which the king himself as Supreme ordinary  have a power to grant and he shall have the benefit of hold a plurality  without any previous dispensation but if the king chaplain be present to a  second benefice by a subject a dispensation be necessary and must be obtain  before his institution to the second live dly a chaplain extraordinary Salkeld  be not a chaplain within the benefit of the statute of the h c but only the  chaplain in ordinary judgement for the plaintiff which be affirm in cam scacc  by a majority of one note he have no wait time but have only a entry of his  name in the book of chaplain a chaplain within the h ought to be retain under  seal cro godb if the king have a special title and present general it be void  hob et per holt after set up Salkeld er p cion and induction a presentation by  the king be void though it be ad corroborand but he must obtain a patent of  express grant charitable use
brown versus mugg mich W salk trespass for take his tithe in Inkborow a  special verdict find that the defendant be possess of the benefice of Stockton  and a chaplain extraordinary to the king be present institute and induct to  the rectory of Inkborow be above the annual value of l per annum that the  benefice of Stockton thereby become void and the defendant be present to it  again by the king as upon a title of lapse and institute and induct and that  Stockton be above the value of l per annum et per cur a presentation of the  king of his own chaplain import a dispensation which the king as supreme  ordinary may grant and he shall hold a plurality without a previous  dispensation but if he be present to a second benefice by a subject be must  obtain a dispensation before his institution to the second live dly a chaplain  extraordinary be not a chaplain within the benefit of h c and but only the  chaplain in ordinary judgement for the plaintiff affirm in cam scacc by a  majority of one note he have no wait time but only a entry of his name in the  book of chaplain a chaplain within the h ought to be retain under seal cro  godb if the king have a special title and present general this void hob et per  holt CJ after institution and induction a presentation by the king be void  though it be ad corroborand but be must obtain a patent of express grant holt  KB er p holt KB charter Trin W case W holt CJ we never order charter to be  bring into court on trial when copy of they may he have at the roll but we  will compel they to give you sight of they church and churchwarden
brown versus rans cro car Mod Mod salk n Lutw Danv the plaintiff bring a  action of debt for l and declare upon two bind each of they in the penalty of  l the defendant demand oyer of the several bind and of the condition of each  bind which condition recite that a marriage be intend between the defendant  and whether stow one of they be to permit and suffer her to dispose of her  personal estate and to permit the person and person to who she shall dispose  of it to enjoy it and the other condition be to permit her to give away l and  that the defendant shall pay it within two month after her decease and to each  of these bind the defendant plead quod condition the same scribe never break  to be per Self ad some time thus far hoc a preparation be verify to this the  plaintiff demurrer it be insist on for the defendant that this plea be good  and shall drive the plaintiff to assign a breach for the matter do not lie  within the notice of the defendant whether she have make any disposition of  her personal estate or have give the l and so can plead no otherwise than thus  but the court hold the plea to be nought and that for save of the bind it be  necessary for the defendant to show how he have perform the condition and this  manner of plead be never admit
brown versus Shaston executor mich car roll in a to know facias to avoid a  former extent on a statute by smith suppose it be satisfy by the profit to  which the defendant plead one Norborn be long before possess as executor of a  assignee and the defendant nor any of they have nothing in the premise and  issue thereon which per curian be proper enough the to know facias be to  remove the same Norborn assignee out of possession Edward responder and Cr  floor and Elgars case especial the profit be not allege to be receive by the  conusee Edward before assignment but when as in this case all be receive by  the conusee it must be against he but when part be in one time and part in  another its best to bring it against both so in a writ of disceit a feoff or  assignee shall not be oust by collusion between conusor and conusee without a  to know facias also there can be no other person take notice of but he that be  in possession judgement for the plaintiff nisi Keble er p lady Pritiman v  martial er report date the lady PRITIMAN and marshal ante in error Br on the  report of the secondary that she be marry and that martial have notice thereof  by suit release before the to know facias return Maynard pray to set aside  judgement on the to know facias on two nihils return and to this the court  incline but the cause be ready for sentence in the spiritual court adjourn  till sentence for the marriage and Twisden say the husband can not release a  hearing complaint bring by the wife in both their name and so it be resolve by  all the justice that the husband can not re Keble lease error bring by the  wife to reverse a fine for nonage but by hale chief justice in Nortlyes case  it be hold the husband may release such error but in another case it be hold  he can not disavow guardian allow to the feme to reverse a fine for nonage
brown versus shore pasch W m show motion for a prohibition on this suggestion  that the administrator of one die intestate before distribution sue for the  intestate S share and that no right be vest but only a power and direction to  the ordinary to distribute and consequent it must be to the next of kin at the  time of the decease and not at the time of the distribution in another term  holt CJ it give a present interest the Act of parliament be the same as if the  party have make his will to this effect the common case of a residuary legatee  who die before probate his executor shall have administration and not the next  of kin to the first testator holt KB that prove this case a right of action or  choose in action will go to executor the proviso for a year be to save the  administrator from a devastavit by not divide till he see the estate as to  Newton S case a man have only one child die whether that be within the meaning  of the statute they hold that he need not the aid of the statute but have all  at the commonlaw and I doubt the law as to that case for I think it a interest  vest dolben I I wonder that it be ever make a point suppose the proviso that  give a year have be leave out what then Gregory I of the same opinion eyres I  the design of the statute be to make a will for the intestate consultation per  totan cur
brown versus sir edward lake brown pray a prohibition to the ecclesiastical  court of Lincoln because he be prosecute there ex duty upon article exhibit  against he for not come to church and for sit irreverent there when he do come  and because they tax cost against he and the court doubt whether cost ought to  have be tax in this cause because it be not a cause betwixt party and party  but promote ex duty judge and per earnestness curiae though a person be assign  by the court to prosecute it and afterward by the mediation of the court the  cost be mitigate and the party submit to pay they and to conform to the law of  the church Hardres de boundary paschae year car two king INSCACCARIO notam by  the chief baron that if a super be set upon one of the king collector concern  his collection whereby he become a debtor to the king that yet process of the  pipe by to know facias and extent thereupon shall not issue against he as in  case of debt but only a process ad to sum up and because process of the pipe  have issue in this case it be discharge ex motion of Mr sawyer
brown versus sir W morgan bart mich geo two summon instead of attachiatus in  case of a member of parliament this be a action of the case on a promissory  note and say in the recital of the writ quod summon instead of attach but hold  well and so resolve on debate in case of a member of parliament in the case of  Lockyer and chetwynd in c b fortescue er p
brown versus tanner pasch Ann prohibition for call the parson drunkard libel  in the spiritual court for brawl in the churchyard and for tell the parson  thou art a pitiful drunken parson and a drunken puppy that and Salkeld move  for a prohibition upon the authority of the case between star and Bucknell  where for the like word a prohibition be grant and so in haine case and the  reason be because drunkenness be a temporal offence it be true the case before  mention be of drunkenness in layman but if it be a offence in a layman a  strong it shall be so in a clergyman it be a crime which do not take its  Salkeld nature from the person who commit it but from the law which be offend  it be true the canoeists make every thing which be a sin and forbid by the ten  commandment to be a spiritual offence as Icesa fides murder perjury c but by  the commonlaw whatever be take notice of and punishable by the temporal law be  a temporal offence and what be not punishable by the temporal law but by the  spiritual law in such case that law be a kind of supplant the temporal law and  the offence so punishable be spiritual offence as fornication adultery c now  as for drunkenness it be always account a tem poral offence for it be  indictable at commonlaw and alehouse be former appoint in the leet and before  the of Elizabeth there be scarce such a crime in England it be true a parson  may be deprive for drunkenness and so he may for buggery but yet he be not  punishable for that offence in the spiritual court because it be a temporal  offence afterward a prohibition be grant as to the word but not as to the  brawl in the churchyard cro car march S p roll Jon godb Lut cousin apology  Camden Elizabeth hob roll higgins case and Rep full case
brown wife against tripe bar pe in bar pe Br trespass of assault battery and  imprisonment of the wife until the husband pay livre ad damnum Self which per  Stroud in arrest of judgement be ill the defendant plead the statute of  limitation the plaintiff reply and set forth a writ against the defendant and  other whereupon the defendant take issue and now after verdict it do not  appear there be any continuances down till the bring this action the court  hold this well enough because the payment be only to be make by the husband  but it have be better have the husband and wife lie a imprisonment of the  husband and wife till payment then ad damnum Self have be well enough be mix  Adjornatur
Brownlow goldsborough Bide versus Snelling hill James rotulo a action of  ejectment bring and also a battery in one writ and after a verdict it be move  in arrest of judgement because the battery be join with the ejectment the  damage be find several and the plaintiff have release the damage for the  battery and pray judgement for the ejectment winch hold the writ nought but  judgement be give for the plaintiff notwithstanding
Brownlow goldsborough castilion all versus smith exec smith Trin James rotulo  action of covenant bring against the defendant and the breach of covenant  allege to be in the time of the executor and the judgement be enter of the  good of the testator the breach be for blow of land contrary to covenant
Brownlow goldsborough constable versus inhabitant in dimid hundred de Waltham  in Comilat Essex Trin James rotulo the action be bring for a robbery the  defendant be find guilty and it be allege in arrest of judgement that the  action will not lie because it be not bring against the whole hundred and it  be answer on the plaintiff behalf that the half hundred be a hundred by it  self and the court hold the writ shall have be brouabt a aiDSt they in this  manner inhabitant in hundred de W call the half hundred of Waltham but the  writ be hold good for the writ be and so shall be intend to be bring against  the man inhabit in the half hundred of W and udgement for the plaintiff and in  a special verdict the jury find that the robbery be do upon the Sunday and it  be hold in the king bench that the hundred be liable
Brownlow goldsborough Cotterel versus Harrington pasch James rotulo in a  replevin the defendant avow for a annuity for grant for year Payable upon  demand and allege a demand the plaintiff demand oyer of the dead and by the  deed it appear that for a hundred and ten pound one rend of twenty pound be  grant for eight year and another for twenty pound for two year if er and t  shall so long live the plaintiff plead the statute of usury and set forth the  statute and a special usurious contract if it have be lie to be upon a loan of  money then it be usury but if it be a bargain for a annuity it be no usury but  this be allege to be upon a lend
Brownlow goldsborough down versus Skrymsther Trin James rotalo a action of  assault and battery bring and there be a demurrer upon the evidence and the  case be that the defendant the day specify in the declaration say that the  plaintiff assault the defendant and in defence of himself justify the beat the  plaintiff reply that he do it of his own wrong without any such cause and in  the evidence the defendant maintain that the plaintiff beat he the day mention  in the declaration and in the same place and the plaintiff perceive that give  in evidence that the battery be make another day and place to wit c which be  the cause of the special verdict for if there be two battery make between the  plaintiff and defendant at diverse time the plaintiff be bind to prove the  battery make the same day in his declaration and shall not be admit to give  another day in evidence by the opinion of the whole court quod notam
Brownlow goldsborough for this word papist no action will lie unless speak of  a bishop Irealand versus smith hill James rotulo action upon the case bring  for these word you norgate take part against I in Ireland who be a papist and  have get a pardon from the pope and can help you to one if thou will the  plaintiff lie a communication between the defendant and norgate and allege  imself of the age of year and not above because it may appear to the court  that he be bear within queen Elizabeth reign the court hold the action will  not lie as it be adjudge in hall case and for this word papist no action will  lie if I deliver my good to you to keep and I request they and you deny the  delivery of they now a action of trover will lie otherwise it be without a  denial if I distrain cattle I must not use they Brownlow goldsborough er p  action of the case for double prosecution of a become fac Warter v freeman  BrownIow and goldsborough er Warter versus freeman mich James rotulo action  upon the case bring for that the defendant sue out a become facias upon a  judgement which he have against the plaintiff upon which judgement the  defendant have before sue out a become facias and the sheriff of Oxford have  upon the first become facias return that he have levy the debt and damage and  that they remain in his hand for want of buyer and the defendant know that the  sheriff have levy the debt and damage and intend to charge he again prosecute  another become facias and that the sheriff have again levy the say debt and  damage and have pay the debt and damage to the plaintiff to wit at Westminster  in Com Middlesex where the action be bring and judgement after debate be give  for the plaintiff though the defendant allege that the become facias be a act  in law and so no cause of action against he
Brownlow goldsborough Hillary James in the king bench cartwright against  gilbert in debt upon a obligation with condition to be and perform a  arbitrament to be make the arbitrator award that the defendant shall make  submission and shall acknowledge himself sorry for all transgression and word  at or before the next court to be hold in the manor of p and for the not  performance of that award the plaintiff bring this suit and the defendant in  bar of this plead that at the say next court he go to the court to make his  submission and to acknowledge himself grieve accord to the award and be there  ready to have perform it but further be say that the plaintiff be not there to  accept of it upon which the plaintiff demurrer and it seem to coke and foster  that the defendant have do as much as be to be do of his part and for that  that the plaintiff be not there ready to accept the defendant be discharge for  this submission be personal and to the intent to make they friend and for that  both the party ought to be present but walmesley and Warburton seem that it  may have be very well make in the absence of the plaintiff as well as a man  may submit himself to a arbitrament of a man which be absent for this be only  to be make to the intent to show himself sorrowful for the trespass and word  which he have make and speak and it be not argue but adjourn till the next  term and the justice move the party to make a and of that for that it be a  trifle suit Brownlow goldsborough er p Hillary James in the common bench
Brownlow goldsborough Mancester versus draper hill James rotulo a action of  debt bring upon a bind with a condition to pay money if c r shall be then live  and shall before the same twenty day of Oct by due form and course in law  Brownlow goldsborough er p perfect levy and acknowledge a fine and a recovery  before his majesty justice of his highness court of common plea of and in  certain house and tenement with the appurtenance which the say draper late  have and purchase of c r the defendant plead that c r be live and do not levy  c and a demurrer and the question be whether draper or Ro shall levy the fine  and hold that draper shall levy the fine No demand necessary
Brownlow goldsborough Pettison versus reel pasch Jacob rotulo a ejectment  bring and trial and verdict for the plaintiff and exception take in arrest of  judgement to the venire facias because this word being under oath be omit for  the writ be to put down see in that and omit the word being under oath and  this be amend by the court when a title be to be try upon a ejectment and a  lease to be execute by letter of attorney the course be this that the lessor  do seal the lease only and the letter of attorney and deliver the letter of  attorney but not the lease for the attorney must deliver that upon the land  and upon ejectment bring of land in two village of a house and forty acre of  land in a and b and a special entry in the land adjoin to the house to wit the  put in of a horse which be drive out of the land by the defendant and this be  adjudge a good entry for the land in both the village by the opinion of the  whole court a venire facias of the parish adjudge good
Brownlow goldsborough powis against bow upon consideration have of instruction  give to the precedent and Council of Wales it be resolve by all justice of  this court that the council there ought not to proceed upon English bill which  contain title but the form of that ought to be only that the plaintiff be in  possession for three year and that the defendant which ought to be always more  than one riotous and with force have enter upon he and so ought to be restore  to his possession and in so much that the bill contain title in this case and  that the defendant have enter upon he and seize he in form of assize and do  not say riotous and with force prohibition be grant butler against Thayer the  Lord admiral grant a commission under the seal of the admiral court to Thayer  for measure of all the corn which shall be transport from one town or place to  another within the creek which be within the first bridge and to have so much  for every bushel measure and grant that if any resist to arrest they and  commit they till they have find surety to appear in the admiral court and at  Milton and Rainebam in ken Thayer endeavour to put his commission in execution  and butler resist he and be for that arrest and sue in the admiral court and  for stay of that pray prohibition and it be grant in so much that the admiral  have not power to meddle within the first bridge for civil cause but only for  maim and death of man but for cause make upon the high sea where the mariner  have the better knowledge in the commonlaw he can try that see the Brownlow  goldsborough er p time of Edward avowry Edward Edward Stamford r Statham  trespass
Brownlow goldsborough Richardson versus sterer Trin James rotulo in replevin  the defendant avow for damage pheasant the plaintiff reply that long before  the time of take the cattle h late earl of l be seize of one message c and so  prescribe for common of pasture for ten beast and so justify the put in of one  cow of the two cow use his common and the plaintiff further say that the say  WR long before c lend to the say t p the other cow to manure the land of the  say t p as long as the say W please and so prescribe for the put in of that  cow be thereof possess by reason of the lend of it and so demand judgement Ana  Hutton sergeant move that the bar be nought because the plaintiff have falsify  his replication because the replication be by two and by the plead another  time of the take the property be in p only and the special property by virtue  of the lend be also in p and so replevin ought to have be bring in the name of  p only and the defendant demurrer the replication and the plaintiff be nonsuit
Brownlow goldsborough Shotwell versus corderoy in formedon the tenant pray in  aid and the prayee in aid and tenant vouch and the vouchee be essoined and  adjourn and at that day the attorney of the tenant without the prayer in aid  cast a essoin and a idem die give the prayee in aid and it be quash for they  shall not have several essoins but join essoins a formedon bring of land in a  b c the tenant plead a fine of all by the name of the manor and tenement in a  b and it be object that he say nothing to the land in c but the court hold  that by the name of the manor the land in all the village will pass and the  defendant may if he will plead as to the land in c that it be not comprise in  the fine hill James rotulo well formedon in the discender the writ be general  that I l give to t l and the heir male of his body upon the body of d v widow  lawful to be beget which d the say t afterward take to wife and which after  the death of the say t c son and heirmale of the body of the say t upon the  body of the say lawful beget to the say I l young son and heir of the say I l  son of the say t ought to descend by form of the gift aforesaid c and whereof  he say that the say t be seize c and Elizabeth of the say tenement do feoff  the plaintiff in fee to the use of the say t l and his heir c and note in the  count no mention make of the marriage if a gift be make in tail to d and his  heir male the remainder to a in tail d discontinue in the life of a and d die  without issue and the heir of a bring his writ as the immediate gift to a his  ancestor who never be seize in his life and for that cause the writ be nought  but if a have be seize of the land then it have not be necessary to have show  the first gift to d by the opinion of the whole court
Brownlow goldsborough Skeate versus Oxenbridge and his wife Trin James rotulo  waste bring of land and garden in l of which e king be seize in his demesne as  of fee and be so thereof seize after the four of February h thereof feoff e S  and other to the use of the say e S and of the say e for term of their life  and the long liver of they and after the decease of the say e S and the say e  then to the use of the heir of the body of the say S dead the now plaintiff be  son and heir beget on the body of e commit waste and in the declaration he  show the feoff make to the feoff and the habend to they and their heir and  because the word heir be omit in the writ exception be take but because it be  in the declaration it be adjudge good and note in this case the woman be  receive upon the default of the husband and plead to issue if the feoff have  but a estate for life then they can convey a estate in feesimple over waste in  the to hold for dig of seacoal
Brownlow goldsborough Stokes versus winter Trin James rotulo in replevin the  defendant make cognizance as bailiff to tenant for life to who the annuity be  grant for life to begin by will after the death of the devisor and allege the  death of the devisor but not the day of the death after who death the say h be  seize of the yearly rend aforesaid in his demesne as of his freehold for term  of his life by virtue of the devise aforesaid and because seven pound of the  rend aforesaid for one year end at the feast c and by the space of fourteen  day then next follow be behind to the say t the say time which c the say t as  bailiff of the say h do make cognizance of the take of the cattle aforesaid in  the say place in which c for the say seven pound for the yearly rend aforesaid  be so behind c and issue be take whether the say I at the time of his death be  seize of the say six acre of land in his demesne as of fee as c and after  trial exception be take to the advowry because it be not allege that the  annuity at such a feast after the death of the devisor be behind but it be  overrule because there be so much express and judgement give for the defendant
Brownlow goldsborough wile versus vinor Trin James rotulo or debt upon a  obligation to perform a award the defendant plead that the arbitrator make no  award the plaintiff reply that the defendant by write do revoke and null the  authority of the arbitrator foster hold the bind be forfeit although he may  revoke the plea be that he do discharge the arbitrator against the form of the  condition my Lord coke hold that the power be countermandable if the  submission be by write the countermand must be by write if by word I may  countermand by word if two bind themselves one can countermand alone if  obligor or obligee disable by their own act to make the condition void the  bind be single h if I be bind to feoff a and I marry her before the day the  bind be forfeit e the great doubt be because no express notice but notice be  imply and the bind forfeit because he do not stand to it judgement for the  plaintiff
Brownlow goldsborough Wilkins versus Danre Trin James rotulo the defendant  avow for a rend charge grant to his father in fee with a clause of distress  the plaintiff demand oyer of the deed which be a grant of the rend to one and  his heir to hold to he his heir executor and assign to the use of the say h  and his assign during the life of a stranger and whether it be in fee or for  life be the question and whether the habendum be contrary to the premise or do  stand with the estate if the habend have be to he and his heir during his own  life this have be void but it be hold otherwise for a stranger life and no  occupancy can be of a rend liberty to make lease
Brownlow plaintiff against Cox and michil defendant a assize Ro Rep more in a  assize for the supersedeas office sir Francis Bacon the king attorneygeneral  move the court to have further time S nine or ten day for to plead coke chief  justice we be swear for to maintain the king prerogative a far time be then  give he by the court to plead and a day appoint for the trial Bacon  attorneygeneral the king prerogative have four columns or pillar S the first  which concern the state and marshal matter the second which concern  ecclesiastical matter the three which concern judicial matter in which these  patent for the supersedeas office be the four which concern matter of commerce  and these four I shall ever maintain accord to ill place notam that sir  Francis Bacon attorney be to move a sergeant at law have a short motion offer  to move before he at which he be much move say that he marvel he will offer  this to he upon this coke chief justice No sergeant ought to remove before the  king attorney when he move for the king but for other motion any sergeant at  law be to move before he and when I be the king attorney I never offer to move  before a sergeant unless it be for the king
brownlowe against the executor OF ellin Littleton l have recover in dower  against b and damage from the death of her husband b bring error and assign  error c hang which l die it be resolve upon search of precedent that a know  fac shall not issue against the executor for the damage and there need not a  new writ oh f error for that error do not abate by the death of the defendant  in the error as our case be otherwise if the plaintiff have die and as to the  land there deed not new error because by the death of l the land belong to b  so in p Elizabeth b r William against William in error bring upon a judgement  in dower with the damage the defendant in the writ of error die the plaintiff  bring a new writ of error ad in person thou to sit back against the executor  who bring a to know fac for to have execution of the damage and the party  plead that there be error hang for the damage and by the court if the  plaintiff in the error have assign error accord to the course of the court  then the plea be good but otherwise if he have not assign error for the to  know fac for the damage be for to hasten he to proceed cum execution in the  error Noy er p
browns case a information upon the statute of Elizabeth pro eastern that one  brown be retain a apprentice in husbandry until the year of his age and that  be before his age of year go away and the defendant absque any testimony  detain he contra form to cause to stand and by Hutton and Harvey justice only  show the branch of the say statute which say and if any servant retain accord  to the form of this stand hetley tute depart from his master c and that none  of the say retain person in husbandry until after the time of his retainer be  expire shall depart that be not to be intend of a apprentice in husbandry but  of a hire servant for the statute do not intend to provide for the departure  of a apprentice because that a apprentice ought to be by indenture and then a  writ of covenant lie upon his departure to force he to come again and by the  commonlaw a action upon the case lie for retain the servant of another and by  they the retainer without be testimonial which be a offence against that law  be after the year of retainer expire for so be the word of the statute but  they say that the information be nought because that it do not appear that the  defendant do not retain he out of the parish where they serve before for the  statute say out of the city town or parish c except he have a testimonial and  the word secundum form to cause to stand will not aid it and in the same  village or city c the statute do not require a testimonial because that there  it be know c and for these reason after here say for the plaintiff judgement  be stay if c
browns case Anthony brown bring a action of trespass against Richard pea the  case be this John warren be seize in fee of the manor of warners and of the  manor of Cherchall and demise his manor of warners to the young son of Richard  foster his cousin in fee at which time Richard the father have issue George  foster and John foster and be demise his manor of Cherchall in haec word Owen  I will my manor of Cherchall to Margery water for her life and if she die and  then any of my cousin foster son then live then I will my foresay manor of  Cherchall unto he that shall have my manner f warners and after the devisor  die without issue and the reversion of the manor of Cherchall descend to Henry  Warner as brother and heir of the devisor and after the say Henry Warner by  deed enrol do bargain and sell the manor of Cherchall to Anthony brown who  devise it to the plaintiff and then George foster die without issue and the  manor of warners do descend to John foster his brother and heir who enter and  feoff the Lord rich and after marriage the tenant for life of the manor of  Cherchall die and the plaintiff enter and the defendant enter upon he as  servant to John foster whereupon the plaintiff bring this action and judgement  be give for the plaintiff because that the word and the intent of the devise  be that the manor of warners and Cherchall shall go together and therefore the  manor of warners be sell before the death of Margery by John foster and after  the death of Margery John can take nothing by the devise mich and Elizabeth  rot or
BROWNSMITH vers gilborne in canc No carry a voluntary settlement into  execution the defendant have two daughter and on the marriage of one of they  to the plaintiff brother the defendant enter into no agreement to give her any  portion but only tell he that as she have only that and one daughter more the  estate will come between they seven year after the marriage the two daughter  with the mother consent cast lot for the estate and a attorney be direct to  prepare a settlement of what shall fall to each daughter to be settle after  the death of the mother as to this plaintiff sisterinlaw upon her and her  husband for life with remainder to his right heir the attorney through  carelessness omit to complete the settlement either in the life of the wife or  the husband and now the plaintiff as heir at law to his brother bring his bill  to have the settlement complete insist that the marriage be have in respect of  the estate this be not bare a voluntary agreement but be to be take as in  consideration of marriage but king Lord chancellor dismiss the bill with cost  say it be mere voluntary there be nothing in write at the time of the marriage  so as to be a obligation within the statute of fraud at the time of cast lot  the mother be under no contract to do it it be a voluntary act and there can  be no case show where a court of equity ever decree the specific execution of  such a agreement vide Coleman v Sarrel bro Chanc Cas strange pro quer
Brownson vers avery ibidem original debtor take as a servant to prove the  payment by another a sell good to b and afterward c desire d to pay a and  promise to repay he d pay a and afterward b allow the money to d on account  and in a action against c I call b to prove the account it amount to payment  and it be object that the contract be original only between a and b b be still  liable to a and be therefore swear to discharge himself but the chief justice  say he will allow he to be a witness to prove the payment as a servant to c  vide tibbald v Tregott Mod Martin v Horrel post strange report er p
Brownsworth versus trench Trin James rotulo a action of debt bring upon a  escape against a bailiff of a liberty and after a trial exception be take to  the declaration because it be not allege therein that the sheriff make a  warrant to the bailiff upon a execution but it be only allege that at a  aforesaid by virtue Brownlow goldsborough er p of the warrant aforesaid he  take the prisoner and say not within the liberty aforesaid and the exception  be hold void Trin James a action of debt bring b that executor and the  defendant plead that the plaintiff be not executor and try and find for the  defendant and the defendant upon the statute for cost desire cost because the  jury find against the plaintiff that he be not executor and if a verdict pass  against one that be not a executor he shall pay cost but cost be deny by the  whole court for the jury may find a untruth devise of the profit be a devise  of the land itself
bruer and SOWTHWELL mich car banc Reg arrest of judgement in a action upon the  case upon a assumpsit the plaintiff in this case move again for judgement  notwithstanding what have be former speak to arrest it for though the word  discomputando in the declaration be insensible yet there be enough in the  declaration to ground the action and that be the breach of the assumpsit  assign to deliver the currant buy of the defendant and the word discount shall  not hurt it Bacon justice be of the same opinion but roll justice say a the  bargain be here set forth upon which the assumpsit be make and if the bargain  be ill the assumpsit be not good hale of council with the plaintiff say if  part of the bargain be insensible and part not yet a good assumpsit may be  ground upon that part which be good but roll say the bargain here be entire  and if part of it be not good it be all nought yet he say if Dart of a bargain  be good and part void yet a action may be bring upon it the rule be that it  shall be argue again on both part
bruer and SOWTHWELL Trin carol arrest of judgement in a action upon the case  Bruer bring a action upon the case upon a assumpsit to pay so much money for  currance sell unto he discomputando for four month the defendant demurrer to  the declaration for the incertainty of it because it be discomputando for four  month and express not for how much he shall discount and so there can be no  certain damage give and upon this it be stay till the other party move
bruges versus Searle all prescription for common of pasture for sheep good Mod  S c show in trespass for impound his sheep the defendant justify damagefeasant  in his freehold the plaintiff reply and prescribe for common of pasture in the  place where c for all his sheep levant and couchant on his tenement in  Edisborough as appurtenant to his say tenement and issue be take upon the  prescription there be a special verdict to this effect videlicet that the  plaintiff have common of pasture there for all his sheep prout the plaintiff  within placitando allegavi send the same a swearer beyond to say that the  plaintiff have common there as well for all other cattle levant and couchant  on his tenement as for sheep as appurtenant to his say tenement c the question  be whether the plaintiff have not fail in his prescription for common of sheep  only when he have common for all other cattle likewise for a prescription be a  entire thing and can be divide as the plaintiff have do in this case but per  curian this be a general verdict for the plaintiff because the jury have find  that the the plaintiff have common c prout allegavi and all the matter find  afterward be surplusage and void Carthew nevertheless as to the doubt intend  the court be Willing to settle it deliver their opinion videlicet that upon  the whole matter the verdict be find for the plaintiff for that the action be  only for impound sheep and therefore the plaintiff may well abridge his  prescription as to they only since nothing else be in dispute and the find  that he have common for other cattle do not falsify his prescription but stand  well with it the plaintiff have judgement
Brumley against todd t assume that if b marry his servant c that be will give  he and the plaintiff in the assumpsit show that he have take the servant to  wife and that the defendant although often requisite have not pay c and it be  move in arrest of judgement that the plaintiff have not show that he have give  notice of the marriage to the defendant and yet judgement be give for the  plaintiff and a precedent be show in Elizabeth a assumpsit to pay at the day  of marriage and no notice be show and yet good and affirm upon error bring
BRUMWELL against garnet one c trin geo rule for a a council make that may in  last easter term though the paperbook be not then deliver nor afterward till  the that of June instant hold irregular and the rule for a a council discharge  this day videlicet Wednesday that June but on motion of plaintiff counsel the  same day the court make a new rule for a a council and give leave to set down  the cause for Friday next dispense with the shortness of the time for the  delivery of book to the judge turner against Horont Trin Geo sharp against  sharp mich Geo quote will for defendant draper for plaintiff
Brunell V wade old ms note lord Hardwicke a party may give proof of particular  act under a general allegation of weakness of mind Brunell v wade L C June
brunt against spencer slander thou art a traitorly rogue and I will prove it  per curian be actionable judgement pro plaintiff Keble er p
bryan against smith easter geo gapper for defendant move in arrest of  judgement a blank for the return of the venire facias be leave in the record  of nisi prius and obtain a rule to show cause which on hear draper for  plaintiff be discharge it be constant practice to leave a blank the award of  the venire facias be no part of the issue and be amendable by the venire  facias itself
bryan executor against holloway hill geo upon the common motion to bring  principal interest and cost into court and refer to prothonotary the court  refuse to grant the rule plaintiff be a executor but say plaintiff may be  Willing to accept the debt and cost and therefore they will grant a rule to  show cause
Bryan v Wooley equity case abridge er the plaintiff be solicitor employ in a  suit by the husband and wife for recovery of the word recovery of not in the  original a term of year in right of the wife the husband die and leave no  asset and the bill be to have a satisfaction out of this term so recover and  now enjoy by the wife Lord Chan decree the plaintiff a satisfaction of his  demand out of the profit of this term and he to be examine upon interrogatory  as to what he have receive and defendant to pay cost east Geo Sharston and  hipsley vin Abr his lordship say it be strong equity that the plaintiff shall  have a satisfaction out of this term so recover by his cost and pain since the  wife have the benefit of it and consent to it ibidem vide the case of the  duchess of Hamilton and incledon p c No agreement of the husband to part with  the wife be inheritance shall bind the wife or be carry into execution  February Bryan and wolley vin Abr pl
bryant v speak Dec it be the rule in Lord hardwicke time to give interest at  per cent on legacy out of personal estate and per cent out of real see Ves and  Ves it have now long since be alter and the general rule be that they shall  all carry interest at per cent from the end of a year after the testator death  the ease of maintenance be a exception vide sitwell v Bernard Ves where Lord  Eldon c disapprove the court be go further on particular circumstance except  as to maintenance supplement p upon a question what rate of interest legacy  shall bear Lord chancellor say that the general rule be that legacy out of  real estate carry one per cent low than the legal interest but if out of  personal estate because of the high interest of money than land it shall carry  the legal interest unless particular circumstance induce the court to vary  therefrom but for that a special case must be make the reason of this be that  the ecclesiastical court will give the legal interest on legacy out of  personal estate as those in question be and the difference of the jurisdiction  in which they be sue for shall make no alteration Reg lib a fol enter Bryant v  gold
bubble case it be argue in the case of bubble who be administrator during the  minority of a infant that the court of the march of Wales have no authority to  for such a administrator to account before they but only the ecclesiastical  court and if they intermeddle in any such thing this court may grant a  prohibition
buck against Amcotts h James b r in a prohibition the defendant say that in  Hornchurch in Essex be chapel of ease videlicet Rumford and Haveringe chapel  and that the of Haveringe have use time out of mind c to contribute to the  reparation of Rumford and that in the time of h army literar patent to run  together ii c and Rumford be pull down and erect in a more convenient place  within this precinct and circuit videlicet twenty eight foot long and fourteen  foot broad Noy that it do not lie army literar patent in general be not good  but the patent ought to have be show in haec word or produce in court by which  the court may judge for a new church can be erect without letter patent  because it be a sanctuary we e h and e the Lord Lislees case the prescription  be go by the erect in another place and long c as aforesaid we Rep p and that  shall be take strict Perkins e e but the court be on the contrary because it  be pro good public and in such a case a pleader by to run together ii be good  as of a union h and that the conusans for reparation of the church appertain  to the spiritual court and be not like the case of a tenure Rep because the  tenant by that be put to a great charge and no profit or benefit accrue to the  tenant as it do to the parishioner and easter term ensue a consultation be  grant by the court
buck against aston Friday fever cost sander on Cr pray cost in a writ of error  on a judgement in a quare hinder on verdict against one and on a demurrer by  the other and damage on car cap that where judgement on verdict be give the  party shall have double cost the court agree on h cap that if no execution be  have of the presentation or damage the party shall have cost for delay of  execution in any part but on Cr smyth and smyth no cost can be after execution  execute because no delay and upon the late statute car be only as to the  security and by rule of court cost be tax nisi
buck against warren attorney in case easter geo on promise defendant pay into  court on the common rule and afterward obtain a rule to plead double non  assumpsit and non assumpsit infra sex aged plaintiff move to set aside the  double plea with cost and have a rule to show cause which be make absolute  plaintiff by the rule to pay money into court be confine to plead the general  issue and no other plea the motion afterward to plead double be a imposition  on the court chapel for plaintiff gapper for defendant
buck vers atwood where a deed come in by incident the admiralty may try  whether it be fraudulent the mariner sue in the admiralty for wage and a deed  be plead to have be make at land whereby the mariner agree to subject  themselves to the loss of their strange report er p wage on particular  circumstance and it be reply thereto that the deed be obtain by fraud and  circumvention it be so declare below and a sentence for the wage it be then  move for a prohibition because the admiralty have no original jurisdiction for  wage but it be connive at for the ease of the mariner who may join in the suit  which they can do at law but then it must be upon a parole contract and not a  deed and here be a deed make at land that be the subsist contract and will  merge the other salk Mod SC vide post a say per curian this be only a deed on  one side to forfeit the wage upon particular circumstance but will not enable  they to sue for their wage at law the deed therefore come strange in only by  way of incident and then they may proceed to try it there can be no  prohibition
buck versus angel assumpsit Danv Abr p I lev side keb the plaintiff count that  whereas he have procure one uvoodward at the request of the defendant to  surrender a lease the defendant will pay c on non assumpsit plead and verdict  for the plaintiff it be move in arrest of judgement because it be not say that  the defendant assume and promise and to Twisden justice it seem not to be a  good declaration and so it be rule in the first case that be ever move in this  court but it seem to Kelyng justice to be only matter of form but judgement be  stay until c
buck versus barnard show in debt for rend bring against the administrator of  the lessee it be hold by holt CJ that a administrator be Chargeable as  assignee for the time be enjoy and be in possession of the premise and the  declaration be against the defendant as assignee judgement for the plaintiff  holt KB attorney
Buckenham ante pardon Coron Fitzherbert he deliver in his pardon which recite  the verdict and judgement neither of which be extant and therefore they fine  sir Thomas fanshaw and the marshal for let he go abroad also the indictment be  quod to beat which be omit in the pardon and only cannot be injured insert the  court bail he but will not allow the pardon
buckeridge S case buckeridge be convict of forgery and sentence to be put on  the pillory and then obtain the king pardon they at who suit move for a rule  to set her on the pillory the court order her to show cause and finch  solicitor come and show in her behalf that she have the king pardon and pray a  discharge of the rule this be before she appear upon the rule the court say  they can not take notice judicial of it but in regard Mr solicitor affirm he  have a warrant for her pardon by he they bear so great a respect to the king  warrant that when she come up they will give her time to show cause why she  shall not be set upon the pillory c
BUCKHURSTS case lessee for ten year grant a rend charge unto his lessor for  the year afterward the lessor grant the remainder in fee to the lessee it be  the opinion of the whole court that the rend be go and extinct because the  lessor who have the rend be a party to the destruction of the lease which be  the ground of the rend Elizabeth in the king bench
Buckland against kellet Wednesday Nov escape Siderf pl in dell Br seu in debt  upon escape on cap outlaw after judgement Maynard yesterday move in arrest of  judgement the party be take by capias utlagatum after the year it be not say  in the declaration that he that escape be ever charge in execution at the suit  of the party by prayer on the first judgement in which case albeit a action  sur case will lie yet not a action of debt for which he rely on   b frost case  that until election make he be not in at suit of the party Jones pro plaintiff  albeit the capias be after the year yet debt lie against the sheriff for the  escape without any prayer of the party enter on record and so be Cr Cr and  Keeling Ch just incline to this but Twisden doubt et adjornatur
buckle against lucas administrator judgement be sign as quick as can be and  strict regular but be set aside on payment of cost and defendant have leave to  plead two bind and plene to manage praeter draper for defendant prime for  plaintiff
buckle and brown how far a attorney shall be discharge from the payment of  trophy money in a replevin of a distress take by the officer of the tower for  trophymoney suppose to be due upon the statute of Ch Mr Robinson move that the  defendant may have liberty to plead two plead one de in an unjust manner svan  not common with others the other that the defendant be a city attorney and  thereby discharge from all office of bear arm and all duty of this sort he say  that in the case of one smith which the chief justice be of counsel in it be  determine that they be discharge but still this point be endeavour to be call  in question again accord the motion be grant
buckler against angel Siderf pl assumpsit hide move in arrest of judgement in  action upon the case in consideration that the plaintiff will procure the  lease of a house of one uvoodward to be surrender to the defendant at his  request he will pay and content he on non assumpsit and verdict for the  plaintiff per curian the judgement stay because this be but evidence of a  promise without express quod super see assumpsit and this issue be no  affirmative and negative no promise be lie in the declaration Keeling hold  this but form and aid by the verdict but Twisden say the first case be ever  move in arrest of judgement be that the defendant in consideration the  plaintiff will deliver certain hop he will pay he c and be not say super see  assumpsit judgement be stay and so per curian preater Keeling it be here
buckler against angil Assump it that he will be Willing to pay SC side keb  raym assumpsit and declare that in consideration that the plaintiff will  surrender a term the defendant will he Willing to pay after verdict for the  plaintiff it be move in arrest of judgement that here be no promise and then  non assumpsit be no issue to be try and so hold the court and stay the  judgement levinz er p
buckler against more assumpsit modern pl Cr pl hetley Cr pl in assumpsit to  pay money three month after the defendant plead that such a day the bill be  exhibit and that non assumpsit infra sex aged before to which the plaintiff  demurrer and per curian it be ill on general demurrer and shall be quod causan  act non to grow progressively infra sex aged and though this be a assumpsit  ground on a bill of exchange and the acceptance and the time of payment and  acceptance be above six year yet per curian both be alike as on payment to be  on request which begin from request and judgement pro plaintiff
buckler and ash proceed in a action of debt upon bind stay upon payment of  principal interest and cost in a action of debt upon bind Hosley move that on  payment of principal interest and cost all proceed may stay grant per cur see  p ante S p include cost in equity
buckley against benhall on a special case state the question be whether the  pauper who be a certificateperson have gain a settlement by rend a windmill in  benhall of fourteen pound per annum that be whether it be a sufficient  tenement within the statute though it be admit that in Salkeld a watermill be  hold a tenement and the rend of it clear a settlement within the statute yet  it be object in the present case that it appear while he rend it under a lease  he give security for the rend and for the last three year he be only tenant at  will now the foundation be the credit of the party rend and that fail in this  case on the other side it be argue that he that have credit to give security  have credit to pay rend the king against the inhabitant of saint mary Guilford  Hilary Geo rend a windmill general be hold good court No difference what sort  of mill it be but it will gain a settlement and the give security for the rend  do not alter the case and the order of session be quash hilary fourteenth OF  george the second
buckley against turner assumpsit modern pl Siderf pl in consideration the  plaintiff to cause to go attendance the defendant brother he assume to pay  foster except in arrest of judgement that there be no consideration which  Keeling agree and that it shall be to let go attendance so Moreton but contra  by Keble er p Twisden and raynsford that it be well enough to pay if the  plaintiff will sue or send to prosecute the defendant brother albeit the  averment be to cause to go attendance thus far but judgement stay post pl
buckley against turnor Monday Apr ante pl assumpsit Jones pro plaintiff pray  judgement the consideration be ground on a just debt for ware sell to the  defendant brother and quod to cause to go attendance good grammar and after a  verdict which the court agree on view of rider dictionary and judgement pro  plaintiff Keble er p
buckley ux versus collier mich will B R salk S c where the wife ought not to  be join in the action unless a express promise be make to her Mod husband and  wife bring a action on the case in which they declare that the defendant be  indebt to they for periwigwork do by the wife at the instance and request of  the defendant he promise to pay c and upon a demurrer to this declaration it  be adjudge ill because the duty belong to the husband and shall survive to his  executor f he die therefore she ought not to be join in this action with the  husband unless a express promise have be make to her to pay the money Wilson  see a great case on this subject cro side roll
buckley versus Cambell hill Ann B R usance the time must be aver the plaintiff  declare upon a bill of exchange draw at Amsterdam Payable at London at two  usance and do not show what the two usance be and judgement be give pro def  for the court can not take notice of foreign usance which vary be long in one  place than another a a Mr Bailey in his treatise on bill of exchange page make  a quere on this point where there be a express averment that the bill be  present on the day it become Payable the omission be only fatal on demurrer  keb
buckley versus palmer Trin W salk Mod a action for a false return and verdict  find for the plaintiff and now a peremptory mandamus be move for but it be  oppose by the defendant holt CJ when a action be bring for a false return and  that be falsify we can refuse a peremptory mandamus but this motion here can  be make till four day be pass after the return of the postea because the  defendant have so long time to move in arrest of judgement
buckley versus palmer Trin will B R see page pl Mod raym after the return  falsify peremptory mandamus be of right see Mod information for a false return  c Comber S C holt see salk skin Str Str vide saint Ann c Com mandamus d that  vol d Edward pa a action be bring for a false return and a verdict be for the  plaintiff and a peremptory mandamus be move for and oppose because it be a  hard verdict c et per holt c j when a action be bring for a Salkeld false  return and that be falsify we can refuse a peremptory mandamus say notam this  motion can be make till four day be pass after the return of the postea  because the defendant have so long to move in arrest of judgement Pas W b r  the case of the city of Exeter
buckley versus pirk Trin Ann B R rot   b more cro car Bulst Poph post S c d p  case l e if executor of lessee for year enter into the tenement no part of the  profit unless what be over and above the rend shall be asset but be receive by  the executor as tertenant and appropriate to the use of the lessor vide title  executor
BUCKLY administrator OF Nichols against Welsh trin car two rot payment in know  f on judgement the defendant plead payment to which the plaintiff demurrer per  curian its ill by the party himself but by the bail it be good if its bring by  administrator pendent light and the contest in the spiritual court be on will  nuncupative its doubtful if only about administration its well enough but if  the contest be between executor or on controversy of a will in write such  administrator pendent light can sue as have be adjudge adjornatur but in both  he must aver the contest continue
Buckmaster versus TROUGHTON mich geo I in what time judgement may be sign  after call for a plea c Vid broom v uvoodward post p home v chapman p in this  cause the defendant be call upon for a rejoinder in the evening and judgement  be sign the next morning it be move to set aside the judgement for want of  long notice the court set aside the judgement on payment of cost because no  time be limit by rule of the court cook c p but declare it shall be a stand  rule for the future that no judgement shall be sign till the open of the  office the next day in the afternoon after proper demand be make in write of  the plead for want of which such judgement shall be sign
BUCKMER against sawyer formedon in remainder a man seize of land in gavelkind  have issue three daughter that be a b and c devise all his land to a in tail  the remainder of one half to b in tail the remainder of the other half to c in  tail and if b die without issue the remainder of Brownlow goldsborough her  moiety to g and her heir and if c die without issue the remainder of her  moiety to b and her heir the devisor die a and b die and the question be if c  shall have a formedon in remainder only or several formedons for this land and  it seem to all the justice that one formedon lie well for all for that that it  be by one self same conveyance though that the estate come by several death  and this action be to be bring by the heir of c after the death of c see the  three and four Phil and mary dyer note that after appearance of a jury and  after that diverse of they be swear other be challenge so that it can not be  take by reason of default of juror but a new distringa award and at the day of  the return of that these which be swear before appear and then be challenge  but no challenge shall be allow for that that they be swear before if it be  not of after time to the first appearance michaelmas James in the common bench
Bucknall against SWINNICKE accord modern pl in indebitatus for money lend to  the use of the plaintiff the defendant plead that post promise c there be a  agreement that the defendant shall pay this money to I S in satisfaction of a  suit in the exchequer and to stay that which the plaintiff accept in that  manner and no other to which the plaintiff demurrer general because the  receipt and promise be agree so it be impossible the defendant can receive it  in other manner without issue or traverse of the promise in other manner and  it be not good by way of accord because the Keble money be pay by the  plaintiff not by the defendant and judgement pro plaintiff nisi
Bucknall and SELLWEED execution ex motion winnington solicitor general the  court grant a supersedeas of execution by capias be general unde intimacy be  which be intend of judgement in b r whereas it be on judgement in c b affirm  in b r and though no error be assign bat only to know facias and execution for  not assign error for the capias as well as become facias must be special unde  intimacy be in c b and judgement affirm in b r
Bucknall forth c against tailor wine in feign action sur promise for livre  receive by the merchant who pay it to the plaintiff as d per quart for excise  of brandy within the statute car cap suppose it to be a strongwater whereas  the defendant who be the merchant will not pay nothing this be but a foreign  import spirit not make of homematerials and the statute be of spirit of wine  and cider import which can be intend of spirit import make of wine and cider  because else which none can do it must be prove that it be make of wine and  cider and the consequence will be that spirit of wine and cider import will  pay no duty which be a great manufacture here and the wisdom of the Act be  that English manufacture and material shall pay but d of foreign material d of  foreign material and manufacture d on each act of excise and there be yearly  spend more brandy make here by galons than in all Europe beside and be know at  the CustomeHouse and so enter as water vitae for where there be no rate in the  customhouse set the merchant pay d in the pound accord to the intrinsic value  of the thing but it be agree that spirit Keble make of homemanufacture as  cider of English growth pay nothing till make in to other manufacture and in  car cap in lieu of coinage it be call distil water so in a Irish Act and per  curian that which be repute to be a strongwater or usual drink be such but if  not potable but only in order to prepare water its a spirit and afterward  verdict be pro plaintiff
BUCKNELLS case action for robbery on the statute of Winchester Bucknell be rob  in a hundred within the county of buck and thereupon bring his action upon the  statute of Winchester because the thief be not take and not gild be plead by  the inhabitant the jury give this special verdict videlicet that he be rob the  same day allege in the declaration but in another place and within another  parish then that he have allege in the declaration but that both the parish be  within the say hundred upon which they pray the judgement of the court whether  the inhabitant be guilty adjudge by the court for the plaintiff for it be not  material in what parish he be rob so it be within the same hundred Owen hill  Elizabeth in Com banc rot
BUCKNELS case against the FERMERS OF excise tax Coleman move for a certiorari  to remove three information exhibit against he before the commissioner of  excise which Jones on the Act of car cap of take away the court of ware oppose  because there be a appeal give to the next session and a clause that no  certiorari shall be allow but yet by Coleman this court be not exclude to send  one to the commissioner but only to the session in the country also the party  have election either to pray certiorari or to appeal to other commissioner  also this clause arise on car a additional Act against brewer car which make  these offence and the penalty thereof in which there be no negative word the  court incline it lie not but they order the fermors to show cause why it shall  not go which be all one as to deny it for they give judgement and make  execution one day upon a information the other and the court will not stay  proceed in the mean time so can never try the question
bucksom versus Hoskins mich Ann B R ld raym S c Mod to know facias variant  from the judgement not amendable after nul tiel record the writ be not vicious  in see Mod case salk S C holt error of a judgement in c b and the to know  facias to assign error be quare performance to have non debet of a judgement  in ejectment for two message whereas the recovery be de to make one messuagio  only the plaintiff in error plead nul tiel record and the defendant move to  amend he cite cro Ro e cro cro et side et per holt c j nothing appear to be  vicious or informal to need a amendment and there may be a good judgement that  agree with it the writ be good though improper for the purpose and we can put  a deceit upon the defendant and make his plea false when it be true cro James  be say to be a strain case
Buckstone against SHURLOCK mich banc sup enter Trin rot error to reverse a  judgement in the common plea upon a information for sell of wine without  licence a writ of error be bring to reverse a judgement give in the common  plea upon a information for sell of wine without licence contrary to the  statute the error assign be that the information be bring in the court of the  common plea which be in the county of midlesex whereas the offence be allege  to be do at Lambeth in the county of Surre which ought not to be as Davisons  case be in hob Rep roll chief justici how do you prove this to be within the  statute of Edward if the statute give liberty to justice of peace and oyer and  terminer or justice of assize to inquire of this offence then a information  can be prefer in a county where the offence be not do and the meaning of the  statute James be not to put the party without remedy and if he can sue by the  statute of Edward in the count where the offence be commit then this statute  of James bar he not to prefer a information in another county latch of council  against the enformer say thht by the statute of Edward a information lie  before justice of peace or assize or gaol delivery roll chief justice I deny  that by the statute of Edward the information can not have be bring in any  other place but in the court at Westminster and therefore that it be not  necessary to bring it in the county where the fact be do notwithstanding the  statute of James it be reason it shall be so because that no jurisdiction be  give by the stat of James to justice where they have no power before and the  court of record express in the stat of Edward shall be intend one of the court  at Westminster and not a court of record elsewhere therefore show cause why  the judgement shall not be affirm
Buckwood versus Beal mich James in a action of trespass it be say by the court  that if a sheriff execute a capias and there be no original to warrant it he  be excuse in it for he be not to examine whether the original be sue out or no  and for this Trewyrmards case h and so if a bailiff execute a process make to  he by the steward for damage recover in the manor in a thing in which they  have no authority to hold plea the bailiff be excuse and shall not be punish  because he be not to examine the jurisdiction of the court h Edward ass but if  process come to the sheriff to arrest I S and he arrest I n or to make  execution of the good of I S and he make execution of the good of I n he be a  trespasser for in this case he must take notice Brownlow goldsborough at his  peril of the person and the good for when he arrest I n or do execution upon  his good he do it without warrant and so if I S sue a replevin to the sheriff  to replevin the cattle and I S come to the sheriff and show he the cattle of I  n and say they be his cattle and he make replevin of the cattle he be a  trespasser to I n and the sheriff may have a action of trespass against I S  for his false information for the sheriff must at his own peril take notice  who cattle they be h h but if there be any fraud in the matter he may aver  that
bud against Milward this be a action for scandalous word and defendant move  the court to respite the trial upon a affidavit of the absence of a material  witness upon show cause it be insist the affidavit shall have prove that the  absent witness be present when the word be speak and to show that to be the  practice a case be quote trubi against Nicholls Trin Geo per cur there be no  reason to encourage these action more than or indeed as much as action for  good sell and the like the affidavit be in the same in all barn case and the  rule to show cause why the trial shall not be respite be make absolute chapel  for defendant Eyre and agar for plaintiff
bud versus berkenhead Trin W m B R in replication to avoid the statute of  limitation the continuances must be show see show Mod Lord raym Str atk will  defendant have plead the statute of limitation the plaintiff reply in  avoidance that he sue out a attachment returnable mich car et quod sum verinde  in such a manner process to be that the defendant in Michaelmas term James  Salkeld er p appear c et per cur this plead be not good it must be show that  there be continuances till the time of declare and a in such a manner process  be not sufficient to show a matter before declaration though it have be hold  so for matter after
BUDEN v door July exception Lord Hardwicke hold that in the case of a bill for  discovery of a defendant title he may object to make such discovery by his  answer it seem however that subsequent decision and many judicial observation  have shake the rule deducible from the principal case and subject a party to  plead or demurrer instead of object to answer by a answer except in case of  impute crime penalty or forfeiture see much reason and most of the former case  refer to in Ves c c see also Ves c and Ves and b c as to the except case of  impute crime of penalty or of forfeiture see Mr Beamess valuable work on plea  which inter alian refer to the recent case of Parkhurst v Lowton Meriv quod  vide as well as by plea c supplement the bill state a title and that certain  old term be stand out defendant do not plead thereto but set up a title  inconsistent with the plaintiff though he may have plead it exception to the  answer for not set out what deed and write defendant have relate to defendant  title the master allow the exception Lord chancellor allow the exception to  the report for that you can come by a fish bill in this court and pray a  discovery of the deed and write of defendant title if indeed there be any  charge in the bill general or special that defendant have in his power deed  and write of plaintiff title a answer must be give thereto Reg lib a fol
BUDICOME and jones how far the court will not set aside a writ of inquiry by  reason of the smallness of the damage Mr reeves move to set aside a writ of  inquiry which be have in a action bring against the defendant for lie with the  plaintiff wife one reason be that the jury have give but S d damage another  that they be interest for the defendant the court say where indeed the damage  be certain upon the face of the declaration they do set these writ of inquiry  aside if they do not give as much but in other case they never do it and as to  the exception about the jury be interest the court say you shall not have go  on then so they will do nothing in it lev Ven Barnardiston king b er p
BUICKLEY against EVESQ chester tithe Paulet pray a prohibition in suit for  tithe suggest a plea of a agreement for a year plead in the ecclesiastical  court of Chester and not allow d which be by way of contract and not in bar as  a agreement for life or many year but per curian all be one and both be  triable by the spiritual court if the suit be for tithe in kind but contrary  if the suit be for the money then a prohibition will lie and so Cr must be  intend
bull against knight smith forge to pay chimneymoney not a blowinghouse  trespass for take his good and upon non culp the jury find a special verdict  and therein the statute of chimneymoney which do enact that for every  firehearth shall be pay S per annum proviso that the Act shall not extend to  any blowinghouse stamp or kiln and that the plaintiff have a smith forge which  can be use without bellows to blow the fire and because the plaintiff will not  pay S for it the defendant collector of the chimneymoney take the good as a  distress for the S si c and upon argument by the king counsel for the  defendant no one appear for the plaintiff judgement be give for the defendant  for a blowinghouse be a house where iron lead or tin be cast or melt to which  the proviso extend but not to a smith forge levinz term sanct hill year car  two in banc king
bull against mayo slander I have indict he of perjury and doubt not but to  prove he guilty to all intent and purpose Jones move for judgement be agree  Hicks case that the latter part be not actionable but the whole sentence must  be intend false after verdict and so its as good as a express averment that he  be never indict of perjury which Twisden agree and that the defendant must  justify if he can and without king b xil Keble er p special Keble loss  averment be needless hide and Windham contra falsely wickedly will not supply  where the averment be necessary as here for if he be indict its not actionable  so where its say I be tell or I dream c the plaintiff must aver where in fact  he be never tell so wherever the word be not scandal without averment but by  consent the party agree to amend the whole or waive it and begin de to make  new and discontinue by consent judgement stay by agreement
bull against palmer executor upon account with himself nonsuit shall not pay  cost SC Jo keb ante assumpsit and declare that the defendant covenant with he  be executor to I S as executor upon which account so much be due and he  promise to pay it upon non assumpsit the plaintiff be nonsuit and the question  be if he shall pay cost wile hold that he shall pay cost because he do not sue  as executor nor produce the will but find the action upon a account with  himself Rainsford chief justice Twysden and Jones justice contra for the  action be in the right of his executorship and the money recover will be the  asset and they give judgement accord
bull against palmer in assumpsit the plaintiff be nonsuit in indebitat  assumpsit upon accuse computasset for money c have in the testator lifetime  shall not pay cost keb levinz the plaintiff declare that the defendant be  indebt to his testator whereupon the plaintiff account and the defendant be  find in arrear and promise to pay upon issue non assumpsit the plaintiff be  nonsuit it be move by Thompson that the plaintiff shall not pay cost for the  ground of the action be the duty to the testator and therefore the action be  not within the statute of h touch cost sander the for the action be find upon  the account between the plaintiff and the defendant and so the matter be  within the knowledge of the plaintiff and for this he cite the case of Atkey  against hear Cr car and W Jones there be no need there for the plaintiff to  dame himself administrator but the court hold that the plaintiff shall not pay  cost for the plaintiff make title to his action as administrator and the money  recover shall be asset and therefore he shall not pay cost Cr James Barret  against Winchcomb and Haywarth against David Cr car peacock against steer  Hutton townley case Jones t er p
bull against potter c ante error Jones pray error bring on judgement in know  fa against the bail may not be certify into the exchequerchamber be as Hub  Bradshaw case not within the statute Elizabeth albeit it lie into parliament  nor be it ever certify into the exchequer and per curian the bail be discharge  of this writ Keble er p
bull against rogers mich geo defendant have move in arrest of judgement and  obtain the common rule which be that the entry of judgement be stay till the  court be move on behalf of the plaintiff and shall otherwise order of which  motion defendant be to have notice draper for plaintiff admit the objection  make in point of law and pray that a entry be make on the roll as the  adjudication of the court that the judgement be arrest which be order the rule  leaves the action pen pleadable in bar to a new action till the entry pray be  make plaintiff can bring a writ of error or maintain a new action pool for  defendant
bull and knight cost Mr solicitor finch pray Triple cost on car cap in  trespass against the king officer collect the hearthmony as in car cap be give  to the constable which Livesly secondary have refuse to give because the  constable may still collect at the king election and no Triple cost be give to  the king officer say adjornatur
bull and knight Thursday Jan tax in trover on not guilty special verdict find  car cap that two shilling shall be pay for every firehearth not except and S  except stamp blowinghouse c car cap the defendant debit agreed price have  power to distrain si super totan means the firehearth of a smithsforge be not  Chargeable c for the plaintiff if Chargeable for the defendant and Mr  solicitor winnington for the defendant that a smithsforge be Chargeable in car  cap and so adjudge in goffe and Lloyd by three judge against hale Ch just who  contra to rule by consent of party take hold of imperfect plead for this be  not within the exception of car cap S which only enumerate some particular and  give no exemption in like case so though smith use bellows they can be say  blow house which be appropriate to cast of ironworks not to smith and though  this be a utensil of trade its as well Chargeable as baker oven and brewer  copper wile justice say this be a hearth and not include in the word  blowinghouse which be put into save the meltinghouses of tyn in Cornwall who  have also stamp to coin it et per curian a smithsforge be neither within the  word nor intention of the exception of car cap and no body attend for the  plaintiff judgement pro ring nisi
bull and palmer ante cost in indebitatus in to hold off only on accuse  computasset to the executor Polyxphen pray cost on nonsuit be as his own debt  which be oppose because it appear all be as executor and the suit in that  right as upon escape in executor time Cr barrel but by wile this be a matter  in the plaintiff own cognizance and the account be the ground of this action  and need not be say as executor nor show testament in declaration but only in  the account and therefore cost be to be pay Twisden nun pay cost at commonlaw  before h cap and this be only between party which be intend in his proper  right not as executor and wherever the executor must make his title as  executor though the debt accrue in his time as here he shall not pay cost  contra in trover on conversion in his own time there he need not be name  executor but here the account can be allege to the plaintiff general but must  say as executor and Cr and hut peacock and Townly be doubtful report but must  be rule on that difference which Rainsford Ch I agree and the profert litter  forger of wills be not necessary but aid by verdict so by Jones justice the  defendant shall pay no cost for this money recover shall be asset and the  account be as executor as on a collateral promise per curian contra wile no  cost
bull and palmer rend Indebitatus for rend on lease by the testator and  assumpsit in the same declaration against the defendant on accuse computasset  with the plaintiff for the same rend as executor Harris pray cost on nonsuit  because the account be in the defendant own time and to this wile justice  incline strong on conversion by executor in his own time which be within the  reason of h cap so Cr but a general indebitatus on account if the party be  find as executor its ill and so have be adjudge and so in assumpsit on actual  promise to he he shall pay cost which Rainsford chief justice agree contra by  Twisden and that a account will not lie bare for rend which Rainsford chief  justice agree unless express for that and other thing as tax et adjornatur  religion in information on Elizabeth cap at Stafford assize the defendant  after the jury swear come into court and conform and special verdict find this  and whether this save charge or not be the question per curian any time before  judgement conformity be sufficient and to be take most favourable Keble er p
bull S case ante poor S settlement two justice make a order to remove he to d  they appeal to session where it be order that he be remove to a three place  which be ill for they can but affirm or reverse and the order of session  reverse
bull v allen all Feb demurrer to a bill contain distinct matter and party bill  to be relieve against several contract enter into by the plaintiff with the  defendant relate to share in a bubble call the Pennsylvania bubble and to have  his money repay which he have pay to the defendant for share sell by they  respective and charge that the defendant have Bunbury form themselves into a  society to carry on the fraud the defendant demurrer because the bill contain  several and distinct charge against several and distinct defendant and the  demurrer be allow notam they deny combination as be necessary upon such a  demurrer as this
bull v Harvey barn er Lassiter against harvey bull against the same trin geo  after verdict obtain by plaintiff the record of nisi prius and writ of hab  corpora jurat be accidental lose by Mr jacomb late associate of the home  circuit rule for defendant and jacomb to show cause why new record and writ  shall not be make out agreeable to the old and verdict return accord to the  find of the jury make absolute on affidavit of service no cause be show to the  contrary win for plaintiff
bull versus steward b r escape upon mesne process issue out of the borough  court against the bailiff thereof defendant here shall not take advantage of  any error in the process below under which he may justify action upon the case  against the defendant bailiff of the borough court of Southwark for a escape  upon mesne process the declaration set out the levy the plaint and proceed in  the borough court until the arrest and the defendant Alice Rawlins in that  action be in the now defendant custody he suffer her to escape to the  plaintiff damage upon the general issue there be a verdict for the plaintiff  at last Surre assize and now it be move in arrest of judgement that the  present declaration be ill be it because it appear that the plaint in the  court below be levy against two person John Warner and Alice Rawlins but only  one be proceed against so that the plaintiff by process against one only can  not have have the effect of his suit below to this it be answer and resolve  per curian that even suppose the plaint to be erroneous yet the officer shall  not take advantage thereof in a collateral action as this be and he may  justify the arrest under the process and be shall not be suffer to say in this  action that the plaintiff can not have have the effect of his suit below dly  it be object that the declaration do not allege in what manner Alice Rawlins  be indebt to the plaintiff but only that in general that she be indebt it may  be upon a judgement or such a debt as that court have no jurisdiction of nor  do it appear that the cause of action arise within the jurisdiction to this it  be answer and resolve per curian that this be after a verdict we will suppose  every thing prove at the trial which be necessary to be prove and that the  cause of action arise within the jurisdiction unless the contrary can be make  to appear upon the face of this record judgement for the plaintiff
bullen versus Benson mich will B R where a plea be not good without a traverse  salk Salkeld er p ditioned that the defendant shall appear in B R die moon  prox post quinden consecrated Martini c the defendant plead the statute and  that the bind be primo deliberate by he novemb and that he be then take and  arrest by the plaintiff by a writ returnable in Michaelmas term c in B R and  be so in custody the plaintiff take this bind hoc prepare be verify and upon a  demurrer to this plea it be adjudge ill for when the defendant have plead that  the bind be primo deliberate on the that day of November he shall not have  rest there but have traverse that he deliver it on the b day of November  accord to Yelverton for here the date immaterial for suppose the arrest be  before the return of the writ and then after the return the plaintiff take a  bind antedate this bind be void because the defendant be legal in custody for  want of bail and ought to have be keep in custody
buller and LUSITANO how far the court give liberty to take out execution pen a  writ of error Mr fazakerly move to have liberty to take out execution  notwithstanding a writ of error upon account of there have be another writ of  error in the same court abate by marriage and he say the distinction be  between the second writ of error be bring in the same court and in another to  which purpose the case of Mod Ven and the same book be cite the case of Walter  and Stokoe it be say be the same accord the court give he liberty to do it
buller and WATERHOUS Tuesday may trover in trover by consent try at bar by a  Hardfordshire jury of wood cut on the rectory of Badborne in Yorkshire the  plaintiff title be under the settlment of sir John Maynard and his wife by  fine of her land on marriage of the son on consideration of l portion pay  october to the father on trustee for year for payment of portion and security  of the trust in another indenture of the same date and delivery of the wife  jointure and Keble on payment thereof to be surrender which be pay and the  freehold be to the wife for life then to sir John for life then to the son in  fee with power in the last deed to revoke by consent of trustee and if this be  fraud against the defendant who purchase from the wife of sir John Maynard  that of July car by lease and release be the question by the plaintiff who  marry the daughter and heir of John the son the plaintiff conceive this be a  power reserve not to the son alone nor as standish and Bullen case this be no  shift to put the power in other name but this revocation must be by all party  or the survivor on valuable consideration which by Lord chief justice Branston  upon Elizabeth cap be hold good and not within the statute as a voluntary  settlement the defendant justify this as to the wife land the power be but on  consideration during the term not after because the wife estate be except out  of the first power in the term and so as to her inheritance after that term it  be but a voluntary conveyance but per curian the consideration can be divide  and though the deed be as well for marriage and affection as for money in  portion yet this be a deed for value in the son as well as in the wife who  portion it be
buller and waterhouse collusion special verdict in trover of wood cut in  Bradford wherein sir I Maynard be seize of parcel in his own right and of part  jure wife and for affection and on marriage of his son and portion settle to  Laurence for year remainder to sir I m for life c and another deed declare the  several trust with power of revocation which be for jointure c and fine  thereupon and agree that if sir I m or dame mary his wife after his or after  their death the son by consent of Rushworth c may sell the manor of battle  that they shall purchase as much to the same use verdict find the  consideration of affection marriage and portion extend to both land that sir I  m be dead that the son be dead and leave a daughter marry to buller the  plaintiff and that dame mary without revocation or consent of trustee sell to  the defendant conclude if the former conveyance by Elizabeth cap be void  against the defendant as frame they find for the defendant the court conceive  that they can judge this fraud unless it be express find but adjornatur
buller and waterhouse Friday February ante collusion levins for the defendant  the court be not to judge of fraud but of a proviso of a statute they be as on  h c de his who primo to produce feoffare solent and Brownl and Elizabeth cap  do not say it shall be fraud but that it shall be void within that proviso  this proviso of the settlement be not at the will and pleasure of the conveyor  but at the will of trustee yet it be within the meaning of the statute as well  as   stand and bullock and power to revoke by consent of I S Bridgm pl be a  power within the statute lane and that its find the trustee be relation of the  son wife yet this be only as to the eighty year limit for her jointure and  nothing to the inheritance for here the son also be to revoke by consent of  the trustee which be idle as to the son who have the feesimple and here the  lease for eighty year be surrender and the single question be if the mother  against her own settlement in marriage shall defeat the son say adjornatur
buller vers LUSITANO de pina where error abate by the act of the plaintiff  execution shall go barn b r S c a writ of error bring by a feme sole abate by  her marriage and then she and her husband bring a second and the court give  leave to take out execution it strange report er p be a delay occasion by the  act of the plaintiff in error Jenkins v Bates post S p vide Com dig pleader b  Mod vent
Bullington and salt executor OF executor in debt against executor he plead in  abatement that there be a other executor not name who do administer the  plaintiff take issue that he do not administer to which the defendant demurrer  special that the issue be immaterial per curian on read the record a respond  ouster be award and hale chief justice rebuke wine who demurrer be mere for  delay for executor defendant must say the other do administer but the executor  plaintiff need not be say to administer which have be the constant know  difference so Upton and Noell and bawd and Bennet Keble de boundary michaelis  year in b r car two Wednesday October hale chief justice Twisden Rainsford  justice
bullock v wood surmise upon a prohibition to be prove within six month it be  inform on the defendant behalf that the Plaintiffabout six month pass obtain a  prohibition out of this court for stay of the defendant proceed in the  spiritual court for tithe upon surmise that part of the land out of which the  tithe be demand be chantry land and discharge of tithe in the chantry hand and  so by the statute ought to be in his and that some other part of the choice  case in chancery land be barren heath and waste ground and the plaintiff have  not make proof of his surmise therefore the defendant desire a consultation  with his charge accord to the statute and refer to doctor Barkely to consider  whether the plaintiff have prove his surmise within six month bullock  plaintiff wood defendant year Eliz
bullock vers lincoln practice on assign bail bind Ann c ante the latitat be  returnable on the Wednesday and upon debate it be hold that the bail bind can  not be assign until after Monday for the four day be to be one inclusive and  the other exclusive and where the four day be Sunday the party have all the  next day to put in bail strange pro quer
bullock vers noke at guildhall in person Pratt CJ tender of stock must be on  the very day in a stock cause the plaintiff prove a tender on the second day  of the open and will have examine into the custom of the alley which be to  allow either party a day or two to tender or accept but the chief justice  refuse to hear we say their usage can never alter the law and so the plaintiff  be call N B in c b chief justice king leave it to the jury upon such a  evidence and they find it a good tender vide Thornton v Moulton ante
bullock versus parson pasch Ann salk in debt after verdict for the plaintiff  Mr Eyre move in arrest of judgement that the distringa be with a blank and  debt is owed the cause of action omit so it be a distringa in another cause on  the other side it be urge to be as no distringa and aid by verdict and that it  be amendable hob cro the court make two question saint whether the judge of  nisi prius have authority to try this issue et per holt CJ his authority be  not by the distringa but by the commission of assize for the e c give the  trial by nisi prius before justice of assize at first these trial be bad upon  the venire facias and the clause of nisi prius be by the e c order to be  insert in the venire these trial continue to be upon the venire till e c which  require that the name of the juror be first return into court by this Act two  inconvenience be remedy saint the party may be prepare to make his challenge  and dly the defendant be prevent by this mean to cast a essoin at nisi prius  which be use frequent before dly the court hold no distringa or the want of a  distringa to be aid by a verdict but a ill distringa be not and remember a  case wherein sander of counsel at the bar drop the distringa out of his hand  that he may want a distringa which will be aid and not keep and show a ill one  which will be nought also they hold it amendable and give judgement pro quer  holt KB nolle attendance
BULLYTHORPE against turner in replevin easter geo the court hold that the  particular place of take good c ought to be insert in every declaration in  replevin and that to take in hand in elsewhere loco be to be consider as a  plea in bar and not in abatement No affidavit be requisite to be file  therewith nor be it necessary to be plead within four day after the  declaration deliver resolution curiae
Bulmer versus Charles paulet lord saint John keb in a ejectment upon a trial  at bar this question arise upon the evidence tenant for life remainder in tail  to I S join in a fine I S die without issue whether the conusee shall hold the  land for the life of the tenant for life sergeant Ellis press to have it find  special though it be resolve in Bredons case that the estate of the conusee  shall have continuance but he say it be a strange estate that shall be both a  determinable fee and a estate pur auter vie and he cite cro major and Talbot  case where in covenant the plaintiff set forth that a feme tenant for life  remainder in fee to her husband make a lease to the defendant for year wherein  the defendant covenant with the lessors their heir and assign to repair and  they convey the reversion to the plaintiff and for default of reparation the  plaintiff bring his action as assignee to the husband and resolve to be well  bring because the wife estate pass as drown in the fee the court say Bredons  case be full in the point but the reason there give hale say make against the  resolution for it be say that the remainder in tail passes first which if it  do the freehold must go by way of surrender and so drown but they shall rather  be construe to pass accuse and to make one blowing hob in English case it be  resolve if tenant for life remainder in tail to a infant join in a fine if the  infant after reverse the fine yet the conusee shall hold it for the life of  the conusor   in Bredons case and he resemble it to the case in Inst a man  seize in the right of his wife and entitle to be tenant by the courtesy join  in a feoff with his wife the heir of his wife shall not avoid this during the  husband life nevertheless he tell Ellis that he will never deny a special  verdict at the request of a learned man but it appear that the plaintiff have  a good title after the life shall fall the defendant buy it of he and the jury  be discharge
Bulstrode a inn not to use the trade of a alehouse the same be for traveller  hut notam by Yelverton justice that if a inn do use the trade of a alehouse  this shall be within the statute of alehouse croak justice No person be for to  erect a inD without a licence from the king Fenner justice statute for  alehouse include all except only booth in fair not to keep a inn and a  alehouse but to be suppress to keep a inn only for the relief of traveller the  whole court agree in this
Bulstrode against hall Monday may sewer in evidence to a jury Windham conceive  one can prescribe for the king inheritance videlicet for land betwixt the high  and lowwatermark or infra to flow refluxum as he say have be hold on special  verdict in the exchequer contra for good wreck c Twisden doubt on constable  case   but Glyn against Maynard hold they may prescribe
Bulstrode against hall trial finch solicitor move that trial begin boundary  Paschae and adjourn for a view may be finish in Trinity term which Windham  conceive he must so foster contra by Twisden yet concession be
Bulstrode against LECHMORE June engagement of silence by a counsellor he shall  not be put to answer the bill be to discover a ancient deed of entail suppose  to be in the defendant hand and that he have peruse it and that in discourse  he have acknowledge such deed and other like charge the defendant say by plea  that he be a counsellor with a b that on a reference between the party it be  agree that nothing that pass then shall be make use of on either side or be  disclose the Lord chancellor order that what the defendant know only as  counsellor or under such contract of silence he shall not be put to answer
Bulstrode anfield plaintiff against FEVERHILL defendant a prohibition Ro Rep  in a prohibition move for by Noy the case appear to be this the plaintiff give  in evidence at a courtleet against Feverbill that he be a drunkard upon this  be libel against he in the spiritual court upon this a prohibition be pray and  grant by the court for that no action upon the case lie against one for  prosecute a matter against another in the ordinary way and course of justice  and so be cutler and Dixons case coke pars fol b coke chief justice and the  whole court agree herein for that otherwise man shall be terrify from proceed  in the legal course of justice against another for proceed in this manner  clear a man shall never be trouble or vex in any other Cotirt coke if one come  to we at the assize and petition to we against one and to have the good  behaviour against he he shall never be trouble by a action bring against he  for this again h in Spilmans report a man give evidence in a courtleet against  one that she be a scold upon this she libel against he in the spiritual court  and for this a prohibition be grant for a man shall not be punish by way of  action upon the case or otherwise for prosecute a matter against another by a  legal way and course of justice in this principal case by the rule of the  court a prohibition be grant
Bulstrode Anonymous a presentment ex duty for not frequent his parish church a  prohibition grant by the court to the ecclesiastical court note that one be  present ex duty in the ecclesiastical court for the not frequent of his parish  church he there plead that this be not his parish church but that he have use  for to frequent another parish church and to resort tanto this and because  they in the spiritual court will not receive his plea the court be move for a  prohibition for that by the law in the time of king h e e they in the  ecclesiastical court have not any power to intermeddle with the precinct of  parish church neither be they there to judge what shall be say to be a manse  parish church and so be the opinion of the whole court and therefore by the  rule of the court a prohibition be grant
Bulstrode Anonymous a submission to stand to the umperage of a five c notam  that this question be move unto the court arise upon a submission to a award  where the submission be of all action suit and quarrel unto four person and  the umperaore of another and the assumpsit be mutual to stand unto and perform  the order of they five the four person and the five as umpire do make the  award and the party submit do refuse to perform this order and award so by  they make the question propound be whether this award thus make be make accord  to the submission or not William justice that the award be well make and  pursue the submission but otherwise it have be if in the submission they have  be divide in the submission as if it have be in this manner that if the four  can not agree in their award that then the submission to be to the uniperage  of a five man then these five can not all of they join in the make of this  award but the submission be here to four and to the umperage of a five they  all five may well join in their award and so the award here make by they all  five be clear good and well make accord to the submission and the same award  ought to be perform the whole court agree with he hereiii
Bulstrode apthorpe plaintiff against cockerel defendant action upon the case  for word Ro Rep Ro Abr in a action upon the case for scandalous word upon non  culp plead a verdict be give for the plaintiff it be move for the defendant in  arrest of judgement that the word be not actionable be these old apthorpe be a  perjure knave for he do swear that such wood be worth S whereas it be dear of  a mark coke chief justice the word be not actionable as they be lie here for  it be lie in the declaration that he say that he be forswear at the assize the  word only be that he say he be a old and false forswear knave and I cockerel  will prove it Haughton justice your meaning here be to make your declaration  go to perjury you ought to have say whereas it be not worth a mark you say  here whereas it be dear of a mark this can be good for he may pay S for it and  yet it may be dear of a mark for the maintenance of the action the word shall  have be lie to make this perjury coke a innuend shall never give cause of  action this which be here allege in the declaration be but argumentative by  way of argument and so not actionable the court all agree herein against the  plaintiff and therefore the rule of the court be quod to express grief nil to  take in hand per billam
Bulstrode baily plaintiff against Maynard defendant a action upon the case for  word in a action upon the case for word upon non culp plead a verdict be find  for the plaintiff it be move in arrest of judgement that the word be not  actionable the word be these speak by the defendant of the plaintiff thou art  a roguish knave and a thief cur not vithstanding this be speak in the  adjective sense yet the word thief here be a distinct word by it self and  scandalous and so these word as they be speak be scandalous and actionable and  so by the rule of the court judgement be give and so enter for the plaintiff
Bulstrode baker plaintiff against defendant a action upon the case for  interruption in common where the husband claim in right of his wife shall have  on action without join his wife in a special action upon the case for be  interrupt in the enjoyment of common the case appear to be this a woman sole  have right to have common for term of her life she take the plaintiff to  husband who be hinder in take the common bring a action upon the case in his  own name without name of his wife whether this action be well bring be the  question by the opinion of the whole court the action be well bring by the  husband alone without name of his wife be only to recover damage I and so in  all case where damage be only to be recover as in a quare hinder and ejection  strong he needs not to join his wife Bulstrode er p
Bulstrode baker plaintiff against defendant action upon the case for word Ro  Rep Ro Abr in a action upon the case for scandalous word upon non culp plead a  verdict be give for the plaintiff it be move in arrest of judgement that the  declaration be not good the same be that such a one name carolus be of good  name and fame the defendant dixit de a saying beforehand carolo where be this  baker innuendo the say carolus baker I he have take a false oath and I can  make he look through the pillory it be urge that this declaration be not good  because there be no baker speak of before and the innuend will not make this  good and to this purpose the case between jeames and Rutlech vas cite coke Q  pars fol touch the force of a innuendo coke chief justice the declaration here  be good and sufficient if one shall say of a counsellor where be this  counsellor innuend such a one this be good dodderidge justice if one shall say  your fatherinlaw be forswear innuend I S your fatherinlaw and so lie in the  declaration this be good the whole court clear of opinion that the declaration  here be good and accord the rule of the court be quod judgment to go into pro  querent
Bulstrode benton plaintiff against aim defendant a mistake of the clerk in  enter the judgement amend in court in a action of debt the plaintiff have  judgement quod recupere therefore to look at closely be per curian quod to  express grief recupere the clerk enter this in the enter of which record be  write and enter it in this manner therefore to look at closely be quod  preceding to express grief recupere debt is owed suum przedictuin de and  leaves out thev the same be in the record upon this mere mistake of the clerk  in his entry the court be move to have this amend and make to agree with the  record which the court do hold to be very fit and reasonable so to be do and  accord by the rule of the court the same mistake be amend in the Court  quod  notam
Bulstrode Biggs plaintiff against I S parson de d defendant a prohibition more  n Ro Rep in a prohibition a libel be against he in the SpiritualCourt for  tithe a suggestion there make by he for a modus of S for all tithe upon this a  prohibition grant the party at issue upon this go to trial and in this trial  the plaintiff in the prohibition become nonsuit because he can not prove the  modus upon this a consultation be grant to the spiritual court for they to  proceed there afterward a sentence there pass against he against the modus  from this sentence he appeal to another court upon the same libel there  against he he suggest a new modus of S for tythecorn and hay and upon this  pray to have a new prohibition upon the statute of e cap and this upon his own  surmise there be the same libel as before coke chief justice with they double  plead be not disallow this appeal here be in the same cause shall not make we  to grant a new prohibition the statute be after a consultation duly grant if a  parson de libel there for tithe of tree above twenty year growth if a  consultation be grant and he libel there again for tithe of great timbertrees  he shall here have a new prohibition because the consultation be not duly  grant this Act of parliament ought to have a reasonable construction S to be  before the same judge and for the same cause dodderidge justice the appeal do  only suspend the sentence but yet the same stand till in force in this case it  will be very mischievous if a new prohibition shall be grant for so upon  several appeal three or four prohibition may be grant which will be very  inconvenient notwithstanding the person of the judge be here alter yet it be  for the same cause as before Haughton justice the intent and purpose of this  statute be that he which have but one suit shall not be infinite trouble the  whole court against the prohibition for the great inconvenience that may ensue  and so a prohibition in this case be deny
Bulstrode burgess plaintiff against standish defendant burgess plain against  StandisA defen pasch James b r rot in debt for S rend in a writ of error to  reverse a judgement give in c b in a action of debt there bring for rend of S  and upon nil debet plead verdict and judgement be there give for the plaintiff  for the reverse of which judgement a writ of error be bring and the error  assign be for that the declaration be not good the action be in debt for S  rend and do not show in his declaration how this rend do grow to be due as he  ought to have do and so for this omission in the declaration be so material to  be allege the declaration be not good and the judgement there give for the  plaintiff in this cause erroneous and to be reverse curian all agree this  omission in the declaration to be a clear error to vitiate the declaration and  so the judgement for this cause erroneous and by the rule of the court the  judgement be reverse
Bulstrode Caesar plaintiff against Terrel defendant a action upon the case for  a escape in a action upon the case bring against the sheriff of n for a escape  upon non culp plead all the special matter be find and show to the court which  be this that a capias do issue to the sheriff to take one John which be by a  wrong name the sheriff return a non be invention and upon this a testaturn  issue out to he and therein name he by his right name upon this the sheriff  take he and have he in execution and afterward suffer he to escape Haughton if  the sheriff do arrest one and have he in execution be the wooer by which he be  take erroneous or not if the sheriff suffer he to escape he shall be charge  with this escape though he be erroneous take in execution the whole court  agree herein and that the sheriff be answerable for this escape  notwithstanding the first capias be by a wrong name for he be take and suffer  to escape hereupon non culp plead the special matter be find and show that the  first capias be by a wrong name yet the court clear of opinion that he be take  and in execution by his right name though the first capias be not right the  sheriff shall be Chargeable for the escape clear and so by the rule of the  court judgement be give for the plaintiff Bulstrode er p
Bulstrode Challoner plaintiff against petworth defendant a habeas corpus upon  the motion of Yelverton SollicitorGenerall for stay of execution the case  appear to be this a judgement be give for the plaintiff at Bristol execution  take out and the good of Petworth be attach and this be in a suit between they  for composition and a contract for iron the motion be for stay of execution  until a writ of error here bring be determine the which shall present be try  and if it then appear to be against he the whole money shall be pay and p aid  a habeas corpus for the body of Petworth coke we have no power here to hold  plea of foreign attachment because we can here do justice therein a habeas  corpus most common be pray and grant be the subterfu ge to avoid the do and  execution of justice we may Bulstrode er p grant a habeas corpus though there  be no suit here but yet the grant of this be in the discretion of the judge we  may hold plea of this but I will grant more procedendoes then habeas corpus  because that very much hurt happen to the subject by the grant of habeas  corpus they be chief obtain for matter of delay we can here in this case aid  you by the law but take your writ of error for you have no other remedy there  be no great injustice oftentimes do then happen by the aranting of these  habeas corpus the whole court agree with he herein by the rule of the court a  habeas corpus be grant but they will do nothing to stay execution
Bulstrode Charles crook plaintiff against avery defendant action upon the case  for word in a action upon the case for scandalous word speak by the defendant  of the plaintiff upon non culp plead a verdict be give for the plaintiff it be  move for the defendant in arrest of judgement that the word be not actionable  the word be these speak by the defendant of the plaintiff be a merchant S Mr  crook come into Cornwall with a blow coat on his back but have now get  together a great quantity of wealth by trade with pirate cousin in the tale of  pitcher and by extortion these word super a certain colloquium de prmdicto  carolo propellavit it be urge that these word be too general and so not  actionable coke chief justice the best man in the world may trade with pirate  the best merchant of England may have such trade but this be unknown unto he  Cousenino in the tale of pitcher this go to merchant and this be only by  mistelling these word not actionable he have extort extortion be multicolored  duty these be very have word and do sound in slander but we be not to give too  much way to such action upon the case for any word unless there be express  authority for the same or very apparent slander by the word speak in the time  of king flenry the first and in part of king Edward the three there be no  action upon the case of word nor assumpsits but these have very much increase  of late time too much way not to be give to they dodderidge these word as they  be lie in this declaration be not actionable they be too general they ought  also to express word and scandalous and not so by implication the whole Vourt  a reed herein that these word be not actionable and so the plaintiff ought not  to have his judgement and therefore the rule of the court be that judgement  shall be stay et quod to express grief nil to take in hand per billam  Bulstrode er p
Bulstrode Cranfield plaintiff against turnor and collins defendant ejection  strong Benl in a action of trespass and ejectment the award upon the roll be  against both the defendant they both plead non culp the first process S the  habeas corpora against they both but the venire facias against one of they  only one of they be noisy name in this they proceed to a trial and a verdict  for the plaintiff against both the defendant Crawley sergeant move to have  this amend after a writ of error bring and this omission assignee for error  curian the award upon the roll be well and this be the ground for the venire  facias which be make but against one and so the same be mistake and do vary  from that which be the ground if it the distringa be well against they both  dodderidge justice the error of the clerk be amendable accord to the roll  where this be mistake and be to be make agreeable unto that which be the  ground of all S the award upon the plea roll and this be plain so here in this  case because by the plearoll it be to be inter part prediction the venire  facias be only against one of they this be to be amend and to be make  consonant and agreeable with the plearoll curian the venire facias be well  amendable where it be mistake and to be make agreeable with the plearoll and  this be after verdict as this case here be the venire facias be to be amend  and make to accord with the award upon the plearoll this be the ground to  direct all the subsequent proceed and this omission here be but fault  clergyman who ought to have make the venire facias against both the defendant  and not against one of they alone as here he have do it and therefore this be  to be amend Bulstrode er p the whole court agree herein and therefore by the  rule of the court the same be amend and a supersedeas grant to stay the former  supersedeas have upon the writ of error because improvident to flow out and  the party to proceed in his writ of error and to assign his error without  delay
Bulstrode dean plaintiff against Newby defendant where a plain be to show how  a debt sue for become due and where not in a action of debt bring upon nil  debet plead a verdict be find for the plaintiff it be move in atrest of  judgement by John Harris because the plaintiff do not show how this debt do  first grow due it be adjudge here in this court upon this difference where a  man be in debt to another in he come to the party and desire he to forbear  this for a certain time and he will pay the same to he at a day certain by he  prefix there if be sue he for this after the day he needs not to show how this  grow due for the take of a day certain to pay the same this prove the verity  and certainty of the duty that if a man be indebt to another upon a simple  contract and sue for it upon a promise to pay it be it upon such a promise or  the like the plaintiff ought to show the cause of this and how the same grow  due in his declaration and therein to specify how and in what manner the same  grow due for in the one case S in the matter it be a duty present but a day  give for payment but in the other case not so and therefore he ought there to  show the special cause how the same do grow due and so be the difference which  be agree to be so by Henry Yelverton and by the court quod notam
Bulstrode doctor Alphonso and the college OF physician in London exception to  a return upon a habeas corpus Nota  that as touch this case of doctor Alphonso  which concern the college of Pbysitians in London who commit he for practice  of physic be bring to to the bar by a habeas corpus the return be read the  same upon the read appear to the court to be insufficient no cause be therein  show for his Com mitraent John more move the court for time to amend the  return dodderidge clear the return here be not good I Haughton justice the  censor by the Act be to commit he if they do find Bulstrode er p he to be  faulty here they have commit he but not show wherefore they do this in their  return and so the return not good the court be clear of opinion that the  return here be have and insufficient dodderidge as to the motion make for the  amendment of this return matter of form mere in a return be amendable but not  matter of fact which go in justification of the imprisonment and fine Haughton  if be do practice ill again then he shall do well to make a better warrant for  the commitment of he we will do all the right we can to the college but this  their return here be have and without all defence dodderidge they be very well  direct in doctor Bonhams case coke pars fol in what manner they ought to make  their return here we all agree in this that the return here be clear  insufficient and therefore by the rule of the court doctor Alphonso be bail  until the next term then to appear again the court conceive this to be the  best for he for that if the cou t shall discharge he for the insufficiency of  the return then they will present take he again and commit he and then will  amend their net n and make it better and for this cause for the good of the  doctor by the rule of the court he be bail but not absolute discharge of his  imprisonment
Bulstrode ewer plaintiff against chamberlain defendant a writ of error in a  writ of error to reverse a judgement give here against he Yelverton the king  solicitor move tl e court for a amendment of the bill upon the file coke the  bill here be the original we may amend the declaration accord to the bill but  how can we here amend the bill it self Yelverton the first draught of the bill  be well and right but in the engross of it these word S primo to go into for  the occupancy be omit and this be the main point but this be right in the  officebook in the first draught coke by h if the officebook be well then God  forbid that this omission by the clarke in the engross shall any way prejudice  the party but that this may well be amend and so accord to this by the rule of  the court the same be amend Bulstrode termin Micii caroli king b r certain  case and resolution upon the statute OF Elizabeth capite touch bastard child  and Elizabeth capite concern the poor and provision for they
Bulstrode glass plaintiff against gill defendant in a writ of error cro Yel in  a writ of error to reverse a judgement give in the court of c b in a action of  covenant there bring for not make of a lease and show quod nothing to have of  which he shall make a lease accord to his covenant the defendant there plead  quod to have unde upon this matter they be at issue and the jury find that he  have land whereof he may have make the lease they find what estate he have  therein and so judgement there give for the plaintiff the error assign be that  there be no good issue join for that the plea be have and so the issue upon it  have the question whether the verdict shall make the plea good the court be  clear of opinion that the plea be not good because he do not therein show what  estate he have in the land for the plea of to have of it self be no good and  sufficient plea without show in special matter the estate be have but yet the  whole court be clear of opinion that the verdict here have make the plea good  and so the judgement well give and therefore the rule be quod affirme judgment
Bulstrode Harrison plaintiff against james defendant a action of debt for  money win at play c in a action of debt bring by the plaintiff against the  defendant for money win of he at play the defendant pray that he may be admit  to wage his law and upon this prayer the court give he a day for to perform  this and at the day assign be by his counsel move the court that be may have  the benefit for to waive the wager of his law and to have the matter try by  the country unto this the plaintiff refuse to consent be demand by the court  and therefore by the rule of the court a to withdraw de lege and his  nonappearance be record note that waterhouse a officer of the court and clerk  of the crown office do then say and affirm that by the course of the court the  defendant may at any time without the assent of the plaintiff waive his wager  of law and stand to a trial by the country but notwithstanding this his  information the rule of the court be enter ut above
Bulstrode heath plaintiff against ridley defendant action of debt upon the  statute of usury Bulst Po more side Cr judgement and execution grant contrary  to a injunction statute of e c in a action of debt at the commonlaw upon the  statute of usury of Elizabeth cap and Elizabeth cap the defendant plead the  general issue which be find against he and so judgement to be give against he  a day be give by the court to the defendant to move in arrest of judgement if  he have any legal matter to move to stay judgement in the interim the  defendant go into the hai eery prefer his bill there and there procure a  injunction to stay judgement and execution here but notwithstanding this  injunction the court here proceed and do grant judgement and execution coke  chief justice look into the statute at large of e cap rastal fol and of h cap  rastal fol against such proceed to stay and hinder judgement and execution and  it be much to be wonder that none will inform upon these law in such case  against the party that procure such injunction after judgement at commonlaw or  to stay judgement and execution after trial have for that by the same statute  be it in plea real or personal after judgement give the party ought to be  quiet and to submit unto it for that judgement be once give in curian domini  king be not to be reverse nor avoid but by a legal course S per wandering or  per wipe on and so by the rule of the court in this case judgement and  execution be grant
Bulstrode horn plaintiff against Harrison defendant enter hill or James b r  rot a replevin for cattle defendant justify as servant c in a replevin the  defendant justify the take for that I S be seize of the land in fee where the  take be and that he as his servant and by his command do take and distrain the  cattle there damage pheasant and so justify the plaintiff to this reply and  say that true this be which be allege but say far that long time before I d be  seize in fee of the same land and thereof make a lease to he at will and take  a traverse in this manner without hoe that I S do command he for to enter and  to take the cattle to this replication the defendant demurrer in law and the  plaintiff join in demurrer the only matter in question and insist upon be  touch the validity of the traverse by the opinion of the whole court the  traverse be rule good for that the plaintiff here in this case can not  traverse any other matter but the commandMan secondary inform the court that  if it have be in case of a lease for year or for life then in such a case the  seize of the other ought to have be traverse and not the command and so it  have be here adjudge before but otherwise in case of a lease at will make as  here in this case the court agree in this and so this traverse be here rule to  be good judgement be give for the plaintiff and to have a return of cattle
Bulstrode I S plaintiff against martin and GUNNYSTONE defendant a information  upon the statute of h c a information by he exhibit against the defendant be  two parson upon the statute of h cap against one of they for nonresidence and  against the other for take of a farm the one of they plead sickness and that  by the advice of his physician he remove into better air for recovery of his  health and this be justifiable by the whole court see more for this cook part  fol in butler and Goodales case the other plead that he take the farm only for  the mainitainance of his house and family and this be also justiflable by the  opinion of the whole court George croak move the court for the defendant that  the plaintiff be a common informer and that he do prefer this information a  ainst they only for their vexation and so to draw they to compound with he as  former he have so do by other for which they prosecute a indictment against he  in the country upon the statute of Elizabeth cap make to punish common  informer for their abuse the whole court do advice they to prosecute this  indictment against he George croak move for the defendant that in regard the  informer be a man of no mean that the court will order he to put in sufficient  surety to answer cost if the matter go against he and that then the defendant  will present answer the information William justice Nullain to have ankle  legem  this be not to be do but the rule of the court be that the defendant  shall not answer the information before the informer appear in person
Bulstrode johnson plaintiff against CULLAMORE defendant a action upon the case  for a promise more n Ro Rep roll ab in a action upon the case upon a promise  upon non assumpsit plead a verdict be find for the plaintiff it be move in  arrest of judgement that the declaration be not good there be no good  consideration therein express the case be this the defendant be to account  with the plaintiff pro to visit debt is owed accuse computaveru and find upon  the account to be in arrearage in such a sum in consideration ind the same day  he do assume and promise to pay this at a day to come at which time he fail to  pay the same hereupon the action bring it be urge that the declaration be not  good by reason of the incertainty not show the promise to be make in  consideration of forbearance but in consideration ind dodderidge justice a  action upon the case be include in every debt upon a promise this assumpsit  here in consideration ind be good notwithstanding the objection make against  it if he have assume at another day to pay this at a day to come this have be  good this here be a duty present to be pay or afterward by his promise to pay  this the whole court agree with he herein that in consideration ind he assume  to pay this the same be good without show any consideration of forbearance  because this be not any original debt but where it be a original debt there in  consideration that he will forbear he promise to pay this be good but in this  case here be no original debt but the same upon the account be reduce unto a  debt by the find of he to be so much in arrearage and so the court be clear of  opinion that the declaration be good and therefore by the rule of the court  judgement be give for the plaintiff
Bulstrode jones plaintiff against STENOR defendant a trover and conversion in  a action upon the case for trover and conversion sur non culp plead a verdict  for the plaintiff Harris sergeant move in arrest of judgement that in the  venire facias a juror be name Harewood in the distress and being under oath he  be name Harrwood and so for this variance he pray a venire facias de to make  new this be like another case here adjudge where in the venire facias a juror  be name swift in the distringa and being under oath name swift and this be  here resolve to be bad the whole court agree in this that where there be a S  for a f this be bad clear for they have not the like pronunciation and  therefore this be apparent bad croak justice Baxster and Baxter this be all  one the whole court agree this to be no variance for that Harewood and  Harrwood idem sonant and they be all one and so by the rule of the court  judgement be give for the plaintiff Bulstrode er p
Bulstrode LYSKERRITS case Lyskerrits case as touch the award of a venire  facias where the same be to be of the town and where of the parish as touch  the award of a venire facias the case be this the major and burgess of  Lyskerrit do claim pro see to hold firmariis nest to have a watercourse c a  action upon the case be bring for the stop of this watercourse u on trial the  venire facias be de Lyskerrit town and not de parochian this exception be move  in arrest of the judgement the court be of opinion that the trial be good and  the venire facias well award William justice a house be demise in abington in  the burrow of abington the venire facias be of the burrow of abington this be  here adjudge to be well award and be afterward affirm in a writ of error  curian the venire facias ought to be award from that place which have the best  notice and cognizance of the matter in question and so be the book of e foe  and therefore if there be two place which have equal notice of the matter in  question there the venire facias shall be of both place and so it be adjudge  in Godfreys case this term in this court where one have a manor in Hampshire  prescribe to have common in Wiltshire here in a trial for this common the  venire facias be to be award of both Trin Elizabeth rot
Bulstrode Marsham plaintiff against jolly defendant a writ of error to reverse  a judgement in debt Ro Cr Ro Abr   in a action of debt upon a bind a verdict  give for the plaintiff and judgement a writ of error bring to reverse the  judgement the error assign because the bind be sexiginti whereas it ought to  be sixty coke false Latin will abate a writ but will not vitiate a deed the  court agree herein and by the rule of the court judgement be affirm
Bulstrode mill plaintiff v Anonymous in error first to reverse a judgement in  the c b in a action of trespass against three defendant the first plead  general non culp to the whole the second plead as to part non culp and the  three as to another part plead non culp issue join against they all at the  trial the jury find the first defendant guilty of the whole and the other  defendant guilty of the several parcel and do assess entire damage for the  plaintiff and judgement give for the plaintiff accord in the c b and a writ of  error bring to reverse the judgement and this only assign for error because a  swearer see male to bear about in veredicto to hand over curica this be a  clear error and for this error judgement be reverse per curian and a new trial  to he have
Bulstrode parret plaintiff against parret defendant word be in a action upon  the case bring for scandalous word speak by the defendant of the plaintiff the  word be lie to be these S thou art a sheepstealer upon non culp plead a trial  be have at Gloucester assize ult and a verdict give for the plaintiff  Bridgeman sergeant move the court for the defendant in arrest of judgement  that the word be not actionable be too general and do not ill that he say that  he have steal sheep in facto for the plaintiff it be urge by Trotman that the  word be actionable and to this purpose it be here adjudge in a action upon the  case for these word S thou art a horsedealer and it be here adjudge that the  action do well lie for these word be upon the matter as it be urge all one  with this present case the whole court agree clear that in this principal case  the word be scandalous and well actionable and therefore by the rule of the  court judgement be give for the plaintiff
Bulstrode Penson plaintiff against knight defendant enter mich James b r rot a  writ of error to reverse a judgement in a redisseizin statute of mert cap lib  Assis c e fol plea statute of mert cap in a writ of error to reverse a  judgement give in a redisseizin the case appear to be this two coroner be in  the county the one of they beinly sick and so can not come the writ of  redisseizin direct to the other who do execute the same alone this be assign  for error by Coventry for that in a writ of redisseizin the statute be  assumpsit securn crowner and upon the redisseizin the sheriff return that he  do take with he one of the coroner the other be sick and so can not come and  all this appear by the record to be so and so it be urge that this be a clear  error in the book of assize plea there this writ abate for form e fol plea to  the same purpose dodderidge justice demand whether one coroner may execute  this the statute of Merton capite do assign a number certain and the same be  not to be diminish and this be crowner here he ought to call unto he the  coroner assumpsit securn crowner this be his authority and this he ought to  pursue if there have be four coroner and he have take two of they with he this  have be good and the statute well pursue but not here as this case be take but  one coroner with he the whole court agree with he herein that this be a clear  error and for this error be only assign and insist on the judgement be reverse
Bulstrode POMPIER plaintiff against chamberlain defendant enter hill James b r  rot a replevin the defendant traverse replication have for want of a traverse  in a replevin the defendant avow the take and justify for that the place where  the take be be call Reemeadow parcel of the manor of dam be the freehold of  one chamberlain and that he as his servant do take the cattle there damage  pheasant and so justify his servant unto chamberlain and in his right the  plaintiff reply and for plea say that long time before chamberlain be seize of  this that one S a stranger be seize and so convey a title to himself under he  but take no traverse as to the freehold allege to b in chamberlain the court  clear of opinion that the plaintiff ought to have make answer to the freehold  of chamberlain by wav of traverse William justice he ought to have say that  long time before Cgamb rlain be seize that I S be seize and to have conclude  with a traverse without hoc that the same be the freehold of chamberlain  tempore a deceiving and this have be good but the replication be without this  traverse be not good and so judgement be give by the court for the advowant  against the plaintiff
Bulstrode REQUISH and REQUISHES case fine take of a infant inspection cro  James in b more commissioner for the take of a fine be bring into the  starchamber for take a fine of a infant the case be this Requisli of who the  fine be take be a infant S of the age of twenty year and three quarter want  but nine week of his full age the commissioner take the fine of he have no  notice that he be within age and by inspection they can not perceive whether  he be within age or not nothing be do against the commissioner in the  starchamber for that this be a fault in they but not a crime coke chief  justice in this case of Requisb be in ware to the king they have take of he in  the exchequer a recognizance of a great sunim be a infant that he shall not  convey his land to any one unless it be by assent direction and order of the  same court this be a strange course take by they non fancies malum ut ind to  come good and therefore if he do here bring a hearing qumrela upon this we  will give he redress and reverse this for the law have make a kind of  perpetuity for preserve the land of a infant during his minority so that he  can during this time convey these land at this time the say Requisb upon proof  make by the church book adjudge to be to be within age by the court and for  this the fine be avoid in this case curian ex assent a part do take upon they  the disposition and set of his land in such manner as he shall not sell this  but unto his young brother and this they so do by reason of his simplicity  Bulstrode er p
Bulstrode reve plaintiff against harris defendant enter pasch James b r rot a  action of debt upon a bind to save harmless in a action of debt upon a bind of  pur payment of the defendant demand oyer of the bind and of the condition and  the same appear to be for the save of the plaintiff harmless be engage for he  as his surety in bind for the payment of the defendant to this plead quod non  injure to be the plaintiff reply and show that the be not pay that there be a  capias against he for the same and so hereby he be damnified and whether this  matter show be a sufficient damnification to entitle he to his action be the  question and hold by the court that it be accord to Broughlons case mich  Elizabeth b r and coke part fol where the plaintiff at the day pay the to save  the penalty of the bind see none there ready to pay it and this adjudge for  the plaintiff and that his payment of the be a damage and harm unto he and  this he do to prevent a great harm and so be e fol that in such a case terror  of suit be a sufficient damnification and so this default of payment and the  kind of spurge upon this issue out against the plaintiff be a sufficient da  mnificdtion the whole court agree herein clear that by this non payment of the  and so the capias go forth against he by this be have not save he harmless  that this be a clear breach and the plaintiff be damnified by this and so be  well entitle unto his action against the defendant upon this his counter bind  and so by the rule of the court judgement be give and so enter for the  plaintiff
Bulstrode rice plaintiff against wiseman defendant see earl Bauchapm v win r Q  Ch h a action of covenant Ro Rep Ro Abr in a action of covenant the case  appear to be this S the defendant have a warren in a park call Braddock park  demise warrennam svan England the game of cony unto the plaintiff and do  covenant that he shall enjoy the benefit of his demise for breach of covenant  the action bring and lie the breach in kill of the cony in the park Himself  surrender and also for his not suffer of he to come there and to kill the cony  to he demise because Self to go into to hunt non to let pass coke chief  justice if I have warren in ill land and I demise ill warren in such a place  clear the son do pass if the son be in he by a grant or lease of the park the  son do pass dodderidge justice a man may have a warren in another man land and  there by the grant of the warren the son do not pass coke by h if one grant  his warren except the son the same do not pass and therefore it follow that if  it have not be accept the same will have pass dodderidge I can have a park in  another man land if I grant unto one ill manor of dale manor de dale England  ill close in dale the manor shall pass so here in this case the warren do pass  also a man as here in this case may have a warren in his park by his demise of  the warren in his park the son do not pass coke agree with he herein because  he be here to have the park himself otherwise it be if he have no park the  court all agree in this that the warren here demise be to be intend to be in  the whole park and this to be as large and broad as the park and that here be  a good breach of covenant assign and so by the rule of the court judgement be  enter for the plaintiff Bulstrode er p
Bulstrode SAMBERN plaintiff against SAMBERN defendant a prohibition to the  spiritual court in a prohibition to stay proceed in d suit in the spiritual  court where the case be this upon a will nuncupative by which the testator  devise his land to be sell and the vendor to dispose of so much of the money  to one and of so much to another for which money a suit be begin in the  spiritual court for the stay of this suit a prohibition be pray dodderidge  justice we may grant a prohibition to the spiritual court in case of a  nuncupative will the validity of which be only upon the proof of witness if  this contain matter of conveyance and disposition of land coke where a man  devise his land to be sell by S and so much of the money to be dispose of by  Lim to one and so much of the money to another this be not within the  jurisdiction of the spiritual court for they there to bear and determine this  but this proper belong to the commonlaw the reason of this be because that  this be issue out of land otherwise it be where a man devise that his feoff  shall sell his land and that the money shall remain in their hand to pay  legacy withall  then in such a case for this a suit be proper to be there in  the spiritual court but not in the first case because there it be mere  temporal if the devise be that they shall sell the land and bestow the money  to such for he this be tryable at the commonlaw otherwise where it be that his  feoff shall sell and the money to remain in their hand to pay legacy this be  triable in the spiritual court this be clear testamentary and this be the  difference the whole court agree with wine herein and so in this principal  case by the rule of the court a prohibition be grant
Bulstrode sampson plaintiff against Cranfield and upton defendant action of  trespass for a assault and battery against verdict for the plaintiff several  damage Cr I Counterfeit Cr Cr in a action of trespass for a assault and  battery ad damnum of the plaintiff the defendant plead non culp a verdict find  for the plaintiff against both the defendant and the jury assess several  damage to the plaintiff S so much against Bulstrode er p the one and so much  against the other several and cost to the plaintiff entire against they both  Richardson for the defendant move in arrest of judgement for that they be  joint sue the jury have give against they several damage whereas the same  ought to have be joint and entire against they both the whole court clear of  opinion against he herein that the battery be several and so the damage ought  to be and therefore the jury have do well in this in give to the plaintiff  several damage against the defendant but cost entire be to be give to the  plaintiff against both the defendant and the reason why the damage be in this  case to be several because that the battery of the one can be the battery of  the other and that the battery of the one may be great than the battery of the  other but otherwise it be in trespass for cut down of tree for that this be a  joint act and the damage be to be entire but otherwise it be in this principal  case of battery against two the jury have do well in give of several damage  that for the reason before because the one battery may be great than the other  William justice it be a very clear and plain case that the jury here have do  well in their verdict in give to the plaintiff several damage a ainst the  defendant but cost entire see to this purpose touch the verdict of the jury  and judgement accord to the same r foe b and so in this principal case by the  rule of the court judgement be give for the plaintiff
Bulstrode SAXEY plaintiff against WHEMPSON defendant enter mich James b r rot  error for to reverse a judgement in debt c in a writ of error for to reverse a  judgement give in a action of debt in London against William Saxey alias  speech Saxex this variance be allege for error William justice if he be name  Saxex in the original and Saxey in the alias speech this will be a clear  variance for that he ought to declare against he by the name that he be at the  time when he seal the bind and as he be name in the condition and that the  alias speech be for no other purpose but to make the name for to agree with  the name in the bind Yelverton justice if the action be bring against I S who  at that time be a esquire and afterward he be make a knight there he shall  declare against I S esquire alias speech I S mile the whole court clear of  opinion that this be no error for that a that may easy be make a ten this  error be overrule b the court and by the rule of the court judgement be affirm  for the defendant
Bulstrode scott plaintiff against scott defendant a action of debt for not  performance of a award in a action of debt upon a bind condition for the  performance of a award and for the make of the arbitrament and award in write  under hand and seal indent and the same to be deliver before such a day in a  action of debt bring Bulstrode er p for breach of this in not perform of the  award the defendant plead DUIIUM tale fecit arbitration afterward it be find  that the arbitrament be under his seal but not under his hand and by the  express word of the condition the same ought to be in write under his hand and  seal and also deliver William justice TU award ought to be also subscribe by  he Yelverton and croak justice agree in opinion with he that his hand ought to  be subscribe unto the award in pursuance and accord unto the very express word  of the condition that the same be by write indent and under his hand and seal  and so to be deliver his own hand ought to be subscribe thereunto clear by the  court croak and Yelverton justice if it be so that he can write his name he  ought then for to set his mark unto the award and in this the whole court  agree and so by the opinion of the whole court the plea of the defendant stand  good and for this omission of the subscription to the award judgement be give  for the defendant quod to express grief nil to take in hand per billam
Bulstrode sir george reenel plaintiff against I S a prisoner in the Marshalsea  in his custody defendant motion to have a prisoner fine the court be move on  the behalf of sir George reenel marshal of the court against one of his  prisoner who have very much misbehave himself have offer to make a escape and  have endanger the kill of one of his servant that he have spend in follow of  he l and therefore the court be move to have he fine for this and that he may  have recompense for this his l so disburse and lie out croak justice to fine  he for this we will not de it unless that the precedent of this court in such  a case will warrant this the which we shall first see and well Bulstrode er p  consider of but you may keep he in to shut up custodian S in iron you may also  indict he for these misdemeanour and so by this way to have he fine but not  otherwise sir George reenel be present in court make answer that by the  precedent of the court he may well be fine without a indictment dodderidge  justice curian this be but your suggestion upon which we will not proceed in  such a manner without see the precedent of the court for the allowance of this  but you may keep he in to shut up custodian and this be all the court will de  herein without any other direction give
Bulstrode the bishop OF London and baldwin plaintiff against draw defendant  enter hill James b r rot error upon a suppose mistrial e foe the trial to be  where the land be heal and sprat case and accord for the church of Newton  jefferies a writ of error to reverse a judgement give in common banc in a  quare hinder the case be this the bishop of London at fullam do grant the next  avoidance to a church of his presentation in the county of uvigorn upon a  issue take quod non to go away this be try in county uvigorn judge for the  plaintiff and a writ of error br light and for error assign that this be  mistrial against this the book of e foe be cite to prove that the trial ought  to be where the land be and so be it cite to be adiudzed in a case between  heal and Spratt concern the church of NewtonJeff rye where the grant be make  in London of the next avoidance of a church in the county of Devon and there  in that case it be adjudge that the trial ought to be where the land S Fenner  justice a grant be make here in London of land in county uvigorn non to go  away be plead and issue take upon this this may be well try in either place  either where the grant be make or where the land lie Yelverton justice make  some doubt whether the trial be good in Worcestershire whore the church be  William Fenner and croak justice clear of opinion that this trial in county  uvigorn where the church be be good and the issue well try and judgement be  afterward give accord for the affirmance of the former judgement Yelverton  justice agree with the court herein
Bulstrode the case OF small a prisoner in the Marshalsea touch the regulate of  the prison of the Marsbalsie notam upon a motion make in court to have some  redress in the prison of the Marshalsea for the govern of the prisoner there  be in execution who have Bulstrode er p so great liberty there in the prison  and in continual go abroad by bail and haston so that they will lie there  consume their estate and not pay their creditor and therefore for the redress  of so great a mischief the court be move to have they there keep in salv in to  shut up custodian and not to be suffer to have there so great liberty and so  by this way they may be enforce to pay their debt and so to procure their  liberty and enlarge ent v coke chief justice by the statute of r cap prisoner  sub custodian be not to go out of the prison by bail and haston unless it be  by the commandment of the king or by the king writ or by the agreement of the  party and not otherwise or in any other manner and such kind of liberty give  unto they by their keeper without any such former warrant be clear a escape in  law and as for the rule there I will never give any allowance unto this for  that paramour debtor be odiosus in lege but hereafter we will confine they to  be sub ferris in to shut up custodian and this will be a mean to make they to  pay their debt arid to the counsel which make this motion coke chief justice  say you shall have the effect of your motion and it shall be well do of you to  advice your client to bring a action of debt upon a escape against the marshal  and you shall have justice for this be a clear escape in law
Bulstrode the earl OF Northumberland plaintiff against wheeler and other  defendant enter hill James b r rot a trover and conversion against a  copiholder for life for cut down timber tree Lulteral and wood case in the c b  ante king in a action upon the case for a trover and conversion of certain  timber tree the case and question be as touch the power of a copiholder for  life for the cut down of timber tree and whether such a copiholder may  prescribe by the law for to cut down timber tree grow upon his copyhold land  or not Noy for the plaintiff that he can William justice such a copiholder for  life can prescribe for to cut down timber tree grow upon his copyhold land and  to this purpose in Lutteral and wood case in the c b it be adjudge in point  that a copiholder for life can prescribe to cut down timber treesbut by way of  usage he may for reparation and as touch usuaae and custom it appear in e foe  b that usage and custom to turn their blow upon the headland not sow with  Bulstrode er p corn be good but there it be say by Littleton that a  prescription against reason be not good as if a custom be allege that none  shall put his cattle in it his land before the lord do put his cattle in this  be hold to be a void custom because it be against reason for if the lord will  never put in his cattle the tenant by this shall lose the profit of their soil  but otherwise it be where a day be limit and to this purpose be e foe a b plan  and that a prescription which be against reason be void and shall not be allow  by law see for this Littleton foe plan plan h foe b a in this principal case  here the clear opinion of the court be that this prescription here for a  copiholder for life to cut down timber tree be a prescription against reason  and so void in law and so be the opinion of the whole court but no judgement  be then give
Bulstrode the king against Andrew SORILL a indictment Cr who be indict for  stop of water Henry Yelverton move the court to quash the indictment the same  be insufficient it be lie therein quod queadam Bulstrode er p pars aquea be by  he stop that this be not good be so uncertain croak justice it ought to have  be quoadam pars terrae water coopertea dodderidge justice if the same have be  show to be a watercourse and that this have be turn then to have say great  parten water have be good accord to Lutterels case cook pars fol and the case  between wilies and Searl in b r there remember and Elizabeth dyer fol plea  where the court be against the defendant in a action upon the case quod to  visit magnum lesson aquae c and a precedent there cite which be mich Elizabeth  rot a assize of nuisance pro diversion majoris birth carrsus aquee and hold  good dodderidge justice and the whole court herein agree with he that queedam  pars aquae here be not good and so the indictment for this cause be  insufficient the exception take allow good and so by the rule of the court  Sorill the party indict be discharge and the indictment quash
Bulstrode the king against cox a indictment for a forcible entry in a  indictment for a forcible entry George croak take exception to quash the  indictment for that in the conclusion thereof manu fort contra crown peace  king be omit the indictment be fortitudiney potenia great but no manuforti  also because the same be take before one justice of peace only also it do not  appear upon what statute this indictment be take there be two statute the  whole court clear of opinion that the indictment be not good and so by the  rule of the court the same be quash afterward S the last day of the term Paul  croak move this error by way of exception to the like indictment for a  forcible entry upon the statute of h because he do not conclude this to be  contra peace and move for a writ of restitution which the court will not grant  be the last day of the term
Bulstrode the king against sir Matthew carry junior Ferdinand carry indictment  of murder against two roll r upon a indictment of murder against two by the  grand jury billa true find as to one of they and manslaughter as to the other  how to proceed coke chief justice this be possible so to be and it may be good  for the one may have malice and the other not he may come in by chance and so  kill the other as it be in Plowdens commentary and so be the truth of this  case be that Ferdinand caryi and oseband be in the field fight upon a quarrel  sir Matthew caryi casual ride by and see they in fight and his kinsman one of  they ride in draw his sword thrust oseband through and kill he in this case  this be clear but manslaughter in he and murder in the other so be the  commentary and Mackallyes case pars the whole court agree with he herein  exception be then move to the indictment the same be quod felon percussi and  do not say ad tunc ibidem coke if so then not good Bulstrode er p it be then  further urge that there be neither place nor time show quande percussi but as  to this it be say that there be two ad tune and two ibidems this hold to be  good by the whole court billa true as to Ferdinand caryi dodderidge justice he  be to answer to the indictment which be of murder coke the best way be to have  a new indictment for that this be not good a new indictment against sir  Matthew caryi and this to be for manslaughter for this find of the jury can be  so endorse upon this indictment the best way to have several indictment  against they and not one dodderidge in one indictment this may be special so  set down and well enough coke and the rest of the judge you can proceed  against he by indictment upon this endorsement but upon a new indictment and  so by the rule of the court a new indictment be to be draw against sir Matthew  caryi who by the rule of the court be bail
Bulstrode the king against skeit and other c indictment upon the statute of h  cap Skeit and other be indict upon the statute of h capite for forcible entry  exception take to the indictment that the same be insufficient the same be  that locus in quo adtunc thus far to step out book tenementuni of he in  reversion this be not good as it be urge for if so then no seize Haughton  justice yet the word may be true if he enter afterward dodderidge and coke  justice then if it be so be can have a writ of restitution coke justice here  be a double repugnancy in this indictment for after the thus far to step out  it be extra tenet another exception be take because it be say that customary  tenant and do not show the same to be good luck experience manor the whole  court clear agree that for these exception take the indictment be insufficient  and so by the rule of the court the party indict be discharge and the  indictment quash
Bulstrode the king against springal exception to a indictment for erect of a  gate notam that exception be take unto springal indictment the same be because  to raise up quandan will Hornese in come Middlesex in way regius two hundred  unto januam bee Highgate and do not show in what count Highgate be but notam  that in the margin Middlesex be write Hutton move the court that  notwithstanding this be so yet it do not hereby appear to the judge as judge  in what county Highgate here be the whole court clear of opinion that the  county be writ in the margin do well aid this and so take off this exception  and that this word Middlesex writ in the margin shall well go unto Highgate  also and so the indictment be good by the opinion of the court but otherwise  it have be if in case of felony by the whole court
Bulstrode the king against UNDERELL notam touch the arrest of felon and the  trial of they notam by coke chief justice and herein the court agree with he  that if one do carry brigandage along with he be may then be arrest in one  county and carry into another for that this be felony in all county but if one  be arrest in one county upon the suspicion of a felony do and commit in  another county he may then be carry before a justice of peace in the say  county where the feloily be do and to be there try and this so be do in the  case of one Underel
Bulstrode the king and GOLDESBOROW against whider defendant inform cion for  engross corn upon stat of e c h f cumulus uncertain Ro Rep in a information  exhibit upon the statute of e cap for engross of corn diverse stack of corn  and it be by this word cumulus the certainty of this ought to appear for the  quantity thereof what this cumulus be for by this non constat Curioe upon this  information for what he shall be find guilty by h fol in a assize of rend the  quantity of land ought to be show out of which the rend be issue coke chief  justice I never yet do see a information in this kind but for so manv load of  corn or quarter of corn but never with this word cumulus be altogether  uncertain for the same may be a heap thrash or in shock but most proper when  thrash here it be altogether uncertain quTdam part ternT not good for  uncertainty h and so of a ejection strong for a ridge of land not good be  uncertain for that in some country a ridge of land be more and in some country  less also a detinue lie not de to make one finishing touch no indictment can  be de to make one finishing touch of wheat price this be not good for  incertainty dodderidge there can be a good bar to this information this  information here be frame upon a penal law and therefore the certain quantity  of corn ingross ought to appear to the court and it be never hear to have a  action brouorht for a heap of salt Haughton justice a ejection firm bring de  to make one enclosed space peremptory or urgent call GreenAcre be not good  coke we have adjudge this to he have for incertainty praecipe quod To give  back twenty balance land in ancient time this be good but now explos be that  opinion for the same ought to contain certainty or not good because of the to  have facias possession and therefore certainty ought to appear or not good the  whole court clear of opinion that the information here be not good for the  incertainty in it
Bulstrode tipple plaintiff against PEXALL defendant enter hill two James b r  rot a misnomer of a corporation the case be upon a misnomer of a corporation  be the corporation of shipwright the company of shipwright of Redderiffe be  incorporate by the name of Proefecti Gardianorum Naupegorum de Redderiffe coke  chief justice of ships this be a name know for shipwrights and not naupegorum  the company of shipwright of Redderiffe in the county of Sussex coke they be  to show how a special supplicavit shall be direct to they the opinion of  manwood chief baron be this as touch corporation that they be invisible  immortal and that they have no soul and therefore no subpoena lie against they  because they have no conscience nor soul a corporation be a body aggregate  none caii preate soul but God but the king create they and therefore they have  no soul they can speak nor appear in person but by attorney and this be the  opinion of manwood chief baron touch corporation notam that the writ be here  direct proafecto gardianis associate and in this vary from their name of  incorporation and therefore for this misnaming of the corporation by the rule  of the whole court the writ be hold to he have
Bulstrode vers GILBURN the principal and not the deputy be entitle to fee new  create after the deputation plaintiff have remedy upon a covenant to account  can bring assumpsit for money have and receive vide Toussaint v Martinant term  Rep Com dig action upon assumpsit f bull l n p in assumpsit for money have and  receive to the plaintiff use it appear that the plaintiff be prothonotary of  the palace court and the defendant his deputy and that by article it be agree  what the defendant be to have and he covenant to account for the rest these  article be before the statute Geo c which require affidavit to be make in  order to hold to bail and empower the officer who strange report er p issue  the process or his deputy to administer the oath and to take one shilling for  so do the defendant from the make the Act take the shilling and pass several  account with the plaintiff who have never insist to have those fee bring to  account but have now discover that it be very advantageous bring this action  and it be hold by Lord Hardwicke that though the defendant do the business yet  he ought to account with the plaintiff for the fee for a deputy be entitle to  no more than he stipulate for and if he undertake to execute the office any  subsequent addition to the duty of the office will not vary the contract  though it may be a reason to come to a new one but he think the present action  not maintainable the plaintiff have a covenant under hand and seal which give  he a remedy of a high nature and upon that point have the plaintiff call  strange then the plaintiff bring a action of covenant in c b which be try  before chief justice reeve and he be of the same opinion with the chief  justice of the king bench the jury by his direction find for the plaintiff and  upon allow the defendant what they think reasonable for his trouble which be l  they find l for the plaintiff
Bulstrode warren plaintiff against defendant the return of a to know facias  not to be stop from fill note that upon a judgement give here in b r a to know  facias issue and the same Teturnable in this term by the rule of the court the  return of this can be stay but in favour of purchaser when the return be file  the court may then give a long time to put in their plea to the to know facias  and like wise for to imparle the motion be make to stay the return of the to  know facias from be file which the court will not grant
Bulstrode watts plaintiff against the high commission court a prohibition to  the high Commission court in a prohibition George croak move the court for a  prohibition for Watts parson de S to the high Commission court the case appear  to be this Watts the parson be deprive for incontinency and another present to  his live afterward be procure a pardon and so by the relation of this he be to  be restore again to his benefice he be sue in the high Commission court for  this matter of incontinency after he obtain his pardon yet they still proceed  in the high Commission court against he to give cost upon this a prohibition  be pray to Bulstrode er p stay their proceed the pardon be grant unto he  before the sentence there give coke chief justice incontinency be a heinous  offence in clergy man and by former statute the same be make felony before  allowance of marriage in the clergy but it be a great offence now at this day  in they marriage be allow to they it be fornication before but now it be  adultery suit in the high Commission court and in the starchamber be the king  suit and though another be the plaintiff there yet the king may pardon this  and if the pardon be before sentence there give clear they shall there give no  cost afterward and this be a clear and plain case as it be resolve pars fol a  b in hall case that if the pardon be before sentence the same have discharge  all and then they can there proceed to any sentence of the principal and by  consequence not for cost be but accessary so the court give time to examine  whether the pardon be before the sentence for the cost or not burtons case a  Warwickshire case in the time of queen Elizabeth a good case to what purpose a  pardon shall relate afterward upon view of the pardon it appear to be before  sentence as the court be before inform by the rule of the court a prohibition  be grant
Bulstrode Westley plaintiff against brown defendant Weslly plaint against  brown and a bail bail discharge where the principal be take in execution in a  action of debt the case be this a be bail for brown in debt at the suit of  Westley the money not pay a the bail be take in execution for the debt the  Bulstrode er p principal brown obscure himself upon a motion for the bail by  the rule of the court it be order that the marshal man shall take brown the  principal debtor he absent of himself in Straford for a the bail who be before  take in execution and the marshal man accord do take brown the principal but  he say that the plaintiff some three hour before be with brown the principal  debtor and do then give he notice of the rule of the court and do then advice  he to absent himself and that if he will so do the money shall be then levy  upon the bail who be take and in execution for the same but yet the marshal  man do take he and afterward the plaintiff do write to the marshal man for to  let the say brown the defendant and the principal ire ad grant and that he  will secure he and charge the bail with the debt all this be aver and make  good by oath to the court William justice this execution against the bail when  he have take the defendant the principal debtor this now be no sudh execution  against the bail as shall any way hurt he but he be to be discharge and by the  whole court clear the plairAiff n have no remedy against the bail when be have  once take the principal in execution but the bail ought to be discharge and in  this principal case there appear to be a practice between the plaintiff and  the principal debtor to charge the bail with the debt and to free and  discharge the principal and this upon examination appear full to the court by  oath therefore by the rule of the court the bail be discharge and the  principal to remain in execution for satisfaction of the debt
Bulstrode wicks plaintiff against jordan defendant a writ of error in a writ  of error notam that after judgement give against he he sow the land and  afterward bring a writ of error to reverse the same judgement and in this the  judgement be affirm the court be move for the plaintiff in the writ of error  that he may hold and enjoy the land until he have cut the corn the court  answer this be against the law and we can so order this as if a widow woman a  copyholder who be to enjoy the land durante widowhood if she sow the land and  afterward take a husband she shall lose the corn and the lord shall have it  and so be olands case coke pars fol and so by coke dodderidge and by the whole  court judgement be affirm and that he which do recover shall have and enjoy  the corn
Bulstrode WILLAMORE plaintiff against BAMFORDE defendant a action of trespass  for take of hay in a action of trespass bring for take away of his hay upon  non culp plead a verdict find for the plaintiff it be move in arrest of  judgement that the declaration be not good because he have not pursue his  title make in the declaration coke a man bring a action of trespass for take  his hay and convoy unto himself a title to it this be more than he ought to do  but he ought to have say general quare fcenum suum to take in hand without  make of any title to it and this be good for if one as executor bring a action  of trespass for take of a horse whereas in verity he never be executor this be  clear good and his be executor or not be matter nugatory and it be surplusage  for a plaintiff in his declaration for trespass do to make a title to himself  in this h fol a action of trespass upon the case bring quod theolonium to  carry away mock to loosen object this be good without make of any title and  the first word be void and surplusage and the other good for as the rule be  utile per inutile non to make faulty the court clear of opinion that in this  principal case the declaration be good this exception notwithstanding for it  be but matter of surplusage for a plaintiff to make a title in his declaration  in trespass and if he make a title and do not pursue it or if his title be not  good this be not material be but matter of surplusage and nugatory dodderidge  justice the plaintiff needs not make any title in a action of trespass the  same be a possessory action but if he do make a title in the way of evidence  he ought then to pursue the same and make it good but he needs not to make any  title in his declaration say that this hay be for tithe belong to his farm  which be more than be need to have do this be but surplusage and qo the rule  of the court be quod judgment to go into pro to express grief
Bulstrode WILLINS plaintiff against fletcher defendant a action upon the case  in the nature of a conspiracy c in a action upon the case in the nature of a  conspiracy the case do appear to be this Fletcher in the county of Northampton  prefer a bill of indictment against Willins for be a common barretor and he be  swear before the justice of peace that the matter in his bill contain be true  upon this the jury give a verdict against Willins for which he bring this  action upon the case in the nature of a conspiracy pretend that by reason of  his oath the indictment be find by the jury against he g croak for the  defendant that this action do not lie against he for that he be only one  person and do only take his oath upon the indictment but a conspiracy be where  two three or more do conspire for to indict one and the Bulstrode er p same  lie not against one where he only come in and swear to the truth of his bill  for if this shall be take for a conspiracy no indictment will then be prefer  by any one upon the reason give in cutler and Dixons case coke part foe b for  that then no man will dare to complain if for so do he shall be liable to a  action and so upon this reason it be likewise late a ijudged here in this  court in porter and griffin case that in the like case with this now in  question a action upon the case in the nature of a conspiracy will not lie and  if a juror or a witness do come in upon his oath a action upon the case for  this lie not against he the whole court be clear of opinion that in this  principal case here a action upon the case in the nature of a conspiracy do  not lie and therefore by the rule of the court judgement be give for the  defendant quod to express grief nil to take in hand per billam
Bulstrode wright plaintiff against foul defendant a prohibition to the duchy  court Ro Ro Abr more stat of h c in in e c in a prohibition to the duchy court  for proceed there in a matter after a verdict and judgement at the commonlaw  in a action of trespass coke after a verdict and judgement give in a action of  trespass this matter be not to be bring into any English court this restrain  by the statute of h cap eoden modus quo quid to put to take apart here the  judgement be give in aCourt of record and therefore the same be not to be  dissolve in the duchy court nor yet in any other such court and so the statute  of e cap in the time of king e a quo warranto be bring against the earl  warrein for claim of certain liberty in which he disclaim that he have no  warren neither by prescription nor yet by charter afterward he obtain a  charter for to have a warren infra land dominical he can now enlarge this his  charter by prescription the grant be in the time of king e the place in  question be Westlin a action of trespass against the farmer of the king where  the king will proceed by information he ought to proceed in a court of record  not in the duchy Haughton agree with he herein and that it be a dangerous  matter for a court which be not a court of record to meddle with a judgement  give in a court of record and no decree be there ever make in case where a  judgement be give in a court of record dodderidge we be here swear for to  maintain the inheritance of the king as much as we can and with all our power  but this be to be do duly and with justice by we do unto all but not otherwise  the whole court agree herein that in this case they be to be prohibit but this  be a great case it rest upon a curian beyond advisare vult the court be never  afterward move again herein but the same end between the party
BUMFEILD and james how far the court will require a attorney to enter a  appearance for the defendant accord to his undertake a bill of Middlesex have  be sue out a attorney subscribe on the back of it that he will appear for the  defendant but since refuse it because the defendant will not give he a  authority to appear however on Mr Theedes motion the court make a rule upon he  to show cause why he shall not appear accord to his undertake ex relatum
Bunbury anonymous abridgement of demand if there be a general demand for tithe  and a general replication put in if the plaintiff upon the commission give  notice that he will proceed only as to such and such particular matter it be  as well as if the demand have be abridge in the replication say quaere may sir  Francis page make a baron of the exchequer and baron fortescue aland make a  judge of the king bench Bunbury de term S the number three
Bunbury anonymous Dec a sequestration must be return before it can be move  discharge it on the death of the party as to land post pl a sequestration  issue against I for not perform a decree land be seize by the sequestrator I  die whereupon it be move that the issue as mesn process it determine by the  death of the party but not if in pursuance of a decree notam it bind from the  time of award I vern sequestration shall be discharge but the court refuse it  because the sequestration be not return for the sequestrator be answerable for  what profit they have receive of the land and they have nothing to indemnify  they but the authority give they by the sequestration but the sequestration be  return the court discharge it as to the land from the death of I Bunbury de  term S hilarii
Bunbury baily v PEASTLY July value of the tithe to be ascertain by plaintiff  oath in what case bill for tithe the defendant stand out till a sequestration  and the bill be take pro acknowledged admitted fact it be move for the  defendant that upon pay the cost the value of the tithe may be ascertain and  reduce either by the taxation of the master or by the oath of the plaintiff  himself as be do in the case of Crosman and Goodrick hill term James but notam  there be a consent in that case and the court now will make no other rule but  that the plaintiff shall show cause why he shall not consent to give his oath  to the value
Bunbury baldwin who tam v amendment of a information Baldwin make a seizure of  tea upon the that of November and exhibit his information the same day in  which it be allege that between such a day and the day of exhibit his  information the tea be import c this will have be have for the day of the  seizure will have be exclude there be no fraction of day but upon motion the  court give they leave to amend and to make it the that
Bunbury Blackett v MIDDLETON eoden die one defendant who be never serve with  process appear and answer and have his cost on mend the bill by strike out his  name the court be move for leave to amend a bill by strike out a defendant  name who be never serve with process but voluntary appear and answer without  cost but the court will make the plaintiff pay cost though it be agree by the  counsel at the bar that there ought to be no cost in this case
Bunbury boning v sprott order to examine to the credit of a witness before  publication upon motion you may have a order to examine to the credit of a  witness even before publication passes
Bunbury BORRETT v GOMESERRA do you parole agreement for the sale of copyhold  land carry into execution Eq ab c c Prec Ch Eq ab bill to have a discovery of  a parole agreement for the sale of copyhold land and whether the defendant do  not pay part of be the purchase money and if the plaintiff do not give the  defendant a note acknowledge the receipt of the say in part c and thereby also  promise to make a good title c and whether the plaintiff do not bring his  write before the defendant counsel who approve of the title and to have a  specific performance the defendant plead the statute of fraud and perjury to  the whole bill it be a parole agreement but overrule per totan curian quaere  if copyhold be include in the general word of a act Haydons case lib and hard  how far a court of equity will carry a parole agreement in part execute into a  full execution vide Chan can leak v MorriceHatton and GrayLand these case late  decree in chancery but not yet in printLyster v Pycroft v AmburstSeagood and  gold this cause afterward my come to a hear and though it be object for the  defendant that this be within the statute of fraud c that it be a bare bargain  and not to be carry into execution in equity be as they pretend more than it  be worth yet upon proof of the plaintiff side that there be no fraud that it  be worth that the defendant have do several act of ownership as order in brick  fish in pond c and Bunbury er p have make frequent promise c there be a decree  for the plaintiff per totan curian videlicet Lord chief baron Montague baron  price and page
Bunbury Boughton v wright Jan customary manner of tithing allege in general  the defendant can be let in to prove a particular manner Bill by the rector of  barrow in the county of Suffolk for the tithe of corn c Bunbury er p the  defendant insist that he set out the ten sheaf of wheat and rye and the ten  shock of barley accord to the custom of the parish the custom he will have  prove be that the defendant cart be bring into the field and he throw nine  sheaf into the cart and leave the ten for the plaintiff the question be  whether this customary method of tithing the corn be good for it be insist  upon on behalf of the plaintiff that nine sheaf ought to be set out on the  ground and the ten leave out and marry with a green bough for the plaintiff  and that they ought not to bring the cart into the field and throw the nine  sheaf into the cart before the whole ten be set out for the plaintiff ought to  be able to view and judge whether he have a fair and just ten part and the  court will not let the defendant in to prove the particular custom upon this  general allegation so he be decree to account for they think the whole ten  ought first to be set out before the nine be throw into the cart
Bunbury Bradley who tam v long June information for import brandy in a collier  upon stat Geo Q whether the good ought not to be allege to be foreign post pl  SC Mod hard and lib dr foster c Cr car dyer post pl bunb this be a information  upon the statute of the that of king George cap for import brandy in a collier  verdict pro ring Mr ware move in arrest of judgement that it be not allege in  the information that the good allege to be take in this collier be foreign  good which the statute express require to this it be observe for the informer  that the information conclude contra form to cause to stand and the verdict  suppose every thing necessary be prove on the other side it be reply that  these word only make the conclusion of the case not the case itself Mr  attorneygeneral be absent no judgement yet give
Bunbury chamber v Robinson may cost in what manner tax when the answer be  report scandalous the defendant answer be refer for scandal and be report by  the master to be scandalous and the plaintiff cost be order to be tax the  plaintiff in the taxation of cost have allow to he several item of twentyone  pound six shilling and three pound as fee give to counsel although he do not  pretend that such sum have be real give but it be allege and so admit now that  it be the constant method in chancery to allow cost in this manner by way of  damage and satisfaction to the party for the scandal the whole in this case  that be thus itend to counsel amount to sixty pound which this day the court  will not alter but upon the that of may they think it too extravagant and  reduce it to forty pound
Bunbury clark v Dashwood July exemption from tithe where good ante pl Hicks v  Golding Feb a general exemption hold have more degge dyer town of Wagwick v  Lucas wood Inst burr cro James cro Elizabeth bill for the tithe of the rectory  of Carsington in the county of Oxford particular of the coppicewood call  Burleighwood and the plaintiff derive his title from the lessee of the dean  and chapter of Christchurch the defendant insist that no tithe of this wood be  ever pay but once be terrify for that it be exempt as part of the possession  of Eynsham abbey which be one of the great abbey and consequent capable of a  exemption by the stat Henry and insist by Mr ware for the defendant that  constant nonpayment be a evidence of exemption in the case of a lie  impropriator but notam the proof be only belief and hearsay and the defendant  be decree to account Bunbury de term S michaelis
Bunbury delver v hunter bill by a woman who recover in dower for mesn profit  can Chan c r a woman recover in dower and bring a bill for the mesn profit  sergeant bridge for the plaintiff cite a case of dean v wade in I Chan Rep  large octavo and Chan Rep Coventry v thynn but per totan curian the bill be  dismiss for even where the husband die seize there shall be no mesn profit  until demand as per stat Merton   light but if the husband do not die seize as  he do not in this case the wife can have no mesn profit and beside it be admit  the plaintiff be in possession so may have remedy at law if she have any right  to mesn profit
Bunbury desbrow v Crommie eoden die sequestrator in case of contempt for want  of a answer can remove the defendant good I vern Chan Rep dr salmon v  Hanborough comp a sequestration issue against the defendant for want of a  answer the sequestrator enter the defendant house and remove all the good to  the value of seventy pound at least though the thing in demand by the bill be  little more I now move to have restitution of the good in regard that the  removal of the good be not within their power without a particular order of  the court for that purpose and per curian videlicet Lord chief baron Pengelly  baron comens baron hale die this day there be a difference between a  sequestration for want of a appearance and for want of a answer even in the  first case it be to be look upon only as a distringa in infinitum as law and  the distress there ought to be only at first nothing then increase by degree  as the court direct in order to compel a appearance so the sequestrator ought  in the first case after seizure of some good to apply to the court for further  direction for seizure in order to compel a appearance but in the second case  the sequestrator have no power to remove any good much less to sell for the  good be only to be retain in nature of a pledge to answer the contempt and the  plaintiff receive no injury by this for he may set down his cause and his bill  may be take pro acknowledged admitted fact and in this case the sequestrator  have a day give to show cause why a attachment shall not go against they
Bunbury Disney all v Robertson all bill for toll for land of good in plaintiff  manor dismiss as be proper at law bill prefer by plaintiff as owner of the  manor of Kirkshed in the county of Lincoln for several toll Payable for the  land of good c but per totan curian the a bill of the like nature be dismiss  at sergeant inn June between Harding and Ainge bill be dismiss be a matter  proper at law and a decree in this case can be of no use for it can not  conclude any body but the defendant and it be not like a bill of peace which  bind all party as against the inhabitant of a parish or the tenant of a manor  in which case a bill shall be retain to prevent a multiplicity of suit a bill  of the same nature be dismiss in Hilary term between bind and the city of  Exeter
Bunbury do who tam v cooper information for import brandy in unsizeable cask a  information be exhibit against Cooper for import brandy in unsizeable cask and  the question be upon the stat Ann cap whether they shall be forfeit or pay  duty and though the stat will mark cap say they shall be forfeit or the value  yet three baron against Montague give judgement that they shall pay duty
Bunbury doctor Sloane v HEATFIELD Dec bill for treasure trove dismiss with  cost post pl the plaintiff bring his bill for treasure trove within his manor  and to discover what be find the court say the bill be proper enough as to the  discovery but he can have no relief because he may bring a action of trover  and the bill be dismiss with cost Bunbury er p Bunbury de term S hilarii in  house nobles jan
Bunbury Dodson v oliver Feb bill of revivor for duty and cost not tax in the  first defendant life ante pl Chan Rep temple v rouse lib ball case bill of  revivor both for the duty which be three pound six shilling and eight penny  for tithe milk and easter offer and cost against the defendant as executor to  the defendant who die after the decree but before the cost be tax and  therefore it be object for the defendant that the cost not be ascertain in the  lifetime of the party by taxation there can be no revivor for they now but per  curian although there can be no revivor for cost alone yet there may be for  the duty and cost and decree accord notam in Scaccario all the enrolment there  be the entry notam there can be no subpoena to know facias until the decree be  enter Bunbury de term paschae
Bunbury drake v hopkins Nov a rehear must be apply for in six month after the  decree notam it be this day declare by the court upon a motion for a rehear in  this cause wherein it be grant though after two year and a half since the  decree and after the party have be long before the deputy upon their charge  and discharge that for the future no rehear shall be grant unless application  be make for it within six month after pronounce the decree Bunbury er p
Bunbury DUDDS v BILLINS June witness not twice examinable it be say by baron  price in this case that witness who have be examine upon the first commission  can be examine upon a second to thesame mat without leave of the court
Bunbury Eddowes v dean Feb there can be no decree against a executor de son  tort without set up a administrator per curian there be no precedent in a  court of equity of a decree against a executor de son tort without set up a  administrator for if there shall be a administrator and the defendant pay the  money he will be again liable to the administrator
Bunbury Edgell who tam v sir Matthew decker eoden die amend mean of a  information on the act of navigation salk title amendment pl exchequer rule Mr  attorneygeneral and I move to amend a information of seizure of a ship upon  the act of navigation for import from holland cherryderries cherconees and  soosees call in the information Indian silk the amendment pray be I saint to  strike out silk and make it India good general dly and also to add five  hundred weight of tea this last part be deny for it be to make a new  information and to put the defendant upon a new defence but the former part be  grant per curian Bunbury de term S the number three
Bunbury errington v the attorneygeneral the executor OF sir run knipe may  interpleader there must be a affidavit annex to the bill upon a bill of  interpleader by the plaintiff against the attorney general and the executor of  sir Randolph knipe it be agree per curian that there be a necessity of annex a  affidavit to the bill or else it be demurrable to but quaere if there be any  necessity where only private person be defendant in this case the attorney  general have put in the common answer videlicet that he be a stranger to the  matter in the bill and that he hope the interest of the crown will be take  care of c the defendant Knipes executor now move that the plaintiff bill may  be dismiss and the injunction dissolve and that they may have the eightynine  pound three shilling and six penny bring into court by the plaintiff pay to  they this be oppose by Mr attorneygeneral who at the same time pray that he  may be at liberty to withdraw his general answer and put in another answer  insist on the particular right of the crown to this money and per totan curian  it be grant and think it will be very unreasonable to dismiss the plaintiff  bill or dissolve the injunction and to leave he Bunbury afterward to be  harrass at law by either party when he have acknowledge the debt and pay the  money into court but do not know to which of the party to pay it to and now  the defendant be become in nature of plaintiff quaere if the plaintiff have  any thing more to do when both answer be come in than to move that the  defendant may interplead between one another
Bunbury Fenwick v fortescue Nov security for cost whether it shall be give by  a plaintiff protect by a ambassador it be move that the plaintiff shall give  security to answer the cost before he shall be at liberty to proceed in his  bill in regard he be protect by the Hessian envoy and so no process can be  serve upon he and consequent he come under the same reason as of a foreigner  but this be a bill for a injunction to stay the defendant proceed at law in  ejectment the court deny the motion because the plaintiff be in a manner force  into this court and do not come in original
Bunbury Frazer administrator v more may administrator plaintiff pay cost in  equity bill by a administrator the defendant demurrer and the demurrer be  allow and the bill be dismiss with cost and so say to be the constant course  in equity per totan curian
Bunbury geal v winter decree be never nisi when the cause come on after equity  reserve it be say in this case that when a cause come on after the postea  return upon the equity reserve the decree be never nisi but always absolute
Bunbury gregory who tam v hunt Nov jurisdiction of justice of peace as to cart  and horse seize upon the stat Geo c upon a motion for a writ of appraisement  and delivery for a cart and horse seize for carry tea and coffee the custom  not be pay there be a proceed against they before two justice pursuant to the  stat Geo cap which refer to the Geo cap and also to two statute whether per  curian though the statute have no negative word do not take away the  jurisdiction of this court yet the party have his election to proceed here or  before the justice and that be now attach in the justice and there not appear  to have be any great delay they deny the motion
Bunbury hanson v fielding exemption as be parcel of the possession of saint  John of Jerusalem Rep Eq bill by a lie impropriator for tithe within the  parish and boundary of Shilton and barnacle in the county of Warwick the  defendant as to the manor of barnacle by his answer insist that the manor be  part of the possession of the prior of saint John of Jerusalem who possession  be exempt from payment of tithe Interrog  not common with others shades of  dead c then set forth the stat Henry with the clause of discharge and also the  stat oh hell whereby these priory with all privilege c be vest in the crown  and that no tithe in kind have be pay for this manor upon the debate of this  exemption be cite for the plaintiff lib a cro James more degge for the  defendant dyer b Bridgm latch sir W Jones ray Daniel vicar of bengo in Com  Hertf v sir I Gower Trin the court seem all of opinion that it be a good  discharge but the plaintiff after fail in make out his title and the bill upon  that be dismiss Bunbury er p
Bunbury hold who tam v weeden widow eoden die information upon a new statute  must set forth every thing requisite to bring the offence within that law this  be a information against the defendant upon the statute W for have India silk  in her custody know they to be such whereby she become liable to the penalty  of two hundred pound there be a verdict for the plaintiff and now in arrest of  judgement several exception be take to the information but overrule at last a  objection be make that this be no offence at commonlaw and therefore every  thing ought to be show in the information to make it a offence within this act  of parliament and though there be a averment that the commissioner have  appoint warehouse c yet they have not aver Bunbury er p that there be  warehouse still continue at the time of the seizure or that security be not  give as by the act be direct to which it be say that the defendant be to have  the benefit of they it lie upon her part to show it but per curian the contra  form to cause to stand be only a conclusion from the premise and they think  the case in sir W Jones bedo v not to be law so much ought to appear in the  information as to make this matter a complete offence within the statute upon  the stat Elizabeth t must be aver in a indictment that the defendant do not  exercise the trade at the time of the statute although it be above one hundred  year ago and upon the objection that it do not appear that there be warehouse  continue or that the good be not deliver out upon security judgement be arrest  and Lord chief baron Eyre seem to think there be nothing in the distinction  between a exception and proviso mention in lev Bunbury at sergeant inn post  trin
Bunbury holiday v nabb Nov a answer permit to be amend where it be for the  plaintiff benefit and the defendant be ninety year old a bill be prefer for a  discovery of the defendant title and for a account of the rend and profit of  the estate the defendant in his answer say that be purchase the estate in the  year and have continue in possession ever since and receive the rend and  profit thereof upon recollection the defendant discover that by agreement on  the purchase the vendor and his wife be to continue in possession and receive  the rend and profit during their life which they do until the year and the  defendant have ever since upon motion the court give leave for the defendant  to amend his answer in this particular it be rather for the plaintiff benefit  and the defendant be ninety year of age
Bunbury Israel v Etheridge all June trover or trespass whether they will lie  against a officer for seize absq commendable causan ante pl upon a information  of seizure there be a verdict for the claimer who do not move for a writ of  delivery but bring a action of Martin v Winford Trin trover or trespass do not  lie for good after condemnation trespass for the good against the officer that  seize upon a motion for a new trial there be a verdict for the plaintiff in  this action price baron say that it be now allow and take for law that trover  do not lie against a officer for seize without commendable cause but trespass  will and if the claimer have move for a writ of delivery he seem to think he  can not have this action because then he will have a double remedy baron  Montague be of opinion that neither trover nor trespass will lie because the  seizure be not contra peace but that trespass upon the case set forth that the  seizure be Basque commendable causan will lie as be do in the case of the king  and hellish baron page be of opinion that trespass or case for the  consequential damage will lie but now the verdict be set aside for that they  think here be worthy of approval causan notam bury and page seem of opinion  that in trespass the party shall not recover the value of the good but only  the damage for unlawful seize
Bunbury jenkins who tam c v LARWOOD may Commission to examine witness abroad  in order to make use of their deposition at the trial of the cause sir Robert  Raymond move upon the stat car cap h sect for a Commission to examine witness  abroad in order to make use of the deposition at the deposition at the trial  of the cause though the word of the act be a commission out of the high court  of chancery but be insist this be a remedial law and though it mention only  one instance yet it shall extend to other within the same equity as e act  which say justice shall grant a bill of exception have be extend to the  chancellor in the petty bag and the baron of the exchequer the statute of  circumspect to put in motion say circumspect to put in motion daughter of the  Sun res tangent bishop Norviciensem which Lord coke say be put only for a  instance and extend to other bishop the statute of Westminster give a action  of debt upon a escape against the warden of the fleet and this have be  construe to extend to sheriff gaoler c though only the warden of the fleet be  name Lord chief baron bury and baron price be of opinion that such commission  shall go not upon the act of parliament but by virtue of their original  jurisdiction baron fortescue aland that it may go even upon the statute baron  Montague dissent in both Bunbury de term S the number three
Bunbury johnson who tam v Sour Dec information of seizure the step therein and  what delay shall be a ground for a writ of delivery after a seizure of good  the regular step be to it have be usual to enter information in a book keep  for that purpose beside fill they file a information and then take out a writ  of appraisement upon the return of which the defendant be to enter his claim  and then may move for a writ of delivery if the prosecutor delay fill a  information or do not sue out a writ of appraisement the defendant upon enter  his claim in the book in the office may move for a writ of delivery it be very  much debate in the case of Allen who lamb v Cowper what shall be call delay  but no certain rule lie down so also the same thing be debate this day in the  present case what be most general agree to be that where a seizure be in the  vacation time and there be no information file the term follow if they can  have try it that term this will be delay to ground a writ of delivery upon
Bunbury jones v barrett Feb bill against a sequestrator during the vacancy of  a church whether the bishop ought not to be a party refer to Baylis v bishop  of London Bunbury Ch bill by the vicar of west dean in the county of Sussex  against the defendant who be sequestrator for a account of the profit receive  during the vacation it be object for the defendant that the bishop ought to  have be make a party since the sequestrator be Accountable to he for what he  receive by the stat Henry the court seem to think the bishop shall have beefy  a party but by consent this cause be prefer to the bishop of the diocese notam  it be say a sequestrator can not bring a bill alone for tithe Trin Berwick v  Swanton so it be resolve because he be a bailiff and Accountable to the bishop  and have no interest
Bunbury kennedy Cl v Goodwin may modus of S per annum for a farm of per annum  be too rank rector bring a bill for tithe in the parish of south Okenden in  the county of Essex the defendant insist upon a modus of four pound ten  shilling Payable yearly at such a day for his farm call quince farm which be  thirty pound per annum it be object for the plaintiff that this modus be too  rank and of that opinion be the whole court and the defendant be decree to  account notam the case of edge v Oglander to hill be cite for the defendant  where a modus of eight pound for a farm of eighty pound per annum be allow to  be a good modus and also the case of bishop v Arundel Pasc where a modus of  twentysix pound per annum for a farm not say of what value the farm be be  allow
Bunbury KERSLAKE Adm of Frankpitt v pannel all June bill for a discovery and  relief suggest that defendant break into the intestate room and take away  broad piece c dismiss as proper at law the equity in the bill be deny bill for  a discovery and relief suggest that the defendant break into the room of the  intestate who die sudden and take away ninetynine broad piece twentytwo guinea  bind note and memorandum on the hear I object that this be proper at law the  defendant have deny the whole equity of the bill and that this be a mere tort  and that trover will lie for the money c and cite the case of dr Sloan v  Heathfield and on the other side be cite I vern hunt and matthews vern but per  totan curian the bill be dismiss with cost
Bunbury king v belling whether the court will stay the enter of judgement upon  a information on a suggestion that the witness be perjure at the trial the  defendant be convict upon the testimony of two witness upon a information for  be concern in unship uncustomd good it be move on behalf of the defendant that  the court will stay enter judgement on the postea because the witness be  perjure of which affidavit be produce and be intend to be prosecute for  perjury but the court refuse to stay judgement on this allegation there be no  precedent of any such thing but the chief baron seem to think it may be do if  there have be a indictment of perjury actual find
Bunbury king v bishop all may king v Flanders may issue set by commission of  sewer discharge on motion move to discharge issue set by commissioner of sewer  allege they have no jurisdiction by the stat Henry cap because this be only a  bank throw up by the sea and order they to show cause on notice to the clerk  of the sewer though it be doubt whether this can be do b motion because it be  a judgement of commissioner and no certiorari will lie original to remove  their order
Bunbury king v Rawlins Feb injunction to put the crown into possession upon a  extent a inquisition be take which find a term of so much value the defendant  plead to the inquisition and it be find for the crown and this day it be  insist for the defendant that the court shall order a sale set forth for if  the crown be to be put into possession the defendant who be to have the  residue of the term after the crown be satisfy will be without remedy but  afterward may per opinion all curiae a injunction be award to put the crown  into possession Bunbury de term paschae
Bunbury king v ROSEVERE June whether judgement can be arrest as to part and  give pro ring as to the other part upon a information information for import  salt without payment of the duty for the Triple value on the stat annae and  also for one hundred pound penalty on the stat Geo c the defendant be concern  in unship know the duty not to be pay there be a verdict pro ring and upon a  motion for a new trial a objection be start by baron comens that the  information lie it that it be without duty be satisfy or pay or warrant for  land the same whereas the stat annae say pay or secure to be pay Mr  attorneygeneral therefore give it up that he can not have judgement on the  stat annae for the Triple value but insist that he may on the other part of  the information for the penalty of one hundred pound on the stat Geo cap which  have not the word secure but say shall over and above the penalty already give  forfeit one hundred pound and upon this the debate be whether judgement can be  arrest as to part and give pro ring for the other there be some doubt and  difference in the court about this and it be adjourn to be further argue  wherefore I have not now set down what be then offer on both side
Bunbury king v spencer Nov recognizance discharge where the offence be pardon  sir Constantine Phipps move to discharge the recognizance of a person who be  indict for beat a customhouse officer in the execution of his office in  understatement reventionum domini king and this be oppose by Mr Raby for the  crown upon these word the act of pardon Geo cap except that offence but the  recognizance be discharge per totan curian and if the fine be levy and still  in the sheriff hand it must be restore by a express clause in the act which  give the fine to the party and the Lord chief baron bury say that the word in  understatement c be only pepper and salt baron Montague quote a case upon the  act of pardon in the queen v Hinton where a information for carry salt without  a permit c be pardon be only consequential defraud
Bunbury king v Tomkins Oct one transport on the stat Geo cap upon a judgement  on a information against he for run of wool there be a judgement upon a  information against Tomkins for run wool and he not have pay the sum in the  act mention the solicitorgeneral move upon the stat Geo cap for prevent  burglary c that be may be transport notam Tomkins have be commit to the fleet  charge with the say judgement it be object by sir Constantine Phipps for  Tomkins that he be not within the word or meaning of the Act for first he must  have be commit for want of sufficient bail but he be in custody before the day  mention in the Act second a information must have be deliver to he or the  turnkey and this be a penal statute no equitable or liberal construction ought  to be make upon it but notwithstanding these reason which I think not answer  the man be transport per curian to differ baron price
Bunbury king v yale a bind take in the name of the crown by the cashier of the  excise be good post pl Mr Pauncefoot be appoint cashier of the excise by  constitution from the commissioner of the excise he employ sir Matthew Kirwood  to pay the money he shall return into his hand to the crown and take a bind  from sir Matthew and Mr Yale as his security in the penalty of forty thousand  pound for the payment of the money to the crown and on his own private account  Kirwood break and a extent issue against he and a to know facias be bring  against Yale on his bind notam if yales bind have be for the payment of money  a immediate extent may have go against he upon the plead to this to know  facias there be a demurrer and it be argue on the behalf of Yale that the bind  take by Pauncefoot be void in law because first he be not a commission officer  only constitute cashier without express authority which he ought to have have  to take such bind dly it be against the rule that any tradesman shall be  appoint cashier to any farmer c dly this bind be a oppression to the subject  for by the stat Henry body land and good be liable but note November per  opinion all curiae this bind be adjudge to be good
Bunbury lasco all v moi one of the plaintiff die the other proceed without  revive if the suit be abate the defendant will have advantage of this at the  hear after the bill be file and the subpoena take out and serve but before the  return thereof one of the plaintiff die the other plaintiff without revive  take out a attachment and it be in the vacationtime the defendant can not  apply to the court but be force to put in his answer it be now move on the  behalf of the defendant that the answer obtain from he in this manner may be  take off the file for there must be bill of revivor unless it appear that all  the matter in demand by the bill survive which it do not in this case but the  court will not do it for they say if the plaintiff be irregular and the suit  be abate the defendant will have the benefit of it at the hear
Bunbury lloyd v Mackworth Nov ill two defendant sue for tithe one make default  decree against the other with the whole cost bill for tithe against two the  defendant answer separate and there be separate examination one defendant make  default and there be now a decree against the other with the whole cost and  the court will not distinguish as to the cost between the two defendant but  leave Mackworth to get his contribution from the other as he can but notam  this as it seem can only be by bill November sir Robert Eyre knight one of the  judge of the king bench appoint Lord chief baron in the room of Lord chief  baron Montague decease
Bunbury MERTINS v Bennett Feb a deed poll execute in secret by the son of the  father on the same morning of execute his marriage settlement set aside upon  the circumstance of secrecy only a man upon the marriage of his son make a  settlement on he by article and covenant that he will make he worth full four  thousand pound over and above all his debt c the very same morning the  settlement be execute he get his son to execute a deed poll to covenant to  contribute one hundred and twenty pound towards the repair of a house and  ditch which lie within Dagenhim level this deed poll be draw by the same  person who draw the settlement and be swear that the son execute it with a  seem unwillingness that he believe that the father of the intend wife and the  trustee who all swear the same know nothing of it and upon this circumstance  of secrecy only without any proof of threat or restraint by the father on the  son this deed poll upon a bill prefer by the son against the executor of the  father be set aside as be in fraud of the marriage agreement by carter comens  and Thompson baron only in court though it be prove for the defendant that the  son have pay this one hundred and twenty pound at three several payment about  five year after the settlement and about five year before his father death and  yet have make no complaint of it till two year after his father death Bunbury  de term paschae
Bunbury mitchel v SOAPER may trespass where no more cost than damage vent Mod  salk raym sir though Jones Comberb post beef v butler pl trespass verdict for  the plaintiff quoad transgression cum averiis sepium fensurarum fraction  prostration divulsion that the defendant be guilty and a penny damage the  judge who try the cause have not certify as the statute car cap sect and W cap  sect direct and now it be move that the defendant shall have no more cost than  damage here be no word which amount to a asportation nor any voluntary  trespass certify and Bunbury er p divulsion do not in itself import either and  of that opinion be the court and the plaintiff have but one penny cost at  sergeant inn in chancery lane
Bunbury NIBLETT v daniel Nov if the cause stand over to add a material  defendant the deposition take before can be read against he will of land not  to be prove as a exhibit it be this day declare in this cause by the court  that if a cause be bring to hear and there be a objection for want of party  and the court let we the cause stand over with liberty for the plaintiff to  add a party if that party be a material defendant and concern in interest the  deposition take before can be read against this defendant he not be a party  when issue be join and the commission execute Q then what method to take since  they can examine de to make new because publication be pass before it be also  declare in this cause that for the future no will of a real estate shall be  prove as a exhibit
Bunbury NUTKINS v Robinson Feb prohibition for a churchwarden when his account  allow by a vestry p vent side Godolp Rep p raym sir t Jones if a churchwarden  make up his account and have they allow at a vestry if there be a libel  against the churchwarden in the spiritual court relate to his account a  prohibition shall go
Bunbury Pettifer v james July a wife divorce a month thoro for adultery  forfeit her right to her moiety and widow chamber which she be otherwise  entitle to by the custom of London hob cro dr Stud light Rep a bill be prefer  by a widow for her moiety and widow chamber accord to the custom of the city  of London defendant insist in his answer that she be divorce by sentence in  the spiritual court a month thoro for adultery and therefore that she ought  not to be entitle to her customary part Lord chief baron bury be for the  plaintiff but by the opinion of price Montague and fortescue baron the bill be  dismiss and price say she come with a very ill grace into a court of  conscience to be relieve in this case that the civilian be all of opinion that  mrs sayer have forfeit her right to the administration by live in adultery  with the murderer of her husband and acquire ration the widow here shall  forfeit her right to the distribution Bunbury de term S michaelis
Bunbury Robinson v Iago may the mortgage of a advowson shall present to the  church I vern amhurst v Dawling there be a bill file to redeem a perpetual  advowson that be mortgage and the incumbent die the mortgagor move before the  answer come in that the mortgagee may present the nominee of the plaintiff the  mortgagor and so it be order per curian as it be say be usual especial where  the plaintiff will give security to redeem or bring the money into court as be  now offer
Bunbury rod v lord Coningsby June ancient demesne be not pleadable where  damage only be recoverable c trespass for enter the plaintiff house the  defendant plead the house be hold of his manor of Marden and that it be  ancient demesne and all action c ought to be try in curian manor the plaintiff  demurrer per totan curian judgement for the plaintiff for whatever damage only  be to be recover and a action be contra peace or arms though the title may  come in question ancient demesne be not pleadable Mr will forth plaintiff Mr  Raby for the defendant Bunbury er p fine levy of land in the duchy of  Lancaster who shall have the post fine Ro Abr bro patent between the grantee  of the post fine in the duchy of Lancaster and the grantee of the gildable it  be insist on behalf of the latter that the fine of land levy of the gildable  though within the duchy ought to go to the grantee of the gildable notam first  if they be land hold in capite they belong to the gildable dly though a place  be in the nomina vellarum yet it do not follow that the whole town be duchy  land
Bunbury sir edward blacket v doctor Finney June injunction to the spiritual  court to stay a libel for tithe where a modus be seek to be establish bill  suggest that there be a modus of four penny per score of all sheep go on  Gayerfield in the parish of Ryton in the county of Durham in lieu of tithe of  lamb and wool that the defendant libel in the spiritual court for tithe in  kind that the plaintiff move for a prohibition in the court of plea in Durham  but permit a consultation to go and depend on relief in this court and pray to  have the modus establish the defendant doctor Finney insist there be no such  modus but that the four penny be in lieu of the milk of the ewe which be usual  in that country now upon motion for a injunction to the spiritual court the  defendant council insist that this be proper matter of suggestion on a  prohibition and also the defendant have in the answer deny the modus but per  curian there be some dispute between the party whether the modus be as allege  in the bill and as the spiritual court can try the modus we will grant the  injunction June salmon all v bake rector of Holcombe in Com Somerset a like  bill for establish modus some whereof the defendant admit but absolute deny  the most and great of they and per totan curian scacc though the plaintiff  here have not put in a plea of the libel in the spiritual court yet since that  court can try modus and the bill pray a establishment thereof a injunction be  grant
Bunbury smith v nottingham may injunction to stay execution on a judgement on  a bind for give upon a S S contract for the d subscription upon a contract to  assign to smith a three hundred pound the three subscription in the SouthSea  on the that of August smith do covenant upon assign to pay one thousand and  fifty pound for which he give a bind and judgement be obtain thereupon in the  common plea now smith prefer his bill for a injunction and obtain it because  the money the bind be give for be the consideration of the contract and this  be a mutual agreement we will not put they to cross action at law Bunbury de  term S the number three
Bunbury snowball v VICARIS June evidence admit that may have be produce before  at law a judgement be obtain at law I will a assumpsit upon a absolute  promissory note for fifty pound against the plaintiff snowball who bring his  bill to be relieve suggest the note be real agree to be conditional videlicet  that unless ram insurance rise to one hundred pound per cent I the now  defendant give you my word I will never trouble you for the money it be object  by the defendant first that the plaintiff ought not to be permit to enter into  this evidence now because he may have do it at law either upon the general  issue or by plead special second that the plaintiff ought not to give parole  evidence to prove the intent of a note in write under band but per curian to  waver in opinion Eyre chief baron the plaintiff be permit to go into this  evidence and be relieve and baron price say he can not distinguish this case  from that of lady Clarges v William in this court Feb
Bunbury Swinfen v digby eoden die turnip sow after the corn be clear feed with  sheep and barren cattle shall pay tithe in this cause the court declare that  where land be sow with turnip after the corn be clear and feed with sheep and  barren cattle that tithe shall be pay of such turnip though it be insist upon  for the defendant that the soil in that county Staffordshire be dry and sandy  and that this method of husbandry improve the land so that the plaintiff have  uberiores Decimus of corn and have receive the tithe of lamb and wool of the  sheep so feed before but the court overrule this defence and say it amount to  a non decimand as to turnip Bunbury de term paschae
Bunbury tailor v Crampton all do you bill for a discovery of coal get under  the plaintiff glebe and relief whether this be not proper at law lev this be a  bill bring by the vicar of mad in the county of Salop who be endow of the  glebe to have a account against the defendant of what quantity of coal be dig  and get by they by a work carry by they through a footway under his glebe and  also to have satisfaction for the coal and also pray a injunction to stay the  work the defendant answer but at the hear insist that this be a bare action of  trespass and though the plaintiff may be entitle to a discovery Q I vern hard  yet he ought not to have relief for that the quantum of the coal may be  ascertain by a jury or if discover by the answer they can ascertain the damage  more proper than this court and of this opinion the court be at first but  afterward will not dismiss the bill absolute but retain it till the plaintiff  have ascertain his title at law the reason seem to be because there be several  defendant copartner in these work some of they executor and some administrator  and the plaintiff will be under great difficulty in proceed entire at law for  the damage Bunbury de term S hilarii
Bunbury the attorneygeneral at the relation OF Jackson v the city OF Coventry  Nov corporation be trustee of a charity not oblige to produce their book  relate thereto it be move that the defendant who be trustee for a charity may  produce their book and write relate to the trust and which they confess in  their answer and that they be ready to be produce as the court shall direct  but per totan curian deny for though the information be against the body yet  it be only as they be trustee and not as a corporation and this be their  private evidence they shall not be oblige to discover it and it be not like  the case of corporation book or court roll which be of a public nature and  baron comens say that it be the opinion of Lord Trevor that where the dispute  about the custom of the manor c be between the lord and a stranger who contest  any of the custom of the manor there the lord shall not be oblige to let he  have the inspection of the roll because it be his private evidence but if the  dispute be between two copyholder or between a copyholder and the lord he  shall produce the roll and permit copy to be take thereof
Bunbury the attorneygeneral v burgess Nov partner concern in run good the  crown may come against any one for the penalty ante pl upon a information by  way of to come for the Triple value on the stat annae for good that come to  the hand of the defendant know they have not pay the duty it be determine at  the trial at the sit by Lord chief baron Pengelly in the case of the  attorneygeneral v Carbold Feb a information of to come be try before Lord  chief baron Reynolds who be of the same opinion but notam the king can have  but one satisfaction that if several person be concern either in partnership  or otherwise yet the crown may come against any one of they for the whole  penalty it be in nature of a tort and not a contract as in case of tort a  subject may come upon any one concern in the tort and it be also resolve that  on such a information there be no necessity that the good shall be prove to  come actual into his hand if they come into his power or into the custody of  any agent f big or to any person by his direction
Bunbury the attorneygeneral v forgan July information unship tea a information  be bring on the statute for be concern in unship parcel herb foreign without a  England the duty not be pay for Bunbury er p upon which there be a forfeiture  of the Triple value upon the trial the defendant make no defence rely upon the  objection which he make in arrest of judgement that this herb foreign without  a England to reduce it to a certainty be too uncertain there be many foreign  herb especial in a personal information as this be and on which there be so  great a penalty and the case in the margin be cite and upon the first motion  the court incline to arrest the judgement but give the attorney general time  to search precedent there be only three or four produce in personal  information to support this but the court think that precedent in information  of seizure will be of equal weight to show the usage and what be general  understand by these word herb foreign though it be object that the writ of  appraisement and indenture of return be part of the record and so reduce it to  a sufficient certainty whereas personal information have nothing but the  information to explain itself but the court think on seizure the writ of  appraisement and return can explain nothing in the information but what be  certain before and therefore on the last motion above one hundred precedent be  produce where in information of seizure the word herb foreign be use without a  England to signify tea judgement be give pro ring per totan curian Bunbury de  term S michaelis
Bunbury the attorneygeneral v JEWERS batty Dec information of debt for duty on  French wine in person Lord chief baron Pengelly information of debt for the  duty it be object as to part sure the French wine come from holland that they  be prohibit and forfeit and so no duty be Payable Simms v Kennison but per  lord chief baron after a seizure be make the crown can make a election because  the right be attach in the informer as to his share and this be not a absolute  prohibition but a prohibition sub modus as in case of brandy have be resolve  since the case of do who lamb v Cooper mich Geo at the sit at sergeant inn
Bunbury the attorneygeneral v paul miller and Frampton Feb plea to a to know  facias upon a bind for the exportation of good this be a to know facias upon a  bind to export several good to part beyond sea and not to reland they and to  produce a certificate of such exportation upon oyer of the condition the  defendant plead the statute of equity and that the good be put on board and  that they be not reland but that certain person unknown by force in the  nighttime come and carry they away to this the attorney general demurrer and  judgement be give by the whole court against the defendant as in the case of  the attorneygeneral v king the statute extend only to two case videlicet first  to take by enemy second to loss by sea Bunbury er p at sergeant inn February
Bunbury the attorneygeneral v popplestone Dec one in execution upon a  judgement on a information for be concern in unship c be no bar to a  information against another for the very same thing on a trial before the Lord  chief baron Reynolds at Westminster upon a information against the defendant  for be concern in unship c contrary to the stat Anna it be object that one  Russell have be find guilty on a information of the same nature for the same  good and be actual in execution in the fleet upon that judgement and therefore  the crown can not have a double satisfaction and quote more Noy cro Elizabeth  and insist that in this case ail hearing complaint do not lie the lord chief  baron think the defendant may have plead this matter puis darrein continuance  but however that russell be in execution in the fleet be not a satisfaction to  the crown and so the defendant go into evidence and on proof it plain appear  that the witness for the crown be perjure so Mr attorneygeneral give it up and  there be a verdict for the defendant Bunbury de term S hilarii
Bunbury the bishop OF hereford v cooper all contra Nov the court divide in a  motion of course which be to read a decree and deposition save just exception  yet they must be read it be move for leave to read the decree and deposition  in a former cause save just exception and though this have be former take to  be a motion of course in this court and be now every day do in chancery yet  the order can not now be obtain there be two baron against two the two who  oppose it distinguish between this court and the court of chancery there they  have but one judge here be four and if deposition shall be offer to be read  and two judge shall be of opinion they ought not and two of another opinion  yet they must then be read there be no just exception but quaere de cest  reason
Bunbury the bishop OF London beaumont v Nicholls bill for tithe by the bishop  and sequestrator during the incapacity bill by the bishop of London and  Beaumont as sequestrator during the incapacity of mind of barefoot the present  incumbent for tithewood in the parish of Birchanger in the county of Essex the  defendant demurrer for that it do not appear that either of the plaintiff have  any title and it be insist upon by the counsel for the d defendant that now  since the division of parish the whole right to tithe be vest in the rector  and the bishop have nothing to do with the right even since the stat Henry  which relate to a vacancy but only to take care that the cure be supply and  the profit sequester for that purpose and the other plaintiff be only a  sequestrator who as it appear by the form of the sequestration and by his own  show in the bill be only a anent or collector beside the incumbent barefoot  shall have be make a party for possible at this time he may have recover his  right sense and if he shall exhibit his bill a recovery now can not be plead  in bar of his demand baron price be of opinion that no decree can have be for  the plaintiff if it have be a sequestration during the vacancy nor can there  be in this case but page and Gilbert baron be of opinion the bill have be well  enough if barefoot have be a party either in person or by his committee and  the bill be dismiss but without cost the want of party not be express assign  as cause of demurrer and notam the word and for diverse other cause c be not  in the demurrer as they shall have be Bunbury de term S hilarii
Bunbury the case OF fisher all lessee of the dean and chapter of Christ church  in Oxford Feb whether a constant nonpayment of tithe be evidence of a  exemption against a lie impropriator skin salk Q as to a college Mod this case  stand for the judgement of the court this day when it be expect that the  longcontroverted question whether a constant nonpayment of tithe be evidence  of a exemption against a lie impropriator will have be decide but the court  give judgement on the word of the patent mention in the cause though they  determine that the dean and chapter be a spiritual and not a lie body Bunbury  er p
Bunbury the case OF the commissioner OF the land tax OF the town and  university OF cambridge Julie a super can be take off one and set on another  but process may issue against some of the commissioner of the land tax only a  motion be make by the town of Cambridge that a super which be set upon they  joint with the university may be take off and put only upon the university for  the arrear of the land tax but the court be unwilling to do this without  produce precedent and at last one be produce of sir William Fleming in but in  that case the super be not alter but the process direct to issue against the  person who be Chargeable who be the commissioner that be in default and not  against all the commissioner at last it be by compromise agree that the super  shall stand and the distringa issue against those commissioner only of the  town and university who sign the deficient duplicate Mr reeves for the  university Bunbury de term S michaelis
Bunbury tully v KILNER Feb modus in lieu of tithe hemp flax and hay bill by  the rector of Aldingham in the county palatine of Lancaster for the tithe of  lie ground former use as arable but since convert into hay ground the  defendant insist upon this modusthat the occupier of ancient tenement within  particular will or township express within the say parish with their own cart  carriage and horse lead and carry and ought to lead and carry a cart load of  peat and turf from Ulverston moss to the parsonage house for the use of the  parson and rector his farmer or deputy on such a day or within the space of  every two year as they have or shall require the same in full discharge of all  the tithe of hemp flax and hay grow or arise on the say ancient tenement this  be hold to be a void modus by three baron absent Lord chief baron Montague for  a cart load be too uncertain it may be draw by two or six horse and there be  no right of turbary allege in the parsonage house or in the defendant ancient  tenement sir Constantine Phipps Mr Wardand Mr brown of counsel for the  plaintiff sergeant Chesshyre Mr fazakerley and Mr Bootle for the defendant  Bunbury er p at sergeant inn February
Bunbury Warwick who tam v white April commissioner of excise shall be hold  strict to the letter of stat g which give they jurisdiction upon the stat Geo  king cap which give jurisdiction to the commissioner of excise to condemn  forfeit good therein mention this court will bold they very strict to the  letter of the act since it break in upon the ancient jurisdiction of this  court and in this case a writ of delivery be grant for good seize by their  officer upon give security it appear in the information before they that the  good be remove from one port to another without a permit which be a unlawful  importation and therefore not within their jurisdiction sergeant Stevens sir  Constantine Phipps ware and Mr brown for the writ of delivery Mr attorney and  solicitor general contra
Bunbury whistler v web all bill dismiss for want of party bill for a  redemption the defendant in his answer set forth he be only a trustee Bunbury  er p for a this be object to the plaintiff at the hear that the beneficiary  and trust shall have be make a party and be may have amend this be disclose in  the answer and for this reason the bill be dismiss
Bunbury whitehead v walled Nov security under what circumstance a defendant be  a foreigner shall give it to abide the event of the suit Com digest Mr  Kettleby on behalf of the plaintiff move that the defendant may be oblige to  give security to abide the event of the suit before he go to Oporto where he  live and as be suggest in the bill that the defendant owe the plaintiff four  hundred pound but the answer of the defendant be come in the court will make  no order but upon the that of December follow in another cause where the  defendant have not answer but be in contempt the court oblige the defendant to  give security until answer and further order
Bunbury willy v thompson Nov trespass quare enclosed space to break in pieces  by the husband and wife of her inheritance lie trespass quaere enclosed space  to break in pieces of the husband and wife and for tread down and consume and  depasture the grass of their close adjudge on demurrer that the action be well  bring by the husband and wife the close be her inheritance and there be do  severance of the grass if it have be corn cut down that will have be a  separate interest vest in the husband alone vide cro Elizabeth vent Bulst  Edward cro car
BUNING v kipping the plaintiff lose his suit for copyhold in the lord court  and be dismiss the bill be concern certain copyhold land for which the  plaintiff heretofore sue in the lord court before m Golding steward there  where the same upon hear go against the plaintiff therefore if good cause be  not show to the contrary by this day sevennight then the cause shall be  dismiss Buning plaintiff kipping defendant year Elizabeth
BUNNIWORTH and gibbs Trin banc sup mich rot error to reverse a judgement in a  action upon a assumpsit a writ of error be bring to reverse a judgement give  in the court at Peterborough in a action upon the case upon a promise wherein  the plaintiff declare that in consideration that the defendant have receive  which be due by the plaintiff unto the defendant upon a account make up  betwixt they at such a time the defendant do assume and promise to the  plaintiff to pay unto he a certain sum style report er p of money when the  defendant shall set up a apothecary shop in Peterborough if the plaintiff be  then live g there the error assign be that here be no consideration lie in the  declaration to ground the promise upon for the consideration be the receipt of  five pound which be his own money for it be due to he upon the account and  this can be no good consideration but roll chief justice answer to this that a  little consideration will serve to ground a promise upon and it may be the  plaintiff will not have acknowledge so much as to have be due upon the account  if the defendant will not have make this promise a second exception be take  that the plaintiff do not aver that when the defendant set up the apothecary  shop in Peterborough that he be live there roll chief justice this be a good  exception for the intent of the plaintiff appear to be that he will not have  another of his own trade in the town to lessen his trade therefore let the  judgement be reverse nisi c
bunting against TEASDAILE trin geo plaintiff execute a writ of inquiry  whereupon the jury find no damage and plaintiff execute a second writ of  inquiry without quash the first and on the second the jury find a halfpenny  damage defendant move to set aside the execution of the second writ and have a  rule to show cause which rule be make absolute the court be of opinion that  the second writ be irregular issue the first pen and not return Eyre for  defendant Bootle for plaintiff
BURBURY against yeoman ejectment Siderf pl orlaby move in arrest of judgement  in ejectment because it be de messuagiis sive property which on general  verdict be ill on wood against Peyns case Cr and per curian this be nought on  demurrer Jones pro defendant say that they may have help this by take verdict  of either so when the ejectment be de messuagio property Keble and by Keeling  and Moreton this be ill after a general verdict Twisden contra that it be well  enough after verdict contra in indictment and that the plaintiff by release  damage may take judgement for the message which the other agree in such case  where part of the thing in the declaration be good and part void but where all  be uncertain it must be aid only on the verdict and not by judgement and  release as aforesaid and judgement be stay post
BURBURY against yeoman pl ejectment Twisden agree as Buckworth against  Keckwith and Rawlisons case a ejectment de messuagio sive property be ill  unless it have be far call the Blackswan c but the case that deceive he be  judgement in ejectment de messuagio sive property to make one tosto which he  conceive be for the whole whereas it be but for the toss only and damage  release as to the message or tenement
BURCHIER against wiseman it be say by Anderson and Walmsley that the ancient  sheriff be not discharge till be have deliver the county to the new sheriff  although that the patent be seal dyer and by they agree that if in the  deputation of the undersheriff there be such a clause that he shall not meddle  with any execution above that that be void as to the subject who be not bind  to take notice of such private agreement and indenture and it be void as to  the undersheriff himself as it be adjudge h James c b sir than Nothon against  goldsmith and by Elizabeth cap and authority can be so apportion dyer rep
Burching v Vaughan croak James er report date case Matthew against PURCHINS or  BURCHING against vaughan Hilary term James roll if the meaning of the party  can be collect from the word of a bind it will be good ante post roll ab   a  debt upon a obligation and demand six pound thirteen shilling and four penny  the defendant demand oyer of the bind which be noverint c tender in vigint  nobulis c and be enter in haec word it be thereupon demurrer for this variance  it be move that nobulis be not of any sense for there be not any such word  afterward the dictionary of Thomas Thomasius be show wherein mobilis be set  down for a nobleman and also for the sum of six shilling and eight penny croak  James er p it be resolve for this cause that the bind be good and therefore  adjudge for the plaintiff yet William say that it be adjudge in the common  plea where one be oblige in twenty litter pro scales that it be a void bind
burden and burden salk show detinue of charter no plea after imparlance error  in dower the defendant after imparlance plead detinue de charter cur it be not  pleadable after imparlance for it go only in abatement and judgement be affirm  nisi c
burden and TOMLYN the defendant have bring a writ of error returnable in  parliament Mr Jocelyn move that the entry which the plaintiff have make of a  general judgement may be vacate and that a special entry may be make that  judgement be give against the defendant because the court be of opinion that  the plea ought to have conclude to the country and not with a averment to  prove that the court have sometime allow such special entry to be make he cite  sand but the court declare they think the judgement be right enter for though  this court have adjudge the plea to be ill for one particular reason yet if  the superior court shall think it ill for another the judgement ought to be  affirm and far they say that if such special entry shall be make they think it  will signify nothing for the superior court must judge upon the whole record  and not whether the reason give for the judgement be a right reason or not  judge lee take notice too that Lord coke observe in Inst ch parliament that  ancient it be the method to enter the reason of judgement but ever since  Edward the three time he say the practice have be otherwise accord the motion  be refuse ex relatum vide post
burden and TOMLYN vide ante Mr Jocelyn come now and produce a rule of court  make in this cause last Michaelmas term whereby the court order that judgement  shall be for the plaintiff judgement he say have not be enter in pursuance of  that rule and therefore he move now that in pursuance of that rule the court  will make Barnardiston king b er p another rule that judgement shall be enter  the court declare it to be a settle rule that the party Barnardiston king b  must always give notice of his motion where he move upon a rule of court in  order that they may be inform by the other side whether there have not be  other rule in the cause make contrary and subsequent to that rule for which  reason as no such notice have be give in this case the court refuse to make  any rule at present vide post
burden and TOMLYN vide ante Mr Jocelyn come now and say he do agree that he  have not give notice but as the circumstance of this case be he apprehend  notice be not necessary he say he have in his hand a rule that be make in mich  term last whereby the court order that judgement shall be enter for the  plaintiff he have another rule in his hand make last term which he agree be  upon his motion whereby the court make a rule to show cause why the judgement  shall not be perfect by fill up the blank in it which be leave for insert the  cost and a three rule he say he have in his hand whereby the court order that  the second rule shall be discharge these he say be all the rule that have be  make in this cause and as there be a rule that judgement shall be enter he  apprehend he be now entitle to move for another to show cause why it be not  enter in that manner he agree he ought to have move for his second rule and  not in the manner he do for which reason the rule that be make at that time be  a improper rule and consequent the discharge a improper rule can not prevent  he now from move for a proper one the court declare that they will make no  rule without notice and judge probin say he believe if notice shall be give  the give it will be ineffectual
burden and TOMLYN vide ante the judgement not be enter up complete for that  there be a blank leave for the cost the master not have tax they Mr Jocelyn  move that the defendant in error may be oblige to complete his judgement Mr  Bootle Jun on the other side produce a affidavit that the party have compound  the matter by agreement and that the defendant in error have deliver up the  note which this action be bring upon so that if the judgement shall be reverse  he can maintain another accord the court declare that they will not oblige the  defendant in error to complete his judgement and the chief justice say that he  will not carry up to the house of lord a judgement that be not complete so  that there can be no benefit of the writ of error ex relatum vide post
Burdet against pix in debt upon a single bill by Burdet against John pix as  administrator of Freewen the case be this that be Freewen be bind in a  obligation of thirty four pound to Burdet the plaintiff Brownlow goldsborough  and be also bind to one William pix in Freewen die intestate and the letter of  administration of his good be commit after his death to the say John pix the  defendant and the say William pix also make the say John pix the defendant his  executor and die and the defelident in this action plead that the say Freewen  be indebt to the say William pix and that he be his executor and that he have  good of the say Freewens sufficient to satisfy the say debt the which he  retain for the satisfaction of that and that over that he have not of his to  satisfy he upon which the plaintiff demurrer for that that the defendant do  not plead that he have make his election to retain the say good for the  satisfaction of his own say debt before the action bring and by all the  justice he ought to make his election before the bring of the action otherwise  livre shall be charge with the other debt see uvoodward and Dareyes case  commentary and coke Coulters case Hillary James in the common bench
Burdet against the bishop OF sarum and another Berkshire where several  defendant in replevin be at several issue and but one Venice be award a  challenge of the array by one be good for all in replevin by Burdet against  the bishop of Sarum and another the bishop plead that he do not take and the  other make cognizance as bailiff to the bishop in another place for damage  pheasant and show that the cattle have escape into the place suppose in the  count as they be drive to pound and that upon fresh suit they retake in the  say place as the plaintiff suppose and the plaintiff entitle himself to the  place contain in the count and traverse the take in the other place allege by  the defendant whereupon they be at issue and one venire facias award tomson  and Trafords case b r Elizabeth Leon Poph adjudge by the whole court that it  be a good lease warrant by the statute   light a that it be not good if it do  not commence from the day of the make fol a dyer a er p to try both the issue  and on the appearance of the jury in the bench the array be challenge by the  bishop because no a knight be return upon the panel and by the opinion of the  court this challenge shall serve for the other also because it be one entire  panel accord to e b pl in appeal against several who plead not guilty and one  venire facias alone award and a juror be peremptory challenge by one of the  defendant and not by the other yet be he withdraw as against all and the like  be do m h l b pl in ravishment of ware and e h protection cast for a default  in trespass after issue and for the plead in the case above see well m h fol  rot
Burdet against THRULE account as receiver and say not by who hand account  against one as receiver when it shall be bailiff be bad upon demurrer but cure  per judgement quod to sum up per default account by the plaintiff a merchant  against the defendant a merchant be his factor de plea quod To give back ei  the pure milk of reason master of de tempore quo to be receptor will do you  much good merchandizorum ad master of ind ei reddend and so declare of diverse  good in particular but do not show by who hand the plaintiff have judgement  quod to sum up by default upon which the defendant plead a insufficient plea  before the auditor whereupon a demurrer and judgement for the plaintiff and a  writ of enquiry of damage and now it be move in arrest of judgement that the  declaration be ill first because it charge the defendant as receiver and do  not show by who hand second the defendant ought not to be charge as receiver  in this case but as bailiff for he be to merchandise with the good and by  consequence to have his expense allowance and factorage and judgement in  account as receiver be no bar in a action of account as bailiff   Litt a I  roll nu ibidem let b nu h a e b e but per curian judgement be give for the  plaintiff for per hale though he shall have be charge as bailiff yet the  defendant shall have demurrer to the declaration to take advantage of that and  this be now pass by the judgement quod to sum up levinz for the defendant
Burdet and account ex motion Raymond to discharge the party take by capias ad  to sum up because the sum be and the declaration ill and so it may be except  in arrest of judgement but per curian this be more than a award for though a  writ of Keble er p error lie not thereon yet a to know facias against the  executor do but no motion can be make in arrest of judgement nor the court  will not deliver he
Burdet and ilman Thursday April execution on report of Linesy secondary it  appear that the plaintiff and defendant have both take a become fac testae the  same day against love no one good rest become fac de good eccles and  sequestration at suit of both the same day but one be deliver to the bishop  resister first which by wile justice ought to be prefer but by Twisden justice  where two execution be of the same testae the sheriff may prefer which he will  but per Rainsford Ch just they must divide it but notwithstanding register jud  Orig a writ to deliver the land tenant ut book tenement be say by Polyxphen to  be a void writ and per curian the land can be deliver by fire fac but the  profit and in Harwood and Paytons case it be hold when there be no bishop that  a elegit on Edward cap lie not de earth Church rites and the plaintiff be a  stranger who can take benefit of except to the defendant writ albeit the money  be in court and no return make post
Burdet and THREELE ante payment Mr solicitor on kell b conceive a account of  good as receivor ad merchand be ill send non allocatur for the defendant shall  have demurrer to the declaration the defendant shall have confess what be  allow and plead to the rest and not plead a general issue or as here suffer  judgement by default and on record mich car rot William and low account of  good as receptor ad merchandizandum verbatim as the case in question hale  chief justice rule it good at nisi prius but r account roll   Entr be nothing  to this purpose but that the receptor general shall not answer other profit  but ad marchandizandum shall and this shall have charge as a bailiff the other  not and this be only form as ad valentian for price and judgement for the  plaintiff
Burdet and THRELE ante account levins except in arrest of the second judgement  in account against a merchant as receptor to visit will do you much good  catallorum because it shall be as ballivus wherein he must have charge send  non allocatur this shall have be before auditor or on plea ne unques receptor  or demurrer especial unto as in the case of account as receptor not show by  who hand and this be after the second judgement and error depend it come too  late and judgement for the plaintiff
Burdett S case Trin Ann salk Mod case in trespass the defendant justify as  clerk of the market within the district of whitechapel for a distress for not  use measure mark accord to the standard of the exchequer holt CJ hold that the  clerk of the market can not have power to estreat fine and amerciament  otherwise than as a franchise and it be more reasonable the clerk shall bring  the standard with he than that the people shall follow he or attend at a place  out of the market holt KB fee
Burdett vers Newell on move for a prohibition to the spiritual court for  refuse a plea the party ought to offer a affidavit of the truth of the fact in  the plea a rule be make to show cause why a prohibition shall not be grant to  stay a suit against the plaintiff in the court of the archdeacon of Litchfield  for not go to his parish church nor any other church on Sunday or holiday nor  receive the sacrament thrice a year upon suggestion of the statute of  Elizabeth and the toleration Act I W m c and then qualify himself within that  Act and allege that he plead it below and they refuse to receive his plea and  Mr Raymond show for cause that this fact be false and that the plaintiff be  not a dissenter nor have qualify himself ut above and therefore hope the court  will not allow the rule to stand unless he have a affidavit of the fact for by  that mean any person may come and suggest a false fact and oust the spiritual  court of their jurisdiction quod curian to go away and therefore the rule be  discharge Mr carter counsel for the plaintiff have no affidavit Lord Raymond  er p
Burdett vers Wheatle the plaintiff in error can assign error in fact and in  law at the same time error upon a judgement give in the common plea in case  upon several promise in which upon non assumpsit plead as to two of the count  verdict and judgement be give for the plaintiff and as to the rest for the  defendant and the error assign be that the defendant be a infant at the time  of the promise make and also appear by attorney to which assignment the  defendant in error demurrer special because it contain matter of fact and of  law also and therefore the judgement be affirm
BURDETTS case Trin Ann B R Q whether the clerk of the market can distrain ex  duty for use unlawful measure Mod case in trespass the defendant justify as  clerk of the market within the district of Whitechapel for a distress of S d  for not use measure mark accord to the Salkeld er p standard of the exchequer  upon demurrer sir Peter king pro def urge this be a authority give by e c sect  and holt c j hold that the clerk of the market can not have power to estreat  fine and amerciament otherwise than as a franchise and it be more reasonable  the clerk shall bring the standard with he than that the people shall follow  he or attend at a place out of the market Salkeld false Latin
burdon versus burdon Pas W m B R rot show detainer of charter be no plea after  imparlance   a a comb S c error on a judgement in Durham in a writ of dower  the defendant after imparlance have plead detainer of charter and upon  demurrer judgement be give by the court for the demandant which be now affirm  for per cur he that plead this plea must plead that from the time of the death  of his ancestor a preparation to be thus far a preparation step forth to  assign her dower if she will deliver the charter a a a dowress be now consider  as entitle in all case to come into equity for her dower if she prefer such  mode to proceed at law and though she die before her right to dower be  establish equity will decree a account of the rend and profit of the estate of  which she be dowable in favour of her representative Curtis v Curtis bro  Wakefield v child Fonblanques note to treatise of equity
BURDUS against Satchwell hill geo after a writ of error allow plaintiff bring  action on judgement and bail be justify afterward the writ of error be  nonprossed for want of transcribe the record plaintiff without discontinue his  action on the judgement take defendant good in execution by known on good  evidence be made fa which be hold irregular and the known on good evidence be  made fa set aside and the good order to be restore with cost plaintiff will be  at liberty to take out execution after discontinue his action on judgement  Skinner and draper for plaintiff in error will and prime for defendant in  error obiter per cur No rule to transcribe ought to be give till the record be  bring in in case of a known on good evidence be made fa the court will not go  into a nice enquiry when the be made fa in the original county to warrant the  known on good evidence be sue out it be sufficient if the first be made fa  return be produce
BURDUS against short and Satchwell mich geo plaintiff move for a ha cor to  bring two prisoner in the fleet both charge in execution to the sit at  guildhall to testify in this cause upon a affidavit of their be material  witness and a rule be make to show cause why such ha cor shall not be grant or  why the witness shall not be examine upon interrogatory and their deposition  read in evidence at the trial and afterward enlarge to show cause as before  plaintiff indemnifying the warden but for want of the consent of defendant and  the warden the rule be discharge sometime such writ of ha cor have be grant  the single point of law be whether under such ha cor the prisoner be in  execution the warden can not defend himself against a action for a escape the  last time this question be before all the judge seven against five be of  opinion that the ha cor will not excuse the warden but he will be liable to  answer for a escape Stiless practical register Lord Raymond grant ad  testificand at Le old Baily pro ring without affidavit pasch Ann Keble the  king against Huggins at the old Baily grant ad testificand pro ring Geo will  for plaintiff Skinner for defendant barn er p
BURDUS and HOSlER vide before Mr Abney come now to show cause and say that if  this have be the second action upon the judgement he shall have agree the  defendant will have be discharge upon common bail but as it be only the first  he conceive that special bail be due for this purpose he mention the case of  townsend and mason where judge Raymond refuse to discharge a defendant at his  chamber upon common bail under the same circumstance the court be of the same  opinion accord the rule be discharge
burdy and HOSlER when a action of debt be bring upon a judgement how far  special bail shall be require or not in such action the defendant have be  discharge out of custody for not have be take in execution in due time and now  the plaintiff bring debt upon the former judgement upon which Mr marsh move  that the defendant may be admit to common bail but the court refuse the motion  by reason that this be not the second action bring on the judgement but the  first and for this purpose judge lee mention the case of chamber and Robinson  however afterward the court make a rule to show cause
burfoot versus peal before a to know facias be bring against the bail who  plead that the principal pay the debt ad they impetrationis short catalog upon  which it be demurrer Jones solicitor for the defendant say though the bail may  plead payment because the condition of the recognizance be in the disjunctive  videlicet for render the body or pay the money yet the principal can also it  ought to have be plead to be pay before a capias ad to give satisfaction take  out for as it be it may be after the recognizance forfeit as if the death of  the principal be plead it must be allege to be before the capias ad to give  satisfaction take out but the court hold it to be well enough for if that  matter be material it be to come on the other side and ex agreeableness curiae  the bail have time to save himself before the return of the second to know  facias
burgess administrator de good non OF GAYSELL dead intestate against clayton  executor in debt on bind the plaintiff say that the executor name they of g be  dead not say intestate for which cause Baldwin move in arrest of judgement  because if any executor make his executor the plaintiff be not sufficient  entitle say non allocatur but per curian the defendant ought to show there be  executor judgement for the plaintiff
burgess against DYNHAM Trin car banc Reg hill car rot demurrer upon a plea of  justification burgess bring a action of trespass against Dinham for take load  of timber the defendant justify that he take the timber as a deputy of a  purveyor to the king for the reparation of the mansion house of the king to  this plea of justification the plaintiff demurrer and for cause show that it  do not appear that the defendant have any authority by the commonlaw or by  statute to take this timber for the commission which give this authority ought  to be renew every six month and it do not appear that it be so in this case  Institut f e that he have not show that the house be in decay when be take the  timber and be can take it to make a common stock to repair they afterward when  they shall fall to decay that purveyor ought to pay ready money for the  commodity they take and be do not show in our case that he pay ready money for  the timber by the stat Edward c Edward f but by Edward title bar it seem to be  otherwise but the case there differ from this case for there it be that a  purveyor may take horse to use for a time without pay money but it be not to  alter the style report property that he have not show that he endeavour to  agree with the plaintiff for his timber as he ought to have do hill car rot  Parker and Sturgens case that the plea be huddle up and be not plead  particular and distinct as it ought to be so that the plaintiff know not how  to take a issue h the rule of court be to hear the other side Friday next
burgess against HALDING trinity geo on the argument of a point reserve at nisi  prius the court hold that in the case of a tender the placita be of no  validity a original must be produce judgement order to be enter for defendant  will for plaintiff Bootle for defendant
burgess against nightingale mich geo a writ of inquiry be execute and  plaintiff move to quash the inquisition by reason of the smallness of damage  which be deny prime for plaintiff wright for defendant where the jury find any  damage the inquisition must stand aliter have they find no damage
burgess against PALLAMOUNTER mich geo Belfield move to set aside regular  judgement on payment of cost plead general issue c and ask for leave to pay  money into court on the common rule deny barn per cur money can be so bring in  after regular judgement
burgess vers periam the memorandum of a bill can be amend after a plea in  abatement to answer ouster and demurrer say vide post will Str term Rep the  plaintiff bring a special action for not deliver bank bill upon the first of  may in pursuance of a agreement but the memorandum be general of easter term  last pass which refer to the first day of the term and so the action appear to  be bring before the cause of action accrue wherefore Mr Northey move for leave  to amend the memorandum and make it die Mercury proxime post month Paschae  which be after the cause of action accrue upon affidavit that all the process  issue after the first day of may and this motion be make after the defendant  have plead in abatement and a to answer ouster award upon it and demurrer by  the defendant for this cause but the motion be deny by the court because it  come too late though all be in paper
burgh and bowman Wednesday novemb trin car two rot lease in a ejectment on the  demise of dr Charleton of a house in oxon by agreement to take it for the  yearly rend of and the plaintiff to repair a lease to be draw by saint Thomas  day and the lease then to begin and another agreement by note to let for seven  or eleven year at the doctor election to be engross and that no lease Keble er  p be engross and Holloway for the plaintiff that this be no lease but a  tenancy at will which the court agree thereby but the point intend be that the  first be a perfect agreement can be surrender by latter note of agreement but  the court say this show the intent and for the plaintiff there be no word of  demise and if there be yet covenant be to be insert and no certain time as  Harrington and wise cro pl Hubert Tisdell and Essex it no lease
burgh v Francis that December car follow Ross v arm navy Hotel   Ch d Rep  tempt finch Nels p W I Eq can Abr mortgagor compel under the covenant for far  assurance to supply a defect in a mortgage against judgement creditor a  mortgage in fee be defective for want of livery the heir after the death of  the father offer to pay the money but upon view of the defect in the deed  retract and then be sue by his father creditor as heir and plead riens prter  the mortgage land so the creditor by bind have judgement which relate to the  first day of Hilary term but in truth be after the testae and service of a  subpoena though before the return of it I decree the heir to make a conveyance  to the mortgagee accord to his father covenant for further assurance and that  he shall hold till redemption discharge of those judgement wherein I do not  rely on the legal notice of lie to hang but hold the heir in this case to be a  trustee of the land descend which be charge with the equity of the mortgage  but can not be encumber by the heir for a purchaser without notice of the  trust may be free but a encumbrance be not like a sale Lord nottingham ms  morris v the bank of England can tempt Talb bro PC Edward Toml Ves for a full  report of Lord Talbot judgement vide post appendix swan Martin v Martin Ves  sen Douglas v clay dick Ves brook v Reynolds bro c c dick coat v friar bro c c  Cox Hardcastle v Chettle bro c c Kenyon v Worthington dick Ves Paxton v  Douglas Ves Gilpin v lady Southampton Ves Farnell v smith ball Beatrice  Cleverley v Cleverley cit Ves Paxton v Douglas Ves Gilpin v lady Southampton  Ves
burgh v Wentworth the defendant executor to their father be guardian in socage  to the plaintiff be order to answer for profit take by he the bill be against  the defendant as executor to their father who in his lifetime be guardian in  socage to the plaintiff in right of the plaintiffs mother who he marry for and  concern profit by he take of the land of the plaintiff during his minority for  fine of lease woodsales and wilful decay of house and do aver asset sufficient  to be come to their hand the defendant demurrer because not privy nor  Chargeable by law but order to answer burgh plaintiff Wentworth defendant year  Elizabeth Mews dig title executor and administrator XIII proceed by or against  b S account title infant h guardian duty and power c account title trust and  trustee c the trustee liability of trustee for breach of trust three decease  trustee
BURGHESS OF devise mandamus Bartue pray a mandamus for a capital burghess of  the devise and that they may return on oath as latch pl Audlys case the court  grant the mandamus but deny to compel any return on oath but leave the party  to action sur case
burgis and page what kind of rule be proper to be make on a undersheriff Mr  strange move for a rule on the undersheriff of the county of Northampton to  show cause why he do not deliver to the plaintiff the money levy on a become  facias upon a affidavit that the defendant good be take in execution the  undersheriff write a letter to the bailiff to deliver they up because he have  receive the debt and cost since which the money have often be demand of the  undersheriff but he have not pay it the court declare they shall Willing grant  the motion if it have ever be grant before for they have observe of late that  sheriff make it a practice to delay plaintiff their suit and to stand out till  the attachment however they say they will think of some way to make sheriff  pay cost for their delay the rule make at present be only that the sheriff  shall return his writ
burgis by his guardian against burgis prerogative court Trinity term June that  the interest of a minor son be establish a administration grant to a brother  be revoke dr pinfold for Joseph burgis a minor Joseph burgis die intestate  Richard his brother take administration as next of kin the minor as decease  son call in the administration Richard deny his interest the minor have prove  decease be marry at the fleet to jane matthews his mother and have prove own  and cohabitation in saint Giles parish in the marriage be in we have plead a  affidavit of decease that he be marry and that the lee minor be hischild and  we have plead a letter from Richard to decease in which he speak of decease  wife and child witness for the minor Richard Burman well know decease from and  also jane matthews who be servant to decease father prove cohabitation and own  as husband and wife in wardourstreet and she be then deliver of Joseph the  minor in this cause they remove into saint Giles parish and live there as  husband and wife for several year afterward he go beyond sea and the child  live with his mother the child be admit into covent garden charity school as  the son of Joseph and jane burgis his wife James knight prove exhibit a to be  Richard Burgiss handwriting and that it be write to decease Richard therein  mention decease son be in the freeschool John springer prove the exhibit b and  c N B the brother plead but do not examine any witness on his allegation and  no counsel appear for he at the hear judgement sir george lee I give sentence  for the interest of the minor and condemned the brother in cost upon taxation  the byday and revoke the lee er p administration grant to the brother and  decree it to the guardian for the use of the minor
burk and strew in declaration for dig conyburrows c no need of show title  whether the plaintiff or a stranger be owner of the son right of common not  traversable quaere in trespass the plaintiff declare that he be legitime  possessionatus of a certain tenement contain a fullingmill a close of pasture  and a piece of land call d and that to have to have to withhold common of  pasture in acre in bodily defect forest for all beast levant and couchant  tanquam ad tenement pillage reach that the defendant mind to disturb he of his  common do dig and make coneyburrow there the defendant demurrer to the  declaration and judgement be give for the plaintiff in c b and now upon a writ  of error in this court it be resolve that there needs no title to be set forth  in the declaration it be ground upon the possession and the title but  inducement to the action which be find upon a tort it need not be show whether  the defendant be owner of the son or a stranger if in trespass for chase or  distrain cattle the defendant set forth his freehold or lease for year and  that be take they damagefesant then the plaintiff must prescribe for common it  be not traversable for all right of common must be prove upon not guilty else  the plaintiff can maintain his action the court rely principal upon the case  of saint John and moody mich car true it be after a verdict but hale and the  whole court hold it be a good declaration without the help of the verdict and  BlockLev versus slater in c r hill W m judgment affirma
Burleigh against child wine in action who tam for sell wine by fraud after  general issue the party wave that and plead Elizabeth cap that be on a penal  law it must be in a year because this be debt and not a information he can not  take the general issue but per hale Ch just since James cap this may be give  in evidence as well in debt as in information which the court agree ex motion  winnington to accept the plea and the party agree to accept general issue this  be for new store without account but in action for the duty it be not within  the statute on nil debet and in information for seizure non bring in to be  contra form stat be not the general issue as in other information it be or nil  debet at pleasure and both statute extend to all penal law
Burleigh vers harris No writ of error in person thou lie after affirmance barn  b r Cunn S c a judgement be recover in the Marshalsea and error bring in b r  and error in law assign and the judgement affirm then a writ of error in  person thou be bring and error in fact assign and the court stay proceed upon  it and give leave to take out execution for as error in fact and strange law  can be both assign on one writ there be no reason to do it by a more dilatory  method and it be like the case of Lambell v Prettyjohn ante where it be hold  that error in person thou will not lie after affirmance in the exchequer  Chamber beside it will be very odd that the same court shall affirm and  reverse and as to the case in salk where it be report to lie after affirmance  that be not warrant by the record which be enter hill James rot by which it  appear the writ of error abate and there be no affirmance which be agreeable  to roll Abr Q strange report er p
burley against read b bring some yarn on horseback to the house of a his  neighbour for to weigh it upon his scale and beam and the lord come and  distreyns the horse and yarn for rend arrear by a and by the court that be not  lawful for they be bring thither for another intent h h e also they be in the  possession of the very owner
burman versus buckle bill of exchange custom of merchant case upon a bill of  exchange declaration upon the custom of merchant verdict pro quer Treby move  in arrest of judgement the custom as here lie be as general as the commonlaw  of England I Ro pl side the custom be lie trader well some all personae omit  the word exchange having money to spend Wythens I all the precedent be  exchange having money to spend except one which pass sub silence judgment  arrestetur nisi c
burn and WHITCHCOCK the king moneyers to repair highway replevin the defendant  avow upon the statute of Ph mark and car for not repair highway plaintiff  reply and plead the privilege of the moneyers of the mint to be exempt c the  defendant demurrer holt for the defendant argue that the king letter patent  reach not these act for the exemption be only from duty c grant to the king  and the duty of repair the highway come not within those word but admit it be  a good discharge yet the subsequent act repeal it Inst   draw Drury S case  Inst that all exemption of clergyman be take away Edward and Inst and here  this tax be lie by act of parliament since the patent side dr web S case  afterward judgement be give for the avowants pasch James
burn contra English october mortgage and double account a mortgage to b then  after c have judgement in debt against a and then after a mortgage to d b d  and a account what be due to b d pay he his money and b assign his mortgage to  d c sue d to pay he the debt and to have a account of what be real due to a  and himself d plead the former account saint Lord chancellor declare that c be  to be admit to redeem pay what be due dly but it be debate and insist on by  the counsel of d that the account shall conclude c though no party thereto  Lord chancellor remember Cox and Shearmans case pro quer resp there the  account be litigate here it be voluntary Lord chancellor answer the bill
Burnaby versus sanderson Trin Ann B R Mod case defendant in error may sue out  a second certiorari after a variant original return on the first Rep B R tempt  hard cro car Str Lord raym error be bring on a judgement in c b and want of a  original assign for error the defendant in error come in gratis and allege  diminution and pray a certiorari and thereupon a variant original be certify  upon this he come again at the day give and suggest another original of such a  term Salkeld and pray another certiorari this appear on the master report the  question be whether it be regular et per holt c j if a record below be of  easterterm and want of original be assign for error the defendant may allege  diminution and then a certiorari go to the custos narrow places only to  certify a original of easterterm that be the term of which the placita be if  then the custos narrow places certify a wrong original or that there be no  original then the defendant may come and suggest before in nullo be erratum  plead that there be a original of another term videlicet Hilary or Michaelmas  and then there must go a certiorari to the custos narrow places to certify  that and another to the chief justice of the common plea to certify the  continuances also if the custos narrow places certify a wrong original of the  same term the placita be of it have be hold the defendant may suggest there be  a right original even of that very term and when both be before the court the  court will apply the record to that which be a good original cro
BURNABYS case in cane in person lord king he who have the body in execution  can be a petition creditor reed stat law Toms and Allen have recover judgement  against he he be surrender by strange report er p his bail and then charge in  execution after which the plaintiff in that action prefer their petition to  the Lord chancellor as creditor for a commission of bankruptcy which issue but  be supersede upon the bankrupt petition the chancellor be of opinion that the  body of the debtor be in execution it be a satisfaction of the debt in point  of law so that they be not creditor who can petition Goddard v Vanderheydon  will S p strange pro lender
BURNAND against stand in formedon defendant plead never tenant of the freehold  in abatement and plaintiff refuse to accept the plea whereupon defendant apply  to the court and upon hear council on both side the plea be order to be  receive it can be plead otherwise than in abatement baines for defendant  Darnall for plaintiff
BURNARD against Michael hill car rot Thursday may Friday may covenant in debt  on indenture covenant of power to let and to enjoy a cyder press and in  default thereof to pay livre the defendant plead non be factum on which Jones  pro defendant except in arrest of judgement that here be no breach sufficient  aver which must be be precedent to the penalty hale Ch just conceive the  declaration ill on demurrer because for a penalty a man can assign but one  breach and the condition precedent must be aver but be general allege that he  have not perform any covenant it be only multifarious which be wave by take  issue Keble er p non be factum which the court agree and that the merit of the  cause be try so it be aid by the late statute car cap and judgement pro  plaintiff
BURNARD against Michael Tuesday may covenant in debt on a deed for performance  of covenant in demise of a house the count be only to break in pieces on non  be factum plead and issue quod non be factum Jones move in arrest of judgement  that here be no particular breach assign but only declare general quod to  break in pieces the deed be not obligation general but a deed with covenant  and a pein subsequent upon nonperformance thereof but be after verdict as raze  Entr it be well enough per Twisden a certain sum be demand the want of breach  be supply by non be factum upon the late statute car cap which the court agree  but adjornatur to be refer for want of visn post
burnel against France in error want of the warrant of attorney of the  plaintiff in assize be error a man recover by verdict in assize and no warrant  of attorney find for the plaintiff and this be assign for error bring by  burnel against France of land in Paddington and it be adjudge error in b r a a  yet by e c No judgement after verdict shall be reverse for want of any warrant  of attorney but now see Geo c fol b pl note a ante dyer b er p the sheriff  under a be made fa sell a term afterward judgement be reverse the produce and  not the term shall be restore the sheriff in the execution of a f eri facias  sell a term of the defendant by writ of veqdition set forth and deliver the  money in court to the plaintiff and afterward for error the judgement be  reverse quaere whether the term shall be restore or only the money whereof  there be diverse opinion and manwood dyer and Wray think in mich term at table  that the restitution shall not be of the term because it be legal sell through  default of the party himself but of the money only which come in lieu of the  term c a indictment on e c must state the offence to be with intent to set  forth and extol the authority c and contra forward to cause to stand do not  aid the defect a be indict upon the statute of of the present queen c of  premune for aid one b know he to be a principal maintainer of the authority  and jurisdiction of the bishop and see of Rome with these word in the  indictment S against the form of the statute aforesaid c for which he be in  prison and his indictment certify in b p and for want of these word be express  mention in the act S upon purpose and to the intent to set forth and to extol  the authority c it be think by the major part of all the justice be assemble  for this purpose that the indictment be insufficient notwithstanding the say  word against the form of the statute be in the indictment dyer HICARY term  queen Elizabeth
burnet against fox Friday Jan abatement in error Br on suggestion in the  exchequerchamber that the defendant in the writ of error be dead the court  will do nothing there on affidavit but leave the party to proceed below in b r  be not agree whereupon the administrator on to know to make return in four day  take execution in ejectment and per curian this be well do and albeit the  death of one defendant do not abate the writ in b r yet the death of the  defendant do abate it here and they refuse to set it aside ex motion  winnington Keble er p
burnet against hold executor OF executor modern c pl in debt against the  testator after the day of Ni prius and before the day in batik the testator  aid and Jones pro defendant conceive on the late Act car cap that the  judgement shall not relate to make the debt as a judgement that be but a  specialty at the time of the Act but per curian this Act only make the  judgement irreversable for it be in the discretion of the court to give  judgement erroneous or reverse it but the main question be whether this  judgement shall relate so as to prevent the defendant as executor to retain  for Keble his debt by specialty which be in equal degree before judgement  Adjornatur
burnet against hold Thursday June executor sander pro plaintiff that the plea  be ill notwithstanding car cap for the defendant shall not retain for his own  bind against the plaintiff judgement which be a high debt and a judgement now  by relation against the testator and the executor ought to take notice of the  verdict which Ch just hale agree and per hale Ch just after suit begin he can  pay any debt arbitrary of equal nature without special plead that he have no  notice of the suit but he may retain for this be before any original can be  against he which raynsford agree and that judgement be no evidence on full  assistant but it must be plead special also if this shall not be a good  judgement by relation the executor may pay any debt inferior also the  judgement to the Lord Arlington per hale Ch just be equal the not sue any to  know facias be not material send curian contra that by the to know facias the  payment be well make and the executor can take notice of any other judgement  not sue the court agree the executor may confess judgement in latter suit and  delay a former by plea but Twisden and Moreton conceive the statute only  prevent the abatement and error by death but do not make the judgement to  relate otherwise than it do at commonlaw Keble though it be a judgement as  against the testator Adjornatur
burnet and COBY what word in a will convey a estatetail and not for life only  upon the trial of the issue in this cause the question be what estate the word  in a will convey which be these follow I devise my land to a for life and  after his decease the remainder to the heir male of the body of a and to the  heir male of such issue male the chief justice be of opinion that they convey  a estatetail to a and say that the settle distinction be where the word heir  be in the singular number and a limitation make to the issue of such heir the  word heir be consider as a word of purchase and a description story personae  but wherever the word heir be in the plural number and a limitation make to  the issue of such heir the word heir be consider as a word of descent and not  of purchase Barnardiston king b term mich geo ill
burnet versus hold executor Danv p lev Mod keb a to know facias against a  executor to have execution upon a judgement obtain against the testator the  defendant demand oyer of the record and by it it appear that the plaintiff  bring a action upon the case upon a promise against the testator and upon non  assumpsit plead a trial by nisi prius and between the trial and day in bank  the testator die the defendant plead a debt due to he from the testator upon a  obligation and that he retain so much in satisfaction of his say debt and that  he have not asset ultra the plaintiff demurrer and the sole question rest upon  the construction of the statute of car cap whether that Act shall supply the  death of the defendant so as to make the judgement good against the defendant  debt and after argument adjudge for the plaintiff Raymond sir t term mich car  b r sir Matthew hale chief justice sir Thomas Twisden sir Richard Rainsford  and sir William Morton justice officer mandamus vent keb isle sexton of the  parish church of Kingsclere in Hampshire move for a mandamus to be restore to  his office and the court give time to consider whether any precedent will  warrant such a writ and it be afterward allow
burnett against Kendal mich geo motion to set aside plea in abatement which  come in two day after declaration leave at king defendant attorney chamber  under the door which be not find there till November the agent Mr buck have  appear by king the country attorney and plaintiff have give no notice to buck  the agent of declaration be file or leave cur whether the plea come regular in  or not be the only question and the declaration not be deliver nor any notice  to buck of its be file let the rule for set aside the plea be discharge with  cost it be trick practice to put the declaration under the country attorney  chamber door Skinner for defendant urlin for plaintiff
burnham against bayne the case be a man seize of diverse land the half of they  be extend by elegit and before execution be have against he a new elegit award  and if all the baff which remain or but the half of that which be the four  part of all shall be extend be the question and it be agree by all the justice  that Brownlow goldsborough but the half of that which remain and not the half  of all which he have at the time of the judgement but the half of that which  he have at the time of the elegit and if all which remain be extend the extent  shall be void by all the justice see Edward execution e execution and here the  principal case be a man have a rend of forty pound reserve upon a lease for  year and two judgement in debt be have against he at the suit of sir Thomas  Cambell and three judgement at the suit of the plaintiff the half be first  extend by elegit upon the first judgement have at the suit of sir Thomas  Cambell and after upon the judgement have at his suit the half of the residue  be extend and after upon the judgement at the suit of the plaintiff all the  residue be extend and all the justice agree that the Brownlow goldsborough er  p extent be void for they ought to extend but the half of that which remain  and that be but the four part trinity James in the common bench
burr v atwood and draw v atwood S C Litt Ent Carth bail can bring error upon  the judgement against the principal S C Mod r send for cro car a writ of error  may be quash as to part vide cro car atwood obtain judgement in a action  against I S in which burr be bail and afterward he obtain judgement in to know  facias against burr upon which burr bring a writ of error tam in reddition  judgment how in adjudication performance which be ill because the bail can  maintain error upon the principal judgement upon which Mr Carthew move that  the writ of error shall be quash as to the principal judgement and stand good  as to the judgement upon the to know facias and he cite a case adjudge in this  court pasch will mark between brook and sir William Ellis where sir William  Ellis obtain judgement in debt against brook and I S two executor of I n and  upon a to know become inquiry award and devastavit return against brook  judgement be give against brook upon the devastavit upon which brook sue a  writ of error without his coexecutor I S to reverse the principal judgement in  the action of debt and to reverse the judgement of the devastavit against  himself and because be alone without I S can not sue error upon the principal  judgement the writ of error be quash as to that and stand good as to the  judgement in the to know facias upon the devastavit against himself which case  holt chief justice Lord Raymond er p remember well and therefore in the  principal case the writ of error be quash as to the principal judgement and be  retain for the residue
burr versus atwood mich Ann ld raym Writ of error in which the judgement be  misrecited the plaintiff obtain judgement in a to know facias upon a  recognizance against the bail and now upon a writ of error bring it be quod in  adjudication performance judgment predict error come between manifestus c  adjudge this be nought it shall have be in act of assignment performance  recognitionis predict because a recognizance be not such a judgement as may or  will be intend on the face of the writ of error
burr versus atwood pasch Ann B R far warrant of attorney for the plaintiff in  the action against the principal can extend to the suit against the bail but  there must be a new one Carth Salkeld er p salk Mod Mod cumber post salk lill  Entr error on a award of execution against bail the record of the principal  judgement be return and it be object that the plaintiff at the return of the  to know facias appear by I S his old attorney and pray a alias and that I S  act on as attorney throughout the whole and yet have no other warrant than the  old one which be give he in the original action et per holt c j any one may  sue out or pray the to know facias and therefore the old attorney may but when  the to know facias be return then the plea commence and a new warrant of  attorney ought to have be enter which be by enter quod to express grief to put  down loco his c for the warrant to appear in the principal action be no  warrant to appear in the to know facias against the bail because this be a new  cause and a different record also the chief justice say that upon this writ of  error the record of the judgement against the principal ought not to have be  certify judgement reverse n with respect to atorneys and solicitor see stat  Geo cap Geo cap c notam a attorney of B R have by collusion take a turnkey of  the king bench prison for his articleclerk the article be cancel by order of  the court and order to be keep there burro note to that Edit Salkeld  attornment
burr versus atwood salk Writ of error by the bail tam in reddition judgment of  the original action when the bail be not entitle to such writ salk Mod Mod  comb judgement in the court at Maidstone in ken and upon a to know facias  against the bail execution be award against they and a writ of error be bring  and prosecute by burr who be one of the bail for the defendant in the original  action and the writ be tam in reddition judgment how in adjudication  performance against the bail c and now it be move to quash this writ because  the bail be not entitle by law to a writ of error upon the judgement against  the principal in the original action to which the court agree and they quash  the writ of error quoad all that relate to the judgement in the original  action and no more and the writ be rule to stand good quoad the judge Carthew  er p mean against the bail upon the cognizant fa and accord the plaintiff burr  proceed therein
burrel and lancaster Trin car banc Reg arrest of judgement in trespass quare  enclosed space to break in pieces Burrell bring a action of trespass quare  enclosed space to break in pieces against Lancaster and have a verdict the  defendant move in arrest of judgement and for cause show that there be a  variance between the writ and the declaration for the writ be quare enclosed  space to break in pieces in the singular number and the plaintiff declare of  diverse close but roll justice say that it be well enough for the word  enclosed space be nomen aggregativum and may contain many close and so may  well enough agree with the declaration and therefore let the plaintiff take  his judgement
burrel versus RICHMOND and his wife administratrix of Jonathan Bennet Det sur  devastavit judgement be have against Jonathan Bennet who die intestate and his  wife take out administration then there be judgement on a to know facias that  the plaintiff shall have execution of the good of Jonathan Bennet after which  she waste the good to the value of a action of debt be bring in the debet and  to hold off for this the defendant plead nil debet queen if this action be  well bring and if the defendant have plead a good plea earl sergeant I think  the plea be not good because it be a plea only argumentative its a plea only  to the judgement not to the devastavit they shall have answer the wrong  Newdigate what make this action judgement and devastavit matter of record and  matter of fact fact without the record in such case and the record without the  fact can make the action hob fol Peter versus Stafford in that case matter of  record be mix with matter of fact it be triable per pais in such mix action as  this be nil debet be good enough curian a action of debt will lie upon a  devastavit as against a sheriff in this case after judgement she waste these  good action of debt well lie there be debt is owed ex fault as well as debt is  owed ex contractor it be ground upon a tort also a devastavit without a  judgement will not have make a action of debt but both do if executor waste  they that have right can bring debt upon the waste hub there must be a  judgement the whole make the action
burrell against eastlow prerogative court caveat day July that a  administration improper grant in the court of the archdeacon of Norwich call  in and revoke Robert Burrell die a widower intestate leave one child a infant  Frances Burrell the grandmother of the child be assign guardian in the  prerogative court and take administration as such to decease for the use of  the infant Nathaniel eastlow uncle to the minor be on that march assign  guardian to the infant in the court of the archdeacon of Norwich and he take  administration there for the use of the infant the grandmother cite he to  bring the administration into the prerogative court and to show cause why it  shall not be revoke for want of jurisdiction in the archdeacon court it appear  to be a prerogative case and I decree the administration to be revoke and  condemned the uncle in S d the usual cost
Burrell ball v bright personal action by mate against master injunction grant  and afterward dissolve ad et assignation book that Feb Johannes ball recently  instructress socius ship pron  interrog  ad to hear haec dam recently  peremptory or urgent call the Nicholson contra a certain causan sumarie in  haec Danielem bright recently instructress the same ship diem ad candidacy  Rushworth that Feb copy row curiae porter pro dissolution injunctionis in here  causan per edwardum Wheeler to lead in to be ordo domini judge general order  as to seal of warrant ad et ass book that Dec the judge dr Newton declare that  all warrant which be to be seal shall be seal with the seal of the lord of the  admiralty their lordship have give leave to use the same and that the word sub  seal duty great Admiralli our men great Britauniae c quo such in here part in  order that be use instead of the word sub seal great well ad cause and also  that he appoint Walter graw officer of the court till further order
Burrell block v hopton the vrow Dorothea No jurisdiction in admiralty in a  case of illegal importation ad et assignation Act that July a business of  appeal promote by Pieter block master of the ship call the vrow Dorothea  against William Hopton deputy naval officer in the port of Charlestown in the  province of south Carolina for information and sentence on which day Gostling  pray that the judge will pronounce for the appeal and complaint in this behalf  make and that the judge from who this cause be appeal have no jurisdiction to  inquire as to the importation or exportation of good or offence at Jamaica  contrary to any of the act of parliament in the presence of Farrer dissent who  pray that the judge will pronounce against the appeal and affirm the decree of  the judge appeal from and decree this cause to be remit with cost the judge dr  chapman surrogate for sir h Penrice have hear advocate as to the jurisdiction  of the judge appeal from declare that the judge appeal from have no  jurisdiction to inquire as to the importation or exportation of good at  Jamaica contrary to Act of parliament Farrer with all due reverence protest  the judge assign Farrer to prosecute his appeal by the first session of next  term
Burrell clarke v the fairfield the follow entry refer apparent to a conflict  of jurisdiction between the admiralty and commonlaw court appear in the  admiralty assignation book under date that September Thomas clarke con cimbam  sive transportation quandan peremptory or urgent call the Fairfield ejusque c  recently ad Edimumdum Handley send nunc ad edwardum Beauchamp to look on et  contra dictum Handley in specie ac all men c ad to hear voluantatem domini  super candidacy Exton edvardus Beauchamp con eand et ad candidacy chapman  Burrell er p that the marshal of this court shall restore the possession of  the say light the Fairfield with her tackle apparel and furniture to Thomas  Winston esquire sheriff of Surrey or to his under sherriffe or order in who  possession she be by virtue of a execution at commonlaw at the time of the  arrest make by the authority of this court he the say Thomas Winston or his  deputy first deposit in the registry of this court the sum of ten pound of  lawful money of England and submit the same to the judgement and condemnation  of this court as to the charge of the say Thomas clark in obtain a at first  decretum in this court against the say light or such part thereof if any as  this court shall so order in present time speech extin attestant c
Burrell EWBANCK v Milbourne that Dec owner of the providence against the  charity and against the master of the charity Richard Ewbanck magister et  associate proprietarii ship the providence ejusque c contra naven the charity  of south shield pron  interrog  Joshua Milbourne be magister ejusque c ac  contra dictum Joshuam Milbourne et associate pro interest nest to come between  ac contra dictum Milbourne in specie ac in causan financial loss c
Burrell FLETHAM v godfrey the Elizabeth and the friend goodwill collision  defendant condemned in damage and cost ad et assignation book rd march No  appeal wmus Fletham recently magister et proprietarius ship cujusdam  peremptory or urgent call the Elizabeth de Stockton nor georgius Allen  Franciscus Barker et associate recently proprietarii will do you much good  recently in dictam nave onustor contra naven quandan peremptory or urgent call  the friend goodwill pron  interrog  Gervasius Martin be magister ejusque c nor  contra Peter Godfrey et associate pro interest nest to come between ac etian  contra Gervasium Martin instructress hearing test ac advocate et manager  hincinde dominus finally interloquend ad candidacy sayer junior pronunciavit  damnum in here part support per part Exton to loosen before et to convict part  Exton in financial loss prediction ac etian in expenditure Exton testify be de  trouble c c
Burrell foul v live the John and mary dispute as to possession of mast and  ring decree for delivery of same and for pound damage ad et assignation book  that July Johannes foul proprietarius ship cujusdam peremptory or urgent call  the John and mary hoy ejusque c contra a certain thomam live ad to hear  opinion Goodale to strive for opinion per the dawn ultimo die juridico stretch  out law et iron Willymott dissent et to strive for parten svan to send  different ways dominus hearing c finally interloquend ad candidacy Goodale to  decide prout to follow that the mast and ring be restore to foul and condemned  live in pound damage and also in expense Goodale to stretch out billam to  weigh out dominus more severely punished the same ad pound Goodale fecit fide  de expenditure c admonition ad to give up vela c et ad to loosen lot first et  expenditure infra month non extrahend infra die pro financial loss et  expenditure
Burrell gibbons v the Susannah frost v the betty in these case the master sue  for his wage together with the mariner ad et ass bk rd march that April
Burrell la ville de bilboa a Spanish ship take in a lade of flour brandy and  wine at Bourdeaux with which have touch at bilboa but without break bulk she  sail for Gaspey then part of the French king dominion in America in her voyage  thither that June she be take and carry into Newfoundland on board be a pass  from the king of Spain to sail in the sea and bank of Newfoundland to obtain  baccalao and a charterparty make out as if the ship be to be load at bilboa  but the master and other mariner give the above account of the voyage the  judge of the viceadmiralty condemned ship and cargo saint may on appeal the  lord affirm the sentence and decree the cause to be remit Burrell er p
Burrell newma v cross this be a suit to recover damage for a collision between  the lamb and the rise and crown for which the latter be sole to blame sentence  for full damage be give against her see admiralty court Act book that December  Thomas Newman et associate proprietarii ship Le lamb pron  interrog  and Neal  be magister contra naven Le rise and crown pron  interrog  Thomas cross be  magister ejusque c nor dictum cross pro interest his to come between who die  et loco attract away test another in here causan factis dominus to disclose ut  sequitur that it be sufficient prove that the ship the rise and crown do give  the blow to the say ship the lamb and proceed to state the damage sustain  thereby that by the particular witness oath and the deposition of Andrew veal  the master that what be pay for the repair of the damage to the say ship lamb  be as follow videlicet pound S d pay the smith sailmaker carpenter ropemaker  clockmaker pay for weigh the ship pound Burrell er p tum smith to stretch out  opinion in scribe conception how to strive for become ac law c in present time  Suckley to differ et to strive for the whole of the laws Himself et parti of  oneself in here causan become et ministrar unde dominus legit to bear et to  bring forward publicly dictam opinion pronunciando condemnand et the other to  make prout in eaden to hold together present circumstance tum et ibidem One  cum I writer of shorthand public c c procuribus Suckley protestant de trouble  et de to drive to
Burrell our men seignora deal carman east India good china teas c find on  board a Spanish ship bind from Corunna to nantz be by the lord of appeal that  march condemned as French property the ship be decree to be restore to the  Spanish claimant
Burrell Rawlinson v pagan wage decree against a partowner of the ship for a  proportionate part of the wage sue for No appeal ad et assignation book that  September swan Rawlinson hans Johnson et associate recently sailor ship  peremptory or urgent call the merchant adventure pron  interrog  Thomas web  jam death recently to be master contra Peter pagan recently proprietarium  birth speech ship ejusque c ad andiendinn ionic causan sumarie ad candidacy  sayer dominus finally interloquend ad candidacy sayer pronunciavit saltmoney  to be et be de jure debt is owed to the thirty of the delivery juxta test et  Peter pagan parten eoruin salarior seeker striver after how proprietrium birth  dietae ship to loosen to withhold et to convict dictum pagan in expenditure  zuper taxationem in prox Burrell er p
Burrell the catharine a ship the property of merchant of new York sail with a  cargo to cape francois which be there sell and a full lade of sugar take in  while the master lie at cape francois be procure from monte Christ the copy of  the commission of the James privateer and a letter to Benson a English  prisoner at cape francois appoint he prize master of the Catharine that march  the Catharine sail from cape francois or her return to and the same day be  take by the speedwell privateer and carry to new providence in the Bahama  island rd march the captor libel against ship and cargo as prize and the usual  monition be order the same day the advocategeneral in the name of Jno Kemp  commander of the speedwell but without any authority from he exhibit a  information against the Catharine and her cargo on account of the collusive  capture and pray condemnation onehalf to his majesty and onehalf Burrell er p  to the say Kemp agreeable to Geo two Kemp move that his name may be strike out  of the information as he have proceed against say ship and cargo as prize of  war but the judge refuse to alter the information the court on the motion of  the advocategeneral order notice to be affix for any person to appear and show  cause why the ship and cargo shall not be forfeit agreeable to information to  which the owner of the speedwell appear and pray condemnation of the Catharine  as prize of war that April the judge condemned the Catharine and her cargo  onehalf to his majesty onehalf to the speedwell privateer and dismiss the  libel pray condemnation as prize with cost saint may on appeal by the captor  the lord reverse the sentence of the judge below condemned ship and cargo to  the captor sole and on account of the misbehaviour of the say wm Moxiat in  fill a information contrary to the captor libel pronounce that he shall  personal pay the extraordinary cost arise on that account in the court below
Burrell the dolphin decree restitution of ship and cargo with interest from  the time of sale in the court below to the time of payment and the same in  several of the former cause that November the vast Betrowen that December
Burrell the Elizabeth a ship be buy of the French at Guadaloupe by a Dutch  subject send thence to Eustatia in ballast there load by Dutch subject with  sugar c part ship from the shore the rest take out of bark one of which come  from Guadaloupe with this cargo the ship be take by two English privateer in  her voyage to Amsterdam that December the judge of the admiralty pronounce  just cause of seizure and condemned the claimant in expense but decree the  ship to be restore to claimant assign they to specify the part of the cargo  which be take from the shore that February claimant offer no specification  condemned the cargo as lawful prize that march the lord of appeal reverse the  decree of the judge below condemning claimant in expense and afterward  condemning the cargo and pronounce the good to belong as claim and decree the  same to be restore Burrell er p
Burrell the Elizabeth galley a Dutch ship bind from Amsterdam to curacoa be  drive out of her course take on the coast of Hispaniola the master be then  make for cape francois for wood and water be carry into new York where ship  and cargo be condemned that June which sentence the lord reverse and decree  they to be restore to the claimant
Burrell the general murray property the general Murray be take that November  bind to the havannah by a English privateer and carry into new providence the  ship be load with wine and dry good the master and mariner say in their  examination that the ship belong to merchant of Guernsey where all the cargo  be take in and regular clear out for the havannah to which place the ship be  charter by the owner for other merchant at Guernsey who property the lade be  the charter party be on board the havannah be at that time in the possession  of the English and certificate from the governor of Guernsey of the property  of the cargo be in inhabitant of Guernsey the judge of the viceadmiralty at  new providence condemned ship and cargo as prize of war that July on appeal  the lord reverse the sentence and pronounce ship and cargo to belong as claim  and decree the same to be restore or the value thereof pay to the claimant
Burrell the Helena galley a Dutch ship come from Eustatia to Amsterdam with a  lade of sugar c be take and carry into cork the bill of lade do not mention on  who account and risk the cargo be which the witness declare themselves  ignorant of it appear they have carry two Frenchman with they from Europe and  that great part of their outwardbound cargo be immediate put on board ship and  send to the French island from whence great part of the cargo which be on  board be bring the judge of the admiralty in Ireland condemned ship and cargo  that march on appeal the lord reverse the decree condemning ship and cargo  pronounce the ship to belong as claim and decree same to be Burrell er p  restore but the property of the cargo appear doubtful assign same to be plead  and prove within a month
Burrell the jan and anthony the follow be the common form of the title of a  savage action during the eighteenth century ad et issignation book that April  our sovereign Lord the king in his office of admiralty against a certain Dutch  ship call the Jan and Anthony of about tun burden her tackle apparel and  furniture and the good therein be a ship and good derelict flotsam jetsam or  lagan and find at sea adrift at or about twelve league northeast of Cromer and  bring into Yarmouth road within the jurisdiction of the admiralty of England  and as perquisite of admiralty and against all person in general and against  hans Cornelisz master and also against Thomas Ord John hill William Burrell er  p George and William Matley intervene therein as salvors of the say ship and  good Cornelisz the master intervene pray restitution give bail to answer  savage the salvors also intervene
Burrell the maria the chastetree a Dutch ship sail from Amsterdam with a cargo  of provision clear out for curacoa but with verbal direction to go to  portauprince or leogane if he can get permission to trade there accord sail to  leogane and with permission of the French governor sell the outward cargo and  take in a cargo of sugar with which be take on her return to Amsterdam the  judge of the admiralty in Ireland condemned ship and good and condemned  claimant in expense and cost that march the lord reverse so much of the decree  as condemned claimant in cost and expense and otherwise affirm the same the  vrow Clara and June to the same purpose the Magdalena and June to the same  purpose the Vryheidt that June to the same purpose the Johana maria rd June to  the same purpose except reverse that part of the sentence which condemned  claimant in expense the maria Johanna that June to the same purpose the Peter  and John that June to the same purpose the Gloegande Stor that July to the  same purpose the Isaac that July to the same purpose but reverse condemnation  of claimant in double cost
Burrell the novum plow a Dutch ship sail to Eustatia and there take in a cargo  in the road videlicet hogshead of sugar out of two bark weight of coffee out  of another bark which arrive at Eustatia from martinico or Guadalupe while the  ship lie in the road the residue of the cargo be put on board from the shore  the cargo be all put on board by Dutch laders and to be deliver at Amsterdam  but who be the owner except of a small quantity be not prove that October the  judge of the admiralty decree the ship to be restore and assign the claimant  to distinguish the part of the cargo which be take from the shore of Eustatia  that February the claimant offer no specification the judge pronounce that all  the good in say ship take ought to be presume to belong to the French king or  his subject and condemned the same to the captor that may the lord pronounce  that the direction give by the judge of the admiralty that October and the  several continuances thereof be irregular and erroneous decree part of the  cargo to be restore to the claimant the rest appear doubtful assign same to be  plead and prove within a month saint July decree the rest of the cargo to be  restore as claim the adverse proctor consent thereto the snelle post from  saint Croix and the uryheid from curacoa that march decree to the same purpose  Burrell er p
Burrell the RESOLUTIE a Dutch ship enter into a charterparty to sail in  ballast to Bourdeaux there to take in a lade and carry it to curacoa there to  unladen take in a homewardbound cargo on account and risk of the freighter who  be Dutch subject and bring it back to Amsterdam under this charterparty the  master sail to Bourdeaux there take in wine flour and other thing and on his  voyage to the west Indies be seize by a English privateer the master swear the  voyage be agreeable to his charterparty but the clerk say the ship be bind  direct to saint Domingo and discover conceal paper which be the true  charterparty for the voyage from Amsterdam to Bourdeaux thence to saint  Domingo with a cargo of provision and other merchandise proper for the use of  the inhabitant on condition that he shall pay in France the duty due to the  French king western domain for say merchandise with other French paper that  August the judge of the admiralty pronounce that say ship and good ought to be  presume Burrell er p to belong to enemy or to be otherwise confiscable and  condemned the same as lawful prize that march the lord affirm the sentence the  hoop rd June decree to the same purpose
Burrell the saint Antonio de padua alias the dragon paper false and colorable  the saint Antonia de Padua be take that February war declare between great  Britain and Spain and January come from Rio de la Hache a port on the Spanish  main with a lade of horse and cattle the ship be take under Spanish colour  have on board a Spanish pass and other Spanish paper relate to the cargo be  carry into Jamaica the ship and cargo be proceed against as prize be enemy  property a claim be give for ship and cargo by a British subject resident at  Jamaica as his property set forth that Burrell er p the ship have be fit out  at Jamaica by he on a trade usual carry on by he and other with the Spanish  main and that the Spanish colour and paper be use only to protect they from  French privateer the master by his examination prove the aforesaid fact ft be  also prove by a register that the ship be the property of the claimant which  register it be prove be not usual put on board ship employ in this trade for  the reason aforesaid the judge of the viceadmiralty decree ship and cargo to  be restore to the claimant saint may on appeal the lord affirm the sentence
Burrell the saint Franciscus and the saint antonius that march N B In this  case all the good be claim as the property of the statesgeneral but it appear  by the deposition of the master that part of they be real the property of  Irish merchant at cork and that the bill of lade express these good to be for  the account and risk of subject of the statesgeneral be colorable but these  good be restore with the rest the dAventure that June to the same purpose the  young Peter that July to the same purpose the jane that July to the same  purpose N B In this case the jane part of the cargo be Irish property
Burrell the sally that July to the same purpose n b the master depose that he  believe at least two three of the sugar and other merchandise bring to the  port of monte Christ in small craft or other vessel for sale be the produce of  the French land in Hispaniola and be so bring there only for sale as person  inclinable to purchase usual go on board the small craft to bargain for they  without their be land first at monte Christ the defiance that July to the same  purpose the dolly that July to the same purpose the Quebec that December to  the same purpose the friendship that march to the same purpose the London that  march to the same purpose the recovery that march to the same purpose the  Stadt Flansburg that march to the same purpose the general Johnson that march  to the same purpose the Jenny that march to the same purpose
Burrell the sea flower a British ship sail from new York to monte Christ where  the outward cargo be sell by the master and supercargo to Spanish merchant and  the principal part of the return cargo purchase of they the master be ask  whether the supercargo be at saint dauphin during the ship stay at monte  Christ refuse to answer the other witness say they believe the supercargo do  go to saint dauphin the master say that during his stay at monte Christ he  receive several letter from cape francois but not relate to say bring or her  cargo and be of no consequence he destroy they before be leave monte Christ  this ship be take in her voyage from monte Christ to Hamburg and carry into  Jamaica where the cargo be condemned but the ship release saint may on appeal  the lord affirm t at part of the decree which restore the ship but reverse  that part which condemned the cargo and pronounce the cargo to belong as claim  and decree ship and cargo to be restore or the value thereof pay to the  claimant the adventure saint may to the same purpose N B There be hogshead of  sugar on board but the governor of monte Christ certificate be only for  hogshead the Thurloe saint may to the same purpose the Fanny saint may to the  same purpose the Pitt saint may to the same purpose the Oliver Cromwell that  July to the same purpose the industry that July to the same purpose Burrell  ship come from monte Christ condemned
Burrell Tomlinson V VOGUEL the Eleanor and the Wilhelmina this be a suit by  the owner of the Eleanor and owner of cargo on board her against the owner of  the Wilhelmina for damage to the Eleanor and her cargo the suit seem to have  be in remember the Eleanor and her cargo have be arrest the owner of the cargo  on board the Wilhelmina intervene to protest against the arrest of the cargo  but the decree seem to have go against cargo as well as ship and to have be  affirm upon appeal ad et ass bk that January that June delegate assignation  book that January delegate process book vol that January all person cite be  call lee pray a second default sayer and Cheslyn for Garrett appear for Josiah  bullock Nathaniel Newnham jun and other owner and freighter of the good ware  and merchandise on board the William otherwise Wilhelmina and allege that by  law the say good ware and merchandise be not liable to the action bring for  the pretend damage do to the say ship Eleanor and cargo and therefore pray the  say good ware and merchandise under arrest to be release from the arrest and  deliver to the respective owner and freighter without give bail and then  exhibit attestation upon the oath of the say Josiah bullock and Nath Newnham  and also of casten Claessen and clan Reidt lee deny what be allege by sayer to  be true and that no bail be give and that therefore sayer can be hear and pray  a second default the judge sir h Penrice have hear the advocate and proctor on  both side at the petition of lee pronounce a second default to have be incur  and continue the certificate until the next court lee client to make oath of  their damage within three day that June sir h Penrice pronounce that the  Wilhelmina have do damage to the Eleanor and her lade and therefore condemned  Sayers client in the say damage and also in expense
Burrell VOGUEL and other v Tomlinson and other for sentence and further  information at the petition of both proctor information be finish the judge  take time to deliberate and assign the cause for sentence on Saturday next in  the evening without the attendance of council London between the hour of five  and eight in the evening Edward smith deputy registrar for sentence at the  petition of both proctor sayer porrected a sentence which he pray to be read  lee porrected a sentence which he pray to be read the judge have hear the  advocate council and proctor on the former court and have take time to  deliberate to this day order the sentence present by lee to be read which be  read accord thereby pronounce decree declare confirm remit and do all thing as  in the say sentence be contain the clause of expense be first deleted many  witness be present
Burrell young v Laurence the Elizabeth and Catherine wage decree for wage in  subsequent voyage in priority to wage in previous voyage ad et assignation  book that July No appeal William young Johannes hand et associate recently  sailor ship the Elizabeth and Catherine pron  interrog  Richard Laurence be  magister contra the same ejusque c et dictum Laurence in specie nor contra  josephum short Edvardum Jones et associate etian recently sailor speech ship  pro interest nest to come between ad to hear will domini super hincinde attack  owner hearing test ac advocate et procuribus hincinde finally interloquend  pronunciavit that the mariner who serve in the last voyage be preferable by  law to the mariner of the former voyage and therefore order the money fee c in  both cause and all the charge to be first pay and then the money in court to  be pay to extons client accord to their at first decretum insert caution and  if any be over then the rest to be pay to bridge client bridge testify be de  trouble Burrell er p
BURREY and perrey how far word which be speak of a tradesman shall be say to  be actionable or not in a action bring by the plaintiff for word they be lie  to be speak of he in his trade as a blacksmith and be to this purpose Burrey  put on a lock for Barnardiston king b er p mrs foul and he put it on so that  he can pull out the screw and he break into the house the plaintiff lie  likewise in his declaration special damage which he suffer by the speak these  word and have a verdict with damage sergeant Belfield now move that the  plaintiff may have full cost he say the word be not actionable in themselves  and therefore the special damage be the jit of the action for which reason be  submit it his application be proper by the authority of salk accord the court  make a rule to show cause vide post
BURREY and perrey vide ante Mr Hussey come to show cause upon this rule and  say he submit it that the word be actionable in this case and therefore the  action be to be consider as find upon they and consequent no more cost than  damage ought to be give accord to the word and intent of the Act of parliament  he say the declaration set forth that the defendant know the plaintiff to be a  locksmith speak of he the follow word he put on a lock for mrs foul and at  night break open the house innuendo burglariter and be likely to have be  prosecute for it and down upon his knee and beg pardon he observe that of late  year word have be construe in action bring upon they accord to the plain and  ordinary meaning of they and therefore in the case of button and Hayward hill  Geo which he himself be counsel in in arrest of judgement the say that the  plaintiff Barnardiston king b er p kill my husband be hold actionable the  court think this a matter proper to be far consider of so order it to stand  over vide post
burrow and hays No covenant against covenant covenant upon a demise for year  render rend and breach assign for nonpayment defendant plead that part of the  rend be to be allow c more cur this be a covenant against a covenant Yelv  judgement pro quer nisi c
burrow case constable indict c see salk Mod Cumberba Mod Mod sand vide prox  page he and other be indict for that they be churchwarden overseer of the poor  and he a constable do contemptuous and voluntary neglect to execute to visit  teaching warranta direct to they by the bailiff of Ipswich be justice of the  peace under their hand and seal c it be move to quash it for that the nature  and tenor of the warrant be not express in the indictment for unless the party  know particular what they be charge with they can tell how to make their  defence and for that reason it be quash by the court note the court never give  cost for not execute of a writ of enquiry of damage though notice be give
burrow DEARDEN assignee c versus hold plea that a bind give to the sheriff be  for ease and favour contrary to stat Henry c be all issuable plea within a  order for time the question be whether a plea of the statute of h c against  sheriff take bind multicolored duty c and that this bind be take for ease and  favour c be or be not a issuable plea within a judge order give the defendant  time to plead upon the usual term of plead a issuable plea c in the present  case the plaintiff have sign judgement upon the defendant have thus plead  under the usual order from a judge for time to plead on the common and usual  term for the plaintiff consider this plea as a nullity and now insist that it  be so and therefore that he have a right to sign judgement without give alley  rule to plead but the master report this judgement to be irregular and to this  the court also assentedfor per cur this be a issuable plea for if the  plaintiff have take issue that the sheriff do not let the defendant go for  ease and favour it will have bring all matter suggest in the plea to issue the  judge order do not confine the defendant to plead the general issue the  present plea be within his order and the plaintiff may here have take issue as  above that the sheriff do not let the defendant go for ease and favour which  will have let ill all the matter in issue rule if or set aside the judgement  with cost make absolute but it be suggest by the plaintiff counsel that the  plea be in truth and reality only a sham plea put in mere to gain time Mr  Norton on behalf of the plaintiff move that the defendant may plead as he will  stand by which be consent to on behalf of the defendant this also be make part  of the rule the end of easter term Geo two it be the same case as that cite  ill Sayers Rep it be so oil June Tr g burrow er p burrow trinity term geo two  b r
burrow farewell esquire versus CHAFFEY and other a new trial not to be grant  to gratify litigious passion this cause be try upon the western circuit the  last summer assize before Mr sergeant will who certify that the weight of the  evidence be against the verdict but a new trial be deny upon the nature of the  action the value of the matter in dispute and other circumstance of the case  Lord Mansfield say a new trial ought to be grant to attain real justice but  not to gratify litigious passion upon every point of top law and cite smith v  Branston and smith v Framtpon in salk and a Anonymous case there also mention  of p W b r and likewise smith v page m W b r ibidem also dear v the duchess of  mazarine h W b r salk and spark v spicer h W b r in the same book pa to which  may be add what be say by the court in the case of Dunkly v wade p Ann salk in  these case the verdict be against evidence and the strict rule of law or  obtain through surprise but the court will not give a second chance of success  to a hard action or a unconscionable defence therefore the court upon the same  principle refuse to grant a new trial in the present case and discharge the  rule to show cause why there shall not be one
burrow heart who tam c versus Hawkins Tuesday d June SC black Rep defendant in  a who tam action can be discharge under the lord Act on show against a rule  which be draw up general to show cause why the defendant shall not be  discharge out of custody of the marshal as to the execution with which he  stand charge in this suit but which only mean to bring in question whether he  can be discharge as to the informer moiety for it be not pretend even by the  defendant own counsel that he will be discharge as to the crown be moiety the  court resolve clear and unanimous that defendant in who tam action be not at  all include in the that clause of the Act of g c pa for discharge of debtor in  execution for sum not exceed one hundred pound upon exhibit their petition and  assign over all their estate and effect for the benefit of such of their  creditor as shall have charge they in execution and accord they discharge the  rule Mr solicitor general be for the plaintiff and Mr Baynham for the  defendant see note in burr vin and queen   b   a burrow er p
burrow henry earl OF Carlisle versus Armstrong et all Wednesday that may fine  Payable to the lord of the barony of Gillesland Lord commissioner Wilmot  absent this be a trial at bar on the civil side of the court three question be  here to be try saint whether upon the death or alienation of the tenant of the  barony of Gillesland in Cumberland a reasonable arbitrary fine at the will of  the lord be Payable to the lord or not d whether the tenant have liberty to  let for three year or mortgage without licence of the lord and without pay any  fine at all d whether they have liberty to exchange c without licence or fine  but the defendant counsel say they do not intend to insist on the second  question so that the first and three only remain in dispute about six in the  afternoon this trial end in a verdict for the plaintiff upon all the three  issue
burrow king versus earl ferrers recognizance discharge on Mr astons motion for  the earl and on read the Act of parliament make last session for the  separation of the earl and countess and on the consent of Mr Campbell on  behalf of the countess the earl recognizance be discharge the end of  Michaelmas term a queen if this be not inconsistent for it be say that the Act  be make to put submission to arbitration in case where there be no cause  depend upon the same foot as those where there be a cause depend and this  determination have put they on different foot the syllogism be false for the  conclusion be not contain in the premise if instead oh the first proposition  this be substitute videlicet the Act of parliament relate only to such  submission as be make by agreement or bind and rule of court when there be no  cause in court then the syllogism will be right and the first proposition will  be warrant by Str a case cite to have be adjudge and by what seem to have be  take for grant by the court in barn but query whether to make the Act  consistent it must not be suppose that the court in exercise their  jurisdiction before the Act do not limit motion for set aside award make on  submission by rule where a cause be depend for otherwise the first and second  section of the Act be not consistent b queen as to misbehaviour in the party  in who favour the award be make such as prevent witness on the other side  attend or fraud not discover until after the award see pound W c S vin arbiter  p pi v ante burrow er p burrow hilary term geo two b r
burrow king versus Elizabeth sermon indictment for set a person on the footway  to distribute hand bill quash the court make no sort of difficulty to quash a  indictment though attempt by two or three counsel to be support for that the  defendant for the space of four hour and more together on every of the several  day specify which be the first day of January g and diverse other day and time  between that day and the day of take the inquisition with force and arm c at  London at the parish of saint Martin within Ludgate in the ware of Farringdon  without in London aforesaid unlawful injurious and wilful do set place and  keep a certain person who name be yet unknown to the juror in and upon the  common and ancient footway n the north side of the public street there situate  call Ludgatehill to deliver out certain print bill of her occupation to person  pass that way which say person so set place and keep there by her the say  Elizabeth do on the say day and time remain in and upon the say common footway  during the several space of timeaforesaid deliver and distribute print bill as  aforesaid whereby the same footway at those several day and time be great  impede and obstruct so that the liege subject of our say lord the king there  pass and reside can not so free go pass and repass in by or through the same  way as they ought and be use to do to the great damage and common nuisance of  all the say subject and against the peace of our say lord the king his crown  and dignity the court hold this to be a matter not indictable and quash the  indictment the end of Hilary term Geo burrow easter term geo two b r
burrow king versus inhabitant OF alton Saturday that may Lord commissioner  Wilmot absent see this case at large in the quarto edition of my  SettlementCases No p
burrow king versus inhabitant OF Bentley see this case at large in the quarto  edition of my SettlementCases No pa the end of easter term Geo Mr just Wilmot  be not present be engage in chancery as one of the lord commissioner burrow er  p
burrow king versus inhabitant OF berwick saint John this case may be see at  large in the quarto edition of my SettlementCases page No
burrow king versus inhabitant OF fulham this case be abridge in the table and  it may be see at large in the quarto edition of my SettlementCases page No the  end of Michaelmas term burrow hilary term geo b r
burrow king versus inhabitant OF Hitcham Thursday saint Jan see this case at  large in the quarto edition of my SettlementCases p No and p No
burrow king versus inhabitant OF ilmington wednes that June see this case at  large in the quarto edition of my SettlementCases No p regulan general sheriff  to return writ within four day for the future the sheriff of London and  Middlesex who before can not be compel to return their writ and bring in the  body till after six day shall be oblige to do it within four day
burrow king versus inhabitant OF Kniveton Friday that may see this case at  large in the quarto edition of settlement case pa No
burrow king versus inhabitant OF Milwich Monday that June see this case at  large in the quarto edition of my SettlementCases No pa
burrow king versus inhabitant OF Painswick Wednesday that June see this case  at large in the quarto edition of my SettlementCases No I pa
burrow king versus inhabitant OF saint Matthew Bethnal green Saturday that Nov  see this case at large in the quarto edition of my settlement case No p burrow  er p
burrow king versus inhabitant OF saint Peter in Dorchester Monday that Nov  this case be already publish in my settlement case in quarto No page
burrow king versus inhabitant OF Titchfield Saturday that Nov this case be  already publish in the quarto edition of my settlement case No page
burrow king versus inhabitant OF winterbourn Monday that Feb this case be  already print and publish in the quarto edition of my settlement case No page  m but there be a small error in say that Mr Selwyn and Mr Vernon have obtain  the rule it shall be Mr Selwyn and sir Fletcher Norton
burrow king versus John gardener esquire Thursday that Feb affirmation of a  Quaker can be read in support of a criminal charge the affirmation of a Quaker  John Lewis of Lantrishent in monmouthshire be offer in exculpation of Mr  gardener the defendant upon show cause why a information shall not be exhibit  against Mr gardener for a misdemeanour the read of this affirmation be object  to by the prosecutor counsel and not much insist upon by the counsel for the  defendant the court hold clear that a quaker affirmation can not be read in  support of a criminal charge but they think that a affirmation may be read in  defence of a criminal charge if the person charge be himself a Quaker in order  to exculpate himself in this three case of a quaker collateral evidence in  assistance of the exculpation of another person when the Quaker himself be not  charge at all they think his affirmation ought not to be read and accord it be  withdraw
burrow king versus John spragg and mary Elizabeth spragg his daughter wednes  that June V ante and Mr justice foster in the absence of Mr just denison  pronounce the sentence upon the defendant who offence of malicious conspire to  indict and actual false indict a person of a capital crime whereof he be  innocent will have be in point of real gild a a aggravate and atrocious murder  he say if it have succeed accord to their intention and even now deserve a  very exemplary punishment notwithstanding it have not succeed accord to their  wish John spragg the father be sentence to be remand to the prison of this  court for one month to be set twice in and upon the pillory for a hour each  time once at charingcross and again at the royal exchange to be imprison in  but this clause add that in such plea shall be show how much be true and just  due on either side and that judgement shall be enter for no more than what  shall appear to be so true and just due v post owlet v Strickland b r d may  where it be determine that unliquidated uncertain damage can be set off v post  p Bosewell v Irish b r that June and strange v Inst where it be say that the  villainous judgement there particular specify remain a constant law in such  case as the present to this day but Mr gold and serj Davy agree they can find  no instance or entry of such a judgement actual give that be to say not since  the time of Edward see above and   a a and so it ought to be in law but the  contrary have be adjudge foster burrow er p the prison of this court for two  year from the end of the say month to pay a fine of to the king to find  security for his good behaviour for three year himself in and each security in  l and to be commit until what time mary the daughter be consider by the court  as less criminal partly from her youth and partly as she be under the  direction and influence of her father be only commit to the custody of the  marshal to be imprison for the space of six month from this I
burrow king versus joseph chaplin hankey esquire Monday that may information  for a challenge deny to the first sender Lord commissioner Wilmot absent one  Ralph car a attorney apply for a information against the defendant for send he  a challenge upon hear the affidavit and the letter that pass between these two  gentleman the court think that car himself appear to have send the first  challenge to the other at least that his letter manifest import a challenge  which the other clear so understand and accord accept and propose to fight  with pistol the court hold that though the defendant have behave very improper  and though it will have be right for the court to have grant even  crossinformations in case each party have apply for a information against the  other yet they think that when the aggressor who give the first challenge come  and apply for a information against the other who only accept it however  improper and unlawful it be a very different case and that the court have no  reason to give he this extraordinary remedy by way of information but ought  rather to leave he to his ordinary remedy by action or by indictment therefore  the rule to show cause why a information shall not be grant be discharge do  adjudge the prescription insist on by the defendant to be good but no such  thing be mention in the state of the case and it be very strange if they do  for as the defendant be here respondent there it be sufficient for they to  determine against the plaintiff prescription and if that be so all the case  cite by Mr Norton be in point against grant the prohibition that in ld raym go  further for there the court refuse a prohibition after sentence  notwithstanding the ecclesiastical court have determine in favour of a suit  there find on usage v full v Hutchins p post pa burrow er p
burrow king versus peach et all Saturday that April information refuse to one  cheat against another Cause be now show against a information which have be  move for at the application of some person who now appear to be a parcel of  infamous cheat and gambler against several other of the same profession and  character for a conspiracy to cheat they out of about l at a foot race by a  most shameful transaction of fraud collusion and bribery to induce the racer  to run booty but it appear most clear to the court and it be too plain to be  dispute by the counsel for the prosecutor themselves that the party complain  and those complain of be all of they alike a parcel of infamous cheat the  court unanimous refuse to give the complainant the extraordinary assistance of  this court to enable they to attack their brother in iniquity who have  probable as the court not without reason suspect quarrel with they about but  Eyre add it can be maintain I doubt note also that shower report of what pass  in this case be of Tr W m as likewise indeed be Mod but Carthews be of hill W  m which be two term late v h h p c v post burrow er p the division of their  illgotten spoil they refer the complainant to the ordinary remedy of action or  indictment especial as the fact allege seem to be within the act of parliament  make to prevent excessive game and accord the rule to show cause why there  shall not be a information against they be discharge
burrow king versus spragg and another Saturday that Feb SC black when  conviction be remove by certiorari no motion can be in arrest of judgement  unless the defendant be personal present the defendant have be convict of a  conspiracy to charge a person with a capital felony and the record of  conviction have be remove up hither by certiorari but not the person of the  defendant and Mr serj Davy be ready on behalf of the defendant to move in  arrest of judgement Mr gold pro ring object to his go on with the motion for  that the defendant ought to be personal present and he cite the case of king v  Elizabeth Nichols strange which be exact the same offence as this and it be  burrow er p agree that after conviction the personal presenceof the defendant  be necessary upon such a motion as this serj Davy for the defendant attempt to  explain away this rule and urge that the defendant be safe in burrow custody  already and therefore amenable to the justice of the court and offer that the  defendant clerk in court shall undertake to bring the defendant up at the  defendant own expense in case the objection shall not prevail but the  secondary of the crownoffice be appeal to allege that the rule be as Mr gold  have assert the court hold this to be a fix and invariable rule of practice in  this court that the defendant must after conviction of such a offence as this  be present in court if they will move in arrest of judgement serj Davy find  the opinion of the court and the allegation of the secondary of the  crownoffice to be so direct against he as to the absolute necessity of the  personal presence of the defendant pray a habeas corpus to bring up their body  which be grant and he afterward renew his motion and have the defendant in  court note this case of a conviction differ from that of a special verdict  where the presumption of innocence may be suppose to continue and therefore  the personal presence of the defendant be not necessary at the argument of it
burrow king versus strong SC Sayers l c penalty for exercise a trade contrary  to the statute pay into court without cost Mr Clayton have move on the that  instant that the defendant may be at liberty without pay any cost to pay into  court S be the penalty for his exercise the trade of a grocer for thespace of  one month contrary to Elizabeth c whereof he have be convict upon a indictment  find at the last Cumberland assize which proceed the defendant have remove  hither by certiorari and that thereupon the recognizance may be discharge and  he find his motion upon the authority of king v French pasch g b r king v  fisher Tr g B R both on the motion of Mr ford in which case this be do because  by m c no cost be Payable but upon indictment bring by the party grieve or  upon prosecution by justice c or other civil officer prosecute as such and so  it be also in a former case of king v mary incledon m g b r a rule be make to  show cause and now Mr Norton not object to this motion be satisfy with the  case cite the say rule be make absolute
burrow OF yarmouth grant of the king that the burrow shall be incorporate the  king John by his letterspatent grant that the burrow of Yarmouth shall be  incorporate and the grant be make citizen without name of their successor and  also he grant citizen rashly placita in person balivis and in plead it be not  aver that there be bailiff there and it be object that the burrow can be  incorporate but man which inhabit in that Brownlow goldsborough but to that it  be resolve that the grant be good and the Lord coke say that he have see many  old grant to the citizen of such a town and good and so that the grant citizen  that the burrow shall be incorporate be a old grant shall have favourable  construction but the doubt be for that that it be not aver that there be  bailiff of Yarmouth and if a grant to hold plead and do not say before who the  grant be void accord to Edward h Edward and for that it be adjudge Brownlow  goldsborough er p but the opinion of all the court be that the grant make  citizen be good without name of their successor as in the case of grant fellow  citizen without more note that executor or administer shall not find special  bail for the debt of the testator though that the debt be for a great sum as  three thousand pound or more for it be not their debt nor his body shall not  be liable to execution for that Edward suit be commence hang another writ it  be a good plea though that the writ be returnable in the common berich and the  last suit be begin in a base court but if so be and do not appear to this  court that the plaintiff begin suit in a base court for the same debt for  which the suit be here begin attachment shall be award see h h but this ought  to appear to the court by affidavit c Hillary JACOBL in the common bench
burrow oulton the young versus very Tuesday that Nov proceed not to be stay  because beneath the dignity of the court on a defendant affidavit Mr barn on  behalf of the defendant move to stay the plaintiff proceed t v S and S take  together V g c S burrow er p upon a affidavit that the defendant owe the  plaintiff only nine shilling and cite the case of machine v Robinson Tr g b r  where the proceed be stay because the cause of action be so trifle be only for  S it be therefore hold to be infra rank curiae per cur and master Owen there  it appear upon the very face of the declaration here the plaintiff demand more  the defendant allege it to be less the court can try the quantum upon  affidavit the distinction be where it appear upon the face of the declaration  or not motion deny N B master Owen say that Lord Hardwicke have at first make  some rule of this kind but afterward will not make any more
burrow pierce esquire versus lord fauconberg Saturday that may a right to a  tract path on each side of the river Tees for tow see durn ld raym bull and  queen et vide hark Tr Lord commissioner Wilmot absent in chancery this be a  trial at bar on the civil side of the court by a special juryof the county of  York the question be concern a right to tract or tow vessel upon the bank of  the river Tees which divide Yorkshire from the countypalatine of Durham from  YarumBridge up to low Worsall there have be a former issue try whether the  river Tees be a navigable river from YarumBridge to low Worsall which issue  have be find in the affirmative and the present trial be a new trial a second  new trial indeed direct by the court of chancery upon a issue whether the  plaintiff have a right to a trackpath on each side of the river alternate  accord to the course of its bank for the convenience of tow without let or  hindrance from or pay any acknowledgement to the respective owner of the soil  the trial last till about two oh clock on Sunday morning at which time the  jury after stay out about a quarter of a hour bring in a verdict for the  plaintiff N B the plaintiff do not claim this as a distinct peculiar right of  his own but as a general right claimable by all person who occasion lead they  to navigate this river burrow er p
burrow trinity term geo two b r king versus inhabitant OF great torrington  Monday that June see this case at large in the quarto edition of my  SettlementCases No p burrow v the next case king vers inhabitant of Keynsham  which be the same point and determine on the like concession of the adverse  counsel
burrow v JAMEREAU Nov Sel can in Ch S c stram S c Eq Abr S c mosel S c decree  at Leghorn allow to be read as evidence and this court will not overrule what  be determine there the bill be to be relieve against two action bring upon two  bill of exchange the drawer have fail before the bill be accept and by the  custom of Leghorn the acceptance be void if it be after the drawer become a  bankrupt and so it be determine in the present case in the proper court of  Leghorn in which a decree have be make for set aside the acceptance upon hear  this cause the court allow the say decree to be read and say this matter have  dickens be judicial determine at Leghorn and this court will not overrule what  be determine in a proper court where the action be bring therefore let the  injunction grant in this cause be perpetual and let the defendant at the  plaintiff expense acknowledge satisfaction on the record of the judgement Mews  dig evidence III a see Ellis v MHenry lr c p
burrow vers Willis barrister may lie the venue in Middlesex the report in  fitzg state the ground of refusal to be that the plaintiff be a master in  chancery l raym barn b r fitzg S c upon a motion to change the venue from  Middlesex it be insist that the plaintiff be a master in chancery and a  barrister at law and therefore have a privilege to lie his action in Middlesex  and a case be cite in c b hill Geo Hicks v foot where it be so hold and the  case of carter v dorm   can of prac a in c b Trin Geo and salk and now upon  consideration the court refuse to change the venue but declare they do it on  account of his be a barrister and not as a master in chancery Spelman v will S  p et vide pope v Redfearne burr and the note by sir James burrow strange  report er p
burrow vers Willis SC Barnard b r Str and different report fitzg if a  barrister bring a transitory action he may lie the venue in Middlesex and keep  it there r send for will send for burr the defendant bad obtain a rule to  change the venue out of Middlesex in a action for money receive to the  plaintiff use upon the common affidavit that the cause of action if any arise  in Hampshire Mr Filmer move for the plaintiff to discharge the rule because  the plaintiff be a barrister and accord to the report in Str the court declare  they discharge the rule because the plaintiff be a barrister not because he be  a master in chancery a master in chancery and therefore bad a privilege to lie  his action in Middlesex where his attendance be require and cite salk knight v  Farnaby and the court be of opinion this fall within the reason of that case  the rule be discharge see salk seaman v ling Carthew bisse v Harcourt Mr  Hussey for the defendant Lord Raymond easter term george king b r
burrow west versus radford notice to plead when to be give the declaration be  file on the last day of the second term after the return of the writ but the  notice to plead be only give a little before the essoignday of the follow term  the defendant have object that this be irregular for that the notice to plead  ought to have be give before the end of the second term as well as the  declaration file before that time and the defendant have obtain a rule to show  cause why the proceed shall not be set aside for irregularity with cost but it  be hold to be well enough Mr Owen certify it to be the practice and the court  discharge this rule with cost
burrow Wilford versus Berkeley Saturday that may verdict in crim con not to be  set aside for excessive damage S u law of durn see also dam Mr Morton on  behalf of the defendant move for a new trial for excessiveness of damage it be  a action for criminal conversation with the plaintiff wife and the jury a  special one have give damage the defendant be a clerk in the exchequer during  pleasure at a salary of a year only which be his whole substance the court be  all three clear and unanimous that although there be no doubt of the power of  the court to exercise a proper discretion in set aside verdict for  excessiveness of damage in case where the quantum of the damage real suffer by  the plaintiff can be apparent or they be of such a nature that the court can  proper judge of the degree of the injury and can see manifest that the jury  have be outrageous in give such damage as great exceed the injury yet the case  be very different where it depend upon circumstance which be proper and sole  under the cognizance of the jury and be fit to be submit to their decision and  estimate and the hold the case of criminal conversation with another man wife  to be of this latter kind for the injury suffer by the husband and the  estimate of the damage to be assess must in their nature depend entire upon  circumstance which it be strict and proper the province of the jury to judge  of and in the present case the court can not say that be too much or that will  have be too little note the case of liquid measure v Brigg m g b r before ld  Ch I Pratt be exact similar to this and the very same sum of be give and the  like motion be reject then upon the same principle as the court have now  reject the present one motion deny
burry and very vide ante this matter come now on again the court declare their  opinion that the word be actionable in themselves and for that reason the  special damage can not entitle the plaintiff to full cost accord the rule be  discharge
burry vers very where no more cost than damage l raym barn b r Kely S c case  for word speak of a housesmith per quod he lose the custom of a b and c and S  damage give and rule there shall be no more cost the word be agree to be  actionable of themselves Woodhouse v Bidwell keb surman v Sheeleto burr baker  v hear bull l n p S p in b r turner v Horton barn tiffin v glass ib collier v  Gaillard black S p in c b Denny v Wigg pract Reg   Cas bring c p be contra
burst against Dixon mich geo the question be whether a six part of Mr  Staveleys plaintiff attorney bill of cost not be take off upon taxation he  shall not have his cost of taxation the bill amount to S d and the deduction  be S d the court order plaintiff to pay Staveleys cost of taxation
burst against goddard June thing in action assignable in equity and how the  case be thus there be a sum of money provide by a settlement of land to be  raise for daughter portion one of the daughter marry and die before her  portion pay her husband take Administration to her and assign all his interest  in that portion to his son by a former wife the son by this Title the father  be dead sue in equity for this money it be insist for the defendant that  though thing in action may be assign here on a consideration by the party that  have the interest and be recoverable here by the assignee and that a release  afterward by the assignor unless it be without notice and on consideration to  he to who the release be will not hurt the assignee yet here the assignment be  by a administrator case in chancery and not the person that have it in his own  right this have never be good for there may be a creditor to satisfy the  intestate c the Lord keeper do think there be a considerable difference  between the assignment of the party and of the administrator where the  administrator be a stranger or have not right before and no colour of right  but mere by the Administration but here in this case the Administration be pro  form only for here he have a right to the money as a portion or provision for  his wife and every man have not ready money to give daughter but their portion  be to be provide for by this mean and therefore it be reasonable to advance or  promote the establish of they so that they may be disposable by the husband  who settle a jointure as money itself may be and so decree for the plaintiff  the Lord keeper the master of the roll
burst against valley Tuesday Nov trial Mr Montague pray a procedendo to the  town and county of pool on a certiorari in ejectment bring of a poor tenement  of livre per annum not worth the charge of procure a judge to come thither but  be a county per curian it be deny
burston versus ridley mich Ann B R where there be good notabilia in several  diocese in the same province prerogative court must grant administration but  where in one diocese of one province and in another diocese of another  province each bishop must grant a administration far Mod hard lev roll Abr  Leon cro et bull h Edward lev way Str h enter into a recognizance of before  Glin c j of the Upper bench in to a on a certificate of this into chancery  there issue a writ of extent Salkeld er p recite a recognizance for the same  debt take before Glin c j of the common plea require the sheriff to extend the  land of the conusor accord certain land be extend and upon a liberate deliver  to I S who die possess of good valor l in the diocese of London and also in  Durham lessor of the plaintiff in ejectment take administration in Durham and  also in London and in that right take out a new extent and bring a ejectment  and the court hold that unless the first extent be void the second can not be  good for the party can not have two extent nor two satisfaction but it be  object to the plaintiff title that he shall have have a prerogative  administration say cur contra for neither archbishop have to do in the other  province if a man leaves good notabilia in several diocese of the same  province there must be a prerogative administration if one leaves good  notabilia in two diocese of Canterbury and two diocese in the province of York  there must be two Salkeld prerogative administration but if it be as here it  be otherwise and this administration in the one diocese and the other be hold  good
BURTET v Redman a award make by justice of assize order to be perform the suit  be concern the custom of tenant right for land in dent in the county of York  and for that both party confess that justice dallison and sergeant rastall  justice of assize in that county have make a award in the cause between the  party therefore it be decree that both party shall perform it and a injunction  be grant to either party against the other for that purpose and where a  injunction be the last term grant against the defendant for stay of execution  upon a judgement in the common plea it be order the say injunction shall stand  in force and the defendant shall obey the same and the defendant shall answer  the plaintiff bill William Burtet and Alice plaintiffs William Redman  defendant year Elizabeth fol Mews dig title injunction c practice relate to  continue
BURTLET and smith when several arbitrator be appoint how far a award may be  make by some of they without give notice to the rest Mr Abney come to show  cause why a attachment shall not go against the defendant for not perform a  award make the d of January last there be two objection that he make to it the  first be that one of the arbitrator have no notice give he of the meeting when  this award be make the second that the arbitrator have make their award before  upon the that as to the first he do agree that the reference be make to three  of the arbitrator or two of they but in all such case every one of the  arbitrator must have notice of the meeting which in this case one of they have  not as to the second he do agree that the award be not seal nor stamp till the  d but be sign on the that which make it a complete award and on the d  alteration be make in it the counsel on the other side say that the arbitrator  have notice on the that and then one of they declare he will not meet any more  for which reason they conceive that no far notice be requisite they observe  far that though there be a paperwriting sign on the that yet that be never  deliver by the arbitrator till after the d and therefore till then they can  not be say to have execute their authority the court be of opinion that both  the exception be answer accord the rule be make absolute
burton against bains mich geo this be a action for a assault battery and  mayhem which be try at the last assize for the county of Lincoln and plaintiff  obtain a verdict for S damage plaintiff who by the assault have almost lose  the sight of one of his eye think the damage too small and move the court that  they may be increase upon view of the party and a rule be make to show cause  and upon view of the party and the examination of John more a surgeon over as  far as in open court and hear con barn selon both side the damage be increase  by the court from S to
burton against chapman Wednesday Nov ante infant inasmuch as the promise be  confess by plead nonage the replication be issue sufficient especial after  verdict upon Cr tailor against Parker and there be no difference as to this  between a bar and a replication but the issue after verdict be aid and  judgement pro plaintiff nisi tithe in Dism Br carpenter pray a prohibition to  the bishop court of Hereford on suggestion that all the occupier of land  within such a will have use to pay S d in full of all the tithe of the say  will which per curian be not reasonable there be no remedy to compel any that  refuse to contribute but if it have be that who to take into possession have  use to pay it have be good and a prohibition be deny
burton against gunnel error Br h pl Com b error of a judgement in false  imprisonment in c b trespass and assault against two one be find guilty of all  but the imprisonment and damage and the other be find guilty of the  imprisonment only and find against all ac quod financial loss recupere which  Jones conceive error be pro misis custagiis against they all which by the  course of c b be well enough financial loss in the c b include the cost but by  Twisden financial loss pro custagiis which though not warrant by precedent be  good and the court conceive it well that the writ be direct to b Ch justice to  remove a record in person foster associate nest and the return be by foster  and hide only without associate which yet will not have be good but the judge  shall have be particular name a certiorar to remove Keble a record before I  Bradshaw justice ante and he certify in person I b chief justice and the party  take out a new writ
burton against GUNVILL ante error Br damage in action upon the case for false  imprisonment be joint against all the defendant and several as to the assault  which be agree well enough but the error assign and rely on in the judgement  in c b it be quod recupere twenty shilling damage pro misis custagils beside  the damage de growth distinct from ultra his Keble damage for the trespass  which by Allen be well enough be surplusage and only to ascertain how much of  the damage be for cost how much for the trespass but all be financial loss and  in the end be sum up who in toto see moisten Jones conceive the form be so  strict observe in judgement the concordatum concession have be rule void  Windham conceive that this be no more express then be employ in true  construction which the court agree but that this be variance from the ancient  form therefore adjornatur to search precedent though Twisden think the  financial loss pro misis have be for interest the writ be direct to remove a  record in person Roberto foster associate and its return by f and hide which  by wile the king sergeant be not good but both shall have be name in the  certiorari which be the course of fine plead I h b but by Twisden since the  statute of h all need not be name and so they conceive this return well enough  and can not have be associate post
burton against king Administration quoad repeal of administration for that  cause north and dumb on summons perole by a apparitor Coleman pray a  prohibition to the archdeacon of Suffolk quoad division on affidavit that he  be cite and bad demand a copy of the libel show the administration but not the  libel because deny or none be ever make which the court grant and per Windham  though the ordinary may cite to account he can force any distribution Keble er  p
burton against low pace banc sup mich rot demurrer to a plea in debt upon a  sheriff bind a action of debt be bring upon a bind take by a sheriff for the  defendant to appear in chancery upon a attachment issue out thence against he  the defendant plead the statute of h that the sheriff ought not to take bind  of any but in special case and that this bind be void because it be take  against the statute to this plea the plaintiff demurrer the question be  whether a attachment out of the chancery be within the statute of h style  report the court order cause to be show why judgement shall not be give for  the plaintiff upon this demurrer postea style report er p
burton and hicket upon a information for transport calvesskins the case be by  the late act liberty be give to transport they with reference to the book of  rate which give so much a dozen custom with a exception of calvesskins of  above b weight a d in the book of rate at the end there be another clause  whereby for all other thing import and export for which no certain rate be  limit custom shall be pay accord to the proportion of the rate there set down  and now the question arise whether calvesskins which weigh more than b may be  transport pay custom accord to the proportion of book of entry and the court  hold not because except by particular dame in the book of rate and it be not  the intention of the act to extend this last clause to thing except as these  be but to thing not except for the transportation of they be prohibit till of  late leave be give by this act and the act do not intend to suffer calvesskins  of above b weight to be transport but if there be any of that size in a dozen  of skin tinder that size that will be no obstruction to the transportation of  such dozen as the court conceive though they deliver no positive opinion as to  that point but because the party agree the informer have all that weigh above  b and the defendant all that weigh under deliver to they several Hardres de  boundary consecrated HILLARII anns car two king INSCACCARIO
burton vers Fitzgerald at guildhall sentence of a foreign admiralty condemning  a ship as unfit not to be read in a action on the charterparty action on a  charterparty to go to Calais and take in corn for Spain the defendant plead  that the ship be unfit for the voyage be rot and therefore he do not load her  and issue be join upon the goodness of the ship and several witness examine  the defendant offer to give in evidence a proceed in the admiralty court at  Calais whereby commissioner be appoint to survey the ship upon who report  there be a sentence of condemnation it be object that this be a contract under  seal on land here the admiralty there have no jurisdiction and consequent  their sentence void it appear that the plaintiff intervene in the suit and  have a inspector of his own nomination put into the commission and it be  insist by I and other that faith be to be give to these proceed and we be not  to suppose that the same boundary between court subsist there as here and on  insurance nothing be commoner than to read protest in foreign admiralty but  the chief justice refuse to let it be read this be a contract under seal at  land in which case accord to our law the admiralty have no jurisdiction  strange report er p strange michaelmas term george king in b r sir William lee  Knt chief justice sir Francis page Knt sir Edmund probin Knt sir William  chapel Knt justice Dudley rider Esq attorneygeneral John strange Esq solicitor  general
burton vers souter a promissory note Payable to a man or order be not a  negotiable instrument within the custom of merchant r send for ante and see  the case there cite upon a plea of tender if the plaintiff take the money out  of court he admit the tender assumpsit upon several promise one count be upon  the custom of merchant and declare upon a note subscribe by the defendant  Payable to the plaintiff or order and c the defendant plead a tender and bring  the money into court the plaintiff take the money out of court and then to  have damage traverse the tender and issue be join upon it a verdict be find  for the plaintiff and a penny damage give upon which Mr Broderick move in  arrest of judgement I that such note be not within the custom of merchant but  they ought to declare upon a P  of mutuor and give the note in evidence as it  be settle last term between clerk and Martin see the say case before and of  that opinion be the whole court that the plaintiff can pot proceed for damage  after he have accept the money bring into court and of the say opinion be holt  chief justice strong as he have be Lord Raymond before in the case of horn v  levuin see the say case before but because the postea be not in court it be  only stay until c and afterward it be stay absolute Mr king counsel for the  plaintiff declare that he can not maintain it
Burton versus cony hill James rotulo the defendant avow for a rend charge  grant to he for life by his father issue out of all his land in such a town to  have and to hold to levy and yearly to take the say annuity or annual rend of  c during the natural life of the say p at two feast in the year to wit c  Brownlow goldsborough er p by equal portion the first payment to be make the  first and next feast of the say feast which shall next happen after the term  of year end and determine specify and declare in the say will and if it shall  happen c and aver in the avowry that there be not any term of year specify and  declare in the say testament Brownlow goldsborough before recite and note that  in the premise of the deed it be recite thus in fulfil the will or testament  of I the say t hear date such a day I have give c and the court hold that the  grant be present if no term be contain in the will and judgement be give for  the avowant but after judgement be enter upon record a exception be take  because it be not aver that the grantor be dead and it be allow for a good  exception but it come too late judgement be enter replevin not within the  statute of James
burton versus uvoodward show Mod six month for a lapse lunar and not calendar  special verdict in ejectment of a rectory and tithe the question be whether  the six month for take the oath after the first of August upon the late Act  shall be account solar or lunar if lunar then pro quer web of the innertemple  pro quer that they shall be account lunar because more certain and so they be  account in all case except in a quare hinder Inst cro Yelv roll Inst die mich  car Holcroft S case Act concern nonconformist which speak of six month be  account lunar Litt that several clause of this statute as that of imprisonment  and of be suspend be to be construe of lunar month for advantage of the  sufferer and for the same reason in our case I side king versus custus sir  though powis pro to ward off where a Act relate to churchman there the  computation shall be accord to the computation of the church otherwise in case  of lie person   Inst the law condescend to the common understanding of the  time as a bind to pay money upon the first day of the term shall not be  construe upon the essoinday but the quarto die post time halfyearly be  understand of six month not half a year light roll h side cro Comberbach that  the Act be penal shall be construe favourable   Catesby S case the rule where  word be ambiguous they shall be construe in favour of the party Adjournatur
Burwell and salt versus corrant executor of lane upon a bill in equity the  court hold clear that if land be devise to be sell by executor for payment of  the testator debt the money receive by such sale shall be asset in the  executor band if a action of debt be bring against they and the plaintiff will  have be dismiss if all the land have be sell but because that do not appear  the bill be retain and afterward by agreement the party go to law upon the  defendant confess that he have receive for land sell
Burwell v coat may whether a lie impropriator must set forth title bill by the  plaintiff as lessee of the impropriate rectory of Normanby in the county of  Lincoln under the dean and chapter of Lincoln for tithe hay it be insist upon  for the defendant that the plaintiff be a lie impropriator have not set forth  a sufficient title and upon that the long controvert question whether there be  any difference between a lie and a spiritual person claim tithe be revive but  it be not now determine for per curian the title be well enough set forth in  the present case the defendant insist upon a modus of four shilling Payable at  easter in lieu of tithe hay arise on his farm and other land particular set  forth but per curian this be a void modus because it may introduce a fraud for  if a farmer shall turn all his arable land into meadow he will be discharge of  the whole for four shilling beside it be too uncertain it not be certain what  a farm consist of Mr ware and Mr brown for the defendant sir Constantine  Phipps for the plaintiff
BURWELLS case Mod keb sal c upon complaint to two justice about a bastardchild  they by the Elizabeth order one Reynolds to keep the child upon this Reynolds  appear at session where they vacate the order and refer it back again to the  justice who do nothing the next session after Burwell be judge the repute  father and order to pay so much a week to the parish until the child be year  old this be remove into the king bench by certiorari and they resolve that the  refer back again to the justice by the justice at session be not warrant and  that the last order be insufficient because it be that he shall pay the parish  so much a week until the child be year old whereas the father may take it away  when he please but it ought to have be that he shall allow so much a week so  long as it shall be Chargeable to the parish wherefore they bind the party to  appear at the next session by recognizance
bury and russel how far the plaintiff shall be allow to file common bail for  the defendant within the meaning of the statute of Geo the plaintiff have file  common bail for the defendant within seven day after the return of the writ  whereas by the rule of the court the defendant have till the eight day be out  to do it himself in and after eight day be out the plaintiff serve the  defendant with a copy of the declaration Mr fazakerly submit it that this be  irregular and therefore move that the common bail file by the plaintiff may be  set aside but the court refuse the motion
bury case in the argument of bury case for a divorce the Rep there be cite  Elizabeth b r rot that if a layman be make a commissary by the bishop it be  good until it be undo by sentence although that the canon say that he ought  Noy er p to be a doctor or a bachelor of divinity but h have limit that a  doctor of the civil law may be a commissary
busby and Elliston demurrer to a declaration on a promissory note wherein it  be say the defendant be summon instead of attach to answer overrule plaintiff  declare upon a promissory note and the defendant demurrer to the declaration  and the objection make be that the declaration say the defendant be summon to  answer instead of say he be attach to answer Dennison for plaintiff this be  not material for it be only a recital of the writ and the defendant have not  pray oyer thereof so that it do not appear but it may be by summons Lord  Hardwicke c j you can have this exception without have pray over wms sand h Bl  ld raym but however they may amend the recital by the writ if that be all  judgement for plaintiff this objection since oyer be no long to be have can  now be make wms sand Doug Bos pull see also the case cite Tid
busby versus GREENSLATE at nisi prius in Middlesex in person Pratt CJ where  the devisee of copyhold die after the surrender and before the death of the  devisor the devise be void in ejectment the chief justice rule this case a  surrender a copyhold estate to the use of his will and then devise it to b for  life and after his decease to the heir of his body b die after make the will  and it be hold that his heir can take nothing for it be a devise in tail to b  and his heir be word of limitation and then b die in the life of the devisor  it be the same case with full v full cro Elizabeth a in cro it and Goodright v  right ante and the note b and the chief justice say it make no difference that  those case be of freehold land and this of copyhold where the devisee be live  at the time of the surrender vide duke of Marlborough v Lord Godolphin ves in  this case a person who have sell the inheritance without any covenant for  strange report er p good title or warranty be allow to be a witness to prove  the title of the vendee vide king v Nuntilde ez post
busby versus walker mich geo ill exception against bail to be either on the  bailpiece or the book Vid Rayner v stamp ante p Welsh v haddock post p Foley  upon a motion to stay proceed on the bailbond the court declare it shall be a  stand rule of practice that in all case of exception to bail such exception  shall be make either in the filazers book or on the bailpiece with the  commissioner before it be transmit and afterward above in the filazers book or  on the bailpiece
BUSFIELD and Norden mich banc sup error to reverse a judgement upon a  indebitatus assumpsit by the bail a writ of error be bring by Busfield against  Nordon to reverse a judgement give in the court military of Rippon in a action  upon a indebitatus assumpsit for ware sell wherein there be a judgement give  against the principal a to know facias issue out against the bail and a  judgement be thereupon have against he the bail thereupon bring a writ of  error to reverse both these judgement and assign for error that there be no  issue join in the first judgement and that be erroneous and be the ground upon  which the to know facias do issue forth whereupon the second judgement be give  the second judgement can be good Glyn chief justice but the principal  judgement ought to be reverse by the principal and not by the bail and  therefore the writ of error be not well bring by the bail therefore let it  abate style report er p
bush against chamberlain ante October process Cr pl that the sheriff can make  return of resistance because as Westminster cap its in shameful appearance  king and therefore the sheriff ought to go in person with power as Goldsb pl  upon a resistance of execution the council table refuse to meddle because this  court ought to see their own judgement execute and finch pray a writ to the  highsheriff which all writ be but with a special rule that the highsheriff  shall execute it himself which the court grant and a tipstaff to fetch the  undersheriff up to return his writ which be better than a attachment which be  returnable by it self
bush against chamberlain July execution a sheriff who can do execution by a  posse comitatus ought to acquaint the deputylieutenant of the county and if  they assist not he must acquaint the king and council but yet the sheriff  shall be amerce if he return that he can do execution post
bush against RISHLEY October a rate tithe be not to be decree in chancery the  bill be to have a rate tithe settle by decree against the impropriator and  prevent multiplicity of suit and for the plaintiff it be pray that the court  will either decree that the plaintiff shall hold their land under that modus  kill which at a trial at law pen this suit be find by verdict or that the  court will direct another trial to try the verity of the modus and reserve the  Cause till after the second trial if the court be not satisfy with one verdict  it be insist that after such tithe rate have be ascertain by two verdict the  court ought to decree a enjoyment of the land for which the modus be Payable  under that rate tithe and discharge the tithe in kind and it be compare to the  case of copyholder that have their fine and service ascertain by the aid of  this court by direct of trial for that purpose first and after decree accord  to the verdict on such trial but for the defendant it be insist that this  court have not at any time decree a modus kill and that tithe be Payable in  kind by common right and though it be insist for the plaintiff that it be  frequent in the exchequer to decree a rate tithe the Lord keeper do not think  fit to decree in such a case but order two deposition to be make use of at law  as occasion serve and dismiss the bill case in chancery the Lord keeper  justice wile
bush against smith slander Nels Abr pl action for these word speak of the  plaintiff he be a great rogue and deserve to be hang as well as gale who be  condemned for steal at Newgate session et ex ulteriori ill will he bid I S  steal what good he can and he will receive they adjudge that the action do not  lie for as to the first word the defendant only express his opinion and  perhaps he do not think that gale deserve hang Yelv case of Heake against  Moulton and as for the last word it be only ill counsel but no act be do  therefore not like the case of Lewkner and Crichley Cr car
bush and other assignee of Jones vers gower usury can be plead to scifa on a  judgement but it may be bring on by motion to vacate the judgement Middleton v  hill cro Elizabeth Goldsw SC row v Bellaseys siam vide cook v Jones Cowp Cas  tempt hard much full to a to know facias on a judgement by confession the  defendant plead that the warrant of attorney be give on a usurious contract  and upon demurrer it be hold that this be not within the statute Ann saint c  or to be get at this way for this be no contract or assurance a judgement be  To give back in reluctant the court however incline that it may be get at on a  motion to vacate the judgement as be do in c b Trin Geo Jackson v Mosley where  a warrant be obtain from a infant on the statute de Relegiosis who be restrain  from obtain land art well ingenio yet a praecipe be bring and judgement have  there be force to be the aid of parliament to inquire into collusion
bush case in cur ward a man seize of socage land in fee and of land in capite  in tail devise the three part of all to his wife in recompense of dower and  die she enter immediate into the three part of the feesimple land this shall  bar her further claim by h c a man seize of land in feesimple and also of land  in tail and the feesimple land be hold in socage and the tail land hold capite  make his last will in write and thereby recite that whereas m his wife have  title by the law of the land to be endow of the three part of all his land  tenement and hereditament he devise to her all and singular the three part of  all his land tenement and hereditament etcetera to have the same three part to  the say m during her life in full recompense of all such jointure and dower as  she shall or may have or claim of his say inheritance the question be whether  the wife shall have all of the feesimple land which amount to a three part of  the whole land as well tail as other so that all the land in tail shall be to  the queen in ware or not or whether the will be void and because she have  enter into a three part of the feesimple land without use her writ of dower or  without assignment where she have her election to have the one or the other  the opinion be that she shall be bar from claim more c see the like for bar of  dower by the statute of h c poster fol pl and h Eliz a in all case upon  special contract it be necessary to set out the contract true and a variance  in any part be fatal because the contract be entire bull he bring term Rep  term Rep Cowp term Rep though in mere action of debt it be not general  necessary for the plaintiff to recover the exact sum declare for black Rep  dougl term Rep Henry black dyer b er p postea fol m Eliz postea fol m fol post
bush case note that it be agree in this case that if a parsonage be  impropriate and the vicarage be endow and difference be between the parson and  the vicar concern the endowment that shall be try by the ordinary for the  person and the cause also be spiritual and there the vicar sue the parson for  tithe and he suggest the manner of tithing and pray a prohibition and it be  grant and after upon solemn argument consultation be grant insomuch that the  manner of tithing do not come in question but the endowment of the vicarage  only for that be the elder brother as the Lord coke say this be cite to be  adjudge by coke Brownlow goldsborough er p
bush v field the defendant stay by injunction to pull down room to the  prejudice of another room the plaintiff show by his bill that his house and  the defendant be join together and support by one main wall stand partly upon  the freehold of either of the say party and the plaintiff have also a entry  garret and other necessary room stand upon the kitchen of the defendant he the  defendant go about to pull down the say wall and thereby to overthrow the say  garret the defendant make title to some of the upper room and have pull down  part of the wall a injunction be award to stay the defendant to pull down any  more of the wall or any other part of the say house whereby the say upper room  may be overthrow or impair until the matter be hear bush plaintiff field  defendant year Elizabeth Mews dig title easement and prescription b right of  support from adjoin building
bushel against bland error in assumpsit after verdict if the plaintiff will  deliver to the defendant in Jan in figure be help by Jones be in inferior  court by stat of Jeoffails Keble er p Windham the place be material after  verdict and per curian the time be also necessary and ought to be in Latin  accord to Keble the stat and be in figure be insensible and judgement reverse
bushel against howel Saturday novemb action sur case sir will Scrogs pray  imparlance till next term in action upon the case against the defendant the  recorder of London and other the judge of the mayor court for fine the  plaintiff and other juror for verdict against evidence in a civil cause which  per curian be grant and say withal that this action will not lie against a  judge and the c b be of the same opinion
bushel against jay ante prohibition powis show cause against a prohibition  that it be suggest on the high sea by agreement which yet the court will not  regard that suggestion for the prohibition be that the agreement be ground on  a charterparty make on land
bushel against jay prohibition Allen move for prohibition to the admiralty  upon a charterparty the plaintiff declare in a action upon the case upon a  promise make on the high sea upon a agreement accord to but not mention the  charterparty which be only by suggestion but the same with the charterparty  which real be make upon the land and the court grant it nisi
bushel against starling Thursday June inquest ex motion Mr solicitor for  imparlance in action of false imprisonment for fine set by the defendant as  mayor on the plaintiff as juryman refuse or give verdict contrary to evidence  which the court grant and say that no false imprisonment lie because no writ  of error lie on such a award or judgement but he must be deliver by certiorari  or habeas corpus and no other way this be do as the judgement of a court
bushel plaintiff Newby WAKEFIELD and other defendant where a authority be give  to two the defendant demurrer for that the bill set forth the deed be execute  by one and without date c the demurrer overrule Nicholas bushel who be  grandfather of the plaintiff be seize of the land in the bill do by his last  will give authority to his son brown bushel and to Dorothy his wife to dispose  and convey part of the premise to provide portion for his young child Nicholas  bushel die and not long after the say brown bushel likewise die and then  Dorothy alone convey the land to George Scanderbey bushel who be the plaintiff  father and to his heir for his portion and that he be now in possession but  the defendant as heir at law of Nicholas have bring a ejectment c this be the  case upon the bill the defendant demurrer for that it appear by the bill that  the full power give by the will of Nicholas be to his son brown bushel and to  Dorothy bushel joint and the deed by which the plaintiff claim be execute by  Dorothy alone which be not sufficient to divest the defendant of the  inheritance he be heir at law beside this conveyance be set forth by the  plaintiff but without date day month or year and that he do not make oath that  he have not nicholas will the court overrule the demurrer and give the  plaintiff leave to amend his bill
bushel vers LECHMORE the unnecessary or impertinent addition of a traverse can  only be take advantage of by special demurrer in covenant for rend if the  defendant plead eviction a traverse that he enjoy after the eviction be  impertinent vide Leon pl to a plea of eviction a man may reply a entry by  virtue of a power and traverse the eviction covenant for nonpayment of rend  the defendant plead eviction and conclude with a traverse that he at any time  enjoy the land from the time of the eviction until the day upon which the rend  become due the plaintiff reply that he enter by virtue of a power reserve to  he in the lease and traverse the eviction the defendant demurrer and holt  chief justice take exception to the plea that the traverse be immaterial but  yet he be of opinion that it will not vitiate the plea because where a  traverse be immaterial the adverse party be not exclude Lord Raymond from a  answer but may reply and traverse the material part of the plea and therefore  this be aid by the general demurrer but if it have be show for cause upon a  special demurrer it have be ill but then he be of opinion that the traverse in  the plaintiff replication be a answer to the defendant plea and then the  defendant by not take issue have vitiate his plea for whether the plaintiff  enter by virtue of any power or whether a he be a mere trespasser if the  defendant be not evict it will be no suspension of the rend judgement for the  plaintiff ex rel mri Jacob a vide t Jon Cowp hob comb
bushel versus miller ibidem eoden die that which make a man a trespasser may  not amount to a conversion upon the customhouse quay there be a hut where  particular porter put in small parcel of good if the ship be not ready to  receive they when they be bring upon the quay the porter who have a right in  this hut have each particular box or cupboard and as such the defendant have  one the plaintiff be one of the porter put in good belong to a and lie they so  that the defendant can not get to his chest without remove they he accord do  remove they about a yard from the place where they lie towards the door and  without return they into their place go away and the good be lose the  plaintiff satisfy a of the value of the good and bring trover against the  defendant and upon the trial two point be rule by the c I that the plaintiff  have make satisfaction to a for the good have thereby acquire a sufficient  property in they to maintain trover strange that there be no conversion in the  defendant the plaintiff by lie his good where they obstruct the defendant from  go to his chest be in that respect a wrongdoer the defendant have a right to  remove the good so that thus far he be in no fault then as to the not return  the good to the place where be find they if this be a action of trespass  perhaps it may be a doubt but he be clear it can not amount to a conversion
BUSHEYS case Paul Bushey vicar of Pancras lease his vicarage to doctor clark  the glebe land and the church and all thing to the same belong except the  house reserve twenty pound rend yearly at Lammas and consecrated Petri  advincula by equal portion and if the Godbolt rend be behind by the space of a  month that then it shall he lawful for the vicar to distrain and the lessee be  bind to perform all covenant article and agreement contain or recite within  the same indenture and for rend not pay the of August Elizabeth the vicar  bring debt upon the bind to which the defendant plead that the rend be not  demand the day of August upon Godbolt er p which they be at issue and the jury  be ready at the bar walmesley say that the inquest ought not to he take for  three cause first he have make a lease of the vicarage except the house and  the plaintiff have allege the demand to be general super land glebales and  have not show where to that the justice say it have be better to have say at  such a gate or hedge or highway but notwithstanding they do not allow of that  exception for if it be not well demand it ought to be show of the other side  the second exception be because the inquest be all de Vicineto de Pancras and  it may be that some of the land appertain to the vicarage do extend to  Islington but that exception be disallow also the three exception be because  that the venire facias do not well recite the issue for the exception of the  house be leave out and per curian it be not needful that all be recite but if  another issue then that upon which they be at issue have be recite it have not  be good and afterward the inquest be take and find for the plaintiff but  nothing be speak whether there need any demand in such case or not
buss versus frost vide post side vent Mod sand salk in a trover and conversion  bring by the plaintiff as assignee of commissioner of bankrupt among other  thing he declare that he be possess de to make one vase England vessel vines  in a vineyard in rows Hispanici and it be object upon a demurrer to the  declaration that it be not say what the vessel be make of and so no measure  for the damage send non allocate for it be intend to be make of wood as be use  for cask of wine
bust plaintiff against WADSEWORTH defendant a action of debt upon a bill make  at Hanbrough in a action of debt bring against the defendant upon a bill inade  at Hanbrough in the Lowcountries which be to pay at Hanbrough the plaintiff  bring a action of debt here in this court for the defendant demand oyer of the  bill and so demurrer in law upon the declaration for the variance between the  bill and the declaration dodderidge justice the plaintiff here ought to have  demand in moan that in Hanbrough if a man be bind to pay so much money in  dollar or in French or Spanish money he ought to make his demand accord and e  fol in debt the plaintiff count upon a bill by which the defendant be bind to  the plaintiff in Flemmisb and all the bill be write in Flemmisb date octavo  die of the tenth lxx octavo interlessant domini mecca as the usage be among  merchant and the plaintiff declare and name the place year and day when the  obligation be make and deliver the defendant there demand judgement of the  court for the variance between the count and the obligation in this principal  case the court agree that the plaintiff demand ought to have be accord to his  bill and have not so do for this cause judgement be give against he and the  rule of the court be quod to express grief nil to take in hand per billam
but a afterborn child shall come in with the rest of the child for a customary  share of a freeman of London personal estate decree Trin Walsam and Skinner  Prec in Chan S c say it be so agree by the counsel on both side pale yellow Eq  Rep SC in as many word with Prec in Chan d concern the custom with respect TO  the child OF a freeman and here OF advancement bring into hotchpot  survivorship and forfeiture
but a bill to recover a quitrent may be proper in some circumstance as equity  case abridge er p where the land out of which it be claim be whole uncertain b  and where the day on which the same be pay be also uncertain but then these  thing ought to be lie in the bill else a landlord may be very vexatious to a  tenant and make he spend in his own necessary defence more than three time the  value of the rend say per Lord Chan Talbot in the case of holder and Chambury  ibidem b vide the case of north and the earl and countess of Strafford p can  also that of the duke of Bridgwater and sir Francis Edward Bart upon a appeal  in parliament from a decree of the court of exchequer February will Rep cite  it as take from the reporter ms
but a voluntary bind shall not be pay in a course of Administration so as to  take place of real debt though by simple contract but such voluntary bind  shall be pay before legacy decree by Harcourt l c Feb Jones and Powell
but afterward a difference be take by my Lord Macclesfield videlicet that if a  executor or trustee of money place it out in the fund or on other security  whereby he gain considerable he shall have the whole benefit thereof to  himself in respect of the hazard he run of be a considerable loser thereby  which he must have bear but if such trustee or executor be a insolvent person  at the time of place out such Trustmoney there the beneficiary and trust shall  have the whole benefit gain thereby as he only can have bear the loss thereof  if any have happen the trustee or executor by reason of his insolvency be  incapable thereof and consequent run no hazard at all mich Bromfield and  Wetherle SC ante Eq can Abr Prec in Chan equity case abridge er p h how far  trustee be answerable for each other if two trustee for the sale of a  TrustEstate join in a conveyance of it to a purchaser and each of they receive  pound and they likewise join in receipt for the Considerationmoney though  afterward one of they become insolvent yet the other be not liable to the  money receive by he for their join without which the estate can not be sell be  absolute necessary Townley v Challoner cro car see the case of Churchill and  Hobson p pl salk SC and p vern fellow and Mitchell and Owen S p and will Rep  SC and p
but baron possess of a choose in action as he may release or forfeit it so if  he shall assign it for a valuable consideration it will be good in equity  agree in the say case of Lord Carteret and Paschal t will Rep by as it seem if  there be no consideration ibidem equity case abridge if a feme sole have a  decree to hold and enjoy land till a debt due to her be pay and she be in  possession of the land under this decree and marry and then the husband and  wife continue in the possession c till the baron death the husband alone in  his lifetime may assign it for this be a equitable extent and to be take as it  will be be it a legal extent in which case it be plain that the husband alone  may assign the extend interest per ld Chan king vide the case of Lord Carteret  and Paschall t will Rep vide Eq can Abr p c ibidem if a judgement be give to a  in trust for a feme sole who marry and by consent of her trustee be in  possession of the land extend the husband alone may assign over this extend  interest as he may the trust of a term to which his wife be entitle accord to  a solemn resolution of this court and which be affirm in dom proc in sir  Edward turner case vide vern vern Tudor and Samyne cite by king c in the case  of Lord Carteret and Paschall Trin equity case abridge er p
but equity will not relieve against a voluntary bind give to a common  prostitute who the obligor have keep pass service do not render a bind less  voluntary for it be no consideration at law vide hill v Spencer Ambl vide  Whaley v Norton vern
but if a deed of trust be erect for payment of such creditor as come in within  a year a creditor will not be exclude though he do not come in till after the  year Dunch v ken vern S c but a bill may be exhibit after the expiration of  the year to compel the creditor who stand out to come in or to renounce the  benefit of the trust ibidem d where debt OF a different nature be due and a  general payment be make TO which debt shall it be apply
but if a devise in these word videlicet I give pound apiece to the two child  of I S at the end of ten year after my decease and the child die within the  ten year this be a lapse legacy and be so in all case where the time be annex  to the legacy itself and not to the payment of it Snell and Dec a salk per  Cowper ld Chan though it be object that this differ from the case where a man  devise pound to I S at his age of twentyone because it be a contingency  whether he will attain to that age but the expiration of the ten year be  inevitable a Trin Talbot c in the case of king and wither say that this case  weigh but little with he for saint he do not think it well report and dly the  reason seem idle for why may not a uncertainty be transmissible as well as a  certainty though perhaps not so beneficial can in Eq tempt Talbot so where one  be possess of a very considerable personal estate part in Jamaica and part in  England and be himself reside in Jamaica make his will and thereof several  executor some for his estate in Jamaica and other reside in England for his  estate here and among other thing devise in these word videlicet equity case  abridge er p
but if a devise land to b in d S and t and all his land elsewhere and he have  a mortgage of land that do not lie in d S or t which be of more value than the  land in d S and t the mortgage land will not pass for he can not be think to  mean to comprehend land of so much value under the word elsewhere which be  like a c that come in current branch car sir Thomas Littleton case vent decree  but the reporter say there be other circumstance in the case which show that  it be not his intention that the mortgage equity case abridge er p land shall  pass vide vern win v Littleton SC where it appear that there be some small  parcel of land not specify and of the same nature of those devise to which the  court hold the word elsewhere be applicable and not to the mortgage land which  be of a different nature and of great value and that the testator have charge  the land devise with a rentcharge of pound per Ann which he never can intend  shall issue out of land which be every day redeemable by a general devise of  all land tenement and hereditament mortgage in fee though forfeit will not  pass nor will they pass by such a general devise though the equity of  redemption be after the makingthe will foreclose or release stride v Russel  vern per curian
but if a devise several legacy to b c and d and that if his estate fall short  each to abate in proportion but if it increase that each legacy shall increase  in proportion in this case one alone may sue for his legacy and it be not  necessary that the other legatee shall be make party mich car haycock and  haycock Chan can though one legatee may sue yet if the residue of the personal  estate be devise to three Q whether one of they may alone slay for his part  and salk Nell Chan Rep where it be hold that he can
but if a father devise a legacy of pound to his son Payable at twentyone and  the son obtain a decree for it and pound be report due but before the money be  pay the son become a bankrupt yet the commissioner may assign the legacy and  benefit of the decree rule upon a demurrer hill Toulson and grout vern
but if a feme administratrix waste the asset and then marry and die the  husband be liable to no more than the value of what come to his or his wife be  hand after the marriage decree mich Sanderson and crouch vern
but if a give a bind to b her servant to pay her pound per Ann quarterly for  her life free from tax and by will without take notice of the bind give b per  Ann for her life Payable halfyearly but not say free of tax b shall have both  the annuity for that by the will not be so advantageous as the first can be  presume a satisfaction decree hill Atkinson and web vern Prec in Chan SC  decree that b shall have both the annuity for that give by the will be not so  advantageous to her as the other in respect of the time of payment of the  difference of the place and of the one be free from and the other on the land  liable to tax
but if a infant make a agreement and receive interest under it after he come  of full age such agreement shall be decree against he hill franklin and  Thornebury vern so if a infant make a exchange of land and continue in  possession after he come of age he shall be bind by it Cecil v Salisbury vern  per curian
but if a man have issue two daughter a and b and he devise land to a and to  the heir of her body and for want of issue to b and a die in the lifetime of  the testator leave issue though after the testator annex a codicil to his will  and thereby dispose of some part of his personal estate yet this will not  amount to a republication of the will nor give any Title to the issue of a  mich Hutton and Simpson vern SC ante Eq can Abr pl resolve per curian though  the testator have declare in his will that b have marry against his consent  and that what he have give her be in full of her portion and in bar of any  further part of his real estate if one devise a lease to his daughter and  afterward renew the lease and afterward add his codicil to his will without  take any notice of the lease whether the renewal of the lease be a revocation  and whether the add a codicil to his will be a republication quaere vide vern  Alford v earl
but if a man marry a orphan who die under twentyone her orphanage part shall  not survive to the other child but shall go to the husband Fouke and lewen  vern vide Anonymous Prec in Chan
but if a man subscribe and publish his will in the presence of two witness and  they subscribe it in his presence and after make equity case abridge a codicil  in write recite that he have make a former will and confirm the same except  what be except by the codicil and declare that the codicil shall be take as  part of his will and publish it in the presence of one of the same and another  witness this be not a good will for there be not three subscribe witness in  the presence of the testator and one of the witness to the codicil never see  the will lea and lib Mod adjudge though object the will and codicil make but  one will and the circumstance of three witness want to complete the will be  perfect by the codicil SC I show salk comb Carth pale yellow Eq Rep holt so if  a man make a will in several piece of paper and there be three witness to the  last paper and none of they ever see the first this be not a good will Mod per  curian a will void for want of witness will not operate as a appointment to a  charity vide Att gentleman v barn vern and Title charity
but if a mortgage in fee be make redeemable at Michaelmas or at any other  Michaelmas on six month notice and no covenant to pay the money and the  mortgagor continue in possession pay the interest and by will devise his  personal estate to his wife and daughter the personal estate be not liable in  case of the real there be no covenant either express or imply mich Howell and  price vern will Rep S c say on argue the case Oct on the equity reserve  afterthe trial of a issue that have be direct by the court Lord chancellor  seem to be strong of opinion that the personal estate shall be apply in ease  of the real the testator have say in his will that his executor shall by his  personal estate pay and levy his debt and this mortgagemoney plain appear to  be a debt wherefore his lordship decree in favour of the heir ibidem bring in  Ch SC no decree but precedent to be search note this be a Welsh mortgage and  the last book say it be a common practice in Wales to make mortgage in this  manner with design to keep the estate for ever in their own family ibidem pale  yellow el Q Rep SC in as many word with Prec in Chan equity case abridge er p
but if a mortgagee in fee enter for a forfeiture and after seven year  enjoyment absolute sell the land to I S and his heir the estate shall not be  look upon to be a mortgage in the hand of I S so as to make it part of his  personal estate but it shall be for the benefit of his heir mich cotton and  isle vern SC ante Eq can Abr I mortgagee answerable for the profit and how TO  account the mortgagee be answerable in equity when he come into the possession  of the land for the profit that he make of the land and not for the profit  that he may have make unless there be fraud for it be the fraud and Laches of  the mortgagor that he will let the land lapse into the hand of the mortgagee  by the nonpayment of the money and when it do he be only a bailiff for what he  do receive but be not bind to the trouble and pain of make the best of what be  another tooth Fulthrope v foster vide vern if a mortgagee in possession assign  over his mortgage without assent of the mortgagor the mortgagee be bind to  answer the profit both before and after the assignment though assign only for  his own debt for he be under a trust to answer the profit of the pledge and it  be a breach of trust to assign such pledge to a person insolvent but quaere if  the mortgagor hide so that he can be serve with a Subpna to foreclose whether  the mortgagee may not assign and not be answerable for the profit after  assignment duke of Norfolk case Chan can a mortgagee shall not be bind by any  proof that the land be worth so much unless you can likewise prove that he do  actual make so much of it or may have do so have it not be for his wilful  default as if he turn out a sufficient tenant that hold it at so much rend or  refuse to accept a sufficient tenant that will have give so much for it anon  vern
but if a mortgagee in fee enter for a forfeiture and after seven year  enjoyment absolute sell the land to I S and his heir this estate shall not be  look upon to be a mortgage in the hand of I S so as to make it part of his  personal estate but it shall be for the benefit of the heir mich cotton and  isle vern
but if a person come only for a bare discovery of a deed he need not make oath  of the loss of it as he must do when he come for relief for he can translate  the jurisdiction without oath make of the loss of the deed per ld king Trin  Godfrey and turner vern so where a bill be bring for a bare discovery of a  deed and the defendant demurrer because the plaintiff have not make oath  accord to the course of the court that he have not the deed upon which this  distinction be take and allow of by the court videlicet that where a person  come for a discovery and pray relief there it be necessary for he to make  affidavit of the want of the deed but when he seek but a bare discovery or to  have it produce at a trial it be not necessary for it be not to be presume  equity case abridge that the plaintiff in either of the late case will do so  absurd a thing as exhibit a bill if he have the deed Anonymous Chan can  Anonymous vern S p but vide Anonymous vern where the distinction be take quite  contrary but seem to be the mistake of the reporter
but if a sum of money be award the husband which he be entitle to in right of  his wife and the husband die before it be pay it will go to his executor and  not survive to the wife the award be a sort of judgement which have change the  property Paso Oglander and baston l vern if there be a bind debt due to the  wife the husband may sue alone without join his wife but in case the wife be  join in the action and judgement be recover the judgement will survive to the  wife though have she not be join it will have go to the executor or the  husband ibidem
but if I S devise all his household good and furniture which shall be in his  house at r at his death to his wife and afterward go beyond sea his steward  get the head landlord of the house to accept of a surrender of the lease of  the house and remove the good to another house and write a account of this to  I S who approve of it the good will not pass by the will to the wife otherwise  if they have be remove by fraud to defeat the legacy or by any tortuous Act  without the privity of the testator decree hill earl and countess of  Shaftsbury vern
but if land be devise to be sell for payment of debt in a schedule in that  case the purchaser be bind to see the purchasemoney apply to the payment of  those debt but if the trust be general to pay debt though he have notice of  they yet the purchaser be not oblige to see the money apply mich abbot and  Gibbs S p Spaldinq v Shalmer vern
but if land in mortgage be devise to a for life remainder to b in fee and a  take a assignment of this mortgage in a trustee name though b may have compel  a to contribute one three towards payment of the mortgage in respect of his  estate for life yet if a be dead and the bill be bring against his executor he  shall be oblige to contribute only in proportion to the time that a his  testator enjoy it decree Trin Cleat and Batteson vern
but if tenant in tail agree to convey he may be compel in equity to execute  the agreement but if he die his issue be not bind thereby unless he do some  Act whereby he consent to and confirm the agreement Trin car Ross and Ross l  Chan can Jenkins v Keynes lev S p in car cellar vide boss v Ross but not S p  ante Eq can Abr
but if the bill have be that one commoner have recover one shilling or other  small sum for damage against the plaintiff for oppress the common or for use  the common when he ought not and therefore that the other commoner may accept  of the like damage for what be pass to prevent charge at law that have be in  the nature of a bill of peace and proper in this court paulet v Ingres vern
but if the mortgagee assign over his mortgage to I S and declare a trust  thereof by parole for a and b there be in this case a express trust declare  though by parole only it shall prevent a result trust to the assignor for the  statute of fraud which save result trust extend only to such as be result  trust before the statute and a bare declaration by parole before the Act will  prevent any result trust Trin lady Bellasis and Compton vern but no decree
but if the plaintiff sue one executor and allege in his bill that he do not  know who the other executor be and pray a discovery this will be no Cause of  demurrer rule mich bowyer and covert vern in a bill to be relieve touch a  lease for year or other personal duty against executor though the executor be  but executor in trust yet it be not necessary to make the beneficiary and  trust or residuary legatee party anon vern S p Lawson v Barker and love v  jacomb bro Chan can
but if there be no trust nor infant in the case nor any entry make by he who  be entitle to the mean profit equity will not decree any account of the rend  and profit resolve per la Chan in the case of Hutton and Simpson ux e contra  mich vern
but if two take a lease joint of a farm the lease shall survive but the stock  on the farm though occupy joint shall not survive neither shall a stock use in  a joint undertake in the way of Trade survive and therefore not necessary in  article of copartnership to provide against it per Lord keeper hill Jeffereys  and small vern and per Lord keeper where survivorship be to take place be  where two become interest by way of gift or the like a vide hay v kingdom vern  usher v Ayleward ibidem whether if two joint purchaser pay share and share  alike for a purchase and one die the whole shall survive a accord it have be  decree that if a devise the residue of his estate to his two executor or make  several man executor the survivor shall carry all Chan can though note the  Lord chancellor expression why the survivor shall carry all because all the  judge will have it so ibidem
but if upon the take out Administration two be bind as surety and afterward  the surety take up their bind and procure the prerogative court to take  insufficient security yet they shall not be any far Chargeable in equity than  in law Ratcliff and grove vern that a surety shall not be further liable in  equity than at law vide Simpson v field Chan be
but in a Cause where the defendant have answer and the witness be examine it  happen that in the Title of the interrogatory the plaintiff be call Thomas  instead of John and the court will not allow the deposition to be read nor the  Title to be amend although most of the witness be since their examination go  to sea easter white and tailor vern but quare for this seem only a mistake of  the clerk who error be frequent amend the better to carry on the justice of  the court
but in the case of a particular engagement on the part of the wife as where a  feme covert be authorize by settlement to dispose of her separate estate have  contract for the sale of it the court will decree a specific performance of  the contract Grigby v Cox equity case abridge Ves cit ibidem f what contract  between husband and wife be dissolve by the marriage
but it have be decree in the house of lord that a will of a real estate can  not be set aside in a court of equity for fraud or imposition but must first  be try at law on Devisavit well non be matter proper for a jury to inquire  into July that Bransby and Kerridge SC ante Eq can Abr vide Eq can Abr d what  will amount TO a republication and where a republication will make the devise  good if a man devise certain land and after alien the land to a stranger and  repurchases and after show his intent that the say will shall be his will this  be a new publication and the land shall pass by the devise e r vide hall v  Dench vern equity case abridge er p
but it have be since hold that where a man marry a woman trader who die and at  her death be indebt to several person for ware which she have buy of they and  which be by her in specie at the time of her death and come to the hand of her  husband though a bill be bring against he that he may either pay for those  good or let the person have they again yet he may insist that he be neither  executor nor administrator to his wife and therefore not liable to her debt  and that all her good belong to he by law rule upon demurrer Trin Blackmore  and lie but quaere
but it have since be decree in the house of lord that a will of a real estate  can not be set aside in a court of equity for fraud or imposition but must  first be try at law on devisavit well non be matter proper for a jury to  inquire into July Bramsbey and Kerridge post Eq can Abr S c c concern the  jurisdiction OF chancery in foreign part
but it seem a distribution by the commissioner among the creditor upon a  suppose value of the bankrupt real estate where the commissioner have no money  to distribute be not fraudulent and not to be set aside Hitchcock v Sedgwick  vide vern b what shall be deem the bankrupt estate or such a interest in he as  the commissioner may assign
but leave a open as it be term for the interposition of the remainder when it  shall happen to interpose between the estate for life and the fee and that  this be a contingent remainder and not a executory devise be bar by the  recovery suffer by b Holmes and plunket lev
but otherwise where money be devise to be lie out in the purchase of land to  be settle on a and the heir male of his body for in marriage article the child  be consider as a purchaser but in case of a will where the testator express  his intent to give a estatetail equity ought not to abridge the bounty direct  by the testator per Lord Chan Cowper in the case of b seal and seal will Rep a  in the nature of marriage article the issue be particular consider and look  upon as purchaser and for which reason equity have restrain the general  expression make use of by the party for it can reasonable be suppose that a  valuable consideration will be give for the settlement of a estate which as  soon as settle the husband may destroy per Lord keeper Harcourt in the case of  bale and Coleman east will Rep in this case of bale and Coleman Lord Harcourt  make a distinction betwixt a devise of a trust of land to a for life with a  power to make lease c remainder to the heir male of his body hold this to be a  estatetail but that in article on a marriage to settle land to a for life c  remainder to the heir male of his body by the wife the article be executory  and but as minute the settlement shall be accord to the intention and  consequent to the first son c cite by Lord Chan Parker on pronounce his decree  in the case of Trevor and Trevor east will Rep b vide this case p c e OF  variance between article and settlement
but parishioner may prove a devise to the use of the poor of the parish or  ever vide Townshend v row side cit burr mansf if a executrix to a first  husband marry a second and a bill be exhibit against they to discover a trust  and they in their answer disagree in the matter the wife confess what the  husband deny and what the plaintiff can prove only by one witness the  plaintiff can have no relief for one witness be not equity case abridge  sufficient against the husband be answer and the wife confession will not  avail for she can be no witness against the husband Anonymous Chan can
but per holt c I if a man contract a debt while he be a dealer and after  leaves off Trade and then commit a Act of bankruptcy there none of his  creditor become so since he leave off Trade can sue out a Commission but if  those who be his creditor before he leave off Trade sue out a Commission the  other creditor may come in and join hill W Meggott and mill can in b b tempt W  vide Lord raym Rep SC and S p if all the creditor who petition for a  Commission shall agree to have it discharge or supersede it may be grant vern  per jefferies ld Chan and if other creditor who be not petitioner shall pray a  renewal of the Commission or a revocation of the supersedeas Q if it may not  be grant especial if the supersedeas be within four month after the grant the  Commission alderman blackwell case vide Chan can vern if a Commission be grant  and the bankrupt die yet the commissioner may proceed alderman blackwell case  Chan can
but Semb that the testimony of one witness corroborate by circumstance though  contradictory to the defendant answer be sufficient ground for a decree Pember  v Mathers bro Chan can
but when a attachment be sue out in the time of king Charles the second and  execute three day after his demise but before notice of his death it be  adjudge to be well execute and the proceed thereon regular Burch v Maypowder  vern Q see the bowl show S c b OF sequestration if a defendant be in contempt  and in prison for not perform a decree the court will order a sequestration  against his real and personal estate Elvard v warren Chan Rep of the antiquity  of sequestration and that they be proper and necessary process vide efide v  petit Chan can Kildare v Eustace vern
but when a bill be exhibit by a second mortgagee to redeem and the first  mortgagee plead his mortgage and a decree to foreclose the mortgagor without  notice of the second mortgage yet the plea be overrule mich Godfrey and  Chadwell vern equity case abridge er p if the mortgagor tender the money and  the mortgagee refuse he lose the interest from the time of the tender because  it be but a pledge for the money and if the money be tender he ought not to  keep the pledge and no man ought to pay for the forbearance when he have the  money ready man v burgess Chan can Lutton v rod Chan can S p if upon a  mortgage a tender be make of the money at the place appoint for payment at any  time of day specify in the condition and the mortgagee refuse the condition be  save for ever and the mortgagor need not stay at the place appoint till the  last instant of the day because by the express letter of the condition the  money be to be pay on the day indefinite nor needs there be any new tender  afterward within a convenient time because by the word of the contract both  party ought to acquiesce and upon such refusal the land be discharge because  upon the tender the demise be void and if it be on a feoff the condition be  perform and the feoff may reenter but the money lend do yet remain a debt or  duty because it be a debt by the original lend of the money whether it have be  so secure or not and though the security fail accord to the word of the  agreement yet there be the same natural justice that the money shall continue    light   blow
but where a a master of a ship of which the defendant be partowner equity case  abridge er p buy several good of the plaintiff as beef biscuit sail cordage  the master fail and a bill be exhibit to compel the defendant the partowner to  pay who insist that a only be liable and beside that he have money from the  owner to pay the plaintiff and the court hold that a be but a servant to the  owner and where a servant buy the master be liable and if the owner pay their  servant yet if he pay not the creditor they must stand liable and therefore  decree the owner to pay the plaintiff their debt in proportion to their  respective share and interest in the ship hill spear and degrave vern SC ante
but where a action be bring against a administrator who plead plene to manage  and the trial be bring down by proviso and at the trial the defendant be put  to prove a sum of pound pay before the plaintiff original which not be provide  to do a verdict be against he yet after find the note whereby his witness be  enable to swear that chapter on a bill bring in chancery a new trial be grant  hill car Hennell and Kelland
but where a administrator possess himself of the intestate good and devise  legacy and die and his executor without compulsion and pen a suit in right of  the intestate to recover the good pay the legacy the court will not relieve he  because the payment be voluntary and with notice that the right to the  intestate good be controvert car Hodges and Waddington Chan can
but where a bill be exhibition to prove a will and to perpetuate the testimony  of the witness the defendant plead himself a purchaser without notice of any  such will and insist that unless there have be a verdict in affirmance of such  will nothing hinder the plaintiff but that if he have a Title he may recover  at law the plaintiff ought not to be admit to examine the witness thereby to  hang a cloud over a purchaser estate and upon debate the court allow the plea  hill Bechinall and Arnold vern
but where a bind be enter into before the war condition to pay pound per Ann  for twelve year out of the profit of a office which office be take away by the  usurper but be again revive at the king restoration and it be hold that the  obligor shall not be liable for more than the time which the office continue  decree car Laurence and brazier Chan can
but where a bind be give by the husband for payment of a sum of money to his  wife in case she survive he and the husband after become a bankrupt per ld  Chan there can be equity case abridge nothing stop by way of dividend out of  the bankrupt estate to answer this contingent debt or demand when it happen  but where a BottomreeBond be enter into and the ship return safe before the  dividend actual make they be let into a share of that dividend though the bind  be contingent at first because the contingency be then at a end mich ex part  Chawell versus Cassanet will Rep SC say vide ex part groom atk cit cook  bankrupt law d Edward p
but where a copyholder in fee make a conditional surrender for secure a sum of  money at the end of six month the money not be pay and the mortgagee Willing  to continue his money they desire the Lord that the old surrender may be take  up and a new one make for six month long but the Lord insist on a arbitrary  fine of two year value and thatthe mortgagee shall come in and be admit and  the court be of opinion that equity can not relieve against the fine far than  to permit the plaintiff if he think fit to try the question at law whether the  Lord be by custom of the manor bind to renew the surrender or to accept the  second surrender the matter be end by compromise and a fine of pay to the Lord  the estate be pound per Ann mich Tredway and Fotherley vern equity case  abridge if a infant copyholder be admit and the Lord commit the custody of he  to his mother and the infant tenant commit a forfeiture by cut down tree which  be present and find a forfeiture the Lord enter during the infant nonage and  the land be hold by he and his heir forty year yet the copyholder shall have  relief Carys Rep
but where a defendant plead himself a purchaser for valuable consideration and  deny by way of answer that he have notice of the plaintiff Title at the time  of his purchase or contract the plea be overrule for a evasive denial be not  sufficient and here the word purchase may be understand when the contract for  the purchase be make and it may be he have no notice then and may have notice  after before or at seal the conveyance mich car more and Mayhow Chan can SC  ante Eq can Abr Freem
but where a devise to his sister pound upon condition that she at or before  her death shall give to her child pound thereof and the Sisterdied in the  lifetime of the testator it be hold that the whole pound be lapse for it be a  devise of money the absolute property vest in the first legatee mich Birkhead  and coward vern rule on demurrer Freem Birkett and coward S c say that the  devise be thus I give to my sister h pound upon condition that she give  security to leave pound apiece to her two child and pound apiece to a and b h  die before the testator and per cur the legacy be clear lose for it be to vest  in h first and she be to secure the like same to the child
but where a have a inn in Newcastle descend to he which be let at pound per  Ann but subject to a small mortgage and a be very poor be inveigle to sell it  for pound and afterward bring a bill to be relieve it be dismiss ld Chan  declare that though the bargain be not a fair one yet as it be not attend with  strong badge of fraud there can be no relief against it mich wood and Fenwick  Prec in Chan SC accord SC but not r p post if a bind be enter into by force  and terror but so as not to make it duress the court may relieve against it at  least not suffer it to be carry into execution in equity vide Att gentleman v  Sothon vern per cur a man possess of a lease for three life of a rectory  devise the rectory by his last will but that be void it come to his three  daughter as coheir and special occupant there be a suit in chancery the  husband of one of the daughter fear to be in law and be make to believe that  he shall be force to pay the cost release the arrear that shall be come to he  for his share of the rectory to the other sister who be to bear the charge of  the suit and his equity case abridge er p
but where a have mortgage his land and also confess a judgement and he  afterward on a marriage treaty settle the land thus encumber to the use of  himself for life remainder to trustee to support contingent remainder  remainder to his wife for life remainder to his first and other son in tail  remainder to his own right heir and have no issue article to sell the land to  I S who bring a bill for a specific performance of the agreement and suggest  that the trustee refuse to join and that the mortgagee threaten to enter it be  decree that the trustee shall join and be indemnified the estate be of a  equity of redemption only and there be no issue though the husband and wife be  marry six year and the wife on her examination in court consent free thereunto  mich Platt and spring vern but note those Settlements can rare be break  through but by a Act of parliament
but where a jointress who have a covenant that her jointure shall be of such a  yearly value which fall short though her estate be not without impeachment of  waste yet the court will not prohibit her commit waste so faras to make up the  defect of her jointure mich Carew and Carew SC ante Eq can Abr but if a action  of waste be bring against her if chancery will enjoin the action Q
but where a man devise his library of book to a except ten book such as his  wife shall choose as play romance sermon but not lawbook and make her  executrix it be hold by Lord keeper that she shall not by this devise be  exclude from the benefit of the surplus of the personal estate Trin Griffith  and Roger decree Prec in Chan S c so where one not of kin but a stranger be  make executor and have considerable legacy give he although it be decree by  sir Peter king in the mayor court in favour of the testator two brother that  the surplus shall be distribute equity case abridge er p
but where a man devise the rend and profit of certain land to t b the wife of  W b during her natural life to be pay by his executor into her own hand  without the intermeddle of her husband and after her decease he devise they to  other and it be hold by Rokeby and Eyre justice that the land themselves  belong to the wife against holt Ch just who hold strong that the executor be  only trustee for the wife Trin W m south and Allen in b r salk comb and Mod  ibidem SC adjudge by two I against the opinion of holt Ch I
but where a man devise to his wife his house for the remainder of the term he  have therein with all which shall be in it at his death Lord Hardwicke hold  that cash and bank note will pass by these word but that it will be otherwise  of bind and other security Popham v Aylesbury Ambl
but where a mortgage be make to a in the year to indemnify he against debt for  which he be engage for the mortgagor and in the year he enter into the  mortgage premise and have possession and afterward convey away several part of  the mortgage premise to several person and several sale and marriagesettlement  have be make of they and in the year a bill be bring to redeem but all the  assignee be not party and a decree to a account and a report make and  exception take to that report and so it rest for about eighteen year and then  another bill be bring and another decree to redeem but no prosecution upon it  from the year till and then the plaintiff have purchase the equity of  redemption of those land inter alian from the heir of the mortgagor bring his  bill to redeem the objection against it be the length of time the many  derivative title that have be make and when no suit be depend and the  difficulty of take the account to which it be answer that there have be fresh  pursuit and that the difficulty of the account have be occasion by the  mortgagee themselves and that there be infant in the case my Lord keep hold  there ought to be no redemption and that length of time excuse the mortgagee  from take the estate for his own and use it accord and none that have come in  under he have do amiss and though there be infant in the case yet the time  have begin upon the ancestor it shall run even upon infant as it be at law in  the case of a fine and there be one great objection to a redemption in this  case that it do not appear that the plaintiff pay any thing for this equity of  redemption only have it throw into his bargain hill saint John and turner vern  SC SC but not S p ante Eq can Abr
but where a obtain judgement against b and bring a bill against c for a  discovery of b s good which c have get into his hand and the defendant  demurrer because the plaintiff have not allege he have take out execution  against b the demurrer be allow Paso angel and draper vern
but where a person have swear in his answer to avoid a sequestration that he  be satisfy a debt owe to he in a bill now bring by he for the say debt the  master of the roll will not suffer that answer to be read against he mich  Jones and Lenthall Chan can
but where a son in consideration of pound which he be to have as a marriage  portion with b his intend wife covenant that his father will settle pound per  Ann on her as a jointure and the father settle it accord and the son give a  bind to leave his wife pound if she survive he the son die and the father  pretend the wife ought not to have any benefit of this bind for that it be in  fraud of the marriageagreement and cite the case of sir Nicholas butler and  sir Henry chancy where on the marriage of sir Henry son with sir Richard  daughter it be agree that the young couple shall have so much for present  maintenance the son private agree with his father to release part of it and  that it be set aside though there the son as be say give nothing but his own  and he may dispose of his present maintenance as he think fit so here the son  give nothing but his own money but per cur the case be not alike there the  father be part to the article and deceive by the underhand agreement contrary  to the article but here the son be only party equity case abridge to the  article d be to have all the portion and may give it as he please and decree  that there shall be no relief mich Gifford and Gifford
but where a widow before her marriage with a second husband assign over the  great part of her estate to trustee in trust for child by her former husband  though it be insist that this be without the privity of the husband and do  with a design to cheat he yet the court think that a widow may thus provide  for her child before she put herself under the power of a husband and it be  prove that pound be thus settle and that the husband have suppress the deed he  be decree to pay the whole money without direct any account mich hunt and  matthews vern a woman file a bill whereby she set forth that be entitle to a  estate for life in diverse land c and be about to marry one grey she with his  consent and for equity case abridge er p
but where a widow bring her bill to be relieve against a term for year assign  in trust to attend the inheritance and which have be set up by the heir at law  only in bar of her Title the master of the roll decree for the widow and that  the term shall not stand in her way a though it be object that it be the same  with the purchaser who have notice mich Dudley and Dudley S p decree Paso  Higford and Higford b Prec in Chan S c a that tenant by courtesy shall have  the aid of equity in remove a trust salk vern b decree by Lord Harcourt easter  and not in per Jekyll master of the roll vide will Rep
but where a widow who be guardian to her son receive the rend and profit of  his estate and pay off debt by specialty but take assignment of the bind the  son die in his minority she bring her bill against the defendant the heir for  a discovery of asset by dissent to satisfy the money due by bind she claim the  profit as administratrix to her son and it be hold by the court that the  guardian be not compellable to apply the profit of the estate of the infant  heir to pay off the bonddebt hill water and ebrall vern
but where I S enter into a BottomryBond whereby he bind himself in  consideration of pound as well to perform the voyage within six month as at  the six month end to pay the pound and pound premium in case the vessel arrive  safe and be not lose in the voyage and it fall out that I S never go the  voyage whereby his bind become forfeit and he prefer a bill to be relieve and  in regard the ship lie all along in the port of London and so the defendant  run no hazard of lose his principal the Lord keeper think fit to decree that  the defendant shall lose the premium of pound and be content with his ordinary  interest mich Deguilder and Depeister vern
but where I S make her will in the follow word videlicet I ordain and  constitute h n to be my executor of this my last will and I do give all my  estate real and personal to dispose of for the payment of all my just debt and  for the perform of all such legacy as I have herein or by the codicil annex  bequeathe unto my executor abovenamed and give several legacy in money and  among other pound to her uncle who be heir at law and by a codicil give the  sister of h n her executor pound but give he nothing it be hold by my Lord  keeper and four judge that there be no result trust for the benefit of the  heir and that h n have a fee for otherwise he will reap no benefit by the  devise hill car north and Crompton Chan can
but where land be devise to a and his wife and after their decease to their  child they have then a son and a daughter it be adjudge that a and his wife  have but a estate for life for no great estate have pass at commonlaw and the  intent of the devisor must plain appear or they will never admit of a  construction different from what they will allow in conveyance execute in the  lifetime of the party and for that reason when the devise be to b and his  child or issue b have issue at the time of the devise it must take effect  accord to the rule of the commonlaw and b can have but a estate for life joint  with his child but if a have devise his land to b and his child or issue and b  have he take a e none at the time of the devise then stateTail for it be plain  by the intent of the devisor that the child shall have the land and they can  take as immediate devisees for they be not in be nor by way of remainder for  the devise be immediate to b and his child and the shall be take as word of  limitation way as child of his body wild case   b if land be devise to one  without more word this passes but a estate for life so if the devise have go  further to he and his assign these word of themselves have not enlarge the  estate   light b but though a express estate for life be give to the ancestor  with a limitation to the heir or heir of his body or his issue yet regular the  ancestor take a estate tail accord to the rule lie down in shelly case    videlicet that where the ancestor take a estate of freehold a limitation to  his right heir or heir of his body be word of limitation and not of purchase  but the exception to this general rule will best appear by the case themselves
but where land be devise to be sell for payment of portion to young child and  one of the child die after the portion become Payable though before the land  sell yet his administrator shall have it be a interest vest mich Bartholomew  and Meredith l vern vide cave v cave vern a where a portion to be pay pursuant  to a marriagesettlement be hold a interest vest be make to carry interest  though the party die before it become Payable a this case be entire mistake by  the reporter vide atk
but where land be devise to trustee and their heir in trust to pay several  legacy and annuity and to pay the surplus of the rend and profit to a marry  woman during her life for her separate use or as she shall direct and after  her death the trustee to stand seize to the use of the heir of her body with  remainder over and the question be whether this devise to pay the surplus of  the rend and profit to the wife be such a use or trust as be execute by the h  for if it be then it be urge that she be tenant for life the limitation after  to the heir of her body be couple with it give her a estatetail accord to  Shelleys case   but if it do not then the old son be to take as a purchaser  and it be hold by the court that she have only a trust for life and consequent  the heir of her body must take by purchase and the rather in this case because  it be limit to the heir of her body several and successive as they shall be in  seniority of age and priority of birth and the heir of their respective body  issue and a difference be take between this case and that of Broughton and  Langley salk for there it be to permit a to receive the rend and profit for  life but here it be a trust in the trustee to pay over the rend and profit to  such and such person and therefore the estate must remain in they to answer  these trust otherwise she must be the trustee contrary to equity case abridge  the express word of the will mich Jones and the Lord say and seal decree and  affirm in the house of lord SC bro p c equity case abridge er p d what Act OF  the trustee shall defeat the trust or be a breach OF the trust in he
but where on a treaty of marriage between the defendant and the plaintiff  Joanna the defendant enter into a bind to the plaintiff Joseph father of the  plaintiff Joanna with condition to surrender certain copyhold land to the use  of himself for life remainder equity case abridge to the plaintiff Joanna for  life remainder to the heir of their two body to be beget with remainder to the  heir of the husband the marriage take effect and a bill be bring against the  husband to compel a surrender pursuant to the intent of this bind and the  husband make default at the hear be decree to surrender to the use of himself  for life remainder to the use of his will for life remainder to the use of  their first and other son in tail general successive with a remainder to the  daughter of their two body to be beget in tail general and that in the mean  time till such surrender be make the court declare that the copyhold land  shall be hold and enjoy accord to these use pasch Nandick and Wilkes pale  yellow Eq Rep SC under the name of Nandick and Wilkes in as many word note  this decree be on a bind where though the penalty seem to have be the only  sanction intend for secure the performance of the condition yet a specific  execution be decree and in such a manner too as effectual to secure the issue  from be defeat by make they purchaser pale yellow
but where one de advice a copyhold estate to his grandson and my Lord summer  decree the will good and that equity ought to supply a surrender in such case  as well as in case of a son yet on appeal the house of lord reverse the decree  and hold that equity ought not to supply such defect in disfavour of the heir  at law unless it be in favour of a son or daughter nor then neither if it be  to disinherit the old son kettle and Townshend salk
but where one devise his land to I S his kinsman pay within a limit time a  thousand pound apiece to his two daughter who wire his heir at law and I S  make default and the daughter recover in ejectment yet I S be relieve on  payment of principal interest and cost though it be insist that this be to the  disinherison of the heir and in favour of a voluntary devisee mich  Barnardiston and fane vern Lord Salisbury case er a man devise to each of his  daughter pound Payable at the age of twentyfive year but if they or either of  they marry before the age of sixteen or if the marriage be without the consent  of their mother and trustee then they shall lose pound of the portion which  shall go to his other child one of they marry before the age of sixteen and  though it be with the consent of all the party yet ld king hold that both the  term of the condition ought to have be observe Lord Salisbury case equity case  abridge vent but vide vern S g report whore it be say that the father treat  with the Lord Salisbury about the marriage though he die before it be have and  there the decree be quite contrary and with this last resolution agree skin  Rep S c a devise his land to trustee for three year and if within the three  year there happen a marriage between g who be a distant relation and of the  same blood and W his niece and heir at law then to W for life remainder to her  first son c in tail male by g to be beget but if the marriage shall not take  effect within the three year or if the marriage shall be before the year of  consent and not ratify when of competent age then to f in tail who be likewise  a remote relation of the testator but not of the same blood the marriage  between g and W do not take effect within the three year though several  proposal equity case abridge er p
but where one have issue three son a b and devise to his son a after the death  of his Wifejo he and the heir of his body lawful beget in feesimple and if he  die in the life of my wife that then my son c shall be his heir and die a have  issue and die in the life of the wife and it be adjudge that the issue shall  have the land after the death of the wife and not c for it be in effect a  devise to the wife for life remainder to a in tail remainder to c in fee upon  the contingency of a s die in the life of the wife and do not abridge the  estatetail express give a by his die in the life of the wife Spalding and  Spalding cro car from this case it may be observe that equity will construe a  will against the express word in order to make it take effect accord to the  intention of the testator mill Rep SC cite by Macclesfield g mich in the case  of Newland and shepherd will Rep SC cite by Parker c and by l c I hale vent
but where sir b W recite himself to be seize subject to encumbrance of a  estate which he have mortgage devise another estate for a term of twentyone  year in aid of his personal estate to pay bind and book debt and by a  subsequent clause to pay his debt ld Thurlow decree that the personal estate  and the term shall exonerate the mortgage estate Tweedale v Coventry I bro  Chan can b the order and manner in which debt shall be pay or what precedence  one kind OF debt shall have over another in equity
but where the defendant demurrer because the plaintiff bill be bring against  several defendant for several distinct matter yet the demurrer be overrule  because the plaintiff by his bill have charge the defendant with combination  which the defendant have not deny by answer mich Powell and arderne vern
but where the defendant have destroy the subject of the suit and abscond  unless he find security for cost plaintiff shall be permit to dismiss his bill  without cost Knox v brown bro Chan can
but where the defendant lend the plaintiff pound on a BottomryBond and  afterward insure on the same ship but the insurance be large as to the voyage  there be liberty to go to other port and place than what be contain in the  condition of the BottomryBond the ship be lose the defendant recover the money  on the policy of insurance and also put the BottomryBond in suit the ship  though lose have deviate from the voyage mention in the bind the plaintiff  bring his bill pretend the defendant ought not to have a double satisfaction  to recover both on the insurance and also on the bind he have insure only in  respect of the money he have lend on the bottomry and have no other interest  in the ship or cargo and therefore the plaintiff will have have the benefit of  the insurance pay the premium but the court hold that the defendant have pay  the premium be entitle to the benefit of the policy and run the risk whether  the ship be lose or not and the insurer may as well pretend to have aid of the  bottomry bind and to discount the money recover thereon equity case abridge as  the plaintiff to have the money recover on the policy to ease the BottomryBond  mich Harman and Vanhatton vern
but where the father settle land on his son in tail and take a bind from he  that he shall not dock the entail on a bill to be relieve against the bind it  be decree to be good for if the son will not have give the bind the father may  have only make he tenant for life Trin freeman and freeman vern
but where the plaintiff be a purchaser come into equity for write and a  partition of land and the defendant insist there be a entail and the plaintiff  purchase not good the court on the first hear give the plaintiff a year time  to try his Title a ejectment be bring and a Copy of the deed of entail be  produce but the original lose and not prove to be execute verdict against the  entail the Cause be set down on the equity reserve the defendant insist he  ought not to be bind by one trial in a matter of right of inheritance but the  Courtrefused he any relief be only a decree for a partition but the reporter  add a quaere yet Trin bliman and brown vern
butcher against cooper visn in assumpsit after imparlance it be say that if  any such contract be it be by the defendant and another yet live joint which  per curian be but the general issue and in abatement and a to answer ouster be  award there be in the same Keble declaration a accuse computasset pro to visit  containing ten each allow to grow long due upon account not say what but per  curian it be well enough and he need not say what particular but the plaintiff  may sever damage and nil to take in hand per billam as to this part
butcher against vale condition Siderf pl in action sur case on promise make to  the bailiff on delivery of their sheep impound to a pear at the next court and  prove that they who own the cattle have right of common Keble and the  defendant plead that they appear and be ready to make it appear before coward  the steward at the next court and be refuse it to which the plaintiff demurrer  because there be no mention of any action bring by the defendant in the court  nor have he in this plea aver that they have right of common whereby it may be  try now but per curian this be needless because the condition be here to prove  in a special manner videlicet before the steward and by Moreton this be  resolve in the case of Britton against Prittiman ante on condition to pay on  proof before a master of chancery but because the steward be a stranger to the  contract the defendant bath undertake that the steward shall accept which the  court agree where the three person be mention but the steward by Keeling Ch  just be concern as well as if it have be to prove before the lord against who  the trespass be commit which Windham deny but the condition be only to appear  and prove at the next court in which case the suitor be judge and they be  stranger therefore the defendant do undertake Adjornatur
butcher versus andrews assumpsit in consideration the plaintiff will lend the  defendant S son l the defendant promise d to pay it be only a collateral  promise c assumpsit the plaintiff declare that the defendant in consideration  the plaintiff will lend his son l promise to pay it upon non assumpsit plead  and verdict pro quer it be move in arrest of judgement that the promise of the  father want a sufficient consideration and this difference be take by holt Ch  I where the promise of the father be in consideration that the plaintiff will  lend money c and where it be in consideration that he will pay money to his  son in the former case a indebitatus assumpsit lie not against the father for  it be a collateral promise and ought to be in write accord to the stat of  fraud but in the other case payment to the son upon the request of the father  be in law a payment to the father who be the only debtor and therefore shall  be liable to the action
butcher versus andrews salk the plead salk S C where a action be bring for  more than the defendant promise to pay it be not good in assumpsit the case be  the father be bind by his promise to pay the plaintiff so much money as he  shall lend the son and for such good as he the plaintiff shall let the son  have so as the money lend and the good sell and deliver to he the son do not  exceed the action be bring for money lend and likewise for be the value of the  good sell and deliver and likewise for so much money mutually that fit to the  son at the father request upon non assumpsit plead the plaintiff have a  verdict and damage but upon a motion in arrest of judgement this verdict be  set aside for it be plain the defendant will not be indebt for more than  because he engage for no more and if the jury have give more it have be nought  it be true they give but damage but yet that will not help the declaration  which be for money lend and for the value of the good deliver and it do not  appear to the court but that the defendant have pay already and this now claim  be over and above
butcher versus andrews will B R Carth assumpsit in consideration that at his  request he will lend the defendant son any sum c not exceed plaintiff aver  that he lend a great sum roll Abr vent Indebitatus will not lie against b for  money lend to a at b s request because the promise be collateral only raym  count vent send vent accord Farsl sand lev post cro James comb S C salk holt  Danv Abr pt assumpsit for that the defendant in consideration that the  plaintiff at his request Salkeld er p will lend the defendant son any sum of  money and let he have any good so as the money lend and good sell exceed not  promise to pay he and aver that he lend he in money and sell he good upon  credit to the value of and declare also that the defendant be indebt to he for  so much money mutually at accommodate to the son at the defendant request c  upon non assumpsit verdict pro quer and give in damage upon motion in arrest  of judgement it be allow that the defendant can not be indebt for more than  for he engage for no more so that if the jury have give more it have be nought  here the jury have give less than this be urge to have help the declaration  say non allocatur for first non constat to the court but the defendant have  pay already and that this be now claim over and above dly that the declaration  be nought for the money be lend to I S the defendant can be oblige as for a  debt and liable to a indebitatus but to a special assumpsit as be but  collateral bind by his promise for the same money can be lend to two otherwise  have the money be only deliver to the son at the father request or only have  and receive by the son at the father request for then the loan have be to the  father quod notam a a r send for will vide will Bl Rep
butcher versus cowper keb in a indebitat assumpsit the defendant plead in  abatement that the promise be for carry the good of the defendant to a certain  place and if there be any such contract it be make with the plaintiff and a  stranger upon which it be demurrer Ventris because to plead if there be any  such contract be not good and more like a affidavit to change a venue than  plead and he ought to have aver that the stranger be alive beside the  defendant have take a imparlance and therefore can not plead a abatement  wherefore it be adjudge for the plaintiff Ventris er p
butcher versus porter hill W m B R Carth S C show ante vent where the  defendant plead property be need not make a suggestion pro rest to have Mod  case cro roll Rep lill Ent Mod case replevin the defendant plead in abatement  property in a stranger upon demurrer the court resolve these two point saint  that the defendant may plead property in a stranger either in bar or abatement  dly that where a collateral matter be plead in abatement the defendant shall  not have a return without make a avowry but where the plea in abatement be to  the point of the action as property be the defendant shall have a return  without avowry for whether the property be in the defendant or a stranger the  defendant ought to have a return because he have the possession which be  illegal take from he by the replevin when the plaintiff have no right a a  though this case appear to be establish law it do not seem find on very  accurate reason for the plaintiff be in possession of the good at the time of  the caption by the defendant may be consider as have a right against all  person but the actual owner and it have not much semblance of justice that a  shall seize upon good which be in the possession of b and justify that seizure  by a title in any perfect stranger it will if the precede observation be just  be a more correct proposition that the good be illegal take from the plaintiff  by the distress than that they be illegal take from the defendant by the  replevin
butler against archer if two joyntenants be of land hold by herriot service  and one die the other shall not pay herriot service for there be no change of  the tenant but the survivor continue tenant of the whole land but if a man  seize of land in fee make a feoff to the use of himself and his wife and the  heir of their two body beget the remainder to the right heir of the husband  and the husband die a herriot shall be pa id for the ancient use of the  reversion be never out of the husband michaelm elizab
butler against bernard February a term alien by a administrator shall oh to  his executor and not to the administrator de good non a administrator make  take a mortgage of the intestate term and make a his executor and die b take  out letter of Administration de good non to the first intestate and claim the  residuary interest and trust of the term and pray that he may have the benefit  of redemption but the court decree the benefit of redemption to a the executor  of the first administrator who have alien the whole estate in law of the term  and be not possess in auter law nor of any part of the interest thereof but in  his own right and so it shall go to his executor and not to b the  administrator de good non note either this case be not true state or the  equity thereof be not apparent case in chancery er p for it seem hard to  conceive how a administrator can be possess otherwise than in auter law except  as a purchaser or otherwise vest the property in himself as a be indebt to b  as administrator to c on some matter of account between a and c and the  account be settle between a and b a give b a note for pound be the balance and  then b die intestate this pound shall go to the administrator of b and not to  the administrator de good non of c the first intestate for here the account  together and give of the note make a alteration of the property of the debt  vern quaere if it do so in the case above case in chancery de term S mich year  king car h in cancellar the Lord keeper finch
butler against butler appeal from saint Asaph suit by the husband against the  wife for a divorce for adultery a allegation of faculty be admit but before  the husband answer be give in or any witness examine thereon the judge without  any proof of the husband estate settle a alimony of twenty shilling a week on  the wife the husband appeal therefrom per curian I pronounce for the grievance  and retain the cause
butler against DAVYES lieu error of a judgement in Pallas court in action sur  case on consideration of d pay and livre S Payable in future the defendant  promise to work so many day in make brick within a mile of Shoreditch Crofts  assign it do not appear this place be infra jurisdict which be error the  breach be assign in not work and judgement reverse
butler against dolmen call herself butler arch court Trinity term June that  joint letter of request from the chancellor of London and the commissar of  Buckinghamshire accept quatenus see further pp and post Mr butler son of John  butler of Warminghurst park in Sussex Esq a minor age about eighteen be marry  as suggest to mrs dolmen in part beyond the sea the father be desirous to  annul the marriage and it be doubtful whether she be to be deem a resident of  the commissaryship of buck in the diocese of Lincoln where she live or of the  diocese of London she be actual at this time a prisoner in the fleet by a  commitment of the Lord chancellor for marry a ware of that court Mr butler  obtain joint letter of request from dr Simpson chancellor of London and dr  bettesworth commissary of buck pray the court of arch to take cognizance of  the cause and to cite her to answer in a cause of jactitation of marriage to  John butler the father and natural guardian of the minor the cause be new in  two point first as to the letter of request be grant joint by two judge and  second as Mr butler sue in his own right as father and guardian by nature and  not as guardian elect by the minor and assign lee by the court I will not  decree a citation but in open court where I take notice of the novelty in this  case and accept the letter of request quatenus only which I direct to be take  down in act and decree a citation as play but declare I shall be ready to hear  any objection the defendant when she appear will make to the citation and the  jurisdiction of the court as find on these joint letter of request
butler against hedge trespass for take good I prilis with a continuando till I  June SC side error of a judgement in trespass in the common plea where the  plaintiff lie the trespass the first of April of the take of ten load of wheat  ten load of barley ten load of oat with a continuando of the say trespass from  the say first of April to the first day of June and the error be assign in  this that the trespass be lie that be take they the first of April and so all  at one day the continuando be ill for what be do the first of April can be do  at another day afterward but he ought to have declare of so many load take and  carry at one day and so many at another c and diverse authority be cite to  this purpose and among other the case of Tnitchcote and Elliot in this court  mich car in trespass for layinglogs wood in his land the first of April  conlinuando till the first of may and for this judgement be arrest but  notwithstanding levinz upon view of the book h the judgement be affirm and it  be say that even in the case of Whitchcote judgement be afterward give for the  plaintiff but it be agree that for the do of a single act which be to be do  all at one time as kill a horse c there the continuando be ill but of diverse  thing which may be do at diverse time as here although that the trespass be at  first lie to be do on the first day the continuando shall make a distribution  thereof that part be do at one day and part at another within the time declare  of and the judgement be affirm
butler against Hodges trespass Siderf pl Pargiter on the case of Letchford and  Eliot pray judgement pro defendant in trespass for break his close and carry  away diverse good continuando transgr predict quoad removal to which the  defendant demurrer and per curian Keble er p be thing transitory it be ill  contra if it have be continuando quoad depasturationem or any thing permanent  Adjornatur
butler against johnson defendant have obtain a judge order for time to plead  plead issuably and take notice of trial within term or if he shall not plead  take the like notice of execute writ of inquiry the time for plead expire  February when defendant not plead plaintiff sign judgement and February give  notice to execute inquiry on the that defendant move to set aside the inquiry  for insufficiency of notice urge that plaintiff ought to give as much notice  as he can per cur plaintiff may have give notice on the that short notice  shall be at least as much as be sufficient to countermand a notice videlicet  two day let the inquiry be set aside without cost Skinner for plaintiff wright  for defendant barn er p
butler against lydiat slander in action upon the case for word speak at  several day the defendant plead that the word be not speak within two year  before the action to which Jones demurrer and show for cause special that it  ought to be several issue as in debt for nil debet to modus form and be not  sufficient without say nec to some degree denarius ind on special demurrer  Raymond contra this be as well as car I Cr English case non assumpsit plead to  several assumpsits say per curian clear this be general issue that go to all  and have it be notguilty within two Keble year its well enough and this plea  non a speaking make no issue till the plaintiff reply quod a speaking to be  infra two year be also well enough per curian and if the plaintiff prove any  of they speak within the time its for he say adjornatur
butler against mayor trial Edward will ill Hetly No trial by proviso  notwithstanding default of the plaintiff can be by nisi prius without give  rule of eight day notice in the office of the secondary which the court agree
butler against MONNINGS a seize of three acre grant a rentcharge out of they  to m and after feoff I S of two acre m covenant with I S and grant that he  will not charge they two acre for the say rend with any distress after and b  the terretenant of the other acre be distreyned bring a replevin and the  question be if the covenant and grant by m be a release of the rend Glanville  that it be a release Anderson on the contrary opinion but by the court if it  be a release the terretenant of the other acre may plead that for by that the  rend be extinguish note that if a man marry the wife of a tradesman during her  widowhood she can use that trade if she have not be a apprentice Noy to it c  but of the trade except in the statute as tanner c lege statute Noy er p note  by the court that process out of the court of request be not sufficient  warranty to imprison any man and Glanville advice heal for his client to bring  false imprisonment heal move this case a convict of felony and discharge by  hisclergy take a wife and they bring a account upon a cause before the  conviction for good of the wife and by the court it be good for those good can  not be forfeit by the conviction vide cook light for false imprisonment bring  after pardon for outlawry assize
butler against pincent Hayward for plaintiff move for a attachment against  Phelps for act as a attorney and plead pen a forejudger and a rule be make to  show cause the day before cause be show Phelps apply to Mr I fortescue aland  and obtain a order without summons to be restore to his privilege without  payment of cost upon enter a common appearance at the party suit by who he be  forejudged and it not appear that Phelps have any notice of this old dormant  forejudger obtain seven year ago the rule be discharge Eyre for Phelps
butler against SANKIE Wednesday January error in error Br Bulst pl in error of  a judgement in Ireland if party appear and no error be assign the court on  motion give a peremptory day to assign error but no to know facias quare  performance now lie to spur on the plaintiff in error be always into the same  county where the original be and can be elsewhere in assumpsit and on default  at the day to nonsuit the plaintiff in error and so send back the record and  so it be do mich car b r between Ratclif and smyth
butler against wing arbitrement in debt on obligation condition to perform a  award upon submission to two of all difference so that if the two do not make  de super premise a award they shall choose another honest man to be umpire and  that they shall stand to his umpirage on demurrer to the award set forth  sander pro defendant urge that this be a insensible or impossible condition  for the arbitrator can stand to it and it can be intend of Keble none else but  by west pro plaintiff they must refer ad neighbor anteceden which be the party  submit and per curian the ita quod refer to all as be resolve in the case of  bean and Newberry I Keble and it can be no otherwise intend but that they  shall refer to he that be to perform and judgement pro plaintiff nisi
butler against yateman ante Siderf pl prohibition powis move against  prohibition that it ought not to be grant here because the bind of the parish  be not in question but only of the will but if it be yet it can not be try by  suggestion without plead for they have conusance of the principal this bondary  be but collateral as f n b contra by holt for the plaintiff these party be not  spiritual but patentee of the king latch Huttons case Yelvert and so the bind  be proper triable at commonlaw it be the main question whether it be within  one tithing within the will or borough   b or in another without it in the  same parish Hub but by powis here only the close out of which be only in  question not the will car Whiscars against full in Robert case   Twisden see  no difference betwixt the bind of tithing and of the parish but it never be  grant upon suggestion of the bind of a will be only incidental and against  common right and therefore though question temporal be triable at commonlaw  which the court contra mallet agree and by Windham shall a sue b for tithe of  a close and Keble er p b say he be not owner of it this shall be try in the  spiritual court the court deny prohibition and the authority of Yelvert
butler all contra coote all Oct car Lord keeper Bridgman executor must not pay  their own legacy first if not enough to pay all for all must be in proportion  the plaintiff as legatee come to have a account of the testator estate the  defendant be executor and the defendant submit to the court whether they may  not pay their legacy in the first place and then there will want asset to pay  the plaintiff order that after debt pay all legacy to be pay in proportion  with damage so far as the estate will extend and not like the case at  commonlaw where the executor pay their own debt and legacy first or he that  first sue his whole legacy before other chancery report er p
butler and HUSLER error on motion against the defendant sheriff of Suffolk for  take a guini in part of S which be S for every one name in the capias on  action tam how there be only one S due the court make he return two guinies to  the plaintiff be double of what he have take on Edward cap and thereupon  discharge he d imprisonment
butler and lord MONTGOMERY how far the court will not give a defendant liberty  to withdraw his plea in a action upon a bill of exchange Mr strange move that  the defendant may have liberty to withdraw a special plea of a usurious  contract and plead the general issue but because this be a issue that be to be  try at the bar this term and if the special plea be withdraw and the general  issue plead a new motion must be make for a trial at bar after issue join upon  this second plea so that this trial must necessary be put off to mich term the  court refuse the motion
butler v Denton a reversion think to be pay at a day and before the day  receive part of the money and before the day the tenant for life die and then  the defendant refuse to make assurance but order to do it the plaintiff  bargain with the defendant to buy of he a reversion of land wherein one  Theodore Chapnes have a estate for his life for to be pay before Hollantide  next which bargain or agreement be set down under the handwriting of the  plaintiff and before the day the plaintiff pay the defendant pound parcel of  the money and after and before the day also the tenant for life die and then  the defendant refuse to perform the bargain and order the defendant answer  shall be refer to doctor Hussey and if he find the bargain confess by the  defendant answer then the court will order the land shall be assure and after  upon dr Hussey certificate of the defendant answer to be so it be order the  Plaintiffshould pay the money and the defendant assure the land accord to the  bargain butler plaintiff Denton defendant year Elizabeth
butler v DODTON lessee not name in the premise decree for he the plaintiff  desire to be relieve for a lease make by the defendant to he for year which  the defendant endeavour to impeach because in the premise of the lease there  be no lessee name but only in the habendum and the cause be refer to the two  Lord chiefjustices and the Lord chief baron they certify their opinion in law  that the lease be good in law notwithstanding the lessee be not name in the  premise of the lease but in the habendum and therefore decree accord that the  plaintiff shall hold the say lease butler plaintiff Dodton defendant year  Elizabeth
butler v Jennings defendant of non safe memory Alexander wood make oath that  the defendant have not at this present nor almost these two year pass have  have his perfect sense by reason where of he be not able to answer the bill  butler plaintiff Jennings defendant year Elizabeth
butler v with attachment against he that make a rescue upon Commission of  rebellion diverse commissioner in a Commission of rebellion have return upon  the same that one Ellis make a rescue upon the execution thereof therefore a  attachment be award against the say Ellis butler all plaintiff isaac Wid  defendant year Elizabeth
butler versus coot year car the plaintiff be legatee exhibit their bill  against the defendant who be executor to have a account of the testator estate  and that their legacy may be pay the defendant submit to the judgement of the  court whether they may not retain their own legacy in the first place and if  so there will not be sufficient asset to pay the plaintiff S legacy but it be  decree that after debt be discharge all legacy shall be pay in proportion so  far as the estate will extend and not like the case at commonlaw where  executor may retain their own legacy or pay he who first get judgement
butler versus crips Trin Ann B R bill Payable to I or order Mod S C by name of  buller for crips holt Mod per holt c j pay to I or my order so much be a bill  of exchange if accept and this be the only way to make a bill of exchange  without the intervention of a three person
butler versus crips Trin Ann salk SC Mod can by name of buller v crips per  holt CJ pay to I or my order so much be a bill of exchange if accept and this  be the only way to make a bill of exchange without the intervention of a three  person
butler versus Hammond hill Ann Mr Raymond move to set aside a plea puis  darrein continuance doctor butler be commissary and judge of the court in  Sudbury in Suffolk upon administration grant of the good of a the defendant  Hammond become bind in the bind accord to the statute that c who be the  administrator shall bring in a full inventory and there be a distribution  decree by that court to several of the intestate relation the administrator  will not comply with it and therefore be excommunicate and the bind be send to  doctor Commons in order to be put in suit for the benefit of the intestate  relation the defendant crave oyer of the bind and plead that there be a  account give in and issue be join that there be no such account and now he  come holt KB and offer a plea of a release which I hope this court will not  oblige we to accept if it shall be in the commissary power to release this  bind then the statute will be of no force a common vouchee can release error  in a common recovery Powell I the doctor have not do well in give this release  and it be a breach of trust queen quid ind go for sale
butler versus MALISSY note to pay joint or several how to be declare upon case  upon a promissory note and the declaration set forth that the defendant and  another do jointly well separately promise to pay demurrer ind and for the  defendant it be insist that the action shall have be bring against both et per  Parker c I the plaintiff may have bring it against either or both for he have  his election if the action have be against both he shall have declare as he  now do but that be not right in the action against one only for he shall have  declare general that this defendant by his note promise to pay and a several  note by two will have be good evidence as where there be several obligors and  one only be sue no mention be make in the declaration of the other obligors  suppose the note have be to pay l or l the plaintiff be entitle to either but  uncertain which till he have make his election for be that speak in the  disjunctive say true if either member of the disjunctive be verify whereas he  that speak in the affirmative affirm both part to be true res send for in  Ovington v neal after verdict post ld raym say vide Rees v abbot Cowp both  case overrule the plaintiff pray leave to discontinue on payment of cost which  be grant and at another day move that he may change his rule to one to amend  on payment of cost but this last motion be deny
butler versus palmer Trin will B R election to be make by the body at large  may be restrain to a select number   b a Inst jenk Rep case B R S c in a  action for a false return of a mandamus it appear that king Edward grant to  the burgess of Dartmouth a charter to elect a mayor de he himself annual and  by constitution make in the reign of Q Elizabeth and king James the first and  long usage in pursuance thereof the method be for the common council to  propose two person for the freeman to choose out one of they that thus it  continue till and then a bylaw be make for repeal all former bylaws and ordain  that for the future election shall be make by the freeman at large and accord  the two succeed election be make in the year the old charter be surrender  Salkeld but that surrender be never enrol and a new charter grant under which  new charter the town make a bylaw repeal the Salkeld er p bylaw make in the  court resolve saint that though by the grant of Edward the election be to be  by the freeman at large yet this may be restrain and regulate by usage and  bylaws to the choice of one out of two only a dly that the bylaw in have well  restore the ancient and primitive constitution and repeal those bylaws that  alter it dly that the surrender of the old charter be void for want of a  enrolment thly as to the new charter and bylaws make under it the court hold  that if those that be member under the old charter happen to be the only  person that act they shall be deem to act by virtue of their ancient and true  right but if commix with other that be only member under the new charter  though the old member be the majority yet they must be take to act by virtue  of the new charter and then what they do be void a vide burr Str burr
butler versus roll Mod case where proceed be stay upon the bail bring in the  principal money and interest and cost into court Mod case proceed on the  bailbond must stay if there be not return of a to take in hand empus the  defendant be sue on a bailbond to which action n he plead and have notice of  trial and then he move to stay proceed on the bind upon bring the principal  interest and cost into court which be grant so as he bring it in such time  that the plaintiff may not be delay of the trial otherwise to proceed Salkeld  it be rule per holt Ch just that the ancient course be that a bailbond can not  be put to suit till a rule be have to amerce the sheriff for not have the body  at the return of the writ and the course now be to stay proceed on the  bailbond if there be no return of a to take in hand corpus
butler versus roll salk on a bailbond the defendant be sue to which action be  plead and have notice of trial and then he move to stay proceed on the bind  upon his bring into court the principal interest and cost which be grant so as  he bring it in such time that the plaintiff may not be delay d of the trial  otherwise to proceed and by holt CJ the ancient course be that a bailbond can  not be put in suit till a rule be make to amerce the sheriff for not have the  body and the practice now be to stay proceed on the bailbond if there be no  return of a to take in hand corpus
butt against foster the plaintiff in a action upon the case the plaintiff  declare that whereas he be a man of good fame carriage and behaviour and free  from all blot or stain yet the defendant with purpose to draw his life in  question and traduce he among his neighbour in presentiam a money penalty c  sin felonae ei to place upon she occasion that arrestari causavi et per  interval two a day in custodian to hold off in person John Pettyman to make  one justice ad peace c duci to take care of nequissim pursue be c the  defendant plead not guilty which be find for the plaintiff and Hitcham move in  arrest of judgement that the action will not lie and of that opinion be Hutton  because that he do not proceed to indictment for there a action of that lie in  the nature of a conspiracy but if a action shall lie here it will be a  mischievous case for by that every man will be deter to question any person  for felony and it be say by Hutton if one say you have break the peace and I  will cause you to be arrest and procure a warrant from a justice of peace by  which he be arrest No action here will lie but Berkley on the other side say  to the contrary and of that opinion be Richardson chief justice that the  action will well lie and by Richardson the defendant ought to be justify that  there be a felony do and that he suspect he oh but be plead not guile hetley  thy and it do not appear by the declaration what be do with the plaintiff  after he be bring to the justice of peace and by that it shall be employ that  he be dismiss upon his examination and here the plaintiff be imprison and  carry before a justice of peace which be a act do as well as in the case where  there be a indictment and a attourney of the court cite one Danvers and webli  case in that very case it be adjudge that the action lie but it be adjourn to  another day
butt against penny disapprove Forbes v Cochrane Dowl Ry b c trover for negro S  c keb Vid lev Vid salk contra see Mod raym lev cro James cro car mark cro  Elizabeth hob Com dig salk raym Mod Com dig Bac ab trover for nearoes and upon  non culp it be find by special verdict that the negro be infidefs and the  subject of a infidel prince and be usual buy and sell in America as  merchandise by the custom of merchant and that the plaintiff buy these and be  in possession of they until the defendant take they and Thompson argue there  can be no property in the person of a man sufficient to maintain trover and  cite   light that no property can be in villain but by compact or conquest but  the court hold that negro be usual buy and sell among merchant as merchandise  and also be infidel there may be a property in they sufficient to maintain  trover and give judgement for the plaintiff nisi causan this term and at the  end of the term upon the prayer of the attorneygeneral to be hear as to this  matter day be give until next term levinz er p
butt and another who tam against heart and another upon the motion of Mr  perrott of counsel for the say defendant pray for the reason mention in the  affidavit of Richard Cracraft the young that the say defendant may have a new  Commission under the seal of this court direct to proper commissioner at new  York for the examination of their witness in this cause returnable on the  first day of next Michaelmas term and that the trial of this cause may be put  off until the sit after the say term on read the affidavit of the say Richard  Cracraft the young and hear the honourable William Murray esquire his majesty  attorneygeneral on the behalf of his majesty and say Thomas butt and Henry  Hastings it be thereupon order by the court as pray Wednesday the d of  November Copgrove who tam c against hold
butt and penny trover special verdict in trover of negro and a half find they  usual buy and sell in India and if this be sufficient property or conversion  be the question and Thomson on Inst for the defendant say here can be no  property in the plaintiff more than in villain but per curian they be by usage  tanquam good and go to administrator until they become Christian and thereby  they be enfranchise and judgement for the plaintiff nisi and it lie of moety  or three part against any stranger albeit riot against the other copartner
butt case more sergeant move at court for a prohibition because where the  custom of the village be that the parishioner have use to elect two  churchwarden and at the end of the ear to discharge one and elect another in  his room and so alternately turn c by the new canon now the parson have the  election of one and the parish of the other and that he that be elect by the  parishioner be discharge by the ordinary at his vistiation and for that he  pray a prohibition allocate as a thing usual and of course for otherwise by  Hubbard the parson may have all the authority of his church and parish
BUTTERFEILD versus BURROUGS Trin Ann B R warranty of a horse to be find want  of a eye be a breach roll Rep bridge f n b king cro James bridge Br guaranty  Fitzherbert deceit skin roll the plaintiff declare that the defendant sell he  a horse such a day and at such a place adtunc ibidem warrantizavit horse  predict to be sound wind and limb whereupon be pay his money and aver the  horse have but one eye c the defendant plead non warrantizavit upon which  there be a verdict for the plaintiff and now in arrest of judgement it be  object saint that the want of a eye be a visible thing whereas the warranty  extend only to secret infirmity but to this it be answer and resolve by the  court that this may be so and must be intend to be so since the jury have find  the defendant do warrant d Obj as the warranty be here set forth it may be at  a time after the sale whereas it ought to be part of the very contract and  therefore it be always allege warrantizando to sell say non allocatur for the  payment be afterward and it be that complete the bargain which be imperfect  without it Salkeld declaration
Butterfield v Butterfield Nov Lord chancellor now deliver his opinion S c Ves  sen I have no great doubt before brown Fearne brown Ves sen and think it too  remote a limitation of a personalty there be nothing to restrain it to heir  live at the death for then it may take effect so be it determine by I in Lord  g Beauclerc v miss dorm atk and in another case and by sir Joseph Jekyl in  Milward v Milward in the only objection be that here be no gift but only a  direction to pay the interest to he for life but that make no difference it be  plain give to the heir of his body and the profit be to he for life it must  necessary vest the whole interest and property to he as in   light a devise of  the profit of land to a for life and afterward the same land to the heir of  his body be a estate tail in possession profit be the same as the land  themselves the decree therefore must be reverse otherwise I shall go far than  any case have go and occasion great inconvenience Reg lib a fol it be now  settle that a limitation of a personal estate in tail vest the whole in the  first taker wms vin Vol daw Pitt and western report in Fearn Prec Chan the  contrary doctrine be former hold and that the first taker have only the use of  the devise for life wms I Eq ab vern
butterfly and dubois day be give to the mayor and alderman of London to show  cause why a mandamus shall not go to the mayor and alderman to swear butterfly  and dubois sheriff the recorder say that the alderman as to this purpose be  but a particular rank of man and that it do not belong to they to swear they  neither do it belong to the mayor alone but that there be a court in London  call the court of the Lord mayor and alderman and that the writ ought to be  direct to the court of the mayor and alderman for that otherwise the mayor and  two alderman may make a return and be within the word of the writ whereas  there can be a court without the mayor and twelve alderman and be remember the  case of rye where a mandamus go to the jurats to swear a mayor part of they  return one cause and part another the court be doubtful how it shall be direct  and take time to consider though Pemberton chief justice be of opinion that it  can not be direct to they as a court it be no judicial matter but only to they  as mayor and alderman yet the custom of London be to swear their sheriff in  the court of mayor and alderman and no where else
button against honey in a English bill for vicaridgetithes in some town in ken  the plaintiff do not set forth in his bill how they become due to he whether  by prescription or endowment as he ought to have do and exception be take to  this at the bear after answer and deposition and the exception overrule  because the defendant do by his answer admit he to be vicar and that the tithe  in question be his due but insist only upon payment and satisfaction quod  notam for it have be often rule Hardres er p contrary it be the ground and  foundation of the plaintiff title but the bill be afterward dismiss upon the  merit with S cost in case of tithe the complainant need not show title either  in law or equity post
button against jowl assumpsit in action sur case on special agreement to pay S  a ounce for hair if he dislike it as a peruke after verdict Barwell move in  arrest of judgement because there be no assumpsit but only a agreement and a  quod cum indebitatus assumpsit to pay I and a general verdict which per wile  be well enough there be but one promise and the former nugatory the court  incline it be ill but adjornatur
BUXENDIN versus sharp pasch will c b S c salk vide Str Cowp Doug the plaintiff  declare that the defendant keep a bull that use to run at man but do not say  sciens or scienter c this be hold nought after a verdict for the action lie  not unless the master know of this quality and we can intend it be prove at  the trial for the plaintiff need not prove more than be in his declaration
BUXENTINE versus sharp pasch will B R salk S C ld raym cite stram S p action  will not lie for keep a mad bull without say scienter the plaintiff declare  that the defendant keep a bull which use to run at man but do not say sciens  or scienter and this be adjudge ill after a verdict because the action will  not lie unless the owner know the quality of his bull and it can be intend  that this be prove at the trial because the plaintiff be not bind to prove  more than be lie in his declaration
buxom ex dismiss pellow versus pellow mich geo h prac ring S c a term notice  where issue have be join above a year Vid bower v street ante p Paul v  Gleedhill post p Reg cur mich sec east Geo two ring cook in this cause the  question be what notice of trial must be give on a issue of above a year stand  it be settle that a term notice must be give and the notice must be deliver  before the essoinday otherwise not good
buxom versus Hoskins mich Ann Mod Cas a writ of error be bring of a judgement  and the defendant S to know facias to assign error be quare performance to  have non debet of a judgement in ejectment for two message when the recovery  be de to make one messuagio only the plaintiff in error plead nul tiel record  and the defendant move to amend by holt CJ this sort of cognizant fac be  always to have execution and the plaintiff in error may plead to it a writ of  error bring and still depend and assign error there be a difference when the  writ be bad and vicious on the face of it and when it be good in the frame of  it but not fit for that particular use and all the case of amendment be of the  first kind and though there will be some colour to amend in this case if the  defendant have appear and plead another plea or have take no advantage of this  ship so as the proceed will have be vicious without amendment here be have  take advantage of it and plead nul tiel record we will not falsify his plea by  a amendment which be good at the time when plead and to amend will be to make  a new writ or alter a good one and fit it to another purpose and to alter the  nature of a writ after it be return and execute ought not to be per cur  wherever a original be amendable there a cognizant fac be so too but this will  not be amend in a original writ of error because it be a good writ and will  well remove the record it describe if any such there be the plaintiff take out  another writ and the court say he may do it without get this quash for if this  writ abate then it be not the same cause
BUXTEN against chapman infant Siderf pl in action sur case for ware sell the  defendant plead nonage at the time of the promise to which the plaintiff reply  that the ware be for necessary hoc petit quod to seek after per native land  prediction defend similiter after verdict Stroud move in arrest of judgement  that here be no issue nor negative as Jennings against lee to which Windham  incline but the other justice conceive this aid by the late statute car cap  the right of the cause be try   Adjornatur and afterward the court hold it  good post
Buxton against Bateman ante in chattel Br church it be a action upon the case  ground on possession Twisden and Windham conceive it well enough contra in a  prohibition then usage to repair must be set forth in the count foster contra
Buxton against Bateman ante in chattel Br church Windham conceive that after  the verdict the not say ad messuagium pertinent be not material contra by  foster and that the reparation ought to be aver be part of the title  Adjornatur Keble er p
Buxton against Bateman Tuesday October in chattel Br see Courton v Frewen lr  Eq chapman v Jones l r ex StilemanGibbard v Wilkinson Keble Q b church Siderf  pl on h Inst Cr Hub Poph in action upon the case for a pue in a church which  the plaintiff claim by prescription Allen move in arrest of judgement that no  ground be lie for the prescription as that plaintiff do repair c and the  difference be where one ground his title or grant of the ordinary or by custom  which after verdict shall be intend good contra of such special prescription  as this which Windham agree if the pue be in the body of the church but  contrary where it be in a isle which may appertain to a house and the  prescription be to have a seat in a certain cellan which per Keble curian be a  isle Inst b and doubt whether any ground be necessary post Adjoruatur a nle  visne action upon the case on rescous be out of the common rule of the court  to alter the venue but it be in the discretion of the court lady Leicester  against Sanford upon consideration of the circumstance to alter it as upon a  action bring against bankrupt may be lie in the county or here whence the  commission be award and the court change it into a indifferent adjoin county  which not appear verdict for the defendant
Buxton against cunney Wednesday Nov rescous on return of a rescue on execution  the court fine the sheriff livre and hold it void but upon indictment of  rescue the court will bring in the rescussors but will do nothing on the  execution but on mean process it be good
Buxton and singleton Thursday February London ex motion brewer for a mandamus  or a precedendo or other remedy for the plaintiff who sue debt in the sheriff  court in London till judgement after which by alleviate Keble complaint it be  remove into the mayor court and the atorneys there refuse all to act but on  complaint to the recorder Howel judge there he assign one Rawlins who since  viner be make Lord mayor he be security for the debt refuse after his fee  receive to act far per curian he ought to be forejudged the court there and  though this court may make atorneys in inferior court yet not in London by  reason of their custom for only four exclusive of all other which be confirm  by parliament nor can there be any procedendo because here be no bail in b r  nor will a mandamus lie for every defendant in they in not give judgement and  they only refer it to the recorder again to see justice do
Buxton versus Bateman derby case lev side keb action upon the case the  plaintiff declare that he be seize of a ancient message and of land within the  parish of S and that he and all those who estate he have in they have time out  of mind use to sit in a seat in such a aisle in the church in the same parish  and that the defendant have disturb he to his damage c the defendant plead not  guilty and find for the plaintiff and Allen move in arrest of judgement  because the plaintiff have not aver that he and all they in who he prescribe  have use to repair the say seat which he ought to have do accord to the case    Inst corven versus Pym cro James Frances and lie ibidem Dawny and do you hob  Boothby versus baily Bulstr may versus Gilbert and the order of seat in the  church be of ecclesiastical conusance the temporal law will not meddle with it  without special reason Twisden justice I have confer with most of the judge in  this case and they be of opinion that the declaration be good enough without  such allegation of repair this be in a action of the case but if it have be in  a prohibition there perhaps it have not be good but when it be as to such  house belong it be parcel of his franktenement and then he do not sit there by  the licence of the ordinary Wyndham and mallet of the same opinion but foster  for the defendant but upon perusal of the record it be not tanquam messuagio  predict pertinent but only that he and all those who estate he have in the say  message have use to sit in the say seat c and upon this Wyndham and the other  judge say that they will advice and upon that it be adjourn
Buxton versus home mich W m show action of debt be bring on a judgement the  defendant plead that he be take in execution and voluntary permit to escape  and the plaintiff consent to it the plaintiff reply that he do not consent c  to which the defendant demurrer and the plaintiff join therein holt c j a  action of debt do lie though perhaps not a to know fac and the court agree  that the sheriff can not take the party defendant again but against the  plaintiff it be no bar it have be hold that if a defendant escape with the  permission of the gaoler the execution against he be entire go and extinguish  and the plaintiff at who suit he be take shall never resort to he that escape  but shall hold himself to the gaoler for his remedy but if he escape of his  own wrong the gaoler may retake he till the plaintiff have make his election  whether he will sue he or the party and in Alanson and butler S case which be  true law and settle it be adjudge that on escape against the will of the  sheriff either the plaintiff or sheriff may retake the defendant on escape  with consent of the gaoler the plaintiff have only remedy to take not the  sheriff and if with the consent of the plaintiff then neither be nor the  sheriff can retake the party escape though the debt be unsatisfy the counsel  who advice the demurrer here know not then of this last case the court give  rule for judgement for the plaintiff
buy against woodman roll covenant in trover and conversion winnington move in  arrest of judgement because the plaintiff say that he be one of the attorney  curiae domini king in the say court to hold plead before the king which by he  be not the office of a attorney but per curian this be applicable to the style  of the court only and not to he judgement pro to express grief Keble er p
buyer against Whitaker and other trin geo ill prac ring barn S c process of  the common plea serve in the county palatine of Lancaster Vid beach v smith  ante p thomson in this cause a motion be make in easter term to stay proceed  on a testatum capias a copy of which have be serve on the defendant in the  county palatine of Lancaster without take cook c p out of a mandate thereon  from the chancellor of the county palatine and a rule to show cause be grant  the matter now come on to be debate and counsel be hear on both side the court  hold that the process be well serve and pursuant to the statute of Geo two cap  and therefore the rule to show cause be discharge
by a agreement previous to a marriage a power be reserve to the woman of  dispose of her property by will make after marriage after the agreement but  before the marriage she make a will this will be not protect by the power and  therefore the marriage be a revocation of it per Lord Thurlow Hodsden v Lloyd  bro Chan can d how far by her act during coverture
by a devise of a house cum appurtenance only the garden and orchard will  equity case abridge er p pass with the house but by a devise of a house with  the land appertain thereto the land usual occupy therewith will pass per  Parker c hill in the case of Blackborn and Edyelly will Rep so
by a devise to child and grandchild none can take but those who be in be at  the time of make of the will for then the will speak unless there be future  word which show the testator intent as if he shall say to all my child or  grandchild which shall be bear or be live at my death agree per counsel cur  east Northey and Burbage Prec in Chan vide Eq can Abr p can
by a marriage settlement a term be create for raise apiece for young child b  that rend c or by mortgage or sale of the term to be pay within year time  after the father be death with interest at pound per cent from his death till  pay there be three daughter and a son and one of the daughter die after the  father but within a year after his death her mother take out Administration  and bring this bill against the trustee and the heir at law to have the pound  raise equity case abridge and pay with interest and per Lord Chan Cowper the  pound apiece be raisable by the trustee present after the father be death if  they have think fit but the child can not have demand it till after the year  it not absolute due upon the commencement of the term because there be a whole  year give for the raise of it and that therefore since one of the daughter be  dead within the year and before such time as she can have demand it in favour  to the heir and for the benefit of his inheritance the case have all go this  way that such portion shall sink and not be raise at all a and decree accord  hill tournay and tournay Prec in Chan a but as to the other child who be also  plaintiff a account be decree to be take of the rend and profit of the term  and their portion to be forthwith raise and pay by sale or mortgage ibidem
by a marriage settlement after the common limitation to the first c son a term  be limit to trustee for three hundred year in trust upon failure of issue male  to raise with all convenient speed pound for daughter portion Payable at  eighteen or marriage which shall first happen after the death of the father or  mother they have issue two daughter only and no son and the father by will  take notice of this provision for his daughter devise to they apiece more to  be pay at the same time as their original portion but in case either of they  die before eighteen then the additional portion of pound apiece to both be to  cease but the estate charge with these portion he devise to I S the daughter  be about sixteen at the death of their father and mother the plaintiff  intermarries with one of the daughter and she be now about the age of twenty  the bill wag bring against I S the devisee c and against the trustee of the  term to have the portion raise and interest from the death of the father and  Lord Chan Harcourt be of opinion that the daughter ought to have either  interest or maintenance from their father be death he be the survivor and  think it much the same whether it be call interest or maintenance that the  father never intend they shall starve till their portion become Payable and  therefore refer it to a master to see what maintenance be reasonable from the  time of their father be death and decree the original portion to be raise by  sale c with interest at pound per cent from their respective age of eighteen  unless I S shall by payment prevent such sale and his lordship will allow but  pound per cent be charge on land though it be press to have pound per cent  east Greenhill and waldoe Prec in Chan pale yellow Rep in Eq S c
by a marriage settlement land be settle on the husband and wife for life  remainder to trustee to preserve contingent remainder remainder to their first  equity case abridge er p and eve other son in tail male and the husband and  wife be marry twelve year and have no issue and have contract debt they bring  a bill and pray that they may be enable to sell part of the land for payment  of else debt and the trustee consent provide he may be indemnified and though  it be urge that there be precedent of like case yet the Lord keeper refuse to  make any such decree say he have know people marry near twenty year without  issue and after have child but at the importunity of counsel give they time to  attend he with precedent Trin Davies and wield vern SC Chan Cas
by a marriagesettlement in case of failure of issue male a remainder of the  estate be limit to daughter until they shall raise pound for portion there be  issue of the marriage a son and two daughter the father devise pound apiece to  the daughter and die the son afterward make his will and devise to the  daughter to the amount of pound without mention of its be in lieu or  satisfaction of any thing due to they and give his land to his heir male and  die without issue and it be hold clear that the father be legacy can be no  satisfaction not be adequate in value beside the father have then a son live  and it be altogether contingent and uncertain whether pound will ever arise  and become Payable or not and therefore it be but reasonable that the father  shall make some certain provision for his daughter but as to the son legacy of  pound it be by two lord commissioner against Rawlinson decree a satisfaction  but upon a appeal to the lord the decree be reverse for the daughter be heir  at law and disinherit there be no ground for the court io make a strain  construction to their prejudice in favour of a voluntary devisee Pasc Duffield  and smith vern freeman a on the marriage of his daughter give a bind to the  husband for the daughter be portion and afterward by will devise land of much  great value to the husband and wife and their heir and die and there be a  defect of asset equity case abridge er p
by a marriagesettlement the intend husband be make tenant in tail and a  provision be make of pound apiece for the daughter the husband afterward dock  the entail and devise to the daughter apiece and it be prove that the testator  have declare after make the settlement that he will add to his daughter be  portion and it be urge that the cut off the entail be for this purpose the  court decree the daughter both sum car pile and pile Chan Rep
by a the express word of the stat of the W a term for two year nay for ought  his lordship see a term for one year or for any certain time be prevent from  be make to papist per Pratt c I in the case of Radcliffe and roper Mod case in  law and Eq perhaps for half a year ibidem a and the trust of a term be as much  within the Act as the legal interest of a term per Pratt c I ibidem
by a trust in a marriage settlement portion for daughter be to be raise  Payable at eighteen or marriage and maintenance in the mean time Payable half  yearly at lady day and Michaelmas until the equity case abridge portion become  Payable the old daughter attain eighteen on August the question be if any  proportion of the maintenance be to be pay from the lady day to the that of  August when the portion become due and the master of the roll decree  maintenance to be pay for that time in proportion and say that maintenance be  always favour be for the daily subsistence of child and not like interest  which be only for delay of payment of what be due but in this case the portion  be not due till eighteen or marriage and therefore no delay mich hay and  palmer will Rep
by a trust in a marriage settlement portion for daughter be to be raise  Payable at or marriage and maintenance in the mean time Payable halfyearly  videlicet at ladyday and Michaelmas till the portion become Payable the old  daughter attain her age of on the that of August and her maintenance have be  pay till ladyday the question be if any proportion of the maintenance be to be  pay from ladyday to the that of August and the master of the roll decree  maintenance to be pay for that time in proportion and his honour say that  maintenance be always favour be for the daily subsistence of child and not  like interest b which be only for delay of payment of what be due but here the  portion be not due till or marriage and therefore no delay mich hay and palmer  will Rep b vide the above case where the court apportion interest on a  mortgage
by custom the surrender of a feme covert with the assent of her husband be  good vide more cit in Compton v Collinson bro Chan can equity case abridge er  p e how far a feme covert shall be bind by the act in which she have join with  her husband
by marriage article a power be reserve to the wife of dispose of all her  estate real and personal by deed or will she be entitle to the trust of a  estate during coverture devise the same by virtue of such power and by Lord  Northington the article be a good reservation of the estate and the will be a  good appointment there be many instance in which instrument intend as legal  conveyance be defective the court have refuse to assist the defect against the  heir if there be not a meritorious consideration that be the case in Bramhall  v hall here the provision be for child and therefore meritorious wright v  Englefield and Cadogan Ambl
by marriage article I S covenant that his intend wife who be seize a estate in  fee shall have power by deed or will to dispose of her estate after her  decease to any person whatever and that he will do any act to confirm the same  subsequent to the marriage she by lease and release recite the article convey  to trustee after her death to the use of her natural son afterward she and her  husband join in levy a fine of the premise to other use and by Lord  Northington the wife have the legal estate in her the lease and release be not  good to pass her estate either as a conveyance or as a execution of a power so  the estate pass by the fine Bramhall v hall Ambl
by marriage article it be agree that pound in trustee hand shall be lie out in  the purchase of land to be settle on the husband for life remainder to the  wife for life for her jointure remainder to the first c son of that marriage  in tail male successive Chargeable with pound for young child remainder to the  husband in fee the marriage take effect and pound be vest in lottery annuity  in with the consent of the husband and wife be subscribe by the trustee into  the SouthSea company pursuant to the Act of parliament which empower and  indemnities trustee for so do upon which there happen a loss of near pound on  a bill bring by the only son of the marriage against the trustee his father  and mother and four infant sister for execution of the trust king c be of  opinion that the loss upon the principal sum of pound ought to be bear in  proportion or average by all the child the loss happen under the direction of  a Act of parliament the trustee be not liable to make it good and it be plain  by the article that the party intend two three for the old son and one three  for the young child but if the elder son shall be at the whole loss it will  equity case abridge er p be just the reverse the old son will have but one  three and the young child two three and decree that the old son bear two three  of the loss and the young child one three accord to their several proportion  in the money and refer it to the master to have a settlement make accord Trin  Geo chamber and chamber vin Abr pl FitzGibb SC say that power be give by the  article to the trustee to invest the pound in any public or parliamentary fund  till a convenient purchase may be find
by marriage article it be covenant that the intend husband if his wife survive  he shall secure to her the value of half of her fortune to be at her disposal  the marriage take effect but the husband never alter the nature of the  security by which his wife be fortune be secure and which be all in her own  name the husband make his will and thereby give his wife more than he be  oblige to do by the marriage article and the rest he dispose of in other  legacy and die Lord Chan hold that this provision make by the will for the  wife be more than the husband be oblige to do by the marriage agreement shall  be take to be in pursuance of that agreement and shall discharge it by this  marriage agreement the husband be make as a debtor to the wife if she shall  survive he for so much as he have covenant to give her by the agreement and  therefore he have oblige himself by this agreement it be reasonable he shall  have the wife be fortune though the security be not alter but still remain in  the wife be name and therefore this though it be by will be a good disposition  notwithstanding the security be not alter it may be more beneficial for the  wife to take under the agreement than under the will and therefore she shall  have her election to take the one way or the other mich Ann plant and farmer m  S Rep note in this case the wife insist not only on have the legacy but also  one half of her fortune because the security be not alter ibidem
by marriage article land be covenant to be convey to a for life with remainder  to the heir male of his body on a bill bring for the execution of such article  the land shall be settle upon a for life with remainder to his first c son in  tail male say per Lord Chan Cowper hill in the case of Collins and plummer  will Rep vide the case of Trevor and Trevor will Rep also Mod can in law and  Eq and Vol Abr Eq p can S c
by marriage article pound be to be vest in a and b in trust but neither of  they to be answerable for the other b receive the whole and give a receipt for  it and by write under his hand and seal declare that a have receive none of it  b die intestate without ever place out the pound his honour decree this a  specialty debt but to affect the executor only and not the heir he not be bind  nor the say declaration extend to he Lord Chan Talbot affirm the decree say  that this without all doubt be a debt by specialty Trin Gifford and Manley  case in Eq tempt Talbot
by marriage article the old son be make tenant in tail proviso that the father  may sell the land by the consent of the trustee and purchase other land and  settle they to the like use the father sell the land and with the money  purchase other land but by this settlement the old son be make only tenant for  life yet hold good and per cur the old son be now make tenant for life only  shall not be at liberty to encumber any part of the land hill Geo beef and  beef Mod to
by the ancient course of the court a person be allow to bring his actional law  against the Representative of the decease and at the same time to bring his  bill here in order to have a discovery of asset though now it be establish  that if the party proceed in equity against such Representative his bill must  be both for a discovery of asset and a satisfaction for his debt per Lord Chan  Hardwicke in the case of Barker and Dumeres Barnard Rep in Chan atk Rep pl
by the civil law the father or mother make one degree the grandfather or  grandmother two degree and the uncle or aunt three degree but if you go one  degree further and reckon to the great grandfather or great grandmother they  be in equal degree with the uncle or aunt as they be in the three degree in  direct line with the uncle or aunt who be in the three degree in the  collateral line for you must reckon through the grandfather or grandmother to  come at the equity case abridge er p uncle or aunt and then they be just in  the same degree of remove from the nephew or niece in the collateral line as  the greatgrandfather or greatgrandmother be in the direct ascend line but the  computation by the canon law be different per his honour Trin in the case of  Mentney and petty Prec in Chan
by the custom of a manor every copyhold tenant of that manor may in the  resence of two witness nominate his successor and such nominee shall enjoy the  land after he for life and the person who nominate may except any part of the  land to any other person yet the nominee continue tenant to the Lord for the  whole but the person to who any part be except shall enjoy that part during  his life and if any tenant die seize leave a wife and make no nomination then  she shall have the tenement during her life else it go to the Lord I S be a  copyholder of this manor intend by his will to give the great part of his  copyhold estate to his godson and the other part to his wife the wife persuade  he to nominate her to the whole and that she will give the godson the part  design for he and offer to give security to that purpose thereupon the husband  nominate her successor and die she refuse to let the godson enjoy the land  intend he he bring his bill the defendant plead the statute of fraud c for  that there be no memorandum c in write but decree for the plaintiff by all the  commissioner and they say they decree it not as a agreement or a trust but as  a fraud and they be of opinion that as by the custom of the manor a estate may  be create by parole without write a trust of such parole equity case abridge  estate may likewise be raise without write notwithstanding the statute a hill  Devenish and banns Prec in Chan a and Keck commissioner say that where a  tenant in tail be about to suffer a recovery in order to provide for his young  child and have be keep from it by the issue in tail promise to do it it have  be decree in this court ibidem vide the case of chamberlain and chamberlain Eq  can Abr p c
by the custom of London a freeman can devise either the orphanage part or the  contingency of the benefit of survivorship among orphan neither can a orphan  devise his orphanage part or the part which accrue by survivorship but such  freeman may give by will to his child legacy inconsistent with the  distribution under the custom and then such child must make their election  whether they will abide by the will or by the custom but they can abide by the  will in part only and take the benefit of the custom also Trin Harvey and  Desbouvrie case in Eq tempt Talbot note in this case one of the child be a  infant her election be reserve till or marriage ibidem vide Eq can Abr p can
by the custom of the city of London where a child be marry with the father be  consent and there be a portion give in marriage such child be debar from claim  any benefit of the orphanage part unless the father shall by write under his  hand and seal not only declare that such child be not full advance but  likewise mention in certain how much the portion give in marriage do amount  unto that so it may appear what sum be to be bring into hotchpot civil and  rich vern but this matter seem to be well settle by the follow case and  certificate sir Ralph box a freeman of London have two son and two daughter  both the daughter be marry in his lifetime and upon the marriage of one of  they with the plaintiff sir Ralph enter into article to give pound with her  for her portion and there be a expectation that her grandmother will leave her  something considerable at let death which the plaintiff friend be not Willing  to rely on sir Ralph covenant to pay the further sum of pound for what the  grandmother shall leave her the marriage take effect and sir Ralph pay the  pound and and the grandmother die and leave the plaintiff wife nothing and now  sir Ralph be dead the plaintiff and his wife bring this bill suggest that she  be not full advance though sir Ralph have declare by his will that she be and  therefore equity case abridge er p
by the statute of fraud and perjury the trust of a inheritance be make asset  at law but the trust of a term be not and by a clause in the statute when  judgement be obtain against the testator the sheriff may take the TrustEstate  into execution king v ballett vern what shall be legal what equitable asset  salk the order in which debt shall be pay Title creditor and debtor letter b
byard v byard a order to make bind to save harmless touch legacy the plaintiff  desire to have a bind make to they by the defendant to save they harmless  against the defendant three daughter concern certain legacy bequeathe by the  testator to the defendant say three daughter which the plaintiff have pay to  the defendant and because the defendant at the day of hear appear not  therefore refer to two master of this court foe see whether it be prove that  the plaintiff pay the defendant the legacy or no to the use of his daughter  which if they do then a decree shall be make choice case in chancery for the  plaintiff that they their executor or administrator shall be save harmless  against his say three daughter their executor and administrator for so much as  the defendant have receive byard all plaintiff byard defendant year Elizabeth
BYAT contra pickering car foe jurisdiction of Cambridge maintain this court  declare the privilege of the university of Cambridge ought to be maintain and  not to be infringe by this court
BYCROFT and lyster vide before Mr Benny come now to show cause it appear that  the intention of the party be that the suit below shall be but for and that  the writ be for be owe to a mistake of the officer accord the return of the  statute of Barnardiston king b er p James be allow but because the bring this  habeas corpus be in some measure owe to the plaintiff attorney he be oblige to  pay the cost of it and upon those term the rule be discharge
byers against Whitaker in county palatine OF lancaster trinity geo the court  hold that the known on good evidence capias be the process to be serve upon  defendant and not the chancellor mandate upon read the Act of parliament Geo  which be explanatory of the Act Geo by the last Act the affidavit of service  of the process be direct to be swear before a judge of the court from whence  process issue or a commissioner appoint by such court which must be intend of  the court of Westminster none other can appoint such commissioner before the  last Act of parliament this court be of opinion that the process to be serve  must be the process whereby defendant may have be arrest before the first Act  beal against smith mich Geo but since the last Act to explain the former the  court of king bench and this court have hold that the first process must be  serve birch for plaintiff comens for defendant
byne vers dodderidge a custom to pay in lieu of tithe S in the pound out of  the rend reserve be a have modus Mr cheshire move against a rule for set this  aside be grant to discharge another rule before make by which a prohibition be  grant to the spiritual court to stay a suit there for tithe upon suggestion of  a modus and this last rule be make upon allegation that the plaintiff have  have a prohibition grant before and that he have a declare upon it and that  issue have be join upon it and a verdict find in it against the plaintiff and  that which Mr cheshire now urge against this rule be that this modus upon  which the rule be make for the grant of a prohibition vary from the modus upon  which the prohibition have be grant before and the verdict have c Lord Raymond  and therefore that this case be not within Edward c for the present modus  suggest be that they have use to pay S in the pound of the rend reserve  whereas the former modus be that they use c to pay S in the pound of the  profit receive and he cite hob against this Mr Broderick say that this modus  be not good for as it be lie in the suggestion if the plaintiff keep the land  in his own hand he shall pay nothing to the parson for the modus be lie to be  pay out of the rend reserve he Cray let a lease at a small rend upon payment  of a fine and he cite roll Rep Ventr but per cheshire that will be a fraud  curian contra it will not be a fraud and per holt chief justice this can be a  modus it amount to as much as the tithe in kind but it may be a composition a  custom can be apply to rend reserve from time to time upon frequent new  reservation and the rule for discharge of the rule grant for the prohibition  be make absolute a see the record lill Ent
BYNION against trotter mich banc sup arrest of judgement in a action for word  Bynion bring a action upon the case against trotter for speak these word of he  he be d thief and have steal my turnip and my grass upon a verdict give for  the plaintiff the defendant move in arrest of judgement that the word be not  actionable because the grass may be grow upon the ground and the turnip in the  ground and so part of the freehold but Rolf chief fustice hold the word be  actionable for the turnip shall be intend to be pull up and the grass mow the  last word be not cumulative therefore let the defendant show cause why the  plaintiff shall not have his judgement
Byron and baker how far in debt for rend the court will not stay the proceed  in a second action till the cost of a nonsuit in a former action be pay in  debt for rend bring by a executor Mr reeves move to stay proceed in this  action till the plaintiff shall pay the cost in a former which be for the same  cause but it appear that this action be for some new rend accrueing since that  demand in the former action as well as for the former rend demand in that  action the court say they can not do it for it must appear by the declaration  that both the action be exact for the same cause they say far that it be not  long since these motion be allow only in ejectment but what make the present  case beyond all dispute be that the court say executor never pay cost upon  nonsuit
byron and elm word c actionable sans special damage case for word what do you  go to London for but to drop your slink with a averment that slink mean a  bastard in that country she go to London last winter big with child and to my  knowledge several people have lie with her Skinner move in arrest of judgement  that the action lie not without temporal damage the case of I roll Medhurst  and balam be deny in siderfin and several other book that which be say in Ann  Davis S case   b seem to be but Comberbach the opinion of the Lord coke and he  cite cro salt versus brown that it must be such a child as be likely to be  Chargeable to the parish else she be not punishable by the stat Elizabeth this  case be not bring within the statute to say a woman have have a bastard be no  more than to say she be a whore which will not bear a action unless by custom  or tenure dumb cast to live holt Ch I the reason of the resolution be because  the ecclesiastical court have conusance have a bastard be but a evidence of  fornication and that in Ann Davis S case have be often deny d if the case be  new perhaps we shall think a action lie without allege loss of marriage as  well as for word tend to the discredit of a tradesman for it touch her in the  most tender part and be a manifest loss marriage be the very end of her  creation for ought I know if it be actionable then there must be a prohibition  in such case for the party must not be liable to ecclesiastical censure and  temporal damage too
byron and fillip execution for execution de good not common with others  against a executor judgement be have against testator and a Davastavit find  defendant plead plene to manage before the return of the Writ but show not how  he have administer as he ought to have do cro Elizabeth salk Werg econ object  to the first become facias that there do not appear that there ever be a to  know facias upon the judgement Ch just there ought to be a to know facias to  make the defendant party to the first judgement and that he may have a day to  plead for he may have a release this be a execution against one not make party  to the Writ and judgement be give for the plaintiff unless Cause before the  end of the term vide case of Guibert and Jones post
Byron case he bring a action of debt as administrator by the letter of  Administration of the bishop of York because the testator have good notabilia  in diverse diocese in his precinct upon a obligation then be within the  province of Canterbury and adjudge that it be not good and the prerogative of  York do not extend to Canterbury and by Anderson if a man die have good  notabilia in Canterbury and York Canterbury shall have the prerogative and by  walmsly and beom that the debt upon a specialty be good notabillia in that  place where it be at the time of the death of the party but debt upon a simple  contract there where the party himself die
byron versus elm mich will B R charge of fornication not actionable without  special damage S C comb case B R roll side in case for word the plaintiff  declare that she be a young woman the defendant to hinder her marriage say  what do you go to London for but to drop your stink she go to London last  winter to lie in and to my knowledge several people have lie with her and they  be hold not actionable for it be not have a bastard but the fornication be the  crime here and that be punishable Salkeld in the spiritual court be not  punishable here without a temporal loss have a bastard be never actionable  before the statute nor be it since unless the party come within the penalty of  the statute which be only when the parish be Chargeable anonymous mich will  B R she have a bastard not actionable because it do not appear that be  Chargeable to the parish vent comb S C side side roll Abr palmer case for  these word she have a bastard child and verdict for the plaintiff and the  court think they not actionable accord to salt and brown case cro Salkeld er p  and deny whether davies case   b for she be not punishable at commonlaw in the  king temporal court for have a bastard nor be she punishable by Elizabeth  unless her bastard be likely to become Chargeable to the parish the statute  only extend to such bastard in other case she be only punishable in the  spiritual court for whore and may sue there but can sue here too for the party  will be double punish by that means Sed adjournatur
c a creditor on a bind with condition to pay money all a future day subsequent  to a Act of bankruptcy can not before the make of this statute be admit to  prove such debt or to have any dividend before such security become Payable  and this Act recite it to have be a Q for remedy whereof the Act be make and  so be the opinion of all the judge mich Geo b r in grammatical case Tully and  spark ld raym Rep vin Abr pl atk Rep but then no such creditor can petition or  join in a petition for a Commission by virtue of the say Act though not by the  statute of the Geo cap sect person take bill note or other security for money  Payable at a future day may petition for all Commission or join in petition  Geo cap sect the commissioner shall forthwith after they have declare the  person a bankrupt cause notice thereof to be give in the gazette and shall  appoint a time and place for the creditor to meet which meeting for the city  of London and all place within the bill of mortality shall be at guildhall in  order to choose assignee at which meeting the commissioner shall admit the  proof of any creditor debt that shall live remote from the place of such  meeting by affidavit equity case abridge or solemn affirmation and permit any  person duly authorize by letter of attorney oath or a affirmation be make of  the execution thereof either by a affidavit swear or affirmation make before a  master in chancery ordinary or extraordinary or before the commissioner viva  voice and in case of creditor reside in foreign part such affidavit or  affirmation to be make before a magistrate where the party shall be reside and  shall together with such creditor letter of attorney be attest by a notary  public to vote in the choice of assignee in the place of such creditor
c a see martin versus long die loveliness June lord commissioner Eq can ab pl  pre Ch S c devise of a term to I S and his assign for ever but if he die  without issue before then to go over to his brother this be a good devise over  I S devise to his son Martin a leasehold estate to he his executor  administrator and assign for ever but if he die before twentyone without issue  in that case devise it over to his brother the question be whether the  remainder over be good it be object that it be a perpetuity for that the  remainder depend on Martin die without issue for if he die before twentyone  though he leaves a child and that child afterward die without issue Vernon  chancery case Martin may be say to be dead before twentyone without issue say  non allocate per cur decree the remainder over good together with a account of  rend and profit from the death of Martin the son of the testator and that the  defendant shall authorize the plaintiff to receive what rend shall be in  arrear Reg lib b fol vide paulet ux v doggett ante and case cite there and the  like case between smith and smith in the exchequer be cite to be so adjudge  Vernon chancery case er p
c Alcock v ellen S c Eq can ab Oct ante case and note a man devise a term for  year to his daughter and her child she then have three child and also to such  other child as she shall have and the child of those child she have other  child afterwards But it do not appear when these child be bear from the  decision however if it be correct report it must be infer that they be neither  bear nor in ventre sa mere when the property vest I e at the testator death  cook v cook vern but the question be whether they shall have any share and it  be hold that the woman and her three child take joint each a four part and  that the afterborn child take nothing and that these word be word of  limitation this perhaps be a error either of the reporter or of the  transcriber it seem inconsistent with the previous sentence and be probable  one of those hasty note which have afford a opportunity for pass a equal hasty  censure upon the general compilation if tire word child ought here to be  construe as a word of limitation the three old can not have be entitle to take  a jointtenants with their mother more than the afterborn child Buffar v  Bradford atk and not of purchase and this as much for the wife part as though  it have be give to her and the heir of her body but see cook v cook where  above freeman er p
c anonymous a attachment against a witness deposition suppress on the return  of a subpoena if a witness will not appear and be examine the party may take  out a attachment for the present course of proceed see Newl Ch bring against  he and if he appear and depose on the other side he may suppress his  deposition Flowerday v Collett dick on motion
c anonymous a Lord chancellor amendment of a original a writ of error be bring  to reverse a judgement give in a formedon for a error in the original it be  pray here that the original may be amended Carr v shaw t r grey v Sidneff Bos  and pull Deshons v head east hold v finch will note that a fine be levy of the  land twenty year since and it be order that if the formedon be bring within  five year after the fine it shall be amend otherwise not as the fine and  nonclaim for year will be a bar thin v caryi W Jones it will be fruitless to  amend what when amend can not avail freeman de term S mich in curian porter
c anonymous account state post case if a man prefer a fill general for a  account a account state be a good plea but if in his bill he set forth that  there be a account and that there be a mistake and set forth the particular  mistake wright v hobbling Ch can Bourke v Bridgeman Barnard Dawson v Dawson  atk in matthews v Walwyn Ves from the particular relation in which the party  stand to each other a settle account be allow to be open though no specific  error be point out see also chamber v Goldwin Ves there a account state be no  good plea per Hutchins all
c anonymous all the obligors bill for payment of money upon a bind must be  against all the obligors for each obligor be entitle to the assistance of all  the other in take the account Madox v Jackson atk and by make the whole number  party the circuity of another suit for contribution be avoid see note to Blois  v Blois Ventr but if the bill state and the defendant admit the coobligor to  be insolvent the latter reason cease angerstein v clarke dick Cockburn v  Thompson Ves it have be say that if the bind be joint and several the creditor  may sue several if he please Collins v Griffith p wms but this seem overrule  in Cockburn v Thompson where above see however Haywood v ovey mad but in that  case Cockburn v Thompson do not appear to have be cite or else he can have no  decree and in this justice non sequitur law
c anonymous bill of review post case this difference be take per cancellar  where a matter in fact be particular in issue before the former hear though  you have new proof of that matter upon that you shall never have a bill of  review Norris v Le neve atk Lord Portsmouth v Lord Effingham Ves sen Wilson v  web Cox can Paterson v slaughter Ambl young v Keighley Ves seem to establish  that new evidence may be sufficient ground for a bill of review but that it be  discretionary in the court to allow such bill or not but see post c p but  where a new fact be allege that be not at the former hear there it may be a  ground for a bill of review freeman de term paschae in curian porter
c anonymous charitable use a annuity be devise to charitable use intentional  but the use express be void and thereupon the Lord chancellor do decree it to  be pay to such person as shall be approve of by the bishop of London for  expound and catechise every Saturday and he cite a case in lane report perhaps  Wickham v wood lane where a pension be give to silence minister and decree by  the baron of the exchequer to poor conform ministers The doctrine of cy pres  though frequent disapprove and its extension far than adjudge case have  already go declare improper be within those limit firm establish the court  however will not administer a charity in a manner different from that point  out by the testator unless it appear that although his intention can be  execute literal another mode may be adopt by which it may be carry into effect  in substance without infringe upon the rule of law if the mode only become  impossible the general object if attainable shall not be defeat  attorneygeneral v Whitchurch Ves attorneygeneral v Andrew ibidem  attorneygeneral v Boultbee Ves jun and in this case by reason there be great  arrear he order that they shall go to increase the stipend and that person  that prosecute this suit to be pay their charge out of the arrear
c anonymous choose in action assign the Lord keeper Bridgeman will not protect  the assignment of any choose in action unless in satisfaction of some debt due  to the assignee but not when the debt or choose in action be assign to one to  who the assignee owe nothing precedent so that the assignment be voluntary or  for money then given But if a good consideration be pay at the time of the  assignment such assignment will now be support in equity though void at law  squib v Wynn p wms row v Dawson Ves sen Whitfield v Fausset ibidem c anonymous  difference between the devise of good and the use of good the first carry the  property the last carry not the property cro see post c p that between a  devise of good for life and a devise of the use of good for life there be no  difference now admit see also hide v Parratt p wms c anonymous ante case  mortgagee assign over for pound the amount of the principal and interest shall  be pay to the assignee on redemption the principal and interest actual due on  examination of the account must be understand or that the mortgagor be a party  to the assignment see the note to the case cite in the margin headnote
c anonymous conusee of a judgement redeem from a conusee of a statute who have  take in a prior mortgage S c semble vern under the title of Morgan v Sherrard  a lessee for sixty year mortgage his term to b and then acknowledge a statute  to c and then confess a judgement to d and die c the conusee of the statute  pay off the mortgagee and take a assignment of the mortgage d prefer his bill  against c to redeem the mortgage and the question be whether d shall pay only  the money due upon the mortgage or that and what be due upon the statute  before c shall be compellable to assign and per curian c must assign upon  payment of the mortgage money only for when a the mortgagor die the equity of  redemption of this term be asset in equity Newton v Bennett Br Scott v Scholey  east case of sir Charles Cox creditor p wms and as the judgement shall be  satisfy by asset in law before a statute so it shall in equity and though the  conusee of a statute have get the assignment of the mortgage yet that shall  not take away the right of priority which the judgement have by the law Rep b  Bereblock v read cro Elizabeth anon Anders note the reason of this decree seem  to be because the term be personal another reason seem to be that assign by  Lord Ellenborough c I in Scott v Scholey where above videlicet that the equity  of redemption be such a interest as be incapable of be seize under a become  facias or extend under a statute from which perhaps it may be not unfair infer  that as the statute form no legal lie on the equity of redemption it ought on  that ground not to be allow to be tack so as to stand in the way of another  encumbrancer right to redeem the mortgage alone asset freeman de term paschae  in curian porter
c anonymous copyhold if a copyholder do for a valuable consideration sell or  mortgage or covenant to convey his copyhold and die before any surrender make  the heir be compellable to surrender accord to the agreement of the copyholder  Hinton v Hinton Ves sen Patteson v Thompson Rep tempt finch keen v sparrow  ibidem Martin v Seamore Ch can greenwood v hare Ch can but if a copyholder  devise his copyhold and make no surrender to the use of his will the heir  shall not be compellable I make this good to the devisee but now by stat Geo c  disposition by will of copyhold estate be make effectual without previous  surrender to the use thereof except in the case of a feme covert do v Bartle  Dowl and Ryland but it be make a query if a copyholder do devise land for the  payment of his debt and die without make any surrender whether the heir be in  this case compellable to make a surrender and the better opinion seem that he  shall not because although this be for payment of debt yet it be mere  voluntary to devise his copyhold and the master of the roll say that if this  shall be allow the lord will be cozen of his fine the second section of the  statute above cite provide against this c anonymous devise of land mortgage if  a man devise land that be in mortgage the equity of redemption will pass to  the devisee and so if copyhold that be in mortgage re devise the equity of  redemption shall pass to the devisee Paulet v the attorney general hard  burgess v wheat W black Phillips v Hele Ch Rep
c anonymous copyhold not surrender ante case post case b note it be say per  cur and agree that where a copyhold be devise and no surrender make to use of  the will the court will supply the defect of a surrender in case it be for  provision for a child but it be the circumstance of the case that induce the  court to do it for they will not do it in all cases But see now stat Geo c the  only except case in which a surrender to the use of the will be still require  be notice in do v Bartle Dowl and Ryl freeman er p
c anonymous executor confess judgement a bill depend for discovery of asset Mr  solicitor cite a case of Patrick and Dec where a executor plead full  administer to a action bring against he whereupon the plaintiff prefer his  bill in this court for discovery of asset and while the suit be depend in this  court the executor confess judgement to another person this court cause he to  pay the whole debt for that the party shall not suffer by a act that be do to  defraud he while he be proceed to this court if the asset be legal unless  special circumstance of fraud appear in this case it seem overrule see ante c  p c p and the authority cite in the note there to which add smith v Haskins  atk morris v bank of England can tempt Talbot Darston v earl of Oxford p wm in  note but perhaps the decree may be maintain on the supposition that there be  no legal asset for accord to mason v William salk the executor will not be  allow to dispose of equitable asset to the prejudice of the first suitor if a  creditor subsequent proceed at law will have that effect the executor shall  move for a injunction
c anonymous feme covert a devise be make to a feme covert and that her husband  shall not intermeddle with it the husband and wife be divorce the divorce of  course be only a month et thoro not a chain marriage causan rage the wife the  bill shall be bring by the wife prochein any Griffith v hood Ves sen prefer a  bill against the executor and make not the husband a party neither as freeman  plaintiff nor defendant which be plead by the defendant and allege that the  husband ought to be a party or else he the executor can not be sufficient  discharge in case he shall pay it So at commonlaw upon analogous principle a  marry woman can sue or be sue even in respect of separate property without her  husband be a party martial v Ruttor t r and it be order that the husband shall  be make a defendant without cost and it be say that if a legacy be devise to a  feme covert this be a trust for the husband unless there be negative word to  conclude him Palmer v Trevor vern freeman er p
c anonymous forfeiture and entry ante case and note in a forfeiture of a lease  by a tenant for nonpayment of rend c and the lessor enter the lease be avoid  it be a usual equity for this court to decree upon payment of arrear that the  lessor shall make a new lease with like covenant post c p but in some case it  will not as if there be any unreasonable covenant and the party have once  legal discharge himself of they this court will not compel he to make the same  covenant again
c anonymous forty pro four hundred the title of this case be Simms v Barry  accord to Rep tempt finch or sims v urry as state in Charles can all the  report agree in the lead principle though differ in circumstance and in burn v  burn Ves Lord Redesdale then solicitor general observe freeman report be by  far the best see also the Lord chancellor judgement in the case last cite  which establish the authority of the present decision a bind be in forty  scales condition for the payment of pound the court decree this to be good pro  four hundred by reason of the greatness of the sum express in the condition  though no money be prove to be lend upon it and by Lord chancellor if it have  be quadragenta it have be good in law for pound and it be decree good for  pound the court say it shall have all the effect of a bind and the obligor be  dead in this case they decree it shall charge the heir as far as his asset as  well as the executor and that it shall be satisfy by the executor before any  bind upon which judgement be not obtain before the day of pronounce the decree  but the court admit that judgement upon bind obtain after the subpoena and  before the decree shall be prefer before it though the contrary be press very  v Philips Ves post c p n and c p and in this case Keck cite the case of savage  and brown Rep tempt finch where a seal be break off a bind this court decree  it good and that after it be decree good it ought to have all the effect of a  bind to charge a heir c but if heir be not mention in the bind this court will  not charge a heir cross v honour vern but a heir though not name in article of  agreement by which his ancestor covenant to convey real estate be bind thereby  post c p freeman er p
c anonymous fraud upon a purchaser a bill be prefer by a purchaser to be  relieve against a fraud by give a particular of great value than the land real  be of but the bill be dismiss with cost because it be the plaintiff own laches  that he will not inform freeman himself of the value and a case be cite by the  Lord commissioner Keck where a purchaser bring his bill to be relieve where  encumbrance be conceal but be dismiss for he ought to have provide against it  by covenant but it be say by Rawlinson that if the purchaser have in that case  have money in his hand that this court will have help he but not after he have  pay his money See ante c p and the authority there cite and a case be cite  where a man convey his land by the quantity of one hundred acre be it more or  less it be observe by sir W grant m r in winch v Winchester I Ves and Bea that  the effect of the word more or less add to the statement of quantity have  never be yet fix by decision be consider sometime as extend only to cover a  small difference sometime as leave the quantity altogether uncertain and throw  upon the purchaser the necessity of satisfy himself with regard to it Mr  Sugden who have collect the lead case in the d sect of the that chap of his  treatise on vendor think the present decision can only be support on the  ground that a actual conveyance be take before relief be seek but that have  the contract remain in become the purchaser will have be entitle to a  abatement though the agreement contain the word more or less even if it be add  by estimation which it be observe in winch v Winchester where above render the  description still more lose and it be not above sixty acre but have no relief  because it be his own laches
c anonymous heir and executor of mortgagee ante case post case a bill be bring  against the heir of the mortgagee to redeem and neither the executor nor  administrator be make party and this exception be take at the hear of the  cause the Lord chancellor will not proceed to the hear of the cause for if it  shall fall out upon the account that money shall be pay by the mortgagor that  be to be pay to the executor or administrator and not to the heir upon the  plain principle that the money shall return to the fund from which it come c p  but to a bill for a foreclosure it be not necessary to make the personal  representative of the mortgagor a party notam differentian fall v brown Br  Bradshaw v Outram Ves and see post c p and so the account ought not to be  controvert without their privity
c anonymous if the heir to prevent the make of a will undertake to pay out of  land this bind the heir who so undertakes Barrow v Greenough Ves
c anonymous in another case where the statute of limitation be plead in bar to  a legacy demand due twenty year since Lord chancellor hold that a legacy be  not bar by the statute nor ever have be so hold
c anonymous interest sur mortgage ante case post case notam S c Charles can  this Trin vacation the Lord keeper declare it shall be a rule that a mortgagee  after the forfeiture shall have interest for his interest but see contra  proctor v Cooper Prec in Charles append c and shall be only Accountable for  what profit he shall receive and not for what he may have receive unless there  be fraud c anonymous interest assignee de un mortgage Ch c and note S c  Charles can that it be always the rule that the mortgagee assign the assignee  shall have interest for the interest then due and be never contradict but in  porter and hobart case Charles Rep ante c p and note there c p note the  question always be whether the mortgagor be a party to the assignment in the  Lord shaftsbury time
c anonymous legacy charge upon land if a man give a legacy and charge it upon  black acre although this be not sufficient to answer the full value of legacy  yet it shall not be charge upon the personal estate and it be say per  cancellar that if a man devise pound out for a lease for year and the lease be  determine yet the legatee shall never resort to the personal estate for this  legacy the distinction seem to be this where a legacy be give with a reference  to a particular fund only as point out a convenient mode of payment it will be  consider as a demonstrative legacy and though the particular fund shall be  insufficient or total fail the legatee will not be disappoint if there be  other asset Gillaume v Adderley Ves and see fountain v tiler price but where  the legacy be clear specific as the legatee will not be liable to contribute  towards make good a defalcation with respect to other object of the testator  bounty so if his specific legacy fail he can call upon the general personal  estate to indemnify he Hinton v pink p wms
c anonymous legatee die before his legacy be Payable ante case post case a  devise to b twenty pound to put he out apprentice when he shall come to the  age of seventeen year and he die before that age and the question be whether  his administrator shall have it or not and resolve that he shall Barlow v  grant vern Nevil v Nevil vern Barton v cook Ves
c anonymous Lord chancellor execution of a agreement not to vary from the  agreement post case b the father upon the marriage of his son article to  settle his land to the use of himself for life remainder to his son in tail c  and when the conveyance be to be make he will have have it without impeachment  of waste but the Lord chancellor will not order it for though it have be  reasonable that it shall have be agree so yet now he must take the agreement  as it be and he will not alter the agreement Ogilvie v Foljambe Meriv hope v  Atkins price Meres v ansell will the rule of commonlaw be Inflexible in refuse  to admit parole evidence to vary a write agreement but in court of equity this  distinction be take a plaintiff who seek specific performance must abide by  the agreement as it stand but a defendant be allow to resist performance if  the agreement continue altogether executory by parole evidence that some of  its term or qualification have be omit whether by mistake or fraud Woollan v  hear Ves clark v grant Ves clowes v Higginson Ves and Bea Lord W Gordon v  marquis of Hertford mad but this indulgence to a defendant seem inadmissible  where there have be such a part performance on the other side as that all the  party can be restore to their original situation which in the principal case  be impossible the marriage have take place Seymour v fotherly vern clinan v  cook Sch and Lef
c anonymous Lord chancellor obligor executor obligee make the obligor executor  in trust for his child c though this be in law a extinguishment of the debt  yet in equity it be not ante c p note and caryi v Goodinge Br berry v usher  Ves but it shall be preserve in be for the benefit of the beneficiary and  trust
c anonymous lord commissioner copyhold a copyhold be grant in reversion after  two life habend post death sursumredditionem c of the tenant for life the  tenant for life sell their estate to a and surrender to the Lord to the  endthat he may admit a the vendee the copyholder in reversion enter and bring  a ejectment and recover at law a bring his bill and have relief because the  surrender be only to admit a the purchaser it be against conscience that the  reversioner shall enter For the surrender intend by the grant be such a  surrender as shall determine the estate do one which be to operate mere as a  conveyance thereof to another person Chantrell v Randall I lev
c anonymous Lord keeper interest a mortgage be make for security of money with  interest at percent with a covenant that in case the money be not pay within  one month after it become Payable that then per cent shall be pay for interest  and upon a bill to redeem the question be only concern interest whether or  shall be pay and decree that in this case per cent only shall be pay because  the original agreement be for and the covenant to pay but a nomin pnae See  Seton v Slade Ves it seem by the report to have be there consider the same  thing whether the covenant be for interest at per cent with a condition to  take if regular pay or whether the covenant be for per cent with a condition  for if not regular pay that in both case alike the high rate of interest be to  be consider as nomin pnae but the distinction lie down in the text have be  recognize by many subsequent decision see Scott v tiler Br stride v Parker  vern Jori v Cox Prec in Charles Nichols v Maynard atk Bonafous v Rybot burr  Astley v welldone Bos and pull but where the original agreement be to pay per  cent with a proviso that if the money be pay within one or two month c after  it become Payable that then the mortgagee will accept there unless the money  be pay within the time agree the court will allow per cent and this be say to  be the Lord hallifax case erroneous report as to the term of the loan in vern  but correct cite in Holles v wise ibidem so the difference be concern the  original agreement only freeman er p
c anonymous Lord keeper purchaser not to produce his deed a bill be prefer  against a purchaser for discovery of a trust and charge that the trust appear  in his purchase deed the defendant by his answer deny any notice of the trust  and also deny that there be any mention of it in any of his freeman er p  purchase deed the plaintiff reply to his answer and the cause be at hear the  question be whether the defendant shall be compel to produce his purchase deed  it be insist for the plaintiff that he have reply to the answer it can not now  be take for true but he ought to prove the truth of it as in other case which  in this case can be no otherwise than by produce the deed on the defendant  part it be insist that if this shall once be admit it will be a artifice to  compel all purchaser to show their deed and thereby to expose their title the  Lord keeper be positive that he will never compel a purchaser to expose his  title in this court see ante c p note and that the court have always take care  to protect they where they swear themselves purchaser without notice of a  trust or encumbrance the master of the roll seem to doubt and say it be a case  of great moment either way for as on the one hand a purchaser may be expose so  on the other hand although a purchaser have notice of a trust or a encumbrance  in his deed yet if he will swear bold there be no way to come at it it be  propose for a middle way that the defendant may produce his deed so as to be  look into by the court or by a master but the Lord keeper will not order it it  be now however the establish practice that in a plea of purchase for valuable  consideration without notice to a bill for discovery of deed and write the  purchase deed must be except for it be plead Salkeld v science Ves sen freeman  in this case it be say by the master of the roll that notice to the attorney  solicitor or agent if prove be good notice to the parties Ante c p note
c anonymous master of the roll a man make a lease of a piece of ground and the  lessee covenant to build and have occasion for money mortgage his lease by  assignment and die insolvent and the lessor prefer his bill against the  mortgagee to compel he to build and to execute this agreement in specie and it  be decree that the mortgagee shall build accord to the agreement of the  mortgagor so that he can not quit the lease Casberd v attorney general bring  William v Bosanquet Brod and bing Pilkington v Shaller vern in the early case  of Sparkes v smith ibidem the plaintiff under similar circumstance be leave to  his remedy at commonlaw but in Lucas v Comerford I Ves jun though the court  will not undertake to direct the building the plaintiff be not dismiss at once  to law but it be only a equitable mortgage the defendant be decree to take a  formal assignment at his own expense to enable the plaintiff to bring his  action though he will be content to lose his money prout dict to be all moi  per Mr poley de term S trin in curian porter
c anonymous mortgage post case if a b and c have three successive mortgage of  the same land and c that be the last mortgagee buy in the mortgage of a the  first mortgagee b the second mortgagee shall not be let in to redeem the  mortgage upon the payment of the money that be due to a unless also he pay  what be due freeman unto c unless c have notice of the mortgage onto b before  he take his mortgage for c be in possession and have a title at law equity  will not put he out unless notice can be prove for if he take a mortgage not  know of the mortgage to b there be no default in he marsh v lee Ventr Edmund v  Povey vern brace v duchess of Marlborough p wms Wortley v Birkhead Ves sen  post append and so it seem to I that if a have a mortgage of land that be  afterward mortgage to b if a lend more money afterward upon the same mortgage  he shall hold to satisfy himself both sum where the mortgage be what be call a  equitable one subsequent advance may be tack by parole agreement or inference  of such agreement from the possession of the deeds Ex part Kensington Ves and  Bea but where the mortgage Ves in this instance therefore a imperfect  assurance be more desirable than a perfect one though the judgement in ex part  Coombe Ves seem to consider such a anomaly as impossible unless he have notice  of the mortgage to b before he lend the last sum of money freeman er p de term  S mich in curian porter
c anonymous mortgage redeemable this seem to be the case refer to by the title  of Hammond v Harris ante c p which see and also Howard v Harris post c p a  case be cite per cancellar where a estate be make by way of mortgage with a  proviso that the mortgagor or the heir male of his body may redeem the  mortgagor die without heir male of his body and it be decree that the freeman  heir general shall redeem upon the payment of the principal money and interest  for where a mortgage be once redeemable it be always redeemable without a new  agreement to the contrary freeman er p
c anonymous No order till it be draw up and sign the plaintiff obtain a  injunction in this court the defendant move to dissolve it and obtain a order  to dissolve it before the order be draw up the defendant arrest the plaintiff  and it be hold clear that this be a contempt of the court and the defendant be  order to be commit for it be no order till it be draw up and pass by the  register for the register minute be only a warrant for a order and no order  Wyatt prac Reg anon Ves morris v Owen Ves and Bea freeman er p
c anonymous No witness to be examine after hear to the same point he be  examine before birch v walker Sch and Lef Vaughan v Lloyd Cox can Purcell v  Macnamara Ves smith v Graham Swanst Swinford v horn mad freeman er p
c anonymous notice of a trust imply if a man confess notice that the estate in  law be in a three person at the time when he purchase he be bind to take  notice what the trust S whenever a purchaser have notice that the estate be  affect by the interest of other beside the vendor it be his duty to inquire as  to the extent and term of those interest tailor v Stibbert Ves jun smith v low  atk c anonymous devise of money in remainder ante case post case Pollexf I S  devise pound to his daughter and if she die before year of age unmarried then  to be divide between three she do receive the money and die before that time  and resolve that the money shall be divide and her executor Chargeable as  possess in trust for the devisees in remainder the legatee over may perhaps  have insist that the first legatee shall have enter into a recognizance for  conditional repayment before she receive the money ante c p c p and see  Catchmay v Nicholas Rep tem finch freeman er p
c anonymous per justice Jones and the Lord chancellor seem to allow this  difference legacy when Payable ante case if a legacy be give to a infant to be  pay at his age of twentyone year and the executor to pay interest for it until  it become Payable if the infant die before twentyone it be due present to the  executor or administrator of the infant but if no interest be to be pay for it  then it shall not be pay until such time as the infant will have come to  twentyone in case he have live because there it be a benefit the testator  intend to the executor by keep it in his hand but in the other case it can be  none when interest be Payable Crickett v dolby Ves freeman de term S trin in  curian porter
c anonymous personal estate in aid of a legatee post case a man have pawn a  jewel for a sum of money devise the jewel to b and make g his executor and  give he all his good chattel and personal estate after his debt land legacy  pay and the question be whether b shall pay the debt for which the jewel be  pawn or whether it shall be pay out of the personal estate by the executor and  decree that it shall be pay out of the personal estate and that the legatee  shall have the jewel discharge of it Upon the same principle which decide that  a devisee of land mortgage may have the personal estate of the testator not  specifical bequeathe and if it will not defeat express legacy apply in  redemption of the mortgage oneal v mead p wms tip v tip ibidem post c p the  foundation of both contract whether of mortgage or pawn be debt whereby the  personal estate be increase this decree be afterward affirm in the house of  lord come dict to be per Crawford who be of counsel in it a Scotch cause  freeman de term paschae in curian porter
c anonymous power execute vide post case a man S c Eq can ab and report more  full under the title of sail v Freeland Ventr and Ch Rep by which it appear  that the will be actual execute in the presence of three witness though two  only subscribe their name but as by term of the power the presence only and  not the signature of three witness be require the case so explain seem  unexceptionable even if there be no consideration for the execution if there  be a valuable consideration equity will have give relief although the power  have direct the subscription of three witness Sergison v Sealy atk make a  settlement with power of revocation and limit new use in the presence of three  or more witness and he revoke and limit new use by his will in the presence of  two witness and decree by the Lord chancellor to be good enough for the  appoint three witness be only that there may be clear proof that it be do and  here it be clear enough though here be only two witness
c anonymous proper party mortgagee note that if a mortgagee in possession  assign over if the mortgagor prefer his bill upon supposition that the debt be  satisfy and to have a account of the overplus there he must make the mortgagee  and all the assignee party but if his bill be only for a account and to pay  what be arrear to the assignee there he need not make the mortgagee a party
c anonymous statute of limitation a bill be prefer by a shopkeeper against one  that be about sixteen year since his apprentice to have a account of he and  the bill set forth that there be several deal betwixt he and the plaintiff his  master as well after his apprenticeship as before and the defendant plead the  statute of limitation and the Lord chancellor hold that as to what be transact  during his apprenticeship it be a good plea and be not within the proviso of  the statute and side his set he free had absolve he but as to what be transact  afterward he order he shall answer and he hold that the action of account be  not save as to all dealer but to merchant and their factor c because many time  their factor continue long beyond the sea freeman er p but though the statute  of limitation can be plead to a legacy for there be no time from which it can  run yet presumption of payment from permit the asset to be distribute without  claim the legacy be a good ground of defence by way of answer Higgins v  Crawford Ves jun Pickering v Lord Stamford ibidem Jones v tuberville bid there  have be conflict decision on the question whether the exception in the statute  of limitation stat I c S in favour of account between merchant apply where  there have be no deal whatever between the party within six year or whether it  be necessary that the last item of the account at least shall have occur  within that time see foster v Hodgson Ves the last express decision on the  subject establish that the statute will be a bar where all account have cease  above six year barber v barber Ves see post c p
c anonymous tithe S c Gwill a bill have be prefer against a quaker see stat  pound W c S pound Geo saint c S Geo c S for tithe who refuse to answer upon  oath the defendant be bring to the bar and have be bring three time before the  bill be take pro acknowledged admitted fact and refer to a master to examine  what be due and to be arm with a commission for that purpose and the Lord  chancellor declare that this court brown v Thetford Gwill post append c have  cognizance of matter of tithe as well as the exchequer and that the plaintiff  have choice door freeman de term S hill in curian porter
c anonymous upon a demurrer after Trin term chancellor oath to be make of the  loss of write the bill be bare to discover a deed the defendant demurrer for  that the plaintiff have not make oath accord to the course of the court that  he have not the deed sergeant Glynn for the plaintiff that in this case oath  be not require and take this that when the bill allege the want of a deed and  seek relief upon the matter of that deed by a decree there such oath be  necessary but when the bill seek no relief but bare desire that the defendant  will discover whether he have such a deed or not or to have it produce at a  trial in that case the plaintiff ought not to be put to his oath for it be not  presume the plaintiff will exhibit a bill in either of the latter case if he  have the deed this be approve by the Lord chancellor and therefore the plea be  overruled Godfrey v turner vern ante c p and authority cite in note there
c attorneygeneral v BAMFIELD S c Eq can ab Lord keeper devise to the posterity  of a one question be a devise of good be make to a for life and after his  decease to the posterity of Thomas Bamfield and the question be whether by  virtue of the word posterity only descendant from the body of t b shall take  videlicet child and grandchild or whether he have no issue it shall go to  collateral relation the Lord keeper be of opinion that it go only to the issue  of the body and that if a devise be to a and his posterity it will be only a  estatetail but the master of the roll think that a devise to a man and his  posterity will create a fee see idle v cook p wms that the word which be  absolute necessary in a commonlaw conveyance to create a fee may be dispense  with in a will a devise to a man and his successor give a fee web v herring  roll Rep Reg lib a fol the cause be hear on the that of October when a account  be direct but the consideration of the disposal of the property be reserve  till such account shall be take no subsequent entry of the cause as be find  whereupon the Lord keeper order they to search if they can find any precedent
c b anonymous affidavit of write lose this rule be lie down per cancellar that  if a man prefer a bill for a thing of which the court have jurisdiction there  the plaintiff need not make a affidavit that he have not the write but if it  be to entitle the court to a jurisdiction there he must as if a man bring a  bill to be satisfy a debt upon a bind and pretend the bind be lose he must  make affidavit of it for if the bind be not lose this court have no  jurisdiction but in this case the bill be bring for discovery of write and  that the Lord chancellor say the court have a jurisdiction of and there need  no affidavit that the plaintiff have they not dorm v fortescue atk anon ibidem  Whitechurch v Golding p wms post c p freeman de term S mich in curian porter
c b anonymous assent to a legacy before probate resolve that if a executor  consent to a legacy and die before probate yet the assent be good enough rule  upon a demurrer vin ab dyer a
c b anonymous charity it be say and not deny that if a man devise a sum of  money to such charitable use as he shall direct by a codicil freeman to be  annex to his will or by a note in write and afterward leaves no direction  neither by note nor codicil the court of chancery have power to dispose of it  to such charitable use as the court shall think fit and so it be hold in the  case of Mr Sidrofens will report vern and cite from Reg lib in note to  Moggridge v Thackwell Ves it be also cite in mill v farmer Meriv and Lord  Eldon c ibidem p and refer to the principal case as one to which he can find  no contradiction elsewhere and his lordship though he express his dislike to  such discretionary jurisdiction feel himself bind by the authority of the  present case and decide in conformity thereto see post append c and the case  of one Jones but if the will point at any particular charity as for  maintenance of a schoolmaster or poor widow then the court of chancery ought  not to direct it to any other purpose the court will not direct the execution  of a trust of a charity in a manner different from that intend except so far  as it see that the intention can be execute literal but that another mode may  be adopt consistent with the testator general intention so as to execute it  though not in mode in substance per cur in attorney general v Boultbee Ves jun  but such as be point at by the will as if the devise shall be for such school  as he shall appoint and appoint none the court may apply it for what school  they please freeman er p but for no other purpose than a school although it  may be for what school the court think fit
c b anonymous contract to sell land not execute special occupant tenant of  frank tenement descendible see Ripley v Waterworth Ves where the doctrine of  special occupancy be full discuss agree to sell to b and b pay he part of the  purchase money the vendor die and his heir enter the vendee exhibit his bill  against he to have his contract execute resolve by the Lord keeper Bridgeman  and other that the plaintiff shall not be relieve for the heir be but special  occupant and do not claim under his father and therefore the covenant or  agreement of his father shall not oblige he to a conveyance of the land But  see post c p that whoever claim as heir be bind by his ancestor covenant  respect the land and Stephens v Bailey Nels extend the doctrine to special  occupant overrule the present case this be about
c b anonymous copyhold devise No surrender Ant case post case a copyhold be  devise to trustee for year to raise legacy for grandchild and no surrender  make to the use of the will see now stat Geo c and the question be whether  this court shall help in this case as it will do in case of a purchaser or  provision for a child but here it be object this be no provision but a bounty  in the grandfather but per curian this court will compel the heir to make it  good as well as in the case of child freeman de term S trin in curian porter
c b anonymous distribution it be hold that where a man make a will and a  executor and the executor die a administrator de good non a distinction must  be make where the executor die before and where after probate of his testator  will in the first case no administration de good non be grant but a immediate  administration Wankford v Wankford salk by when the executor have take probate  shall not make distribution because the party do not die intestate Goodier v  clerk keb and so not within the statute car c where a man die have make his  will and a executor and give he any particular sum as pound or pound and make  no disposition of the rest and residue there the residuum freeman shall be  distribute to the next of kin bishop of cloyne v young Ves sen because  although he make a will yet he be hold to die intestate as to the residuum
c b anonymous hop to the executor in this case it be hold that hop which grow  out of old root the person die in July videlicet after manurance shall go to  the executory see Mr hargrave note to   Litt b and not to the heir cro so hold  and no resolution since to the contrary but otherwise it be of apple and nut
c b anonymous land charge with debt if a man by his will devise his land to I  S and do desire that the say I S shall pay his debt or if it be the say I S  pay his debt or if immediate after the devise of his land he do appoint or  desire that his debt shall be pay or if he use any expression in the will  whereby it appear that he have any intent to charge his land with his debt in  such case his land will stand charged If the personal asset be deficient but  the personal estate be the primary fund the will must show a very unequivocal  intent to discharge it or it will be first apply in aid of the realty see ante  c p and note in which case however the intent of the will be allow to be aid  by averment but in the case at bar where the testator have in the beginning of  his will say that he desire that all his just debt shall be pay and afterward  in the say will he give several legacy and devise land it be hold that this  devisee be not charge with the payment of the debt for if that shall be so the  debt of every testator will be charge upon his land for there be but few will  but have some such expression whereby the testator desire his debt to be  paid Williams v city Ves freeman er p
c b anonymous Lord keeper personal estate devise ante case a personal estate  be devise to a and in case she die without issue then to b resolve that the  devise over to b be void and the whole decree to a see ante c p and authority  there cite in note to which add c in appendix freeman de term S mich in curian  porter
c b anonymous mortgage in what unlike devise conditional post case sir Thomas  man case be cite by the master of the roll that where a devise of land be make  to the old daughter pay pound to the second daughter and pound to the three  daughter c and if the old daughter do not pay the pound to the second daughter  by such a day then he devise the land to the second daughter she pay her  sister portion by a certain day and if she do not pay then he devise the land  to the three daughter c it be resolve this be not in the nature of a mortgage  to be redeemable after the time of payment be over but that the old daughter  not pay at the time appoint the second daughter shall have the land and the  old have no relief See ante c p note freeman de term S hill in curian porter c  anonymous legacy interest agree that where a legacy be give to be pay at  marriage or twentyone year or any other particular time that it will carry  interest from that time Crickett v dolby Ves though a bill for it be not  prefer till afterward but where a legacy be give general and no time mention  for the payment of it there it will carry interest only from the time of the  bill exhibit or a demand made See ante c p note and extract from Reg lib  subjoin to c ante p freeman er p
c b anonymous mortgagor in his bill suggest payment of diverse part of the  money mortgagee by his answer say it be pay for other debt no proof on either  side the court must believe the defendant answer The defendant answer be on  oath but the allegation of the bill not make under that sanction even the  testimony of one witness in support of the bill can unless support by  collateral circumstance prevail against the positive oath of a defendant  Morphett v Jones Swanst post c p c anonymous escape lie not against the warden  of the fleet for escape of one in execution for breach of a decree but the  action of escape in such case be now express give by stat and Ann c S
c b anonymous personal estate in aid of the real ante case and note post case  it be say by finch that a heir at law shall have the personal estate in aid of  the real estate but a remainder man shall not and also that it shall he have  against a residuary legatee but not against a particular legatee but haeres  factus shall have aid as well as haeres born Lutkins v leigh can tempt Talb  Hanby v Robert Ambl freeman c c anonymous hard Rep heir and executor Rep can  if a executor have asset he be bind to redeem mortgage for the benefit of the  heir if a heir be charge with a debt where the executor have asset he may  compel the executor to pay it although the creditor have his remedy against  either Galton v Hancock atk post c p append c freeman er p de term S mich in  curian porter
c b anonymous S c in note to p wms it be hold that if the heir have any  advancement by money or personal Pratt v Pratt FitzGib estate that it shall be  reckon as part of the share because the statute be that he shall have a fall  share notwithstanding any land which he shall have by descent or otherwise  from the intestate in colonel Norton case above it be hold that he have buy  his son a freeman er p pensioner place in king James time for pound which upon  king James abdication be lose so that he have no benefit by it yet this be  rule to be a advancement and to be reckon as part of his share freeman de term  S mich in curian porter
c b anonymous security upon payment of a legacy post case a executor be not  bind to pay legacy without security it be not usual now to take such security  as whether give or not a court of equity will compel a legatee to refund if  the asset prove to be deficient Hawkins v day Ambl anon atk post c p to refund  in case the estate prove not sufficient to pay debt to be afterward discover  and to refund in proportion if not sufficient to pay other legacy
c b anonymous witness may be examine before replication a replication have  frequent be order to be file nunc pro tunc even after a decree Rodney v hare  mosely if the plaintiff do not else c b anonymous account before a master the  party may discharge himself upon his own oath for any sum not exceed S  Marshfield v Weston vern but the affidavit must be positive and circumstantial  Robinson v come atk anon vern per Lord Bridgeman and master of the roll Oct  freeman c anonymous legatee refund ante case b and note a executor pay legacy  leave debt to pay and die Administration de good non be take out the creditor  exhibit his bill against the administrator and the legatee and the court  decree that the legatee shall refund for no executor be bind to pay a legacy  till he be secure to repay when debt be discover therefore in equity the  laches of the executor shall not hurt the creditor it seem that even after  considerable laches on the part of the creditor themselves the legatee will be  compel to refund Hardwicke v mind Anstr
c b Bretton v Bretton car S c Charles Rep Nels Eq can ab devise to young child  money be bequeathe to young child where there be diverse daughter and one son  who be the heir at law and have a fair inheritance yet be by birth a young  child decree that he be not a young child within the devise and shall not take  by it be heir at law the like case be adjudge so by the master of the roll  inter mead and cane all Charles Rep see also Broadmead v wood Br lady Lincoln  v Pelham Ves bowl v bowl ib matthews v Paul will Ch can July
c b Piggott v canning answer without prejudice to the plea notam in  grammatical case piggot v Canning the defendant plead a decree and that the  plaintiff be purchase pendent light and the defendant be order to answer save  the benefit of his plea note the bill be there exhibit to be relieve against  the say decree but the general rule be that a purchaser pendent light be bind  by the proceed in the suit Garth v ware atk and the lie to hang be in itself  sufficient notice bishop of Winchester v pain Ves Lloyd v Passingham Ves  Metcalf v Pulvertoft Ves and Bea fraud seem to have be the material allegation  piggot be a purchaser without notice of canning suit or trust and say the  decree be get by fraud freeman er p
c backhouse v MIDDLETON hill car S c Charles Rep Charles can the last cite  report be the most circumstantial Lord Bridgeman revivor by purchaser Ch can  deposition in a void suit Bacchus be purchaser exhibit a bill of revivor  against the defendant and revive the suit by order and the defendant join in  examine witness but at the hear the plaintiff be dismiss for that the  plaintiff as purchaser can not maintain a bill of revivor The contrary  decision of sir John Trevor m r in don v Allen vern be overrule see hunt v  Lord say and seal Sel can in Charles a original bill in nature of a bill of  revivor be the proper course upon which all party will have the benefit of the  former proceed and no new defence will be allow Clare v Wordell vern Minshall  v Lord Mohun ibidem and it be now move that in a original bill exhibit by  Bacchus he may use the deposition take in the cause of freeman revivor but the  court deny it because in truth there be never any bill depend in it for the  bill of revivor bring by a purchaser be void and the deposition therefore take  on no issue and no bill freeman er p and answer depend Aldbrookes case Clavt  prac Reg Wyatt Ed and consequent no indictment can lie against the witness if  perjure per amhurst adjudge in the time of the late commissioner that where  baron and feme in right of the feme exhibit a bill and the baron die the wife  may proceed without bill of revivor anon atk tooth proc Mitf but see Randall v  Cowarden caryi where a bill of revivor be hold the right modus of proceed and  post c p therefore dr perys wife go on though her husband be dead
c baker v BEAMONT S c Ch can Nov car Lord chancellor have cor one be in the  fleet for breach of a decree for not vacate judgement ante c p and by  judgement in a feign action in the king bench get himself turn over thither  and so have liberty to go abroad and get the defendant in the judgement take  in execution and on habeas corpus he be bring hither and recommit to the fleet  Elvard v warren Ch Rep and confine to his chamber prac Reg in the case of  south v gardener tooth the defendant be put in iron for not perform the decree  but accord to the more lenient administration of justice in modern time even  close confinement will not be order unless the contempt be a very flagrant one  call v Mortimer Br and a habeas corpus with a long return to the defendant in  the judgement grant
c baker v Jennings S c Eq can ab copyhold devise ante case b a copyholder in  fee have issue two daughter devise a copyhold estate to his young daughter  whereby her fortune be make much mare considerable than the elder sister and  there be no surrender see now stat Geo c make to the use of his will the  question be whether that defect shall be supply in this court for although  that defect be general supply where it be for a provision for a wife or child  yet in this case in case it be not supply her fortune will have be equal to  her other sister and the copyhold will have descend equal to they both yet  notwithstanding it be supply here be intend a provision for a child though it  make her superior to her sister in fortune ex relation mri poley
c barker v kellet Trin Lord Bridgeman redemption from the assignee of a  mortgage post case the bill be prefer by the plaintiff as heir to the  mortgagor to have redemption against Mr Kellet who be assignee of the  mortgagee and to know what he pay for the assignment and on payment of the  money Mr Kellet pay for the assignment to have a reconveyance Kellet demurrer  to that part which require he to set forth what he pay for the assignment and  because the bill have not make the first mortgagee party ante c p and note and  rule a good demurrer for that he shall not discover what he pay on the  assignment and if the plaintiff will redeem he shall pay what be due upon the  original mortgage But as between the mortgagee and person claim under he  without the privity of the mortgagor they can add to what be due settle the  account or turn interest into principal matthews v Walwyn Ves post append c c  anonymous infant if a infant suffer a decree by consent it be for ever  reversible Probably a typographical error for irreversible Harrison v Ramsey  Ves sen wall v Bushby Br Bradish v gee Kenyons Rep Bernal v marquis of  donnegal dows p c however in Butterfield v Butterfield Ves sen a appeal from a  decree by consent seem to have be entertain and see post c p otherwise of a  adversary bill
c BEAUTRY ux v ibson all S c Ch can may car master of the roll ante case and  note lease to attend the inheritance release govern by the agreement ibson  possess of a church lease for year buy the fee of the trustee for sale and  then covenant to stand seize c for his wife for life his wife release the  personal estate to the executor the church be restore ante c p and she sue  here to have the term against the release as long as she live cur the lease be  to attend the inheritance and shall go where the inheritance be to go  videlicet to the wife c as to the release it appear by the proof that it be  not intend the term shall pass and therefore nothing of that shall be include  to go to the executor and the release shall extend no far than the agreement  which beget it so in Lord Braybrook v Inskip Ves a reversion be hold not to be  include by the general term of a release
c BEVANT v pope trust of a copyhold the widow estate subject ante case and  note there a copyhold be grant to a in trust for b a die leave a widow who by  the custom of the manor be entitle to her widow estate the question be whether  or no she shall have her widow estate and not be liable to the trust and it be  hold that she shall not no more than the wife of a trustee shall have dower  for the widow estate spring out of the trustestate by the custom as dower do  by the commonlaw there be however this material difference between a widow  right to freebench by custom and to dower at commonlaw in the latter case her  title commence by the marriage and can be defeat by any act of the husband but  in the former case the title be destroy by a sale in the husband lifetime as  it be a necessary condition of her claim that the husband shall have die seize  Benson v Scott Carth brown v Raindle Ves king v inhabitant of lopen t r
c bishop OF worcester v one OF his COPYHOLDERS S c Eq can ab Lord Bridgeman  forfeiture of copyhold relievable the copyholder prefer his bill to be relieve  against a forfeiture for cut timber per cur if the waste be voluntary peachy v  duke of Somerset Prec in Chan Dench v Bampton Ves the court will not relieve  and a issue at law be direct whether he cut else tree with a intent to do  waste Foley v Wilson east and the Lord keeper be press to alter this issue  will not alter it
c bow v Whitmore Dec at the roll forfeiture by condition break bill be to be  relieve against a entry make by the defendant upon the plaintiff who be his  lessee for a forfeiture by breach of condition in the lease in which lease  there be three condition videlicet nonpayment of rend wilful waste and assign  without licence it be insist by the defendant counsel that upon a entry for  nonpayment of rend this court do ordinary relieve because it can put the  lessor in the same condition he be in by order the payment of the rend and his  charge c but where waste be commit by cut down great tree there it be  impossible to set they up again and to put the lessor in the same plight he be  in before and therefore ought not to give relief but notwithstanding the  plaintiff be relieve and refer to a master to inquire what the defendant be  damnified by the fall of tree and upon payment of the arrear of rend damage  and charge and give security for payment of his rend the defendant be order to  make a new leased See ante c p c p c p and note to the first of those case the  authority cite in which make it extreme doubtful whether relief will now be  give under such circumstance
c bowyer v peak S c Eq can ab master of the roll feme covert trader a feme  covert trade by the consent of her husband buy and sell good and give bill for  money and her husband permit her so to do and receive the profit of her trade  if she die and leaves a stock to her husband he shall be answerable for debt  contract in the trade and it be say by the master of the roll that a feme  covert be not under a total disability to contract but if the husband be  assent it be obligatory Lamphier v creed Ves ante c p and he cite the case in  h that if a woman seal a bind in the presence of the husband and he stand by  and do not gainsay it shall bind which he believe may be take out of the book  of number where it be say if the husband be present and do not gainsay it  shall bind freeman er p and in this case the suit be against the husband after  the freeman death of the wife for a bill of pound which she have borrow of the  plaintiff for carry on the trade a issue be direct to try whether the money be  borrow for that purpose for if it be the husband shall be decree to pay it de  term S mich in curian porter
c bright v smith S c Eq can ab master of the roll at Powishouses custom of  London as to orphan by the custom of London if a freeman bath advance a child  in his lifetime and it appear by his will or by any write what the sum advance  be and that the sum advance be less than the customary share do amount to such  child so advance may come in for a customary share bring the sum so advance in  hotchpot but if it do not appear what the advancement be then the advancement  be a bar of the customary share the case here be that the father of the  plaintiff and defendant in his will take notice that he have advance the  freeman plaintiff in his lifetime by give her pound and upward and thereupon  give her five shilling only by his will and the question be whether this shall  be take to be such a certain sum appear in write that she may put it in  hotchpot and come in for her customary share by reason of the word upward  which as it be say make it very uncertain but decree that this be a certain  sum appear in write and he will take it to be pound only and although it be  say that by the word upward it may be take to be pound or pound the master of  the roll say it can not be so intend here but that it may be intend a little  more and so little that the testator do not well know and de least non curate  law note it be suppose that the word upward be insert purposely to make it  uncertain which make it look like a trick but if he have take notice that he  have advance his daughter and not say what she have be bar but freeman er p  here it be decree that she shall come in for her share bring the pound in  hotchpot Beckford v Beckford vern cleaver v spurling p wms Elliot v collier  Ves sen Reg lib a fol Decree that a account be take and the say pound be bring  into hotchpot and then the personal estate be divide into moieties one moiety  thereof to be pay to the plaintiff de term pasch in curian porter
c Bubbs case Lord chancellor heir executor Bubb do contract with a for a  parcel of land for pound and pay he in part but before the rest of the money  be pay or any conveyance execute a die and make b his executor c be his heir b  prefer a bill against Bubb and c to have the rest of the purchase money who  answer that they do not intend to proceed with the bargain and Bubb say he be  Willing to lose his pound that he have pay in this case it be agree that Bubb  who be the purchaser may have prefer his bill against the heir to have have a  execution of a conveyance pursuant to the agreement by reason the agreement be  execute in part in the testator lifetime by payment of pound but it be insist  by the counsel of Bubb that by reason he be the purchaser do not desire a  execution of the freeman agreement and be content to lose what money he have  pay that the executor shall not compel they to it but the court rule that the  executor shall have the money and that Bubb may when he please compel the heir  to execute a conveyance of the estate where a valid agreement have be make for  the sale or purchase of a estate which one or the other of the contract party  be entitle to carry into execution in a court of equity there in the first  case the representative of the personal estate be entitle to the money arise  form the sale of the land and e turning in the other case the heir be entitle  to have the purchase complete for his benefit out of the personal asset  attorney general v day Ves sen Lacon v martins atk Buckmaster v Harrop Ves  Seton v Slade Ves in each of the suppose case both the heir and the executor  be necessary party townsend v Champernowne price note that the court take this  to be a juggle betwixt Bubb and the heir suppose that the heir have agree to  pay back the money to Bubb and so to have keep the land which be worth much  more for now the heir be to convey the land but to have nothing for it for the  executor be to have the money freeman er p
c BULSTROD and letchmere privilege of a barrister it be rule in this cause  upon a demurrer to a bill exhibit for the discovery of deed in the defendant  possession and of the content of other deed which he have see of Mr dingley  estate that the defendant be a counsellor at law shall not be bind to answer  concern any write which he have see nor for any thing which he know in the  cause as counsellor but if any thing come to his knowledge before he be a  counsellor or upon any other account he shall have the privilege of the bar  and be not oblige to answer but a case be cite in Bridgemans time of morris  and Clayton that they be but scrivener shall not have that privilege and the  Lord chancellor make it a doubt if a thing be reveal under the condition of  secrecy to one that be not a barrister whether or no he will oblige he to  answer S c Charles can the negative have obvious be here transpose probable  through a mere typographical error with respect to fact know by a barrister or  attorney unprofessionally the claim of privilege can not be  maintained Parkhurst v Lowten swanston at present there can be no doubt that  the duty of secrecy for as to the party entrust it be a duty not a privilege  extend to solicitor as well as barrister that confidential communication make  during the progress of a suit shall not be divulge be the privilege of the  client and the public see wright v mayor Ves though a contrary doctrine be  hold former Maddox v Maddox Ves sen
c butler v bernard Feb S c Charles can Lord keeper administrator mortgage the  intestate term who shall redeem a administrator mortgage the intestate term  and make a his executor and die b take out letter of administration de good  non to the first intestate and claim the residuary interest and trust of the  term and pray that he may have the benefit of redemption but the court decree  the benefit of redemption to a the executor of the first administrator who  have alien the whole estate in law Elliot v Merryman Barnard ever v Corbet p  wms of the term and be not possess in auter law of any part of the interest  thereof but in his own right and the demand against he be a personal one in  respect of asset come to his hand but no lie on those alienate nugent v  Gifford atk post c p and so it shall go to his executor and not to b the  administrator de good non
c butler v wallis and cool executor of BOWYER S c Eq can ab Lord Bridgman  legacy proportionable executor not pay first the suit be for a legacy the  defendant demand allowance for their own legacy first but it be deny and order  that a account betake for the whole estate and the defendant and plaintiff to  abate equal and proportionable for what the estate fall short and so not like  the case where executor pay their own debt first at commonlaw or he that first  sue his debt in equal degree before the other Plowd in margin attorneygeneral  v robin p wms in equity even if a legatee get a decree for his legacy and be  pay and afterward a deficiency happen he shall refund anon p wms
c c merry v abney the father abney the son and Kendal Nov car S c Charles can  Nels Eq can ab judge foster and master of the roll contract for land another  purchase without notice notam en cest contract the vendor be seize in trust  for he who contract Kendal contract with the plaintiff to sell he certain land  in Leicestershire after which Abney the father live near those land in the  behalf of Abney the son a merchant in London purchase those land of Kendal and  have a conveyance from Kendal to Abney the son and his heir the plaintiff bill  be to be relieve upon this contract with Kendal and against the conveyance and  charge notice of this contract to both the Abneys Abney the son plead himself  a purchaser good fide upon a valuable consideration without notice of Kendalls  contract with the plaintiff and without any trust for his father cur notice to  the father who transact be notice to the son and shall affect he so notice of  a dormant encumbrance to one who purchase for another be notice to the  purchaser Hierm v mill Ves Mountford v Scott mad Toulmin v steer Meriv  Jennings v more vern post c p and accord this case be decree at the hear  videlicet that they shall convey to merry the plaintiff it appear at the hear  that Abney the father have notice of merry contract before he purchase for his  son
c car v bolter executor of sir John cutler master of the roll assignee of a  mortgage what to be allow brown the mortgagee of car for a small consideration  assign Iris mortgage to sir Jo cutler and the bill be to redeem the mortgage  and the question be whether this executor of the assignee of the mortgage  shall insist upon the whole mortgage money or upon so much only as he pay the  mortgagee and it be say per cur that it be the constant rule of this court  that if the mortgagee assign without the mortgagors freeman er p be party the  assignee shall stand in the place of the mortgagee and have the benefit of all  the mortgagemoney whatever he give for it Anon salk Darey v hall vern Bromley  v holland Ves but though as against the mortgagor the assignee have this right  yet as against subsequent encumbrancer and creditor it have be say he will  only be allow what he real pay William v Springfield vern but see the  generality of this observation restrict by Lord Hardwicke c to the case of a  agent trustee heir at law or executor so purchase in encumbrance Morrett v  pask atk and see anon Ventr but if such assignment be make and the mortgagor a  party there what the assignee pay he shall be allow and no more because the  mortgagor be make a party the sum pay by the assignee be as it be a account  state to that sum it be in proof that bolter have offer to take a less sum but  to that it be answer per cur that wherever a person offer to take less than be  due to he there if it be pay he be shall never recover more in equity and on  the other side if the debtor do not accept the offer this court will never  hold the party to it afterward for a agreement must be bind upon all the party  or upon none Gibbons v Caunt Ves and to be enforce must be a conclude  agreement not one rest in treaty Huddlestone v Briscoe Ves a strong where one  party have break off the treaty though he shall afterward change his mind the  locus pnitentiae be open to the other party
c chaffin v gawden S c vern Lord keeper that which is fixed letae a bill be  prefer by the lord of a manor against the tenant for that which is fixed letae  the equity of the bill be to prevent multiplicity of suit in regard it be a  sum of money Payable to the lord of the leet of which every baron that owe  suit and service to the leet be to pay a part accord to the custom of the  place so that to bring a action against every contributor for every little sum  will cause multiplicity of action and thereupon it be decree for the plaintiff  Lord Teynham v Herbert atk hanson v gardener Ves Ewelme hospital v Andover  vern unless they will go to trial at law upon the usage where the issue be  direct to be upon the to use and not upon the debet for it be say if the issue  be upon the debet the right must be make out at the trial but upon the to use  it be sufficient to prove the usage and so it be direct in dr hinckley case of  Worcestershire for a pension of per annum issue out of the estate of Mr jolly  it be say in this case that although a distress be incident to amercement in a  courtleet yet for any duty which the lord entitle himself to by custom he can  distrain unless the custom be also to distrain for it But see contra tonkin v  croker Lord raym Reg lib a fol a issue be offer to the defendant to try the  custom but it do not appear that they accept the offer and a decree be make  against they for the sum demand by the bill freeman that which is fixed letae  be pay to the lord in consideration of the charge in obtain the courtleet  which save the attendance of the resiants from the turn c
c chamber v Cotchett Richard chamber the father by his will give to the  plaintiff his child pound apiece and if either die before the age of his share  to go to the survivor and if all die before that age then their portion to go  to t c the plaintiff be infant prefer their bill by their next friend for  their legacy the defendant who have marry the mother and executrix insist that  the legacy ought not to be pay before the age of because it be order by the  will that if either die before that age his legacy shall go over Whatever  right the legatee over may assert to have the bequest secure the executrix can  have none to retain it see now stat Geo c S decree that the legacy shall be  pay present and interest from the time of the bill and guardian to give his  own security that if either of the legatee die the legacy shall be apply  accord to the direction of the will Post c p and note where there be no  guardian or trustee appoint by the will to receive the legacy for the infant  see the course to be pursue mention in Whopham v Wingfield I Ves freeman de  term S mich in curian porter
c chamberlain v chamberlain S c Eq can ab Lord chancellor will averment of the  intent of the testator ante case post case the father of the plaintiff and  defendant do devise his estate to his old son Edmund with a remainder to his  first second and three son and for default of such issue to his second son  Burgundy with remainder to his first second and three son and so to his three  son c provide that if his old son Edmund when he enjoy the estate shall have  no issue male live that then he shall pay pound per annum for the maintenance  of the old son of Burgundy freeman and for his education in such manner as be  fit for his degree until his old son shall have a son produce and live Edmund  the old son have issue a son who live three day and then die it be freeman er  p in proof that Edmund the testator do declare that his intent be that this  pound per annum shall be pay in case Edmund shall have a son bear that shall  die sudden after per cur the annuity be determine and a collateral proof shall  not be admit against the express word of the will and it be probable his  intent be that the pound shall be continue to be pay although Edmund have a  son which die sudden after yet now it must be take upon the word of the will  and a averment of the intent of the party contrary to his express word shall  not be receive and so decree against the plaintiff if it have be a trust the  intent may have be supply by proof per Cancellar Langham v Sandford Meriv glad  v yapp mad
c chase v box Lord keeper payment of money how apply it be hold that if a man  be indebt to another for principal and interest and pay money general that it  shall be apply in the first place to sink the interest before any part of the  principal shall be sink and so it be hold by the Lord keeper upon the same  reason that if a man owe money upon a bind which carry interest and a bookdebt  which carry no interest and pay money general it shall be apply in the first  place for payment of the bookdebt but that be deny at the bar because when a  man pay money it shall be apply as he intend that pay it and therefore where  both party be silent it shall be intend in discharge of that which be most  beneficial for he that pay it and that shall be to sink the debt which carry  interest and say there be precedent for it but it be agree on all hand that if  at the time of the payment of money he that receive it declare that he receive  it upon one account and he that pay it declare that he pay it upon another  account there it shall be apply accord to the declaration of he that pay  it See every branch of this question full develop and all the lead authority  except that in the text above cite in clayton case Meriv to see also Bodenham  v Purchas barn and Ald brook v Enderby Brod and bing the result seem to be  that where any payment be express make at the time upon a particular account  it must be so apply but if the payment be make indefinite the creditor may  provide he make his election immediate apply such payment to what account he  please where no express appropriation be make by either party the legal  presumption be that the first item on the debit side of the account be  discharge or reduce by the first item on the credit side in champion v Scott  Barnard king b r the court declare that such a question can not be proper  examine at commonlaw but be more fit for a court of equity Reg lib a fol the  entry confirm the above report of the LordKeepers decision
c chute v the lady Dacres S c Charles can Eq can ab October car Lord  chancellor master of the roll allege that the defendant be mistake in her  answer and desire she may amend foster v foster Br Livesey v Wilson Ves and  Bea as to the mode of amendment when allow see well v wood Ves Reg lib a fol  it appear by affidavit that the clause in question be write in the margin of  the draft of the answer and be insert and make a part of the say answer  without the defendant knowledge or consent it be therefore pray that she may  be at liberty to amend her say answer which be allow the matter be insert by  counsel after her perusal which be admit by the court no replication be file  as it be in the Lord Coventry time inter Chettle v Chettle
c clarke v jevon mortgage redeemable dam grant possess of a term for year of  house in the strand mortgage they to hind and then sell the equity of  redemption to the defendant afterward the freeman er p say dam grant sell the  equity of redemption to George dewy the plaintiff testator who mortgage the  same to Sandford the defendant jevon buy in sandford mortgage pay he his  principal and interest George dewy die and the plaintiff be his executor  prefer his bill against the defendant to redeem the defendant plead that  before dam grant sell the equity of redemption to dewy he sell it to her for  one hundred and fifty pound which she have good fide pay and that she have  since purchase in the estate in law of Sandford and so demand judgement  whether she shall answer and by the Lord keeper she must answer for though it  be true general where a purchaser of a equity without notice get in a estate  at law no redemption shall be against he ante c p yet here dewy have take in  the old mortgage Videlicet that to hind and this mortgage to Sandford be make  by him The defendant by buy in the mortgage grant by dewy prima fancy  recognize his right to grant it Reg lib a fol Decree that the plaintiff ought  to be admit to a redemption of the premise on payment of the money lend by  Sandford to dewy or so much of the same as remain due and on such payment the  defendant jevon be to assign the say mortgage and all her interest in the say  mortgage premise to the plaintiff but in default of payment at the time fix  the plaintiff bill to be dismiss with cost there be no case where a man shall  be hinder from redeem his own mortgage freeman de term S hill in curian porter
c clarke v turner S c Eq can ab trust to dispose as the trustee shall think  fit a devise to turner and his heir upon trust that he shall convey it to such  of the relation of the testator as he shall think best and most reputable for  his family a die without issue and the heir at law who be the testator brother  prefer a bill against the defendant to have he convey theestate to he it be in  proof on the defendant part that the testator before the make of his will do  several time declare that the plaintiff be a ill husband and will spend his  estate if he shall leave it to he and several other expression show the  dislike of the testator to the plaintiff but per curian there be nothing in  proof against the plaintiff of any disbehaviour since the decease of the  testator this court will judge it most reputable for the family that the heir  at law shall have it and for the discourse which be before the make of the  will those be all at a end by make the will and notwithstanding all those  discourse it can be deny but if the trustee will give it he he be not disable  to take it freeman and in this case the case of mosely and mosely Rep tempt  finch be cite where a estate be devise to be dispose by two trustee to such of  his relation as they shall think fit and they disarm and thereupon this court  decree it to be convey to the heir at law and a case of baker and barrett be  cite where a man give a personal estate to his wife upon trust that she shall  dispose it among her child in such manner as she shall think fit see ante c p  note and she will have make a unequal distribution of it and this court order  her to give it among they equal there be no proof of any misbehaviour in any  of they and in this cause it be decree that the defendant shall convey to the  plaintiff who be heir at law But see Kemp v Kemp Ves the court now disclaim  the right of exercise the power itself Reg lib a fol the entry confirm the  report of the decree
c colchester v lord stamford and lady suffolk legacy Chargeable upon real and  personal estate if a legacy of pound be give to a Chargeable upon the real and  personal estate and another legacy of pound to b Chargeable upon the personal  estate only and the personal be only pound in this case a shall not have any  thing but of the personal estate but shall be whole satisfy out of the real  estate for although where there be a debt by judgement or statute which charge  the real estate there this court can hinder the creditor come upon the  personal estate because he have right so to do by law and it be not in the  testator power to take that right away still there the other creditor have a  equity to charge the real estate for so much as be take out of the personal  estate and may prefer a bill for that purposed Ante c p and note but in the  case of legatee the party hall not be send round about but the legatee who  have a charge upon the real estate must take his satisfaction there and shall  not come upon the personal estate hide v hide Ch Rep master v master I p wms  post c p and per Trevor if a man have two daughter and devise to one pound out  of his real estate and to another pound out of his personal estate there if  the real estate be evict that legacy be lose and shall never come into a  average with the other upon the personal estate sayer v sayer Prec in Charles
c comb v proud S c Charles can Eq can ab Eq can ab and on the original bill  post c p Jun car demurrer Lord chancellor baron Rainsford post case review  what error assign the bill be a bill of review and in draw up the decretal  order the matter on which the decree be make be declare to be prove and the  case state far different from the fact therefore the error assign be that the  decree be ground on matter not prove and instance in particular that the  matter mention in the decree to be prove be not prove this demurrer be general  that the error assign be not error in law and be but misjudgments c and on  debate it be declare that on a bill of review the cause of review must arise  and appear upon the case as state in the decree ante c p Mellish v William  vern see however Bonham v Newcomb ibidem and that the fact must be admit as  then state and that though the fact whereon the court give judgement be  mistake yet there be no ground of a bill of review but the fact in this case  must be admit true and the decree be matter of record and can be try only by  the record but in mistake the fact the proper course have be to have get the  cause reheard before the decree have be sign and inrolled Ante c p Reg lib a  fol the court assist by turner b not Rainsford b hold that the demurrer be  good and dismiss the plaintiff bill
c contract to sell his estate to m for pound and a annuity of pound a year for  c life two day afterward he die per ld Chan such a contract the term be fair  shall be specifical perform by the heir of c to decree otherwise will be to  lie down a rule that where a bargain depend on a contingent event which chance  both party know if the event turn out against one of the party he must be disN  ed from his contract Mortimer v capper equity case abridge bro Chan Cas by a  marriageagreement which be reduce into write but not seal the son intend wife  be to have more than will have be leave for the father indebt his wife and two  daughter unpreferred and the court will not decree it principal by reason of  the extremity of it but leave the party to his remedy at law here the  agreement be not fraudulent or gain by surprise and therefore not to be set  aside the court not be Willing to decree the whole and not be able to decree  part for a court of equity can assess damage it must necessary go to law Max  of Eq p the note car anon equity case abridge Chan can
c Conway v stroude S c Eq can ab executor de son tort a creditor of I S  decease prefer his bill against the defendant for a discovery of the estate of  I S which be suppose to be in his hand the defendant demurrer because there be  no executor or administrator of I S plaintiff or defendant and hold to be a  good demurrer so a plea will hold Plunkett v Penson atk because if no person  will administer the plaintiff as creditor may and it be necessary that the  executor or administrator shall be party because it may be they may show how  the plaintiff demand be discharged A court of equity will not in general  decide a case unless every one sustain any character the right of which can be  affect by the decision be a party knoll v Alcock Ves but see a necessary  except case where the executor be outlaw and can be find heath v Percival p  wms
c cook v S c Eq can ab contribution three bind in a bind one be principal and  the other two surety afterward a four man become bind to the obligee that if  the other three do not pay accord to the condition of the bind that he will  pay a month after one of the two surety pay the money and prefer his bill  against the four now for contribution and the question be whether he shall be  bind to contribute his be but a supplemental security see parson v Briddock  vern lucid explain in wright v Morley Ves from which it shall appear that  although there be no direct contract or engagement as between the original and  supplemental security yet the former have a claim against the latter through  the medium of the creditor to all who right he become entitle by discharge the  debt see also Craythorne v Swinburne Ves Mayhew v Crickett swanston and the  master of the roll seem to think that he shall freeman er p freeman de term S  trin in curian porter
c cook v walter S c Eq can ab Lord keeper executor to distribute the question  upon the will of mrs Penelope lace be she make her will and the defendant her  executor and give he pound to buy he mourning and the question be whether this  be such a devise to he as shall exclude he from the residue of the personal  estate so that it shall go by way of distribution to the next of kin the  plaintiff bill be for distribution it be admit in this case if no part of the  personal estate be devise to the executor although there be no devise of the  residuum he shall have it and sir Sebastian smith case be cite for the  defendant where a man have make his will and devise all his book except twelve  which his executor shall choose and it be adjudge that shall not bar the  executor of the residuum but it be not a express gift but a exception out of  what he have give which will by consequence have fall into the personal estate  and in this case it be allege that this be not a bequest of any thing to the  executor of any more than what be to be spend upon mourning and so ought not  to exclude he it be no profit to he but to pay respect to the decease but  decree that this be a bar to the executor ante c b p c p Reg lib a fol decree  that the defendant the executor shall come to a account for the rend and  profit of the say Penelope land and also for her personal estate come to his  the say defendant band and that the same shall after payment of the testatrixs  debt and legacy be divide among the party concern in a due course of  administration the consideration of cost be reserve till after the account  shall be take for that it be a gift to he of that sum and he may lie out what  he please of it in mourning and decree that he must account for it to the next  of kin
c copplestone v Foxwell car S c Charles can salk justice foster in absence  porter the plaintiff make a absolute conveyance to the defendant by lease and  release of land worth pound per and in consideration of pound the plaintiff at  the make of the conveyance have but the reversion in fee expectant on a old  life which short after die the plaintiff then make livery to the defendant the  bill be that the say conveyance be make as a mortgage and the plaintiff to be  admit to redeem the proof be that the defendant have say several time after  the mortgage that he know not how long he shall enjoy the land and that if the  plaintiff will pay he his money and damage he shall have his land again and  this be strong urge by the plaintiff counsel to be a mortgage Churchill of the  defendant counsel insist that none can come to redeem a mortgage where the  mortgagee can compel the payment of the mortgage money for the remedy ought to  be reciprocal and in this case the defendant have not any remedy for his money  and moreover that if it be a mortgage it must be so a beginning either by a  condition in the deed itself or by some collateral deed or agreement make at  the same time as a defeasance at law can be after the estate execute and in  this case it appear not that it be a mortgage at first but a nude subsequent  agreement of which there be no execution see barrel v Sabine vern cotterell v  purchase can tempt Talbot ante c p post c p Reg lib a fol it be propose that a  provision shall be make for the defendant wife out of the money pay for the  redemption of the land in lieu of her jointure secure upon the premise but the  opinion of the court seem to have be that a redemption must be allow the  matter be compromise by consent freeman er p
c cox v QUEENLOCK S c Ch can Eq can ab Rep tempt finch which last report give  the best account of the case Lord keeper survivorship joint executor ante case  keb Rep c three executor who be all residuary legatee one of they die before  the will be prove and his administrator exhibit a bill for distribution and to  be relieve against the survivorship and the Lord keeper decree it for the  administrator freeman er p but upon the rehear the Lord keeper take the  assistance of the Lord chief justice north and three other judge who be of  opinion that it be against the commonlaw in point of survivorship and may  introduce a relief in equity against all survivorships in case of jointtenancy  have no other circumstance in the case and so the decree be reverse draper  case Charles can Jackson v Jackson Ves white you William Ves and Bea ante c p  note this be a much strong case than where the executor be not legatee note  this be reverse chief on this ground that debt may arise seven year after and  so the estate shall survive for the possibility of advantage to the creditor
c Crawley v crowther Lord chancellor bill upon goldsmith accept in payment it  be hold and admit that if a man receive a goldsmith bill in payment for money  and he that receive the bill never demand it in three or four day time at the  most and afterward the goldsmith break that this neglect shall occasion the  loss to fall upon the receiver but if the goldsmith break in three day time  the loss shall fall upon he who give the bill for payment for although take a  goldsmith bill be payment prima fancy yet it be subject to that contingency  that the bill may he have if it be demand in three day time and that the Lord  keeper say be the practice in guildhall when he practice there and it be say  to be so hold in a case between Phillips and Phillips hear by the master of  the roll ante case and reference there that accept a bill be no payment if the  money be afterward freeman er p lose without any default of he that take it  but in this case the plaintiff be offer his choice at the goldsmith shop to  have either his money or a bill and he choose a bill and the next day the  goldsmith break and therefore the loss fall not upon the party who pay the  money but upon the plaintiff for it be his own fault that he will nit take his  money it be now likewise hold and the practice be so that if a man receive a  note for money Payable upon demand he need not prove any  consideration Philliskirk v Pluckwell Mau and Sel such a note in itself import  consideration unless the contrary be show bishop v young Bos and pull freeman  if a bill be Payable to a or bearer it be like so much money pay to whosoever  the note be give that let what account or condition soever be between the  party who give the note and a to who it be give yet it shall never affect the  bearer but he shall have his whole money Grant v Vaughan burr
c croak v watts S c show p c Ventr vern Eq can ab lord commissioner  distribution the question be upon the statute of distribution whether a  brother or sister of the half flood shall have a equal share with the brother  or sister of the whole blood and several case be cite as modern report Jones  smith case hill freeman er p and bird sty Rep lady butler case that  administration shall go to the residuary legatee because the statute of  administration be to supply the will of the intestate and to be construe as  near it as may be and Glascocks case be cite in latch and roll title  prohibition c but the court be of opinion accord to the late resolution  sufficient authority upon this now clear point have be cite ante in note to c  p Reg lib a fol the court declare that the plaintiff though only of the  halfblood be entitle to a equal share of the personal estate of the intestate  with the defendant who be of the whole blood and decree accord that the half  blood be in equal step and ought to have a whole share freeman de term S mich  in curian porter
c DAFFORNE v bolt and goodman S c Prec in Charles vern Lord chancellor trust  of a term for year post case S c continue Jo bolt be possess of a term for  year upon his marriage with apoline best assign the same to goodman upon trust  for himself for life and after his decease in trust for his wife for life and  after the decease of the survivor of they in trust for the heir of the body of  the say apoline by the say I d to be beget Jo b have issue by the say apoline  the defendant Barbara bolt and die and then apoline marry the plaintiff and  die and he take administration to her and the question be whether he shall be  thereby entitle to this term or whether the defendant b b shall have it as  heir of the body it be insist for the defendant that this be the same case  with peacock and Spooner ante c p see the note and reference there in Reg lib  a fol we find entry of this cause but not of the decision of the principal  point it be well understand however see post c to have decide in favour of the  heir of the body upon the authority of peacock and which be confirm in the  house of lord and there take that heir of the body shall not be take as word  of limitation but description story personae but the Lord chancellor say this  be a case of very great difficulty and he will consider of it till the next  term and that in case it shall be determine accord to the resolution in that  case great absurdity will follow and he say he have the same case under  consideration between drake and drake freeman er p Spooner but that now these  two case be only follow where the circumstance be so exact the same in specie  as to be undistinguishable mad
c DALBIN v prettiman S c Charles Rep Nels interest for shop debt land devise  for payment of debt the master of the roll will not allow any interest for  shop debt Parker v Hutchinson Ves Taitt v Lord Northwick Ves in Reg lib a fol  and in r l a fol we find entry of this cause but without any notice of the  particular point mention in the report of twelve year stand because he say  tradesman sell on tick sell at a rate accord
c dingly v dingly S c Eq can ab limitation of a personal thing in remainder  vide post case b security to pay legacy a the testator have pound due upon a  mortgage devise the profit of it to the defendant for her livelihood and  maintenance and after her death without issue to the plaintiff and make the  defendant executrix and die the plaintiff prefer his bill in this court to  compel the defendant to give he security that the money shall be preserve to  he in case she shall die without issue freeman and in this case it be make a  question whether this devise of the money after the defendant death without  issue be good or not and it be argue by Mr attorney that it be not for if this  shall be permit here will be a entail of a personal chattel that can by no  mean be barrable for this be as much as if he have devise it to the defendant  and her issue and so it be in case of land but in this case the issue can not  have it because it can descend but must go to the executor of the defendant  the major opinion at the bar seem to be that the limitation over to the  plaintiff be void Boucher v Anthram Pollexf but see post append c n but the  Lord chancellor give no opinion for he say although this court do sometime  compel executor to give security for legacy green v Pigot I Br strange v  Harris Br Ferrard v apprentice Ambl post c p yet that freeman er p must be  when they be clear and without dispute and not when the right be disputable as  in this case or at least depend upon a contingency and so the plaintiff bill  be dismiss and by Mr attorney a mortgage can be entail be for security of a  personal duty and to go to the executor vide ante case
c dr perys case privilege convocation he have his privilege allow in a suit  depend in chancery as a member of the convocation the same with privilege of  parliament that be the defendant body can be attach and he be entitle to  receive a office copy of the bill against he together with the subpoena Newl  harrison bring
c drake v storr thorpe agreement good though the bind void ante case and note  feme covert upon a treaty of marriage the man give a bind to the woman  condition that if he do permit her to dispose of pound then the bind shall be  void afterward the marriage take effect so that the bind become void it do not  appear when the money be to be at the disposal of the wife if during the  marriage the bind may be void at law but if she be only to dispose by will it  be by no mean clear that the bind be not good at commonlaw as well as in  equity milbourn v Ewart t r cage v Acton Lord raym yet this be hold to be a  good agreement and the court decree that the husbandshould give bind to  trustee with the same condition it be hold that a bill may be exhibit by her  prochein any Griffith v hood Ves sen Reg lib a fol across bill be file by  Thorpe and both cause come on to be hear together the cross bill be dismiss  and a decree make as above report a rehear be petition for and obtain when the  Lord keeper confirm the former order or if trustee exhibit a bill for or on  her behalf it be good either way
c DREKE all v mayor or exon S c Charles can Nels Eq can ab Feb car Lord  chancellor I Windham baron turner commissioner of bankrupt assign covenant in  equity lease with covenant to renew the lessee become bankrupt the  commissioner assign to the plaintiff who sue the lessor to renew and resolve  that he should The decision be otherwise the bill be dismiss see the extract  from Reg lib infra and such be hold to be the law in Vandernanker v Desborough  vern and Moses v little ibidem see also Wetherall v jeer Ves Buckland v hall  Ves OHerlihy v hedge Sch and Lef brook v Hewitt Ves sergeant Nudigate affirm  that the commissioner may assign the equity of redemption of a mortgage send  quaere because de hoc the statute James c S speak only of condition and not  conditionsforfeited Serjeant Newdigates opinion be confirm in Whitworth v  Davis Ves and Bea Hitchcock v Sedgewick vern and be now unquestionable law Reg  lib a fol the court have consult with several of the judge beside those  present at the hear be of opinion that neither by the assignment of the  commissioner of bankrupt nor otherwise be the plaintiff entitle to the benefit  of the covenant in question and therefore dismiss the plaintiff bill with cost  freeman er p
c dyer v TYMEWELL S c vern Eq Ch ab lord commissioner fraud the defendant be a  justice of peace in the west when the prosecution be there about Monmouth plot  by terrify the plaintiff that he be like to be prosecute get pound out of he  whereupon the plaintiff prefer his bill here to be relieve and the court  decree he the payment of his money back again for though the criminal part of  the offence be punishable by indictment and now the stat Geo c and Geo c  express apply to this case still to relieve against the civil fraud be the  admit province of court of equity even in case where the court of commonlaw  have a concurrent jurisdiction bright v einon burr colt v Wollaston p wms Reg  lib a fol Decree that the defendant in exact the say pound have do ill and  therefore do and shall repay unto the plaintiff the say pound together with  the far sum of pound as interest for the time he have hold the same and shall  also pay unto the plaintiff his full cost that he shall swear he have be out  of purse by reason of this suit
c earl OF Kildare v ken e content Lord keeper debt pay share and share alike  without preference post case Richard ken have devise his real and personal  estate to his executor for payment of debt and legacy and the creditor have  prefer their bill to have satisfaction of their several debt out of the say  estate upon hear of the cause it be decree that the several creditor shall  come in before freeman the master and prove their debt and receive  satisfaction for the same out of the testator personal estate accord to the  course of law in payment of debt by executor or administrator and there be  pound in the master hand to be distribute among the creditor as the court  shall direct and the creditor have prefer their petition to have the direction  of the court therein it be insist for some of the creditor that they have  obtain judgement for their debt that they ought to be prefer to creditor by  simple contract and on the other side it be insist that the testator at the  time of his decease owe no debt upon judgement and that they who have obtain  judgement by contrivance against the say Jo ken do by their bill charge  themselves to be creditor by bind only and that the bill be bring on behalf of  themselves and all other the creditor of the say testator and do hope that the  say testator estate shall be apply for satisfaction of his debt accord to his  will and shall go accord about preference share and share alike and that they  who have get judgement shall not make use of the same to defraud the rest of  the creditor whereupon it be order that the say testator real and personal  estate shall be apply among the creditor share and share alike without  preference See ante c p note stat W m c S
c FATRED plaintiff Devereux CALADON defendant lord commissioner Widdrington  Terrell Montague defendant enjoin not to plead the statute of limitation the  plaintiff be leave to his action of the case at law move that in regard his  bill be file here within the time limit by the statute of limitation that the  defendant may not have liberty to plead the statute at law Maynard the bill be  only to examine witness to preserve the testimony and not to be relieve and  this court can control statute and the plaintiff may have file his original in  time fountain then the defendant will have bring it on by proviso before the  plaintiff be ready and it be the practice of this court to enjoin the  defendant from plead the statute and cite a case between chamber and remove  soon after the statute be make Widdrington it be a doubt in doctor and student  whether the chancery can relieve against a statute law Hoskins for the  defendant it be the Lord Coventry freeman opinion that if in like case  defendant will not consent to waive the plea the court will retain the cause  order that the court be attend with precedent herein precedent herein raston  and raston car guy v Symcocks Lord Coventry time car upon produce these  precedent to chancellor hide he order a case to be state and he will advice  with the judge in the anon case atk Lord Hardwick c decide that a bill in  chancery be not such a demand as to take a debt out of the stat of limitation  but though the time continue to run during the pendency of the suit in equity  yet the court will not allow the debtor to take advantage thereof at law Sturt  v Mellish atk and the house of lord so decide in Mackenzie v marquis of powis  Br p can fol ed
c flood v flood mortgage redeem in proportion post case a estate in jointure  be subject to a mortgage resolve that the jointress and the reversioner must  redeem in proportion palm v Danby Prec in Charles videlicet the jointress  onethird part and the reversioner twothirds and that have be the proportion  usual in this court to charge the estate for life with a three but it seem  hard because now a estate for life be worth nine or ten year purchase whereas  former it be worth but seven and so it be if a estate subject to a mortgage be  devise to a for life remainder to b in fee there they may redeem in proportion  videlicet a onethird and b two three but the more equitable rule of modern  time be that the several party must contribute in proportion to their  respective interest white v white Ves in Reg lib a fol entry relative to this  cause may be find but they do not allude to the particular point notice in the  report
c Floyd v Buckland S c Eq can ab master of the roll statute of fraud and  perjury the plaintiff have a house in Monmouth street agree with the defendant  for a piece of ground adjoin to take a lease of he for as long time as he have  in the house and thereupon the plaintiff enter upon the ground and build a  wall and make a vault c for conveniency of his house and when he have so do  the defendant refuse to make he a lease whereupon the plaintiff prefer his  bill to have a execution of the agreement that the defendant may make he a  lease the defendant plead the statute of fraud and perjury the agreement be  only by parole and no agreement in write his plea be overrule by the Lord  keeper and the cause come now to hear before the master of the roll he decree  the defendant to perform the agreement and to pay cost and say the statute be  not make to encourage fraud and cheat and the plaintiff have lie out his money  in pursuance of the agreement and take possession Foxcraft v lyster Colles p c  bind v Hopkins Sch and Lef see however Wheeler v DEsterre dows p c that the  fact of expenditure by the tenant upon the premise will not establish a right  to specific performance of a lease for life if such life be not name in due  time or if some of the life name be not in existence at the time of the  agreement of the land freeman the defendant ought to execute a lease for as  long time as the plaintiff have in his house and the case of one butcher  semble butcher v Stapeley vern be cite where a parole agreement be decree  possession be deliver in pursuance of it and likewise a case decree by the  Lord Nottingham where a deed wonder as seal for security of money borrow and  the deed be absolute the defendant promise to freeman er p seal a defeazance  and afterward refuse a bill be prefer to compel he and though he insist upon  the statute of fraud and perjury he be decree to seal a defeazance see post c  p though there be no agreement in write for that purpose
c GARBEROND v GARBEROND cite in court lord commissioner devise to all his  child post case I S devise that his personal estate shall be divide among all  his grandchild or child and after the devise and before the death of the  testator another child be bear resolve that child shall have a share the  principle act upon be that so many child as come in be before the fund be  distributable shall be comprehend Ayton v Ayton Cox can Scott v Harwood mad  ellison v airy Ves sen the rule be extend to a child in ventre sa mere clarke  v black Br h Bl stat pound W m c freeman de term S mich in curian porter
c GARFOOT v GARFOOT Nov car on a Demurrer S C Charles can Eq can ab executor  die before sale the heir shall sell land devise to the feme for life afterward  to be sell by executor for young child portion the executor die the feme die  the young child prefer their bill against the heir he demurrer because but a  authority in the executor which be now dead with they and the demurrer  overruled Ante c p c p
c gay v WENDOW S c Eq can ab Lord chancellor a woman upon marriage give a  private bind the plaintiff a woman who have pound give by her brother the  defendant upon her marriage give a bind private to her brother to repay the  say money the husband be dead without issue the defendant sue the bind at law  upon the plaintiff whereupon she prefer her bill here to be relieve against it  be a fraud by reason it be do without the privity of her husband it be urge  for the defendant that it be good reason for the husband or any of his issue  to be relieve in case they have be concern but that there be no reason that  the woman herself who give the bind shall be relieve but order that the bind  shall be deliver up for be once a fraud no accident of death or course of time  shall alter the case and the plaintiff be relieve notwithstanding it be her  own agreement be do in fraud of the husband Hamilton v Mohun p wms Turton v  Benson ibidem Jemmitt v wit Kenyons Rep palmer v neave Ves de Maneville v  Crompton Ves and Bea Redman v Redman vern in ex part Kirk Ves the principle be  thus lie down it be true where a debt be cut down by the policy of the law the  complaint may be make by sharing in sin but the mischief and prejudice to  three person be the consideration of the relief freeman er p freeman de term S  trin in curian porter
c gibson v gibson S c Eq can ab at the roll posthumous child ante case and  note a give a bind to pay pound to his daughter in case he shall have no son  live at the time of his decease and he die his wife be great with a son and  the question be whether the daughter shall have this pound which if she have  will have be more than his son will have have freeman per cur she shall not  have it for although there be no son live at his decease so that it be not  recoverable at law yet it can be presume to be his intention that if a son be  bear after his decease the daughter shall run away with the estate and in this  case it appear that the mother be quick at the death of the father and by the  civil law posthumus pro born to have and so decree that the plaintiff shall be  relieve against the bond See stat pound W c
c gilbert v fault and Feb car SC Ch can chancellor master of the roll No  dismission after a decree bill be to be relieve against a action for rend and  at the hear of the cause it be decree to a account the account be state by the  master then the plaintiff move to dismiss his bill pay what cost the court  will assess which be oppose for that the judgement of the court be give the  plaintiff ought not to abuse the court and depart from it and the case of  Wingfield and Thomas be cite where and obligation the plaintiff here be decree  to pay principal damage and cost and after the plaintiff there will have  dismiss his bill but it be deny Churchill who to be able renunciare Juri pro  see introduce the master of the roll direct it to be move before the Lord  chancellor and the Feb it be move before he it be deny and the Lord chancellor  and judge brown in car between cheatly and Packington give the same rule in  the like case Carrington v holly dick Lashley v Hogg Ves Mocher v read ball  and Beatrice but if the decree mere direct inquiry the bill may by consent be  dismiss anon Ves freeman er p
c girl v VERMEDUN S c Eq can ab heir bind by article the defendant ancestor to  who he be heir article in his lifetime for the sale of certain land which by  the article he covenant to convey but do not covenant for he and his heir and  the question be whether the heir shall be bind to perform this agreement and  hold that he shall in as much as his ancestor after the seal of the say  article be in the nature of a trustee for the plaintiff of those land Seton v  Slade Ves Rawlins v burgess Ves and Bea Capel v girdler Ves which trust with  the say land descend to the heir the liability of real and personal  representative in respect of a contract of their predecessor be regulate by  that of the party himself at his death broom v monk Ves rise v Conynghame Ves  see however ante case b p but see also the reference in note infra and decree  accord and they cite sir John otway case where when he be go to be marry his  wife uncle promise that he will settle his freehold and copyhold upon his wife  freeman er p and her issue and though this be by parole only yet this court  decree a execution of it it must be presume that the case cite be decide  before the stat of fraud be enact Randall v Morgan Ves dundas v Dutens Ves Jun  Montacute v Maxwell p wms but see post c p that if a agreement be show by any  write though informal the case be out of the statute be in consideration of  marriage and the case of Stephens and Baily Nels overrule c b p ante and see  pool v pool Ch Rep where a son who take land by conveyance not by descent be  decree to perform his father covenant where tenant pur auter vie to he and his  heir article for a sale and die although this be such a estate a be not asset  to the heir yet he be here decree to execute this agreement
c glover v portington all S c Charles can Nels Eq can ab may car master of the  roll voluntary gift on condition forfeiture mortgagee by will remit part of  the mortgage money and all interest provide the rest be pay within three year  or if the rest be pay in three year the mortgagor not pay in three year lose  the benefit of that bequest for the gift be voluntary Garrick v Lord Camden  Ves and in this case upon demurrer it be resolve freeman that if a man have  less decree for he than he will have he shall not bring a bill of review But  may appeal to the house of lord prac Reg Reg lib a fol the court declare that  as the favour intend the plaintiff by the will be conditional and the  condition be unperformed the plaintiff can have no relief in equity but on be  admit to redeem must pay the whole mortgage money but a bill of review lie  only for he against who the decree or dismission be and after long debate the  demurrer be therefore allow and note in the case above the mortgagor sue to  redeem be decree to pay the whole money causan how above and the decree  confirm on a rehear and fountain of counsel with the plaintiff mortgagor agree  it to be so freeman er p
c GODSCALL v walker WALL SC Charles Rep Nels may car consideration of a  judgement examine judgement get against a infant by practice Aitcheell v  Harris Ves jun Barnsley v Powell Ves sen acknowledgement of satisfaction may  be decree in equity on a judgement so obtain see post c p Reg lib a fol the  court refer it to the master to examine and report what have be real lend by  the defendant to the plaintiff and the defendant walker be to produce his book  and paper of account upon oath before the say master and forasmuch as there  seem to be some difference between the proof in this cause and the defendant  answer the say master be to look into the same and if he find that they cross  or contradict one the other the say master be to report the same special and  until such report make the injunction grant in the cause be to continue in  force order that it be refer to a master to examine how much money the infant  receive note the guardian be party to the practice
c Griffith v jones SC Ch Rep master of the roll Trevor poor kindred a man make  his will and give several legacy to several of his relation and after his debt  and legacy pay he give the surplus to his brother and sister child and  grandchild and the rest of his poor kindred at the discretion of his executor  two question I how far the word poor kindred shall extend and for that resolve  that it shall carry one degree far than he have express and no far it be say  that of late it have be hold that if a man give his personal estate among his  kindred that the devise freeman shall be govern by the act of distribution of  intestates estate but this be a will he say he will extend it one degree far  than the testator have express he hold that the child and grandchild and the  rest of the poor child shall have equal share and that the executor shall have  no power to give more to one than another notwithstanding the word at the  discretion of my executors It seem no to be well settle that where the court  be call upon to dispose of the property in such case it recognize no other  rule than the statute of distribution but that where the testator have entrust  any one with a power of selection such power may be exercise by the party to  who it be give coal v wade Ves car v Bedford Ch Rep mahon v savage Sch and Lef  Bennett v honeywood Amb wright v Atkins Ves Walters v man ibidem by Reg lib a  fol we learn that the cause be reheard before the Lord chancellor who order a  account but take time till the say account shall be bring in to consider to  what degree the word poor kindred shall extend but no further entry have be  discover
c grub v woodhouse mortgage redeem after fifty year a mortgage be make in of  land then of the value of pound per and and money be at eight per cent the  mortgagee be to enter present and pay the mortgagor pound per and the  mortgagee have be in possession ever since and pay the pound per and the  plaintiff be the grandson and heir of the mortgagor prefer his bill against  the defendant grandson of the mortgagee to redeem and it be hear at the roll  the bill be dismiss by reason of the length of time the mortgagee have be in  possession fifty year but upon appeal to the lord commissioner the cause be  hear this term they decree a redemption by reason of the continuance of the  payment of the pound per and which be all one as the pay of interest be  pursuant to the first agreement Edsell v Buchanan Ves jun lake v Thomas Ves  hansard v hardy Ves baron v Martin Ves Hodle v Heali Ves and Bea whiling v  white coop and if interest be pay constant upon a mortgage the antiquity of it  be no objection against the redemption of it but it be order that there shall  be no account freeman of profit hardy v beef Ves but that they shall be set  against the interest and the mortgagee have his costs The cost be to be pay in  the first place Kenebel v scrafton Ves unless there have be improper conduct  on the part of the mortgagee Detillin v gale Ves Reg lib a fol at the first  hear the master of the roll dismiss the plaintiff bill but on a rehear the  Lord chancellor reverse that decision and decree a redemption of the premise  in question and that the plaintiff shall be at liberty to take out a  injunction to restrain the defendant from do waste freeman er p till the  account be take and a reconveyance execute but allow the defendant his cost
c guavers v fountain in scacc S c Eq can ab sequestration the question be  whether the court of exchequer can grant a sequestration after a decree for a  personal duty it be admit that in process for appearance a sequestration be  always grantable by this court but for a personal duty after a decree there be  many instance in my Lord chief baron hale time and in the Lord Montague time  where it have be deny and these precedent that have be produce for it be most  of they where it be the suit of the king which be admit on all hand that where  the king be plaintiff it may be grant but by the opinion of baron jenner heath  and Powell it ought to be grant for they think that if it may be grant in  mesne process where it do not appear whether there be any duty or not a strong  after a decree where the duty be adjudge and ascertain and it be always the  practice of the chancery it ought much more in this court where the plaintiff  be suppose to be a debtor to the king and they think that the jurisdiction of  the court of equity will be to little purpose if the court have not sufficient  authority to see their decree execute the Lord chief baron doubt because the  Lord chief baron hale can never be prevail upon to grant it nor the Lord  Montague to who learning he say he must great subscribe but by the opinion of  the other three it be granted Post c p c p the process by sequestration to  compel performance of a decree be now part of the undisputed jurisdiction of  the court of exchequer for the form see fowl ex bring freeman er p freeman de  term S mich in curian porter
c haw v warner S c Charles Rep vern Lord keeper personal estate apply in aid  of the real ante case and note a have mortgage the manor of S devise the say  manor to b and afterward devise all his good chattel and personal estate to c  his debt and legacy be first pay thereout and the question be whether b shall  take the mortgage land subject to the encumbrance or whether the mortgage  shall be discharge out of the personal estate freeman and the Lord keeper take  time to consider of it this differ from bishop case next before by reason of  these word my debt and legacy be first pay thereout the Lord keeper take two  or three day time to consider of it and give his opinion that the personal  estate ought to be apply to pay off the debt upon mortgage and his legacy and  debt be first pay shall extend to debt upon mortgage and decree accord it may  perhaps without presumption be make a question whether this decision need the  support of the strong fact that the testator will his debt and legacy to be  first pay out of his personalty a condition which if nothing be say upon the  subject will probable be imply though the last precede case be contra or  freeman er p whether it may not well rest upon the ground that there be no  bequest of any specific chattel or fix sum and that a gift of all a testator  personal estate must mean if the term be general all remain after every legal  demand upon it be satisfy Shallcross v finden Ves Bootle v Blundell Meriv  green v green mad Brummell v Protheroe Ves French v Chichester Br p c folio  edit the present case be affirm in dom proc march Reg lib a fol the court  declare that the mortgage in question ought to be discharge out of the  testator personal estate and decree accord
c hawk against mollineux replevin prescription in a replevin by hawk against  mollineux who avow for damagefesant the plaintiff in bar of the avowry plead  that sir gervase Paston knight be seize Leonard er p of a message and twenty  acre of land and that always those who estate c have use to have common in the  place where c for all their cattle commonable in this manner videlicet if the  say land be sow by assent of the commoner then no common until the corn be mow  and when the corn be mow then common until the land shall be sow again by  assent of the commoner and this prescription be find by verdict and exception  be take to this prescription because against common right so as a man can sow  his land without the leave of another but the exception be disallow by the  court for the prescription be hold to be good by the whole court for by the  law of the land the owner of the land can blow the land where another have  common but here be a benefit to each party as well for the owner of the land  against the commoner as for the commoner against the tenant of the land for  each of they have a qualify interest in the land Yelv Leonard enter pasch  Elizabeth rot in common banc
c heir and administrator the Lord Plymouth be the grantee of the custody of a  lunatic with the rend and profit receive of the estate purchase land the  lunatic die the question be between the heir and administrator who shall have  the benefit of the purchase see ante c p note see ante c p note and the court  be of opinion that the administrator shall have it and not the heir for if the  money have not be lie out it have be clear that the administrator shall have  have it and if lie out of the money will alter the case then it will be in the  power of the grantee of the custody to prefer the heir or administrator as he  please and they say this court may either follow the land purchase or the  estate of my Lord Plymouth it be admit that if a estate be encumber the  guardian or trustee of a infant may with the money raise out of the estate  clear the encumbrance Oxenden v Lord Crompton Ves jun ex part Grimstone Ambl  ex part whitbread in re hide Meriv and that will enure to the benefit of the  heir in case the infant die but that be not like this case
c herbert v herbert Lord keeper trust to pay debt and legacy ante case Rep c  it be cite by dobbins as a case now settle upon consideration have of all the  former case by this Lord keeper in a cause between Herbert and Herbert Eq can  ab that where land be devise for payment of debt and legacy that the debt be  such as have no lie upon the land as debt by simple contract c the debt shall  have no preference but if there be not sufficient to pay all they shall be pay  in proportion although it be otherwise hold in the Lord nottingham time who  use always to say that a man ought to be just before he be bountiful and so  see ante c p note and to the authority there cite addDixon v Wytham I Charles  can Whitton v Lloyd ibidem post append c the course of equity seem since that  time to be settle freeman de term S hill in curian porter
c herne v herne S c Prec in Charles Eq can ab Reg lib a fol the Lord keeper  dismiss the bill so far as it seek to charge the land purchase with payment of  debt and legacy and to have the same consider as part of the personal estate  although it appear by the trustee own book that money which he receive as  trustee be actual invest in the purchase of land which if it have not be  invest will have be subject to the Act of distribution hold that yet those  land be not liable to be distribute and the case of Kirk and web affirm in the  house of lord be cite ante case p see note there freeman de term S trin in  curian porter
c hide v petit mich S c Ch can post c p Lord keeper baron turner sequestration  of what post case fountain in maintenance of the jurisdiction of chancery to  grant sequestrations on the real and personal estate for breach of a decree  for a personal duty urge Sacheverill v Sacheverill in king James time the  contrary side admit it well in case the defendant have go beyond sea so if he  will absolute lie in prison Lord keeper hint that a court baron in a judgement  in deceit do sequester the profit of the real estate by a judgement in debt  the mayor of the staple may do it therefore it be reasonable the high court of  chancery may do it fountain allege that it always have be do and so be the law  of the court which be consequent the law of the nation Martin v Kerridge p wms  anon Mosley morris v bank of England can tempt Talb ante c p c p the commonlaw  do not attach the body for personal duty yet attachment or subpoena have be  always allow as the process in chancery and in chancery there have be account  against executor time out of mind though not by the commonlaw or statute law  at this day but fountain will not defend the sequestration of choose in action  or on copyhold but see Whitehead v Harrison Barnard king b r Colston v  gardener Ch can Reg lib a fol the Lord chancellor assist by Moreton I desire  to be attend with precedent before he shall deliver his opinion sergeant  fountain say he know several bill to be relieve against general security by  statute by give security on particular land freeman er p
c hill Elizabeth in the common plead a lease for year be upon condition that  the lessee shall not grant over the land at will or otherwise he devise the  same to his executor who accept the same only as executor and not as devisees  and yet it be the opinion of the justice that the condition be break because  he have do as much as lie in he to have devise the land see h dyer roll Len  hill Elizabeth in the king bench
c HITCHINS v HITCHINS S c Prec in Chan vern Eq can ab Lord keeper dower the  plaintiff have recover her dower at law prefer her bill to be let into it and  particular to set aside a satisfy mortgage which be keep on foot and set up to  keep her out of possession it be insist for the defendant that a woman shall  have freeman no relief for her dower in equity in case the party can bar her  at law because it be not due to her by any contract or agreement but she be to  get it as she can and cite the case of the lady Radnor and Vandebende ante c p  where a term to attend the inheritance shall keep her out of her dower and it  be so settle in that case upon a appeal to the house of lord but per cur this  satisfy mortgage shall not stand in her way ante c p and decree it to be set  aside and think the case of Vandebende a hard case another point be state that  the husband by his will have devise to his wife a part of his estate much  better in value than her dower but do not say in bar of her dower and the  question be whether this shall bar her in equity and they cite the case of  Laurence and Laurence ante case that it shall but per cur it shall not for  whatsoever be give her by will shall be intend a bounty and not in  satisfaction of what be her right unless it have be so express see ante c p  note and to the authority there cite add Lord Dorchester v earl of Effingham  coop Reg lib a fol the court decree that the dowress shall be let into  possession of the land and tenement set out by the sheriff for her dower  exonerate from the aid mortgage and that she shall be pay all arrear in  respect of her say dower with her cost of this suit freeman de term S hill in  curian porter
c Hodgkins v lutwych time a bar of equity of redemption it be say in this case  that if mortgagee be in possession and levy a fine and five year pass that  this shall bar the equity of redemption see ante c p note but it be now well  settle that a mortgagee can by fine and nonclaim mere bar the equity of  redemption for the fine in such case displace nothing it be still the same  estate Kennedy v Daly Sch and Lef story v Lord Windsor atk and a entry of the  mortgagor will not prevent it because his entry be not lawful but the  mortgagor ought to bring his subpoena Glumdalolitch v leman W Bl Clifford v  Asbley Ch can post append c
c Horrell v Waldron S c vern Eq can ab LegaciesDemurrers the plaintiff be sue  in the ecclesiastical court for legacy to infant and prefer his bill here to  be indemnified in the payment of they see stat Geo c post c p and the  defendant demurrer because the conusance of legacy belong to the  ecclesiastical court and they will take care to indemnify the party in payment  of they but the demurrer be over rule because this court have the proper  conusance of legacy anon atk wind v Jekyl p wms the ground of jurisdiction be  that the executor be a trustee for the legatee and in some case this court  will take care for indemnifying the executor or administrator where the  ecclesiastical court can and will make a legatee refund if debt appear  afterward if the legacy be decree by this court anon p wms Edward v freeman p  wms and this court will give interest for a legacy which that court do not  Nicholas v Nicholas Prec in Charles and the plaintiff have a election to sue  here or there and this court hold plea of legacy by the rule of the civil law  and therefore a legacy give upon condition that if the party marry then to be  void this be a void condition but not if the legacy be give over ante c c p  and see in Lloyd v Branton Meriv the reason assign for the different decision  in the two several case Reg lib a fol the demurrer overrule without cost  because by the civil law all condition against marriage be unlawful freeman er  p
c HUMFREIS v Griffith may car Lord chancellor master of the roll infant to  convey appeal from a decree in the grand session of Montgomery the decree be  that a infant shall convey by stat whether c infant trustee be enable to  convey estate hold by they in trust but then they must have no other duty to  perform attorney general v pomfret Cox can cur we will reverse the decree but  will not so far countenance the jurisdiction of that court if although the  land be within the party defendant life without the jurisdiction the court of  session have not the mean of do justice Tranter v Druggen comb Vaughan v Evans  Str otherwise semble no appeal lie to chancery from the great session of Wales  see Galbraith v Neville in note to dougl see however post append c Reg lib a  fol the court seem to have be less abrupt than the report represents the  decree make in the court of session of Montgomery be declare to be erroneous  and therefore the same be reverse but by consent of the party the matter in  difference be refer as to express it to be for the infancy of the defendant
c HUMFRYES v rigby S c Eq can ab game the bill be to be relieve against a bind  give for money win at play videlicet at allfours the plaintiff be a distiller  of strong water and the defendant a tapster at the bowlinggreen in red lion  field and it appear that the defendant lie the card and turn up the knave of  club which be jack several time together and be a unreasonable sum for such  person to venture at play the plaintiff be relieve and the bind order to be  deliver up although this case be not within the statute stat car c S and see  the late statute whether c Geo c Reg lib a fol the court declare that there  appear to have be fraud in obtain the say bind decree the same to be deliver  up to the cancel without cost if obedience be pay on the service of the order  otherwise with cost the bind be for less than pound yet this court always  relieve before the statute where any fraud appear
c hunt and baker S c Eq can ab trust of a term for year post case case con it  be say per winnington and not deny that where a trust of a long term be limit  to the husband and wife for their life with a remainder to the heir of the  body of the wife there after the death of the husband the wife have the  disposition of the trust of the whole term and after her death her executor or  administrator and where the remainder be limit to the heir of the body of the  husband there the wife be administratrix to the husband have power to dispose  of the trust of the whole term this doctrine as general one seem establish Mr  Fearne in his admirable treatise on contingent remainder p observe that web v  web p wms the decision in which be conformable to the case in the text appear  to have be the rule authority ever since in case of the like nature and that  peacock v Spooner post c p and Dafforne v goodman post c p be only attend to  in case exact the same in specie if a man marry a feme who be the beneficiary  and trust of a term if she die this trust will not survive to the husband but  shall go to the executor or administrator of the wife and this be say to be  withams case that Instit and that be the difference where the wife have a  estate in law in a term and where she have only a trust post c p freeman er p  freeman de term S hill in curian porter
c hunt and pit v pit S c vern Ch can Eq can ab baron ad power deal term in  trust pur Le feme post case ante case and note Ch Rep a feme possess of a term  for year convey it to trustee in trust for her self and then take husband and  the question be whether or no the husband have power to dispose of this trust  of the term and it be say per cancellar that it have be always hold that the  husband have no power of a trust for the wife of a term for year but in the  case of sir Edward turner this point come before the lord and the lord rule it  otherwise contrary to his opinion and since the lord have so do freeman they  have alter the law in that particular and therefore he declare his opinion to  be that the husband have power over this trust of the term but whether the  wife be entitle to a provision thereout against a assignee for valuable  consideration provide the interest be as it be in the principal case a  equitable one see Salisbury v Newton I Eden wright v Morley Ves like v  Beresford Ves in addition to the case cite ante in note to c Reg lib a fol the  decree in substance full confirm the accuracy of the report above and though  it appear in this case that the husband have notice before the marriage that  the wife have settle the say term in trustee yet that will not hurt he because  if the law be that he shall have power of it his know it will in no sort  prejudice he but if a man before marriage be make a party to dispose of a term  for year in trust for his wife for her jointure or for separate maintenance or  do make a agreement not to dispose of it there it shall not be in his power to  dispose of it post case freeman de term S hill in curian porter
c if a infant have a freehold or a chattel lease and a guardian or trustee  alter the nature of the interest or take a new lease of the same sort it seem  that the new lease shall result and go as the old one will have do or at least  for so much of the time as be unexpire of the original lease Pearson and Pym  quaere term and year ms note
c IRETONS case S c Eq can ab custom of London vide post case baron and feme  choose in action Rep c post case resolve that where a citizen of London devise  a legacy to one of his child that child shall notwithstanding have his share  out of the customary part unless it do appear that by the intent of the  testator that legacy be to go in satisfaction of his whole share Northey v  strange p wms since the stat Geo c S which give a unfetter power of disposal  of the whole this question be less likely to arise unless the freeman have  engage before his marriage that his personal estate shall at his death remain  subject to the custom such a agreement will be bind and prevent his disposal  by will of the customary part and it be likewise hold per cancellar that if  the wife be entitle to her customary part and the husband die that the  executor of the husband shall not have this but the wife because it be a thing  in actionCo Litt Reg lib a fol decree that plaintiff have remedy at law to a  customary part of the personal estate of his father accord to the custom of  London and the plaintiff right thereto have be save in the decree make in a  former suit bring by the now defendant against the present plaintiff he ought  not to be deny his remedy in this court for the say customary part be the  demand ever so hard of which this court can take any notice no care be take by  the will or marriage settlement to prevent the same the party therefore must  account for the personal estate of the testator and the defendant must pay the  plaintiff what be due both by the say will and also so much of the personal  estate as the plaintiff customary part thereof do amount to
c izard v burst S c Eq can ab at the roll will new publication the defendant  testator by his will give his four daughter pound apiece and afterward marry  his old daughter to the plaintiff and give her pound portion after freeman er  p that he make a codicil and give pound apiece to his unmarried daughter and  thereby ratify and confirm his will and die and the plaintiff prefer his bill  for the legacy of pound give to his wife by the say will and the only question  be whether the portion give by the testator in his lifetime shall be intend in  satisfaction of the legacy and hold that it shall and agree to be the constant  rule of this court that where a legacy be give to a child or where the donor  though not actual the parent yet put himself in loco parent Wetherley v Dixon  coop who afterward upon marriage or otherwise have the like or a great sum it  shall be intend in satisfaction of the legacy hartop v Whitmore p wms ex part  pie Ves unless the testator shall declare his intent to be otherwise but see  that evidence dehors may be admit to repel the presumption Elliston v Cookson  Br Shudall v Jekyll atk and the presumption will not arise where the provision  make in the father lifetime be subject to a contingency spinks v robin ibidem  or be not the same noble birth with the legacy grave v Salisbury Br nor it  have be say if the bequest be of a residue Freemantle v bank Ves but as to  this point see Bengough v walker Ves and it be say the word of ratify and  confirm do not alter the case though they amount to a new publication be only  word of form and declare nothing of the testator intent in this matter Monck v  monk ball and Beatrice and authority there cite Reg lib a fol the court  declare that the portion of pound have be pay to the plaintiff wife after the  make of the say will such payment ought to be esteem a full satisfaction of  the say legacy and that the subsequent ratification of the will shall not  extend to give her a double portion
c knight v Adamson S c Eq can ab lord commissioner long possession a writ of  aiel be bring in the court of a copyhold manor to avoid a estate for that  there have be no surrender a possession have go with the defendant there for  fortyfive year the court grant a perpetual injunction for that after so long  time a surrender shall be presume and the roll may be lose and no reason the  estate shall be avoid after so freeman er p long a possession and the Lord  commissioner Keck cite the case of Lyford and Gower vern Ch can Eq can ab in  the Lord Coventry time where a injunction be grant in the like case and the  case of pigeon and Loveday car where a lease be attempt to be avoid for want  of livery after a long possession case of rise and Trelawny car that after  long possession a surrender will be presume be confirm as general doctrine in  Wilson v Allen James and walk in the present instance the question as relate  to a surrender to the use of a will can not now arise see stat Geo c Reg lib a  fol the court declare that by reason of the length of time wherein the  plaintiff and those under who he claim have enjoy the premise in question the  defendant ought not to have any benefit by the judgement in the writ of aiel  and therefore decree that all proceed on the say judgement be stay by a  perpetual injunction of this court but nevertheless the defendant be at  liberty to proceed at law in any action of ejectment for the say premise and  if any such action shall be bring the party be not to plead or take advantage  of the statute for limitation of action
c lady Holcroft all v smith evidence ante case S c note a settlement of sir g  Bineon under which the plaintiff who be his sister claim be lose but be prove  in chancery as to the mode of prove a settlement or will in chancery see hind  by the plaintiff themselves thirty year since who be not then concern in point  of interest but be since entitle by that deed it be order that a copy of the  deed shall be admit to be read at law and likewise that the plaintiff  deposition shall be read to prove the deed although they now claim under the  deed Glyn v bank of England Ves sen haw v hand atk goss v Tracy p wms freeman  de term S mich in curian porter
c lamb v parker S c vern Eq can ab Eq can ab Lord keeper revocation of a will  mrs Parker devise the estate in question for three life and afterward make a  lease of the same estate for three other life and the question be whether this  lease be a revocation of the will and the Lord keeper seem to be of opinion  that it be not a revocation because the three life in the lease may die before  the testator and then the devise shall take place but be not positive but  refer it to the judge of the king bench by way of a case to determine The case  have be argue before holt c I Powell and powys I I they return a certificate  as follow we be of opinion that the devise be revoke quoad the term devise but  not as to the reversion expectant thereupon there be other point in the case  as to which the judge also certify but as they do not appear in the report  above the reader be refer for a full account of they to Br p c fol edit where  the cause be report as decide on appeal in dom proc it be agree that where a  man devise a fee and after mortgage in fee that this will not be a revocation  earl temple v duchess of chandos Ves Fitzgerald v Fauconberge FitzGib Reg lib  b for the court agree with the opinion certify by the judge see above note  decree accord and order that the dismission pronounce at a former hear of this  cause by the master of the roll shall be reverse because there be a equity of  redemption subsist which may be operate upon by the will but in this case  there be nothing but a mere possibility for the life in the will may die  before the three life in the lease et adjournatur and refer it to the judge of  the king bench freeman er p
c lesley case at the roll S c Eq can ab trustee for a infant purchase a man be  guardian or trustee for a infant to who land be descend or devise but the  title be in fact in a three person if the trustee or guardian buy in the title  of this three person this shall not be take to be a trust for the infant for  he be at liberty to purchase it as well as any body else this dictum seem  contrary to the current of modern authority as well as to rushworth case ante  p keech v Sandford Sel can in Charles ex part James Ves down v Grazebrook  Meriv and many other decision appear to establish the broad principle of  discountenance all purchase whatsoever of the trust property by the trustee  while they retain that character however fair the circumstance may appear from  the difficulty there be to be sure there have be no improper management and in  the case in the text though the title be say to have be in fact in a three  person that point may have be disputable but who be to dispute it when the  trustee have deprive himself of the power or at all event of the inclination  to do so and so it be hold in the case of comb and Throckmorton per cancellar
c lister et all v lister S c vern Eq can ab Lord chancellor baron and feme the  plaintiff be creditor to the defendant husband and prefer their bill against  the defendant and several person who be debtor to the defendant upon bind  before her marriage and the case be that the defendant estate be about pound  consist chief of bonddebt and in consideration of this portion if the  settlement be make express in consideration of this portion or that  consideration be plain imply then late case have overturn the authority of  this decision Cleland v Cleland Prec in Charles salwey v salwey Ambl Garforth  v Bradley Ves sen car v tailor Ves Druce v Dennison Ves post c p but if as be  intimate by the report in vern the jointure be not make in conformity to the  agreement the decree seem unshake the husband settle pound per annum jointure  and die soon after the marriage before the say bind be pay or alter and the  wife enjoy the jointure and not leave asset his creditor prefer this bill per  cur the bind not be alter the law have vest the right to they in the wife and  be not asset of the husband neither in law nor equity and so the bill be  dismiss
c lord Antrim v duke de Buckingham Jan S c salk Charles can Eq can ab side  Lord chancellor Lord Bridgeman Lord hale power execute per feme covert after  marriage the lady Margaret of Antrim mother of the defendant be a feme sole  seize of a reversion after one life convey the land to the use of herself for  life the remainder to in tail with power for her be sole this term of the  power make the decision unquestionable see ante c p note and reference there  make to make lease for three life or twentyone year in possession the feme  marry and then she and her husband lease for twentyone year in the life of  tenant for life to commence from the date for payment of debt c if this lease  per baron and feme be good Bridgeman this er be not pursue for by marry she  have put herself under the power of her husband and there be a difference  between a nude power and a power which flow from a interest for when a bare  power be give to a feme by will to sell land although she marry yet she may  sell and may sell to her husband but when she reserve a power out of a  interest of her own contra but such power ought to be expound benign at this  day though former take strict second point be whether the lease from that date  be good be not resolve afterward hale and the chancellor concur with Bridgeman  the bill be dismiss
c lord grey case S c more full in Rep tempt finch and more correct from Lord  nottingham ms in swan which see trace father and son vide post case he  purchase land in his old son name the money be pay by he but the deed mention  it to be pay by the son and a acquittance be give for it to the son the father  take the profit all his life and diverse testimony there be of each side some  seem to imply a trust and other the contrary but here the Lord chancellor lie  down this maxim that when a father purchase land in the sons  name prima fancy  this shall be intend a provision for the son and shall never be take to be a  trust without most clear evidence and proof unless some precedent declaration  can be prove for if a father purchase land in a son name intend it a provision  for he he shall not afterward raise a trust upon this for himself by any  subsequent declaration but perhaps there may be such subsequent circumstance  as may imply a precedent declaration but in this case he will give no  judgement but persuade a accommodation the suit be not compromise and a decree  be make declare the purchase to be a advancement not a trust swan where above  the principle seem full established Dyer v dyer Cox finch v finch Ves post c p
c lord mohun case encumbrance in proportion upon the marriage of the father  and mother of the defendant it be agree that a estate of the yearly value of  shall be settle upon the lady for life for her jointure with remainder to the  first and other son the father be dead and the estate agree to be settle be  encumber the question be whether the encumbrance shall lie upon the mother and  son in proportion or whether the jointress shall be disencumber and the whole  lie upon the son and a case of carpenter and Bennett vern be cite wherein it  be say that be first hear before the Lord north he exonerate the jointure and  lie the encumbrance upon the son but afterward be reheard before jefferies he  reverse that decree and lie it in proportion the Lord keeper take time to  consider of it See post c p c p
c man v burgess S c Charles can Eq can ab Oct car master of the roll mortgage  money tender no interest after if a mortgage be forfeit and the mortgagor  tender the money to the mortgagee and then prefer his bill to redeem the  mortgagee shall have no interest from the time of the tender Lution v rod Ch  can and if particular circumstance of vexation appear the mortgagee may  further not only lose his own cost but also be saddle with those of the  mortgagor Shuttleworth v Lowther cite b the Lord chancellor in Detillin v gale  Ves v Trecothick Ves and Bea Harvey v Tebbutt James and walk six month notice  however if there be no special contract shall be give of the intention to pay  off the debt gyles v hall p wms and the tender of the money must be formal  make bishop v church Ves sen Reg lib b fol the court order that if on take the  account it shall appear the money tender be the full amount of what be due  then the plaintiff be not to be charge with interest after the time of such  tender but if it shall appear that more be due at that time than the sum  tender then interest be to be compute for the whole time until payment make
c Manaton v squire S c very brief report in Ch can partition a bill be prefer  by a tenant in common to have a partition upon a suggestion that the other  tenant in common have alien to person unknown so that he can not tell against  who to bring his writ of partition and also that the other tenant in common do  with their cattle eat up all the profit for which he have no remedy at law c  in this case it be hold per cancellar that the chancellor have equal power to  make partition by commission see fondl Tr Eq p note the jurisdiction be not  only establish but have almost supersede any application to the court of  commonlaw on the subject from the difficulty attend the prosecution of a writ  of commission agar v Fairfax Ves Reg lib b fol a commission be direct but not  execute as the party agree that one shall purchase the other interest in the  premise as the commonlaw have by writ of partition for it can be deny but by  the statute h a tenant in common have a right to partition and the delay at  commonlaw many time be such it be in a real action if the demandant happen to  bring his writ against the person that be not the tenant c that he shall never  attain the end of it and he say he do no more question the jurisdiction of the  chancery in this case than he do whether a gift to a man and his heir be a  feesimple and grant a commission unless the party can agree without before the  next term
c mich Elizabeth in the common plead a man seize of a pasture within which be  two great grove and wood know by the name of a wood lease the same by  indenture for year and also in the same pasture be certain hedgerow and tree  there grow sparsim by the same indenture bargain and sell to the lessee all  wood and underwood in and upon the premise and further that it shall and may  be lawful to the lessee to cut down and carry away the same at all time during  the term Harper say the hedgerow do not pass by these word for they be not  know by the name of wood h manwood hold the contrary mounson contrary to  manwood for the word of the grant may be supply by other in it videlicet wood  dyer hold that these hedgerow shall pass for the grant be general it be  further move if by these word the lessee may again cut they c or but once  Harper manwood and mounson three of the justice hold that he may cut they but  once but dyer hold the contrary say so it shall be if the word have be grow  upon the premise and this word grow although it sound in the present tense yet  it shall be take also in the future tense if not that the word tunc be lie for  that be a word of restraint the case which be argue in the chancery h where I  be present be this the prior of saint John let a commandry provide Leonard  that if the say prior or any of his brother there be commander will dwell  thereupon then the say lease to be void and it be doubt if that proviso do  extend to the successor for this word be in the present tense and yet it be  hold by Fitzherbert that it shall be take in the future tense and so to extend  to the successor but otherwise if the word have be nunc be Leonard er p  Elizabeth in the common plead
c more v MAYHOW S c Charles can Eq can ab Nov car Lord chancellor I Terrell  notice of trust after article and before conveyance the plaintiff bill be to  be relieve upon a trust and charge the defendant with notice and that yet he  have get a conveyance and yet on or before the conveyance freeman er p have  notice defendant by way of answer deny that he have notice at the time of  purchase for plea say he be a purchaser on a valuable consideration Obj he  ought to have express the money give for S be a valuable consideration but not  equitable cur the plea be good as to that But see ante c p note and Sculthorp  v burgess Ves jun the plea depend on the answer that he have no notice at the  time of the purchase which be not a sufficient denial of notice for purchase  be equivocal and may mean the article on agreement of purchase and so he may  have notice at the time of the conveyance execute cur it have be always  freeman rule that if the purchaser after article have notice before or at the  execute of the conveyance it shall defeat his title and therefore resolve that  plea be not good Harrison v Southcote atk Hardingham v Nicholls atk Tourville  v naish p wms the conveyance must be execute and the money actual pay
c Mr OTTOWAYS case Nov injunction against a parliament man Lord keeper grant a  injunction for want of a answer against a parliament man but order no  attachment shall be take out but in less than sixteen year afterward as appear  from the anonymous case in Ch can the practice be establish which at present  prevail of make sequestration the first actual process against member of  either house of parliament for a contempt in not appear a attachment however  must be previous seal and enter upon which the sequestration be ground but  such attachment be never execute pale yellow for Rome and the first order for  sequestration be always nisi Bernal v marquis of donnegal Ves
c Mr rushworth case mortgagee renew a lease it be hold that if a college lease  be mortgage and the mortgagee renew his lease that this shall be for the  benefit of the mortgagor pay the mortgagee his charge and per Lord chancellor  the lessee of a college c have a tenantright in France and all other place  almost but here and the college be bind to let he renew but the law be not so  here but however the mortgagee here do but graft upon his stock and it shall  be for the mortgagors benefit if trustee mortgagee or other person interest  obtain a renewal the new lease be always subject to the trust and limitation  of the old lease though they be not oblige to renew yet when do it be a  continuation of the old lease raw v Chichester Ambl Winslowe v Tighe ball and  Beatrice Randall v Russell Meriv Pickereing v vowles Br post case p
c Mr VARNEES case S c Eq can ab Lord chancellor relief against a bad bargain  one Mr Varnees a young gentleman in consideration of pound give he in the  lifetime of his father do give a bind for pound to be pay within a year after  the death of his father to who he be heir the say bind be sue he prefer his  bill to be relieve and be relieve repay the say pound and interest to  expectant heir the court of chancery seem to have extend a degree of  protection approach near to incapacitate they from bind themselves by any  contract peacock v Evans Ves post c p
c Nicholson v shearman S c Charles can Eq can ab and at commonlaw in t raym  side and seem to have be one of the early case which establish that a action  will not lie for a legacy Jun car Lord chancellor baron turner legacy Payable  by executor de son tort one exhibit a bill against a executor and a stranger  set forth that the testator estate come to both their hand and that the  testator have give he a legacy c the stranger demurrer because the executor be  only suable the court overrule the demurrer for whosoever get any of the  testator estate into his hand be answerable for the legacy read case Rep Reg  lib b fol demurrer hold to be insufficient but the benefit of the matter  contain therein save to the defendant till the hear r l b fol decree that the  defendant shall pay the legacy to the plaintiff with interest from the time of  the bill file unless the plaintiff can prove a previous demand and in that  case with interest from the time of such demand see ante c note and in Trin  term this cause be hear and decree
c noel v jevon S c Eq can ab post case the bill be to be relieve against the  defendant dower her husband be only a trustee and it appear that the husband  be but a trustee the defendant be bar of her dower contrary to the opinion of  Nash v Preston cro car and so it be say be the constant practice of the court  now if the husband be seize mere as trustee the wife will be entitle to dower  at commonlaw but this court will not suffer her to take advantage of it Hinton  v Hinton Ves sen because the estate in equity will not belong to the trustee  but to the beneficiary and trust finch v earl of Winchelsea p wms freeman er p  freeman de term S trin in curian porter
c Norton v Mr barker distribution colonel Norton have issue mrs Whitehead and  two other child mrs Whitehead have issue mrs Barker and two other child and  upon her marriage with Mr Barker he give her pound colonel Norton be dead  intestate the question be whether this pound shall be account as part of her  share because the word of the act stat car c S be where any child be advance  and here she be the grandchild hold by the lord commissioner Rawlinson and  Hutchins that this shall be reckon as part of her share
c parker v plummer upon a appeal from a decree at the roll Jan car bare  agreement decree in specie Parker sell a lease which he have for three life  from the dean and chapter to plummer and it be agree plummer shall pay pound  for it after the defendant agree with the plaintiff that if he will abate he  pound he will reconvey the lease whenever the king and dean and chapter be  restore the plaintiff thereupon abate the pound and king Charles be now  restore the plaintiff exhibit his bill for the lease which the master of the  roll decree to him Nota here be the pound abate and so execute on one side  note this be decree against freeman er p the son of the purchaser the father  be dead quaere whether he come in by settlement or as occupant upon appeal  this decree be affirm by the Lord chancellor and justice Bridgeman in this  case it be object that this court ought not to decree it for it be in freeman  nature of a wager and the consideration unequal and penal and that a action  more proper lie and that it be in the discretion alley v deschamps Ves Cooper  v den Ves jun this discretion however be not arbitrary but find on fix  principle of equity buckle v Mitchell Ves III post c p note c p Reg lib b fol  the master of the roll decree the say agreement to be perform and that the  defendant shall reconvey and restore back to the plaintiff the premise and  account for the profit thereof since the king come into England and the  restitution of dean and chapter and on a rehear the agreement be full prove  and that it be make on valuable consideration the decree be affirm of the  court to decree agreement or not which be where they ought to be perform ex  debt is owed the whole of the laws yet decree ut above
c peacock v spooner S c vern Eq can ab distinguish web v web p wms question  lion v Mitchell mad Lord commissioner trust of a term ante case and note  content post case the trust of a term for year upon a marriage be limit to a  the husband for life then to b the wife for life and then to the heir of the  body of the wife b the husband to be beget a die leave issue b marry a second  husband and die the husband take administration and the question be whether  the husband shall have the term as administrator to the wife or the issue and  resolve that the issue shall have it for to support the intent of the  settlement they will take the word heir of the body to be description personae  and not word of limitation note that this seem to carry the trust of a term  far than a other judgement and contrary to former resolution but all the  commissioner be of that opinion note that after hill term this cause be hear  upon a appeal in the house of lord and the appeal be dismiss and the decree  confirmed See villiers v villers atk but the authority be follow only in case  exact the same in specie with itself fearne posthum Theebridge v kilburne Ves  sen Garth v Baldwin ibidem by Reg lib b fol we learn that this cause be first  hear before jefferies c who decree in favour of the administrator the report  above allude to a rehear before the lord commissioner who declare they see no  reason to give the plaintiff the administrator any relief upon his bill but  dismiss the same and the plaintiff have obtain possession of the premise under  the former decree he be order to reassign the same to the defendant the issue  of the decease feme freeman de term S hill in curian porter
c PENHAY v Hurrell S c vern contingent remainder ante case S c post case a  fine levy to the use of the father for year if he shall so long live and after  to the use of trustee for year for particular purpose and from and after the  death of the father to the use of the first son in tail with diverse remainder  over and the question be whether this limitation to the first son be not void  and that depend upon this whether the father shall have a estate for life by  implication for otherwise there will be no estate of freehold to support the  contingent remainder and my Lord chancellor have consult the judge say they be  of opinion that the limitation to the son be void there be no estate for life  vest in the father but see the final resolution post c p but if it have be in  case of a covenant to stand seize it may have be otherwise
c PENHAY v Hurrell S c vern Lord chancellor judge Powell another point arise  in this case a seize in fee levy a fine to the use of d for seventy year if a  life so long and after the decease of a to c and the heir of his body  remainder to the right heir and the sole question be whether a use result to a  for life for if it do not the limitation over be all void for want of a  freehold to support they during the life of a it be agree in case of a  covenant to stand seize that what be not limit out of the covenantor do  continue to he and therefore if a man covenant to stand seize to the use of  the heir of his body it shall be a estatetail because the old estate for life  continue in he and my Lord coke opinion in the case of Fenwick and Mitford  more Leon and be that it will so do in case of a feoff to use which opinion it  be say by judge Powel my Lord chief justice hale do seem to be of in the case  of Pybus and Mitford lev Ventr Mod t raym Keble Freem and my Lord coke when he  come to be chief justice continue freeman er p of the same opinion as appear I  roll rep in the oftencited case of lane v panel and it be say that this differ  from the case of Davis and smith in the house of lord show Rep of can in  parliament p and see S c dyer b because there it appear the estate move from  the wife and so the husband shall not take a estate by implication but here it  be a s own estate and so the judge and the Lord chancellor be of opinion that  the use shall result accord to my Lord coke opinion and freeman the rather  because contingent use be not favour in law but where it may be remainder  shall vest but it be say the earl of Bedford case seem contrary and the chief  justice be of another opinion and therefore the Lord chancellor desire the  opinion of all the judge it be a point never yet settle by any solemn  resolution vide Lord paget case Jenk cent Leon de term S hill in curian porter
c PENHAY v Hurrell S c vern n vide Lord Bedford case Poph ante case S c the  Lord keeper after consideration have and a case be state give his opinion that  a have a estate for life by implication and so the remainder all good there be  a freehold to support they and he go upon the case of Pybus and Mitford in I  Mod Rep and bring the book into court where it seem to be the opinion of my  Lord coke and hale that as well in a fine or feoff as in a covenant to stand  seize so much of the use as a man do not depart with remain in he and so he  say be the I Inst and give judgement accord n b if this resolution hold  throughout there can hardly be any such thing as a bad limit contingent  remainder for if a freehold be not limit away it remain in the feoff in case  of feoff and so will support any contingent limitation This objection will be  qualify by recollection of the rule that where a use be express limit to the  owner of the estate he will not be allow to take any result or imply use  inconsistent with the use limit to he if therefore a estate for year have in  this case be limit to the settler he will not have take a estate for life  against the express word of the settlement and a subsequent limitation of the  estate will have be void as a remainder Adam v savage salk rawley v holland Eq  can ab but in sergeant hill ms a query be make whether this will not be good  as a spring use here however as no express estate for year be limit to the  settler and the present freehold be not limit away it result so as to support  the limitation in remainder Reg lib b fol the decree affirm on a rehear  freeman er p
c Philip v Philip bill on a goldsmith post case it be hold by the Lord keeper  that if a legatee accept of the executor a bill upon a goldsmith and the  legatee do not demand the same of the goldsmith and after the goldsmith break  that in this case the loss shall be to the legatee but if the legatee demand  it in convenient time and the goldsmith do not pay it but break then it shall  not go for payment but the legatee may resort back to the executor freeman er  p for his legacy and it be say in this case that four or five day shall be a  convenient time for this purpose see the case on this subject collect in city  on bill freeman de term pasch in curian porter
c porter v HOBBARD S c Nels Ch Rep Ch Rep interest upon interest post case a  mortgagee after money be incur for interest assign over to one that pay he his  principal and interest the question be whether or no this assignee upon the  redemption shall have interest for the interest and this difference be take  that when a mortgagee assign with the consent of the mortgagor to one that pay  he the principal and interest there the interest and principal be consolidate  by the consent of the mortgagor and there upon redemption the assignee shall  have interest for the whole sum that he disburse and so it be come semble if  the mortgagor and mortgagee state their account and co I to a agreement to  continue the money long but if a mortgagee assign over without the consent of  the mortgagor there no interest shall be allow to the assignee for what he pay  for interest for if that shall be allow the scrivener of London will make a  trade of assign every six month and so turn their interest into principal and  by that mean receive interest upon interest freeman and this case be cite to  the master of the roll he will not allow interest to the assignee for interest  that he pay to the mortgagee it not be do by consent of the  mortgagor Ashenhurst v James atk earl of Macclesfield v Fitton vern Carew v  Johnston Sch Lef matthews v Walwyn Ves post c p and append c freeman er p
c POVYEs case S c Eq can ab Lord chancellor trust for payment of debt a be  indebt pound whereof pound be secure by mortgage the residue by bind a before  his death make a lease of all his land to trustee for payment of his debt  which lease in the whole be worth about pound the heir of a after his death  sell as much land as pay pound whereof the mortgage for pound be part which be  more than the value of the trust estate Povye who be a creditor for the other  pound bring his bill against the heir and the trustee to have his debt satisfy  out of this trust estate it be insist for the heir that have pay as far as the  value of the trust estate do extend he ought not to have his land charge any  far but it be rule that as the trust land be not sufficient to satisfy the  whole debt the heir and the trustee and the mortgagee shall not juggle  together to cheat other creditor by pay the mortgage first off the mortgagee  may take his remedy indeed against the heir or personal representative at his  election but this election will not determine which fund ought proper to be  charge nor vary the right as to those fund Galton v Hancock atk a creditor who  have a double fund to resort to will not be allow by his option to disappoint  another who have only one aldrich v Cooper Ves but on the contrary the trust  land shall be apply in the first place for the other debt because the  mortgagee can be at no damage be secure by his mortgage but on the contrary if  the mortgage shall be first satisfy the other creditor may lose their freeman  debt and so the plaintiff in this case have relief for his debt freeman er p
c pratt v colt S c Charles can Lord Bridgeman ancestor judgement not to charge  a trust in the heir colt father have give a judgement to the plaintiff sir  George Pratt for pound and that colt father have the trust of the fee of pound  per and which descend to the defendant his son and heir who sue the trustee in  this court and have the estate in law convey to he and now sir freeman George  Pratt will by the aid of this court extend those land by this judgement and it  be argue that if this have be a term for year and the trust have come to the  executor it have be asset in equity and so in this case where the defendant  claim as heir the defendant demurrer to this bill and the Lord keeper rule the  demurrer good and for reason say the executor claim in auter law but the heir  to his own use but note that this have not be take to be a good demurrer by  the old and best practiser as little accord with good reason for the heir at  law be as much Chargeable with the ancestor judgement three year subsequent to  the decision of this case the question be put at rest by the stat of fraud the  that section of which express declare that a trust estate which be suffer to  descend shall be asset in the and of the heir to answer the obligation of the  ancestor and see stat James c as the executor with the testator debt and so  equity ought to follow the law and the abovesaid difference be immaterial
c price v very Lord chancellor mortgage redeemable ante case and note ante  case b and note it be hold that if a estate mortgage be once redeemable it  shall always be so till release or foreclose but see ante c p and the note  thereto that length of time may bar redemption see also that the remedy of the  party ought to be reciprocal ante c p as if a mortgage be make with a  condition that if the mortgagor pay the money at any time during his life the  mortgagee shall reconvey this may be redeemable by his heir after his decease  notwithstanding the redemption be limit to the mortgagor during his life only  so if a mortgage be make redeemable upon payment of the mortgage money at a  certain day but if the money be not then pay that if the mortgagee will pay a  further sum to the mortgagor that then his estate shall be absolute or that he  will make he a further conveyance or any thing to that effect this estate be  notwithstanding redeemable after the day of payment and the mortgagee can  enforce the mortgagor after default to make he a absolute estate until he  foreclose he
c proud v comb S c Charles Rep Nels Charles can above case master of the roll  ante case and note account state be a good plea but if there e any agreement  to rectify mistake it shall not conclude though under hand and seal
c Purefoy v jons Lord chancellor finch agreement to deliver up security not  execute Mr knightly Purefoy the plaintiff be bind with his brother George to  the defendant in a bind of pound for the payment of pound and there be also a  mortgage make by George to the defendant for security of the same money  afterward George have occasion to take up more money agree with the defendant  to give he a statute for his security and the defendant to deliver up the  mortgage and as the plaintiff pretend the bind too the mortgage be deliver up  but not the bind George die and the defendant sue knightly Purefoy upon the  bind who prefer his bill in this court to have the bind deliver up accord to  the say agreement some proof be offer to the agreement to deliver up this bind  upon the give of the statute but the Lord chancellor say if the agreement be  ever so well prove yet the plaintiff shall have no relief here for here the  defendant be shipwreck and have this plank to save he and he will not take  this from under he to let he sink to make he lose his debt and if he can have  any remedy at law he may take it he shall never be defeat of it in equity by  the decree of this court if the defendant have a equal claim to the protection  of a court of equity as the plaintiff to its assistance the court will not  interpose on either side Mitf but whether in this case the equity be equal  must have depend upon the consideration for and particular term of the  agreement
c ramm rand v cartwright S c Eq can ab in marge Nov car master of the roll  fraudulent deed good against the grantor a voluntary deed find to be  fraudulent against a mortgagee yet the grantee in the say deed may afterward  sue for redemption for it be good against the granter and his heir Curtis v  price Ves and though equity will not assist a volunteer yet if the act be  complete though voluntary the court will act upon it ex part pie Ves Reg lib b  fol it be propose that the defendant the mortgagee shall give the plaintiff  the grantee the sum of pound and that the plaintiff shall release her interest  in the premise to which the party consent a decree be make accord and it be  order that on such payment as aforesaid the plaintiff shall deliver up to the  defendant all deed and write in her possession concern the premise in question  and also execute such further assurance as a master of the court shall think  necessary at the cost and charge of the defendant and he shall have the equity  of redemption Kennesby v parrett freeman chancery case case er report date c  KENNESBY v parrett Dec car demurrer legatee maintenance ante case legatee of  portion at as it do not appear whether the legacy be only first to vest at the  time mention or be previous vest then to become Payable and as it be leave  equal uncertain whether the testator be one who stand in loco parent it be  impossible to make much use of this case as a authority twentyone year of age  have maintenance in the meantime allow they on suit here I archer in curian
c randall v Richford S c Ch can Nels Eq can ab Jan car witness mistake  reexamined a witness allege he have mistake himself at a commission the  commission be return he come to London and make oath that he be surprise a  special commission issue to reexamine this witness which be do accord but this  special commission be suppress by motion by advice with the master of the roll  with the six clerk as contrary to the course of the court neither at law nor  in equity be a witness allow to allege mistake general as a ground for  reexamination though in proper case where a specific mistake have be point out  leave have be obtain to correct that mistake but the reexamination will be  confine to that point only Kirk v Kirk Ves Asbee v Shipley mad and be very  spare permit Lord Abergavenny v Powell Meriv Bott v birch mad Rowley v Ridley  Cox can Reg lib d fol by affidavit it appear that the defendant be mistake in  his deposition for that several circumstance which he have consider of since  be not in his memory when he be examine and therefore it be pray that he may  be at liberty to rectify his say deposition the court refer it to a master to  examine into this statement and report his opinion thereof by fol we collect  that as it appear the plaintiff be deaf that his application be make from  motive of conscience only and that the commission have never be open so that  non to agree what the deposition be a special commission be order with power  to reopen the former commission and to rectify the say examination if need be
c rich v jaques S c Charles can Eq can ab Oct car Lord chancellor certiorari  bill rich be plaintiff upon a certiorari bill Porlington v Tarbock vern Reg  lib b fol the plaintiff bill dismiss with cost and order that a procedendo  shall issue to enable the defendant in this court to proceed to a hear in the  Lord mayor court and that at such hear either party may be at liberty to use  the deposition here take in this cause to remove a cause out of the mayor  court because his witness live out of the jurisdiction of the court and now  have examine his witness here the defendant here who be plaintiff in the mayor  court move for a procedendo the plaintiff here insist that his bill be of new  matter and desire to be hear here and so he be and after hear the cause  dismiss
c same ASTREYS case S c Eq can ab statute of limitation account against  executor in this case it be hold unanimous that where there be a account  current for twenty year as receiver earl of Hardwicke v Vernon Ves of rend and  much more in pay and receive mutual yet this be not bar by the statute of  limitation but if the account be state or end ante c p note but where the  nature of the connexion between the party have be that of principal and agent  or of attorney and client the settlement of account will not be hold  conclusive if a reasonable ground be show permission will be give to surcharge  and falsify such settle account Beaumont v Boultbee Ves lews v Morgan price  and then the party forbear to prosecute for six year he be bar by the statute  and here astrey who be the executor of mrs moss his mother in law who be  executrix of her husband Mr moss be decree to account for the profit of land  receive by Mr moss before his death in trust for the plaintiff freeman er p  freeman de term S trin in curian porter
c sander v DELIGNE and barn lord commissioner purchaser without notice upon a  bill to foreclose the plaintiff have take a mortgage for year of one who  afterward he discover to be but tenant for life and hear that there be a  estate in I S in trust for infant get a conveyance of this estate to protect  his mortgage the mortgagor be dead and the question be whether he can do it by  virtue of this conveyance he have no notice of this trust when he lend the  money or whether he shall not for this estate be a trustee for the child  Hutchins it be a settle rule of this court that whoever take a estate clog  with a trust for child present become a trustee for those child Trevor and  Rawlinson doubt and cite sir John fags case Charles can see ante c p where a  purchaser get a deed of entail into his hand whether he do it by power or  otherwise Siddon v charnel bunb Hitchcock v Sedgwick vern if he have no notice  of it when he make the purchase he shall not be bind to discover it a case be  cite where a man get a ladder and fetch a deed out of a window and yet be not  bind to freeman discover it to impeach his title and Culpepers case be cite  where a man have buy gavelkind land of the old son and pay his purchase money  without knowledge that it be gavelkind and afterward for a song buy in the  title of the young brother who be ignorant of their title yet can not be  relieve afterward in this court the purchaser have honest pay his money  without notice may use what mean he can to fortify his title Trevor if we do  not set aside his deed or subject it to the trust yet we ought not to assist  he in any thing and so not to decree any foreclosure in this case but if he  have get a title at law let he make the best of it he can at law but he shall  have no aid of this court See however turner v back vin ab freeman er p
c Savile v darcy about S c Charles can Eq can ab Lord chancellor money pay  before a bill of review decree for a great sum of money bill of review bring  and new matter assign the rule Lord Bacon Ord of court be plead that the  defendant ought first to pay the money before the bill bring cur let he give  good securityPrac Reg Mitf for the money and we will dispense with the rule  and the like between baston and Byron by order of the house of peer about
c seaborn v Blackston S c Charles can Eq can ab Nov car master of the roll  baron conclude per receipt deal feme the wife receive money due upon a bind to  her husband she usual receive and pay the money ante c p note the authority  cite in which show that a feme covert may be the attorney of her husband see  post c p he get judgement on the bind order that he acknowledge satisfaction  ante a p Reg lib b fol the court be satisfy that the award which be the matter  in question be make at the mediation and request of the defendant wife and  that the defendant ought to make good the contract make by his wife and be  bind thereby and that the defendant shall acknowledge satisfaction upon the  judgement obtain by he at law on the say bind at the plaintiff charge freeman  er p
c seymer v Nosworthy hill S c report as to the first order make by Lord keeper  Bridgeman overrule the plea in Ch Rep Nels and Eq can ab as to the whole  proceed in Rep tempt finch where the ground upon which Lord keeper finch  reverse the order make by his predecessor and allow the plea may be find these  ground have since be full establish by numerous decision see Jerrard v sander  Ves jun by Reg lib b fol we find that the defendant plead himself to be a  purchaser under a will which the plaintiff allege to have be revoke when it be  order that the defendant do answer the plaintiff bill so far as to bring the  validity of the say will in issue and that the plaintiff do proceed to a trial  at law against the defendant upon this issue whether the say will be revoke or  not and such trial be to be confine to the single point aforesaid No entry of  the reversal of this decree by Lord keeper finch have be discover in Reg lib  but the report in can tempt finch where above be too clear and circumstantial  to leave the matter doubtful Lord Bridgeman plea of a purchaser upon a  valuable consideration ante case and note defendant plead himself a purchaser  for a valuable consideration but rule no good plea in regard he do not plead  himself a purchaser from some of the plaintiff ancestor for a purchase from a  stranger without title be hold no good plea and therefore the defendant be  order to answer hill vacation be the second seal before easter term on motion  by Mr Nosworthy the plea be hold good by the Lord keeper finch and all the  subsequent proceed set aside
c shall v shall S c Eq can ab Lord keeper provision and not a trust Jo shall  the father have several son purchase the inheritance of several house c in the  name of his second son and die and the young son who by the custom of that  place be heir at law prefer his bill against the second son to have a  conveyance of the estate to he allege that the second son be only a trustee  for his father and that he be heir to his father be entitle to have a  execution of the trust and a conveyance to he and his heir it be plain in this  case and so prove that the father pay all the purchase money and that he have  lie out great sum of money in building upon it and improve it on the other  side it be prove that the father before he purchase declare he intend it for  his second son and some other parole discourse to that purpose cur dismiss the  bill for that it be a settle rule in this court that whenever a father  purchase in the name of a child unprovide for it be intend a provision and not  a trust ante c mumma v mumma vern dyer v dyer Cox can where all the lead  authority on the subject be bring forward unless it be otherwise prove and the  proof lie on the other side ante c p note and it be also before the statute of  fraud and perjury Charles c and it be strong since because declaration of  trust freeman ought to be in write though in other case anon Ventr lade v  Craddock p wms Wray v steel Ves and Bea Reg lib b fol the decree as enter  confirm the report a trust will result where it appear that another pay the  money freeman er p
c Simons v Simons Lord keeper debt in what order to be pay in a cause depend  in chancery concern payment of sir William bassett debt there be several debt  due by mortgage and judgement and not be sufficient to pay all the question be  whether the mortgage shall be prefer before the judgement and the cause be  hear before the master of the roll be decree the payment of the mortgage  before the judgement and the decree be sign and enrol whereupon there be  afterward a appeal to the house of lord and they reverse the decree and order  that they shall be pay promiscuous accord to their priority and so it be now  hold note this case I have ex relation Mr Swinborne n b this question must be  intend of puisne mortgage and judgement for as to the first mortgage and  judgement it never be a question but that the first will take place because  the first have a legal right and stand in no need of the aid of a court of  equity The first mortgagee certain can have the estate take from he till his  mortgage money be pay but the aid of a court of equity may be most useful to  he nevertheless in foreclose the equity of redemption if the money be not pay  and thereby exempt he from the necessity of keep account freeman de term S  mich in curian porter
c sir edward heath v Hanley WHITWICK S C Ch can Nels Charles Rep Eq can ab Reg  lib a fol the court order that as the matter chief depend on the statute of  limitation the question shall be refer to the judge of the court of king bench  or the major part of they who be request to mediate and end the difference  between the party if they find it practicable if not then they be desire to  certify their opinion in this case upon the statute of limitation to this  court who will thereupon make such further order as shall be meet No entry of  the result have be find on a plea maii car chancellor I Wyndham limitation  trust vide case and note the plaintiff be son and executor to the last chief  justice heath so make at Oxford during the difference between king and  parliament but never sit as chief justice in Westminster hall the bill be to  have a account of money receive by the defendant as prothonotories of the king  bench which be all to belong to the chief justice which money they by their  office ought to receive for the chief justice by a imply trust army duty the  defendant plead the statute of limitation James the plaintiff insist that the  trust be not within the statute of limitation answer on the other part that a  guardian c be within the statute and he be trustee c order that the defendant  shall answer
c sir gervase Scroop v sir adrian Scroop S c Charles can Oct car upon a plea  judge hide ante case content see the note there father and son joint purchaser  survivorship bill be to be relieve for the manor of Gedney the plaintiff claim  by the devise of sir gervase Scroop grandfather of the plaintiff father of the  defendant the defendant plead that sir gervase buy the manor in the name of  sir gervase and the defendant that the money for the purchase be raise by the  sale of land of inheritance which will have come to the defendant if not sell  and the court be hold in both their name and he be never seize in trust for  gervase and now claim the whole by survivorship cur this be a good plea unless  it can be prove a express trust which can not be do but by a replication and  there be no replication the plea shall be take true for per cur the purchase  shall be intend a advancement for the son Taylor v tailor atk dyer v dyer Cox  can Glaister v hewer Ves ante c p note cro and sir Sidney Montague case there  and crisp v Pratt March Reg lib b fol the cause be reheard on the that of  November before the Lord chancellor assist by turner b when the former order  allow the plea be affirm with double cost this plea be reheard the that of Nov  and on argument on both side allow
c sir henry Bellasis et ux v sir William erwin S c Charles can June car upon a  plea Lord chancellor Ch ba hale I hide proviso to defeat a portion in terror  ante case and note suit be for a portion of pound the defendant plead it be  give her provide she marry with consent of a and if not then to have but pound  per annum cur this be but in terror but otherwise if the portion have be limit  to a three person this case be cite and rely upon ante c p Reg lib a fol the  cause be reheard and the original order and decree overrule the plea be affirm  freeman er p
c sir thomas Bennett and sir William brown v box al s c Charles can at  considerable length Eq can ab asset against heir this case concern asset in  equity by which it appear that the ancestor encumbrance on it be so great the  revenue on it will not pay the interest for which reason resolve no asset in  equity But at law have the estate be a legal one the plaintiff will have  obtain judgement though he must have wait for the fruit of it and a analogous  decision will have be make in equity as to this trust estate for such it  appear to have be twelve year late and at all time subsequent to the stat of  fraud Charles c of which see the that and that section Reg lib a fol the Lord  chancellor request Lord chief justice hide the Lord chief baron and Mr justice  Windham to consider the case as state for their opinion Fol the judge be of  opinion that the land be not asset the circumstance be but lose state in the  report the ancestor have only a trust estate in the land and the statute of  fraud be not yet pass see note above
c sir William DARCYS case payment by recouper forfeiture per felon de see it  be hold that if a owe b pound by recognizance and b owe a pound or pound upon  any security whatsoever and a sue b that b can compel a to pay himself by way  of retainer out of what be due to he but they must take their mutual remedy  but see now the statute of setoff Geo c S Geo c S see also simmons v Knox t r  unless there be any agreement to the contrary freeman er p and it be likewise  resolve in this case upon solemn argument that if a man that have a debt due  from another by recognizance be a felon de see that this recognizance be  forfeit freeman to the king hale v petit Plowd and the administrator of the  felon de see shall not have it and if the king do grant a pardon which extend  to debt as in this case the act of general pardon do that this enures to the  benefit of the debtor and do not restore any interest of the administrator of  the felon de see
c sir William denny v Filmer S c vern Nels Charles can Eq can ab Jan car Lord  chancellor Ch I Bridgeman bill pro acknowledged admitted fact review error  upon a bill of review for that the decree be that the bill shall be take pro  acknowledged admitted fact the error be that the defendant be not bring in by  process of contempt and thereon have a day assign to answer on which the  defendant demurrer for that it appear by the decree that he appear by his  clerk on the process of contempt and pray far time to answer by his counsel  cur let the defendant answer save the benefit of his demurrer till hear and  afterward it be hear and because of the defendant appearanceThat former it be  a rule never to take a bill pro acknowledged admitted fact if the defendant ut  above and because afterward he stand out all process of contempt and will not  answer resolve the decree be well ground freeman er p have not appear see ante  c p but that the law be now alter see the reference in the note to the case  cite
c smith v alterly car S c Charles Rep notice condition heir a devise his land  to his wife and after to his old son with condition that if his wife shall be  with child pound shall be pay by his old son and heir at law to the child  after the mother death the wife have a child and after her old son convey away  the land to a purchaser and on proof that the purchaser have notice of the  will freeman er p a decree be for the daughter for her money devise and  declare it be a trust to go with the land and yet this will be void in law as  to the legacy see he who be to have the benefit of the breach of the condition  be the heir who be to pay the legacy See ante c p note post c p
c smith v OXINDEN S c Charles can Eq can ab salk Trin car Lord chancellor  merchant factor custom steal the east India company sue their factor for a  account of pound in gold he account for so much of it pay to the emperor of  east India for custom the come freeman er p pany insist that none be pay admit  which it be refer to merchant who ought to have the benefit in case the factor  defraud the emperor of India of the custom and certify by the merchant that  the factor ought to have it for if the gold have be seize for nonpayment of  custom the factor have be Chargeable wherefore he shall have the benefit Knipe  v Jesson Charles can anon skin vin ab Reg lib b fol the court be full satisfy  that the factor be not to account for the custom save he have run the risk of  the act vide grammatical case neighbor
c smith v Pemberton S c Charles can Eq ab may car interest turn into principal  on mortgage ante case and note the mortgagee have assign for principal and  interest the mortgagor come to redeem the question be if what the assignee pay  shall be all take for principal resolve that all which he real pay and be due  shall be principal but the account between the mortgagee and the assignee  shall not conclude the mortgagor to the authority cite in note to the case in  marge headnote add chamber v Goldwin Ves norrish v martial mad and therefore  refer to a master freeman er p freeman de term S mich in curian porter
c squire v mayor S c Eq can ab Lord keeper heir and executor hold that a  furnace though fix the question in such case will be whether it be so fix as  to be essential to the support of the building if so the executor will not be  allow to remove it vin ab but if it can be disannexed without injury to the  fabric of the house or be put up as a accessary to the carry on trade it will  be the property of the executor Elwes v Mawe east to the freehold and purchase  with the house and also hang Harvey v Harvey Str nail to the wall shall go to  the executor and not to the heir and so determine contrary to Herlakendens  case   Q ill dit nest lie quoad to send forward
c SWINNOCK v crisp S c semble anonymous report Ventr maintenance of child  legatee ante case post case the defendant marry the plaintiff mother who be  executrix to her former husband the father of the plaintiff who devise the sum  of two hundred and fifty freeman er p pound among the plaintiff three of his  child who be breed up by the defendant now sue for those legacy the defendant  allege that he have maintain they for several year and give they good  education which cost he much more than the interest and that he have bind one  of they apprentice and give seventy pound with he and for this he pray that  what it stand he in more than the interest may be allow this he out of the  principal but the court will not allow any thing out of the principal but see  Harvey v Harvey p wms ex part green James and walk walker v Wetherall Ves  Barlow v grant vern towards their maintenance but only the interest by reason  that the defendant have marry the mother who be bind to maintain her own child  the mother while she continue a widow may be bind so to maintain her own child  but by the second marriage the husband become a purchaser of his wife property  and he can be under no obligation to provide for the child by the former  marriage tubb v Harrison t r Cooper v Martin east Lanoy v duke of Athol atk  Billingsley v Crickett Br and when the father of her child be live the wife be  not bind to apply any separate estate she may possess for their maintenance  holy v banister mad but for the seventy pound which be pay to put one of they  apprentice that be allow out of the principal such franklin v green vern war v  war Prec in Charles but lee v brown Ves be contra
c terwit v GRESHAM S c Charles can Eq can ab Lord chancellor baron turner  deposition in a former cause between other party read order upon a long debate  that the deposition of witness take in a cause thirty year since about the  same matter be encumbrance and damnifications shall be make use of in this  cause witness be dead though that suit be between other party from who these  claim not but see coke v fountain vern and post c p and note Reg lib b fol the  court be clear of opinion that the matter in issue in the present cause have  be in issue in the former cause the deposition take in such former cause ought  to be read and use as evidence before the master in take the account in the  present cause and the case between Trinity hall and doctor Commons cite and  between Charlton and Vaughan
c tew v THACKWELL S c Charles can sub nom Jew v Thickwell Ch Rep sub nom Jew v  Thackwell Oct car Lord chancellor apportionment of a rend the plaintiff be  lessee of diverse land whereon one entire rend be reserve a township recover  right of common in part of the land not be evict   Litt a b do v meyler Mau  and Sel be authority that where a part of the land be actual evict there  apportionment of the rend may he have at commonlaw the lessee can not  apportion the rend at law so sue here for apportionment as there be precedent  that he may but it be prove that the land be still worth the rend the bill be  dismiss it must of course be presume there be no covenant against the right of  common claim Duckenfield v Whichcott Ch can Reg lib b fol the plaintiff bill  be dismiss with cost but it do not a ear by the record that this be do because  the land still continue worth the whole rend but because a bind enter into by  the plaintiff and on which the cause hinge be so frame as to make the  defendant right clear the plaintiff allege the bind to have be obtain by  surprise but fail in his proof thereof freeman er p
c the lord cornwallis case S c Eq can ab Eq can ab Prec in Charles vern Lord  keeper asset power to raise money ante case and note the Lord Cornwallis upon  his marriage with sir Stephen fox daughter vest a term in trustee upon trust  to raise pound for young child and pound more for such use and purpose as he  shall appoint he appoint pound to be raise for his daughter and the other  pound he appoint to be raise and by his will give the last pound to his  daughter also and die the creditor prefer a bill to have the last pound apply  as asset towards payment of their debt which be the only question in the case  and in this case it be decree that the last pound shall be asset for he have  appoint it to be raise it be in the nature of his personal estate and the debt  shall take place before the legacy give to his daughter but in this case it be  hold that if a man who have power to raise money die in debt have make no  appointment for raise it the creditor can make this asset and raise the money  pursuant to the power but in the case in question the money be appoint to be  raise which make the difference See Lord townsend v Wyndham Ves sen and the  authority cite in that case Reg lib b fol the Lord keeper declare that the sum  of pound which under the say power have be appoint by the say Lord Cornwallis  as a collateral security for payment of one of his creditor ought subject to  such collateral security to be deem asset and be apply to the payment of the  say Lord cornwallis debt and accord decree that the trustee in the marriage  settlement name shall raise the say pound by mortgage or sale of the trust  estate together with interest upon the say sum to be compute from the end of  the first year after the death of the say Lord Cornwallis
c theyer v web examination on interrogatory note in grammatical case theyer  and web the defendant plead a release which be prove to be deliver as a escrow  issue be join on a special special replication be now disuse prac Reg  replication the defendant be order to perfect his answer on  interrogatories According to modern practice if the plaintiff have omit to  state in the first instance so important a fact as the delivery of the lease  mere as a escrow he may on the defendant plea be put in have move for leave to  amend his bill Mitf but that every plea of a release ought to aver the  consideration see Roche v Morgell Sch and Lef by Reg lib b fol we collect that  this cause be set down to be hear on the that of July but the decree do not  appear to have be draw up
c thickness v vernon S c vern Lord chancellor survivorship ante case post case  where there be joint tenant or joint executor this court will not take away  the benefit of survivorship that the law give but if there be any word or  circumstance see Rigden v vallier Ves sen aveling v knipe Ves to differ it or  in case of a will Russell v long Ves haw v haw will any intent of the testator  appear to the contrary then this court will not permit the benefit of  survivorship and a case be cite by the Lord chancellor which be decree before  the commissioner who call chief justice roll to their assistance where land be  purchase in trust for two person equal and do not say equal to be divide and  decree at first that the trust shall survive but afterward upon a bill of  review by the consent of roll that decree be reverse and a difference be offer  in relation to survivorship where a devise be joint to executor and where it  be to residuary legatee that in one case there shall survivorship and in the  other not but the better opinion be that there be no difference but it be all  one Cray v Willis p wms and case there cite to which add Jackson v Jackson Ves  Reg lib b fol the court declare it be the plain intention of the testator that  his estate shall be divide equal between his executor and that there shall be  no advantage of survivorship between they and therefore decree that the  survive executor shall come to a account for the whole estate of the testator  and that the same shall be equal divide between the plaintiff the  representative of the decease executor and the defendant
c two anonymous money upon a mortgage whether the heir or executor shall have  it in a case S c Eq can ab between the heir and executor of a mortgagee who  shall have the money due upon a mortgage forfeit which be make to the  mortgagee and his heir it be declare by Lord chancellor finch I that when upon  a mortgage money be make Payable to the heir or executor there before the day  or at the day of payment the mortgagor have election to pay it to which he  please but even in this case if the mortgagor exercise his right of election  and pay the money to the heir the heir be a trustee only for the executor  Kendal v Mickfield Barnardis Charles can but after the day of payment be over  and the mortgage forfeit by law though equity do give the mortgagor relief so  as upon the payment of the money he shall have his land yet equity will not  revive the election of the mortgagor to pay it to the heir or executor but  then he shall be force to pay it to the executor because it come out of the  personal estate of the testator and thither it shall return turner case Ventr  post c p but if in the mortgage neither heir nor executor be mention then  after the death of the mortgagee the law determine it to be pay to the  executor for since a mortgage have be consider in equity a mere personal  contract it follow that the mortgage money be to be deem personal estate until  foreclosure or a release of the equity of redemption and actual possession  obtain by the mortgagee Awdley v Awdley vern and in this case the money be  decree to the executor
c ware v lake s c Charles can Charles Rep pale yellow Rep in Eq Ea can ab may  car Lord chancellor I brown Subpna Sci fa heir executor demurrer to a subpoena  in nature of a cognizant fa ante c p because the plaintiff therein do not  allege himself heir or executor to he that have the decree resolve the  demurrer be nought and never any such before for the subpoena be no record nor  any where file but if there be any defect in the order for the subpoena cause  must be show at the return of the writ but the order mention the plaintiff to  be both heir and executor
c will penn v brown all S c Eq can ab master of the roll trustee assign  without notice a bind be take for pound in the name of one Lemana scrivener in  trust for the plaintiff leman leave occasion for money without the privity of  pen borrow it of brown and assign this bind to brown for security brown  freeman have no notice of the trust and there be nothing of the trust appear  by the bind and the question be which of they shall have the benefit of the  bind it be agree that if it have be a mortgage and it have be assign to brown  without notice of the trust that brown shall have have it because there a  legal estate have be vest in he without notice ante c p and note but this case  as be insist differ from that because by the assign agent of a bind nothing  passes at law but a equitable right to which be rebut by the prior equity in  the plaintiff and so it be say it be hold in the case of sir Edward Abney ante  c p by the Lord chancellor but the master of the roll be of opinion in this  case that brown shall have it but sir Edward Abneys case be cite to be the  very point he desire to see that case before he will give any opinion he say  it be a stand rule here that if I trust a scrivener with my bind post c p and  the obligor pay he the money and talk up the bind that I shall have no remedy  against the obligor but if the obligor compound with the scrivener for less  than be due it be a evidence of fraud and then it may be the obligor may pay  the money again Parrott v well vern
c William v Owen and arthur S c dick Ch can Eq can ab June car demurrer to a  answer the defendant answer the bill of review it be evident from the context  that the bill be a bill of revivor and so it be state in Charles can where  above though both the report in dick and Eq can ab have copy the blunder in  the text above which will make the whole argument inconsistent but so as that  some matter in his answer will bring into examination some part of the decree  as it be sign and enrol on which answer as to that part sergeant fountain draw  a demurrer because this will tend to perjury and infiniteness to reexamine  thing examine and decree of which opinion the court be but as well the  defendant counsel as the court say there can be no demurrer upon a answer in  equity sergeant Glynn for the plaintiff say he have know it the court make a  order that there shall be no examination of that which have be examine and  that be the rule Harrison v Ridley Com freeman er p
c williams v ARTHUR S c Charles can Eq can ab Nov car plea and demurrer bill  of revivor on cognizant fa a decretal order be pronounce in after it have  depend on account for three year the decree be draw up recite the first order  but part of the matter there be omit in the decretal part of the decree the  decree be sign and enrol the defendant die and cognizant fa be sue to revive  but the plaintiff discover the omission and that he can not have remedy that  way nor can mend the decree as defective by surprise the defendant be dead  upon any motion in court he exhibit his bill of revivor to revive so much as  be omit and in truth the word of the bill extend to revive the whole decree it  be plead that the decree be enrol a bill of revivor do not lie but a cognizant  fa order it be now the practice to revive in all case indiscriminate by bill  Mitf and that the plea be overrule
c Windham v Windham Lord keeper I Twisden decree by consent for a lease or  other personal estate shall bind purchaser otherwise say the Lord keeper you  will blow up the court of Chancery Bradish v gee Ambl see last case and  reference there make c anonymous bill pro acknowledged admitted fact in  original bill or bill of revivor if the defendant have not appear but stand  out all process of contempt the bill shall not be take pro acknowledged  admitted fact but see now the stat Geo c Mawer v Mawer Cox can short v downer  Cox but this only when the defendant have appear and stand out all process for  want of a answer freeman er p
c wiseman v beak and tyson S C vern Eq can ab follow ORorke v Bolingbroke App  Cas fry v lane Ch d lord commissioner bargain unreasonable the plaintiff be  entitle to a remainder in fee after the death of sir William wiseman without  issue and have occasion for pound borrow it of the defendant beak and give a  judgement or statute to pay pound upon the death of sir William wiseman  without issue in the year in the year see Ch can and vern proceed against the  same defendant arise out of similar transaction the defendant be inform that a  court of equity will interpose in this unreasonable bargain by the advice of  sergeant Philips exhibit his bill in this court that the plaintiff may pay he  his money or else that he may be conclude to be relieve the now plaintiff then  put in his answer and refuse to pay the money but insist upon his bargain and  swear that he never will seek any relief in a court of equity and yet sir  William wiseman be dead without issue prefer his bill to be relieve and here  it be insist upon and admit that this be not in the case of a young heir but  the plaintiff at the time when he make the bargain be at least fort year of  age and a proctor at doctor Commons and therefore suppose to understand  himself and no surprise prove but the bargain make freeman at the plaintiff  instance and there be a bill and answer it be say to have go far than any  other cause of this kind but notwithstanding the court decree that upon the  plaintiff pay to the defendant his money and interest the security shall be  deliver up ante c bow v heap Ves and Bea and the bill and answer be look upon  to be a contrivance which if it shall once take will be the common practice  and it be say per Keck as fortification of fraud do increase so the court of  equity must invent new battery against they and Maynard be so much against  these bargain that he be for give only the principal and no interest but the  practice have be otherwise the defendant have his interest
cabel and vaughan   Whelpdales case be can plead non be factum sand postea  side keb hard in a action of debt upon a bind against one and it appear  another be joint bind with he wherefore the defendant demurrer but it be  adjudge for the Ventris er p plaintiff for the defendant can demurrer in such  case unless the other obligor be aver to be live and also that he seal and  deliver the bind cro askew and Hollingworths case h and if one be bind to two  one obligee can sue unless he aver the other be dead in b r levit Staneforth
cabell against vaughan ante pl bail in dell Br Pemberton pray proceed on the  bailbond may stay there be bail put in to the original action which the court  deny now be after judgement on Trin car rot debt against one who demand oyer  whereby it appear three be joint bind and adjudge good Trin rot levet and  stanforth debt against one on joint bind which so appear on oyer after non be  factum plead a special verdict be find and adjudge he can not plead non be  factum and per curian this be a mere abatement and must be plead and per  curian judgement pro plaintiff in suit upon the bailbond upon the say book and  Cr before cite
cadwalader jons Esq against John Lenthal and his lady mich relief for a debt  which the plaintiff have swear be satisfy before answer the bill be to be  relieve for a debt owe by bind from sir James Stonehouse to who the defendant  the lady be his executrix which debt and bind the plaintiff in his answer to a  former bill have swear be full satisfy to he but that be to avoid a  sequestration of the debt as be allege and the master of the roll though that  answer be set forth in the defendant answer in this Cause will not suffer the  answer to be read against the plaintiff and so decree the defendant to satisfy  the debt for though the rule be that he who have commit iniquity as here in  the false answer shall not have equity yet it seem that be to be understand  when the iniquity be do to the defendant himself as where a lessee be sue at  law on a forfeiture of his lease for nonpayment of rend or the like if such  lease be obtain by fraud or false suggestion equity will not relieve contra if  no fraud c be do to or impose on the lessor vide maxim of equity vide post ant  Max Eq c case in chancery er p case in chancery de term sanct hill year king  car h in cancellar the Lord keeper justice Moreton
Caesar against bull AssiseOffice Thomas Cesar plaintiff in assize against  Emanuel bull for the office of clockkeeper to the prince and this he claim by  grant of the king during his own life with the fee of two shilling a day for  the exercise of it and three pound yearly for livery and the patent purport  only the grant of the office and not word of creation of the office as to put  duty c and the plaintiff can not prove thaf it be a ancient office and for  that be nonsuit in the assize though that the tenant have make default before  pasch James in the common bench
cage against dod mich banc sup what copyholder may prescribe against his lord  and what not upon a trial between cage and dod touch a copyhold it be say by  the court that a copyholder for life can prescribe against his lord but a  copyholder in fee may for he have the copyhold in the nature of land of  inheritance and also that if a copyholder for life cut down timber tree the  lord may take they and that if a under lessee for year style report of a  copyholder cut down timber it shall not be a forfeiture of the copyholder  estate
cage and acton pasch W see SC Mod e r with note case W debt against a  administratrix to her husband for arrear of rend upon a lease make to he in  his lifetime the defendant plead that before the intermarriage between they he  enter into a bind to her to pay so much money to her her executor c upon  condition that in case she shall survive he he will leave her worth so much  money that he have not perform the condition that she have no asset above  which be a less sum than that which he have bind himself to pay her and that  she retain that in part upon which the plaintiff demurrer general the point in  this case be two saint whether debt upon a bind be of as high a nature as rend  so that a executor may give it preference of payment dly whether the  subsequent marriage be a release of the bind the court videlicet holt Rokeby  Turton and gold agree clear that rend whether upon a parole or lease by deed  be in equal degree to a bind and executor may prefer who he please but as to  the second point in mich W Rokeby be dead the court argue seriatim and gold  and Turton hold that the marriage do not release the bind holt CJ hold clear  that it be extinguish by the marriage but this case go afterward into chancery  and there the bind be consider as a marriageagreement vern
cage mich car banc Reg to vacate a satisfaction acknowledge upon a judgement  one cage be in execution in the king bench upon a judgement have against he  for a hundred pound the plaintiff attorney by fraud without the consent of his  client acknowledge satisfaction upon this judgement afterward the attorney of  the defendant without the consent of his client acknowledge another judgement  for the same debt the plaintiff council move that the defendant may be in  execution upon the first judgement and that the satisfaction acknowledge  thereupon may be vacate roll justice answer the attorney ought to be commit  for acknowledge the second judgement without warrant but here be two fraud one  of each side so that there be fraud against fraud and so the party be leave to  their remedy one against the other but both the attorney shall be commit for  their false practice and we will examine the whole truth of the matter  Saturday next
cage versus russel Chan can smith v Ashton Chanc Rep a feme covert have power  by her will to devise certain land devise they to her executor to pay l out of  they to her son when he shall attain the age of one and twenty year provide  that if the father of the son do not give a sufficient release to the executor  of the good and chattel remain in such a house then the devise of the l shall  be void and to go to the executor after her decease a release be tender to the  father who refuse it and then the son exhibit a bill against the father and  the executor for the l and to compel the father to release the executor in  their answer insist upon the refusal as a forfeiture of the l and the father  say that though he have for some reason before refuse he be now ready to  release the Lord chancellor decree the payment of the l and say that it be the  stand rule of the court that a forfeiture shall not bind where a thing may be  do afterward or any compensation make for it as where the condition be to pay  money or the like but in the case of fry and potter in the d of car which see  at large in the modern report where a devise be of a house upon condition that  the devisee shall marry with the consent of three person and she marry without  consent it be a immediate forfeiture for marriage without consent be a thing  of that nature that no after satisfaction can be make for it but if where  there be a devise over to a three person after a forfeiture by the first a  forfeiture in such a case will be general bind but here it be say that it  shall go to the executor c which be not to be consider because it be no more  than what the law imply Ventris boundary consecrated michaelis year car ill in  cancellar
cain against Molineux defendant move to be discharge out of execution be  steward of the household to baron Bourk a foreign envoy and obtain a rule to  show cause which be afterward discharge on hear counsel on both side it appear  that defendant be a trader that he reside at his own house in the old barn  palaceyard Westminster and that the envoy be at Hanover at the time of the  arrest Eyre for plaintiff chapel and Skinner for defendant
CALCHAM plaintiff SPATMAN defendant in account the judgement be quod to sum up  and the bail in that action be admit as evidence in this court for he for who  he be bail the point in this case be whether one Everard who be bail for the  plaintiff against who a judgement be have quod to sum up shall be allow as  evidence for he in this court because he swear to discharge himself in case  the plaintiff prove insolvent the order be by consent that the plaintiff put  in another bail Everard shall be allow as evidence as far as by law he may
CALCHMANS case by the court if a obligation be take in the name of another to  the use of a bankrupt the commissioner may well assign that unless the other  party have of his own money pay and satisfy debt due by the bankrupt in  consideration of that also creditor within Elizabeth be intend for merchandise  c and not creditor upon counterbond and the commissioner shall judge of that  for if they make a assignment to such creditor such allegation afterward come  tarde for the statute vest the thing assign in the party to who c
Calcot v YARBURY this suit dismiss out of the court of request therefore  motion be make to be dismiss hence and order to put the same in by answer upon  oath the defendant by his Council make request to be dismiss from the  plaintiff bill for that it contain the same matter heretofore dismiss out of  the court of request where the plaintiff exhibit the like bill order by this  court that the defendant shall put in the same by the way of answer upon oath  and demand judgement thereupon whether this court will any further plea  thereupon Calcot plaintiff Yarbury defendant year Elizabeth
calcraft against swann hill geo defendant become a bankrupt and after his  certificate allow his good be take in execution defendant obtain a rule on the  statute Geo sect to show cause why the be made fa shall not be set aside and  restitution per cur we be not require by the statute to proceed in a summary  way as to the good of a bankrupt though as to his person we be if the  defendant do not obtain his certificate in time so as to plead it he may bring  a hearing complaining the rule be discharge will for plaintiff Skinner for  defendant
calf against Bingley c recover in debt against a and have a to know fac  against Bingley his baily who plead that after the judgement a bring error in  the exchequerchamber and hang that a have render his body in the king bench  for only a transcript of the record be remove in guard marescalli and there  hang the error die which matter he be put to aver per pais and it be rule by  the court that that averment be nought for it ought to have be by record and  Jerman say that hang that suspension of the execution Noy the principal can  render himself for then he can be in execution that by the death of the  principal the bail be discharge so by justice Jones if he have die before the  return of the first to know fac so in Hobbs and Todcastles case that death  after a cap against a principal and before a to know fac against the bail be a  discharge and so all the clerk affirm Noy er p
Callaghan vers pennell non assumpsit infra sex aged be a special plea upon a  rule to show cause why the judgement shall not be set aside for irregularity  it appear that the action be a action of assumpsit that non assumpsit infra  sex aged be plead and that the issue be not make up by the clerk of the paper  sayer the rule be make absolute and by the CourtIn the case of Howell v clark  hill g in this court and in the case of the bank of England v wait Trin g  likewise in this court it be hold that non assumpsit infra sex aged be a  special plea and no case have be cite wherein the contrary have be hold  wherever a special plea be plead the issue by the settle practice of this  court must be make up by the clerk of the paper sayer er p
CALLONEL versus briggs Trin Ann I salk action upon a agreement that the  defendant shall pay so much money six month after contract the plaintiff  transfer stock and at the same time the plaintiff give a note to the defendant  to transfer the stock he pay the money c holt c j if either party sue upon  this agreement the plaintiff for not pay or the defendant for not transfer to  maintain the action one must aver and prove a transfer or tender and the other  payment or a tender for transfer in the first bargain be a condition precedent  and though there be mutual promise et if one that thing be the consideration  of the other here a performance be necessary to be aver and be oblige the  plaintiff to prove his transfer or a tender and refusal to accept within the  six month holt KB and it have be late adjudge that if the plaintiff do not set  forth in his declaration that he be at the SouthSea house c on the day agree  at such a time and stay tilf the last hour of the day to transfer his stock he  can maintain his action supersedeas
callop against brandlin attorney a reteyner in b r by a attorney of the c b  parole though the attorney in c b as child case have no warrant be good and  the party be put to his action upon the case against the attorney in c b but  the court will not undo the judgement f n b Keble er p hearing Quer especial  be a judgement have about five year since but have there be any practice  appear in the party the court will have consider on it but execution be do by  cap ad sit and judgement on a action upon escape have the court will not  examine it but order the attorney of c b to attend
callop against Metham error of lessee in b r be aid pl venire facias upon  issue in inferior court be of be error per curian so judgement of debt and  damage and cost de good test si si non de good not common with others against  executor upon plene to manage find against he be erroneous contra of ne unquen  executor upon asset of find the debt be whereas only damage shall be against  the executor si c
CALLWOOD against ballard bail Coleman pray execution in debt on obligation  condition to perform covenant in a indenture and on performance plead a breach  assign in nonpayment of rend and find for the plaintiff that it ought to go  after judgement unless the party put in special bail as James cap wile the  king sergeant this rend come in by way of collateral breach and the action be  not debt for rend or for money only but for performance of covenant which the  court agree and that this statute be not to be enlarge but be restrain but yet  in debt upon the indenture if the breach be assign on the reservation on  nonpayment of rend bail must be put in but not in any counterbond to save  harmless or debt for penalty in any article indent and per curian execution  stay without bail be not within the statute
cally against sir William fish Intr t James b r rot upon evidence the case be  thus f have three several close first arable d pasture d meadow b pretend a  right to all and enter and make a lease of all to try title the servant of a  with cart about their master business enter in one of the close and by the  court that be a ejectment of all although there be not any proof of the  command by their master
calthorp against jacobson lease in debt for rend on lease mich Interrog  birth  to please which be enjoy for a year unto car and the action be for pillage and  end and to which the defendant demurrer and Keeling Ch just hold it ill send  curian contra that the finite be immaterial but adjornatur
Calthorpe versus keb in debt for rend the plaintiff declare that he let the  defendant such land year of the king Interrog  both birth to please and that  year the defendant enter and occupy it pro to make one year tune proxime  sequent and because the rend be behind pro pillage year limit he bring the  action upon which it be demurrer because the rend be demand for the year end  and it be not show that the defendant enjoy the land long than year and in  debt for rend upon a lease at will occupation of the tenant must be aver to  which it be answer that it be say pro prediction year which refer to the year  mention before which be next follow the lease and it may be say limit year for  so it be end then or at any time after and the court say it will be clear good  after a verdict but be upon a demurrer they will advice
calthrop against allen in debt the demand be of S and declare upon five  several contract and show the certainty upon every of they which be cast up  amount to S more than be demand and because that he do not show how he be  satisfy of the remnant it be hold quod nothing cap
CALTONS case it be move by sergeant Fenner and agree by all the baron that if  the king make a lease to a render rend and there the lessee let we parcel  hereof render rend in this case the second lessee shall not have the privilege  of the exchequer to fly thither to be sue concern this land because that by  such mean all the cause in England may be bring into the exchequer and  hereupon Fenner say that he have demurrer upon a bill exhibit into the  exchequer Chamber by such a lessee and pray the court that he may not answer  and he be thereupon dismiss upon not guilty plead the party join issue and  after evidence give and the jury dismiss from the bar some of they have apple  and fig whereof the court take notice when they come to give their verdict do  examine they upon their oath and they who have eat be fine five pound and  commit to the fleet and some of the justice do doubt if the verdict be good  and upon many precedent have it be adjudge good and they rely much on the  precedent of the h rot where one of the jury do eat before they be agree and  yet the verdict be good and after a writ of error be bring and the judgement  affirm h h
CALVERAQ against PINHERO trinity geo upon a issue of nul tiel record plaintiff  deliver the book and give himself a day to bring in the record videlicet tres  Trin July but do not bring in the record on that day July plaintiff offer the  record and move it barn may be read which be refuse by the court it not be  bring in on the day plaintiff have give himself to produce it wright and  Hayward for plaintiff Burnett for defendant
CALVERAQ and his wife against de miranda in a action of trespass and assault  to the damage of Mr justice fortescue have order bail for and the defendant be  present at the time the recognizance of bail be take his bail be bind joint  and several in plaintiff barn recover a verdict for and the bail move to stay  proceed against they both on their payment of and upon show cause the court be  of opinion that as the damage in the writ be lie here be no fraud upon the  bail the recognizance be separate as well as joint and in its nature a  judgement the award of the court thereupon be that plaintiff have execution  therefore so far as the penalty of each recognizance will go it be just and  equitable the same be apply towards satisfaction of the condemnationmoney for  payment whereof and not of any particular sum the condition be the practice of  the king bench have be mention but the proceed there by bill where bail be  take without any particular penal sum differ wide from the form of proceed  here and must be govern by the ac etian bille otherwise bail may be defraud  Bootle and Burnett for bail Eyre and Hayward for plaintiff
Calverle against plummer husband not Chargeable for provision for his wife  take without his consent assumpsit against the defendant for diet and lodging  for his wife and upon non assumpsit at a trial before hale in Middlesex the  case be the husband leave his wife in the country and come and live in London  twenty year and here marry another for which he be indict and his wife come to  London to prosecute upon that he cause her to be arrest and she be commit to  the plaintiff the gaoler who now sue the husband for her diet and lodging  during the time she be in prison hale chief justice the husband be not  Chargeable without some evidence of his assent as that he visit his wife in  prison or by any other act approve of this provision by the gaoler but here  the contrary appear for she come to prosecute he and he be convict and have  his clergy upon her prosecution if the husband will not allow her necessary  she ought to have complain in due course of law for her maintenance upon which  the plaintiff see the opinion of the court be nonsuit
Calverle v Calverle postea prohibition suit v executor for the distribution of  the residuum have a legacy by the will vern pl see vern Eq Abr d pl and the  note there Mod will Rep to Ch pre pale yellow Eq Rep will Rep Mr Whitaker pray  a prohibition to the arch court of Canterbury in a suit against a executor for  a distribution of the residuum of the testator estate undisposed of he have a  legacy by the will and the suggestion be that by the commonlaw of England the  executor be entitle to the residuum powis justice after determination in the  case of foster and hunt it have be receive in chancery that where the executor  have a legacy by the will distribution shall be make of the residuum till in  the duchess of beauforts case in the house of peer several of the lord affirm  that the decree in the case of foster and hunt be find on a fraud practice by  the executor and the person that make the will who persuade the testator to  leave a real part of his personal estate undisposed of by assure he that the  law will distribute it among his near relation and the present Lord chancellor  gilbert case have determine that there shall be no distribution of the  residuum but it shall go to the executor at commonlaw where there be nothing  more in the case than that the executor have a legacy by the will and absolute  renounce that power in the court so that this matter hang in great uncertainty  at present and be very fit to be settle Parker chief justice if there be some  case wherein there may be a distribution of this nature and other where there  may not and which of these be the case in question depend upon fact to be  prove I do it see how we can prohibit before that appear per cur rule to show  cause N B the court afterward grant a prohibition on the prayer of sir John  Duddlestone a freighter in who hand the fraught be arrest gilbert case er p
Calverle v Calverle prohibition suit v executor for a distribution of the  residuum before the court grant a prohibition to stay the suit of a  distribution of the residuum of the testator estate undisposed of with  direction to declare upon it immediate et per Parker chief justice the  question be whether there can be a distribution in this case within the equity  of the statute Mr Lutwyche for the defendant say it be a trust in the executor  if that be so the court of chancery have indeed a jurisdiction in it but not  the ecclesiastical court quaere and note the executor be ha res death no one  to be able known on good evidence a having made no will to go away gilbert  case er p
Calverle v parker Feb in case of a bill for a discovery only the plaintiff  shall pay cost though he have a discovery and the defendant be the occasion of  the bill wherever a bill be for a discovery only and the plaintiff have a  discovery by the defendant answer the plaintiff can reply or proceed for by  the discovery the plaintiff have obtain the end of his bill and when he have  have the benefit of it in a action bring at law and come after to dismiss his  bill which be must do or the defendant Bunbury will such dismission will be  with cost to be tax which seem hard since the defendant be the occasion of  this bill by his false plea below and the plaintiff there can be allow no cost  in equity vide stat annae cap sect
Calvert versus prior pasch W m Com to know facias by the plaintiff as  administrator de good non and set forth that one Treminier the testator  recover a judgement against the defendant such a day and year and after make I  S his executor and die I S die not have administer c and administration de  good non c be grant to he the defendant plead quod performance non because to  say that the say Treminier make I S and I d his executor and that I d be yet  alive unde petit judgment quod breve proad empty the plaintiff reply to bring  to naught non because to say quod prmd Trerninier make J S his only executor  absq hoc that he make I S and I d his executor et hoc petit quod to seek after  per native land to which the defendant demurrer general holt KB er p it be  object that the replication ought to conclude et boc a preparation be verify  and not to the country but it be answer that here be a express affirmative and  negative and although it be informal it be good in substance and aid by the  general demurrer another question be move whether this be a plea in bar or in  abatement for it be ill in bar holt c j cite h that a plea which begin in bar  and conclude in abatement be a plea in abatement and vice line and I it shall  not be so yet the plaintiff bath make it so by reply to bring to naught non  more Onelys case agree wherefore judgement quod respond ouster
Calvert versus prior SC show to know facias by administrator de good non to  know facias by the plaintiff as administrator de good non and set forth that  one Treminier the testator recover a judgement against the defendant such a  day and year and after make I S his executor and die I S die not have  administer d c and administration de good non c be grant to he the defendant  plead quod performance non because to say that the say Treminier make I S and  I d his executor and that I d be yet alive unde petit judgment quod breve  pillage empty the plaintiff reply to bring to naught non because to say quod  Comberbach pillage Treminier make I S his only executor absq hoc that he make  I S and I d his executor et hoe petit quod to seek after per priam to which  the defendant demurrer general it be object that the replication ought to  conclude et hoe a preparation be verify and not to the country but it be  answer d that here be a express affirmative and negative and although it be  informal it be good in substance and aid by the general demurrer another  question be move whether this be a plea in bar or in abatement for this ill in  bar holt cite h that a plea which begin in bar and conclude in abatement be a  plea in abatement and vice line and if it shall not be so yet the plaintiff  have make it so by reply to bring to naught non more only S case agree  wherefore judgement quod respond ouster procedendo lie of course without  motion for not put in of bail
caly versus hardy GOLSON all just peace of the town of Ipswich pasch Ann Mod  salk the magistrate of the town have a mind to turn the clerk of the market  out of his place and procure a forcible entry to be make upon the markethouse  to get the holt KB er p possession thereof from he and the justice of the town  be as be suggest in the faction will not inquire of the force holt c j if all  the justice of a corporation be concern in a force and will not inquire of it  the next justice of the county shall do it for the deny to do it be a  forfeiture of their exemption from the county and here a mandamus be grant  joint and several to all the justice of the town to inquire of the force for  the court will suppose they all guilty holt KB justification
caly versus Joslin Uxolt trin car rot debt in debt for rend upon a lease for  year against the husband and wife executrix which be lie in the debet and to  hold off upon plene to manage plead and a demurrer thereupon the case be well  debate by reason of contrary resolution for alein report er p hargrave case be  reverse in the exchequer   because the action be in the debet and to hold off  but afterward James between the Lord rich and frank in c b upon great debate  it be adjudge good in the debet and to hold off and the like judgement be give  James in c b in sir Henry carry case and after that Pasc James rot p b r  between Paul and moody it be adjudge good in the to hold off only and the like  car in the common plea and the same year in this court between smith and  Nichols and the reason of these contrary opinion be the inconveniency of the  one side and the other for in as much as the executor can waive the term it be  hard if the rend shall exceed the value of the land and they have no asset  that they shall be charge in the debet of their own proper good and yet if the  action must be bring in the to hold off only where full administer be a good  plea then may they retain the land and with the profit thereof satisfy debt  upon specialty whereby the lessor shall be defeat of his rend for the avoid of  which inconvenience it be resolve that they may be charge in the debet and to  hold off for prima fancy the land shall be intend to be of great value than  the rend and if it be otherwise alein report mich car banc king
Cambell against preston Saturday April assumpsit in consideration the  plairftiff at the defendant request will deliver he certain parcel of timber  the defendant will build up two room in such a house and repair after verdict  in special action upon the case for the Keble plaintiff Raymond move in arrest  of judgement that the defendant have time during life unless request and the  request be Oct and the action be of Michaelmas term so there be no convenient  time give send per curian the defendant ought to have plead it special or  demurrer for that cause because it be not sufficient judgement for the  plaintiff
Cambell v Bordieu strange er report date gordon vers Morley campell vers  BORDIEU at guildhall a ship may go to the general convoy at the hazard of the  underwriter bind v nut Cowp Enderby et all v Fletcher sit in land Trin Vac  park on mark inn S p on a insurance from London to Gibraltar warrant to depart  with convoy it appear there be a convoy appoint for that trade at Spithead and  the ship ranger have try for convoy in the down proceed for Spithead and be  take in her way thither the insurer insist that this be the time of a French  war the ship shall not have venture through the channel but have wait in the  down for a occasional convoy and many merchant and officekeepers be examine to  that purpose but the chief justice hold that the ship be to be consider as  under the defendant insurance to a place of general rendezvous accord to the  interpretation of the word warrant to depart with convoy salk and if the party  mean to vary the insurance from what be common understand they shall have  particularize her departure with convoy from the down the jury be compose of  merchant and in both case find for the plaintiff upon the strength of this  direction strange report er p strange easter term george king in b r sir  William lee Knt chief justice sir Martin wright Knt sir Thomas denison Knt sir  Michael foster Knt justice sir Dudley rider Knt attorneygeneral the Hon  William Murray solicitor general
Camden v morton pasch S c serjeant hill ms jewel ms neither in the register  book nor the minute book
camp who tam c against gale defendant move in arrest of judgement the last day  of the term but have no affidavit of notice of the motion the court make the  common rule to stay the entry of final judgement till cause show but declare  that for the future they will never make a rule to stay upon a motion in  arrest of judgement the last day of a term without notice chapel for defendant
camp who tam c against gale trin geo two prac ring barn S c No motion in  arrest of judgement the last day of the term without notice cook a motion in  arrest of judgement the last day of the term without notice of the motion and  a rule to show cause be grant but the court say that no motion in arrest of  cook c p judgement shall hereafter be make without notice on the last day of  the term
campbell clerk versus aldrich clerk c b prohibition to a suit in spiritual  court for marry without banns or licence this be a rule to show cause why a  prohibition shall not issue to the consistory court of the bishop of London  ground upon a suggestion that the defendant have libel the plaintiff in the  spiritual court for marry without banns or licence and several instance be set  forth as appear by the register book also that the plaintiff have baptise  several child and perform other ministerial office in the parish of saint John  without any licence from the bishop against the prohibition it be say there be  no plea put in below so the libel be confess to be true and thereupon it be  insist that the matter therein contain be of spiritual jurisdiction and so the  rule ought to be discharge for the prohibition it be say that the spiritual  court be take conusance of a matter proper at law for now since the late  marriageact it be felony to marry without banns or licence and there must  first be a trial at commonlaw before a clerk in such case can be deprive or  degrade and so be hob the whole court be of opinion that the rule shall be  make absolute as to the marry without banns or licence that the plaintiff may  declare and this matter upon the late marriageact may be more solemnly debate  and as to the other ministerial act in the libel the rule be discharge  sergeant prime for the plaintiff sergeant pool and sergeant Hewitt for the  defendant Wilson king bench michaelmas term geo two
campbell esquire versus come and another a capias ad to give satisfaction make  returnable at a day which fall out of term will not be void though liable to  be set aside by motion see east a to know facias be bring against bail the  defendant plead thereto that the principal die before the return of the capias  ad to give satisfaction the return of the can sa be thereupon set forth in the  replication it appear to be returnable on Thursday next after eight day from  the day of the purification of the virgin mary the defendant demurrer general  to the replication Mr serj nares on behalf of the defendant insist that the  proceed be irregular for the word from be exclusive and consequent the writ be  not returnable till in vacationtime even a week in the vacation and as this be  a proceed by bill the to know facias must bear testae on the day of the return  of the can sa which therefore will be in vacationtime too it ought he say to  have be make returnable on Thursday next after the octave c and he cite a case  of girdler v m g b r in burrow Mr Yates contra for the plaintiff insist that  it be right and regular true and even strict computation and be it otherwise  yet as it be a execute V freeman report per Atkins accord it be so for the  purification fall on Monday so that either way the Thursday burrow er p cion  and not upon mesne process the writ of can sa will not be void but only liable  to be set aside upon motion for irregularity and he cite the case of Shirley v  wright salk where it be hold that the sheriff who have let his prisoner escape  shall not take advantage of a want of a to know facias to ground the can sa  upon which have issue post diem et annum the whole court be very clear and  unanimous with Mr Yates in both point and accord give judgement for the  plaintiff
campbell versus saint John Trin W m B R rot ld raym S c demurrer to a demurrer  make a discontinuance S C comb holt ante but if there be a issue as to part  and a verdict it be aid in trover for a box and peciis silver the defendant  demurrer to the declaration and the plaintiff demurrer to the defendant  demurrer and conclude hoc a preparation be verify the defendant maintain his  demurrer and put the matter upon the court and first the court hold that  trover will lie for plate general vide style dly that all be discontinue by  the plaintiff not join in demurrer but demurrer upon the defendant demurrer  for there be no difference between plead over when issue be offer and not join  in demurrer but plead over both be alike and make a discontinuance Salkeld er  p
Camphell and saint John trover for argent England plate well trover pro two  hundred twelfth part silver England plate the defendant demurrer and show for  cause that argent England plate be too uncertain but the court hold it certain  enough so two hundred weight drug England drug have be rule well then it be  move that the cause be discontinue for the plaintiff instead of join in  demurrer say placitum be insufficient and so demurrer upon the defendant S  demurrer and Yelv Alexander versus lane be cite where the defendant offer a  issue and the plaintiff reply and conclude hoc a preparation be verify and the  defendant rejoin d it be hold a discontinuance holt and eyres I deny d that  case in Yelverton to be law and say it be but form and belp d by a general  demurrer but the chief justice say that the plaintiff ought to have maintain d  his declaration and when he do not do that in effect nothing to say and then  when the defendant rejoin it seem a discontinuance sir Barth shower pro quer  if the plaintiff offer a issue petit quod examine per native land and the  defendant offer another issue de hoc to put down c be that a discontinuance  holt Ch I tell I any case where a demurrer be proper and you be not bind to  join sir Barth shower in case of a demurrer to plea in abatement one may  demurrer upon that demurrer holt Ch I that S where the demurrer be not  apposite but if the demurrer be proper and apposite you must join Comberbach  er p
CAMPHILL ms saint John Intr Trin will mark rot S C comb salk trover for so  many ounce of plate good a demurrer upon a demurrer be a discontinuance trover  of a box et two hundred twelfth part silver England plate c the defendant Lord  Raymond er p demurrer to the declaration the plaintiff demurrer to the  demurrer of the defendant and the defendant join in demurrer exception be take  to the declaration that it be uncertain because it have not specify what sort  of plate c so that the defendant can defend himself if the plaintiff shall  bring another action against he for the same plate by plead the recovery in  this action say non allocatur a for trover pro two hundred weight drug have be  adjudge good and there be here as much certainty as there then Mr Northey for  the defendant take exception to the plaintiff demurrer to the demurrer of the  defendant when he ought to have join in demurrer so that here be a  discontinuance for which he cite Yelv Brownl Alexander vers lamb justice Giles  Eyre say that he doubt whether the case of Alexander and lamb be law as to the  point of the discontinuance but all the court be of opinion that there be a  discontinuance here in the principal case a trover for two hundred weight of  drug good r sty n accord to style this be after verdict
Campian against Skipwith bail Siderf pl in action of debt on obligation to  bear harmless the plaintiff count that such a day a bill be exhibit by  Williamson Tr car the defendant plead as of Trin car non injure the plaintiff  reply that pasch the defendant bring a bill for the separate maintenance of  williamson wife by payment whereof the plaintiff be damnified which Keble per  curian be impossible for the damage be here allege to be after the action  bring also per Keeling on the main it be against the plaintiff because the  defendant be but security to the plaintiff here for payment of the money as  separate maintenance to williamson wife and the breach be assign that  Williamson bring a action sur case against the plaintiff on his promise to pay  so much if the defendant now who be then plaintiff will remit the rest which  be a plain cheat against which the defendant Skipwith be not bind to secure  the plaintiff Adjornatur Keble er p
Campians case dyer a er norris S case and CAMPTANS case the parish of h extend  into two county of b and W lease of a close by name of a in the parish of h in  the county of b the in fact the close be in W be good but where the name of  the parish itself be mistake the lease be bad the parish of burst extend into  the county of Berks and wilts be adjoin within which parish be a close of  pasture dyer and meadow call Calleys lie in the county of wilts and a lease be  make thereof for a term of year by indenture by sir Jo Norris to one Thomas  Goueld by the name of his pasture and meadow call Calleys in the parish of  burst within the county of Berks which Calleys in truth be in the county of  wilts c whether it shall pass or not and by the report of sander east James  between Skipwith and Ellis and other upon evidence to the jury it be hold by  the court that if a man bargain and sell his manor of grandson in the county  of oxon whereas he have not any manor there but in the county of Cambridge it  shall not pass otherwise if livery have be make dyer a er p chief baron the  lease be hold in the exchequer to be good and so rule on great deliberation  and advisement and not like a case in the court of ware h of the present queen  which be that one Campian by deed enrol bargain and sell a house in the parish  of saint Botolph without Bishopsgate be in the tenure of one William by the  name of his house in the parish of saint Botolph without Aldgate in the tenure  of William that be extreme difficult to make the purchase good because the  thing alien have no name except the name of the parish which be mistake note  that there be four parish of saint Botolph in London S without Aldgate  Bishopsgate Aldersgate and Billingsgate see this again e of the present queen  foe michaelmas term queen EczAsETH
campion vers nicholas ibidem the admiralty law for wage may be supersede by a  special agreement the cargo of the ship be lose by the capture of a Swedish  privateer who carry her into gottenburgh the master stay there three month to  refit the ship and take in new lade and to prevent the seaman from go away he  agree to pay they so much per month while they stay there and in a action for  this the master will have discharge himself on the rule that fraught be the  mother of wage and that none be strange ever pay while the ship be lade and  unladen which the chief justice agree to be the general doctrine but be hold  it not sufficient to control a special agreement as there be in this case and  where too there be so long a stay at gottenburgh vide Yates v hall I term Rep  where a ship be take a promise to pay monthly wage to one of the sailor by the  captain to induce he to become a hostage be hold bind on the owner although  they have abandon the ship and cargo buller I contra
CAMPOST versus in a action of debt upon the statute of Edward for tithe of  Eltham park in ken the general issue be plead and upon a trial at bar it be  hold upon evidence by hale chief baron and the whole court that the king be  not by virtue of his prerogative discharge of tithe for the ancient demesne of  the crown but that he be capable of a discharge de non decimand by  prescription because he be mask to mix as well as a bishop vide Rep LEvesque  de Wincliesters case but if the king alien any of the land that he be so  discharge of tithe for his patentee shall pay tithe and not only so but the  prescription be destroy for ever though the same land shall afterward come  into the king hand again by escheat or otherwise
cane against golding mich banc set opinion of the judge upon a arrest of  judgement in a action of the case this case former speak to and argue be a  action of the case for slander the plaintiff title be now speak to by the  judge and first by roll chief justice who hold that the action do not lie  although it be allege that the word be speak falsely et wickedly for the  plaintiff ought to show a special cause but that the verdict may supply but  the style report plaintiff ought also to have show a special damage which he  have not do and this the verdict can supply the declaration here be too  general upon which no good issue can be join and he ought to have allege that  there be a communication have before the word speak touch the sale of the land  whereof the title be slander and that by speak of they the sale be hinder and  be cite James be and Bailyes case b r James doctor Edward and ball case and  car roe and Harwoods case a judgement in it in Windsor court and reverse here  and James sell and paries case b r Jerman justice to the same effect and he  say that there ought to be damnum et in an unjust manner allege to maintain  the action for one without the other be not enough and here do not appear any  damage because there appear no communication of sell of the land Nicholas and  ask justice of the same opinion so the rule be nil to take in hand per billam  except better cause show roll justice say that there be finger God in the case  for there be a strange verdict find
cane against golding mich banc sup refer to Ratcliff v Evans qb arrest of  judgement in a action upon the case for slander the plaintiff title cane bring  a action upon the case against Golding for slander his title by speak these  word videlicet his right and title thereunto be nought and I have a better  title than be the plaintiff have a verdict the defendant move in arrest of  judgement that the word be not actionable Twisden of council with the  plaintiff argue that the word be actionable for though the word speak of  themselves may not be actionable yet here they be allege to be speak falsely  et wickedly and that will make they actionable e f n Br hob Rep water and  freeman case and as to the objection that be make that the declaration be only  quod to be having appearance of truth to sell and that he be hinder by the  word and therefore there may have be no bargain make though the word have not  be speak the answer be that it be well enough set forth as it be for all  treaty upon too contract be but likely to proceed and be not certain till the  contract be make but which be more it be further allege here that by reason of  the speak of these word be can not receive his tithe which be a express loss  hale for the defendant argue that the word of themselves be not actionable  although they be say to be speak falsely et wickedly except a special damage  be allege to come to the party for such style report word as these differ from  word that be speak of the person of a man and though there be damage yet they  be not scandalous for the defendant claim a title as well as the plaintiff and  the say that the word be speak falsely wickedly do not make they to be so  speak nor make they actionable if they be not so in themselves roll chief  justice say there ought to be a scandal and a particular damage set forth but  it be not so here but move it again Saturday next postea
cane against pell Trin banc sup arrest of judgement in a action upon the  statute for tithe cane bring a action of debt upon the statute of Edward for  substraction of tithe against pell and have a verdict against the defendant  the defendant move in arrest of judgement and take a exception to the  plaintiff declaration that it do not appear by it in what parish the land lie  out of which the tithe grow due on the other side it be say it appear well  enough by implication but if it do not it be not now material there be a  verdict in the case by which it be help lerman justice say there be only a  implication to show in what parish the land lie and that be not a violent  implication neither and therefore the declaration can be good but roll chief  justice answer what if the plaintiff have only say that the ithes belong unto  he and it be here after a verdict and the declaration be help by it but if you  have demurrer to the declaration it will have be rule to be catch and if the  tithe do belong to the plaintiff why may it not be employ that they io belong  to he as parson of the parish and be of land lie within the parish but let we  see a book and speak to it again the next term
cane versus coleman Trin W m in cam scacc Intr in B R mich James rot lie in  prison upon arrest be a act of bankruptcy otherwise if he put in bail vide  infra pl contra lill raym lev vent burrow far skin t r Indebitatus for money  have and receive to his use on a special verdict the case h be a silkman owe b  and to c b arrest he for the in the sheriff court and have bail after that  videlicet within a month h pay off c and after that render himself in  discharge of his bail in b s action and note James c say he shall be a  bankrupt from the time of the first arrest et per cur that be and must be take  from the time of the first arrest upon which he lie in prison not where be put  in sufficient bail for that may be infinite prejudicial and mischievous and no  man can ever safe pay or receive from a tradesman adjudge in b b and affirm in  error in cam scacc a a this point be recognize in cook bank law content to  smith and stracy post
canning contra hicks December S c vern testament legacy mortgagee where the  mortgage be of the feesimple to he devise pound and other legacy and then add  a devise of pound to the defendant who he make executor and die two point be  decree saint that the executor shall have the benefit of such a mortgage  videlicet the land and not the heir though the land be descend to he dly that  the legacy do not bar the executor of the mortgagee though it be much press by  Mr finch and other to the contrary and that it be a implication that the  executor shall have no more than the pound because the testator express will  that the executor shall not be pay his legacy till after his debt and other  legacy pay so that the pound be as much in this case as if he have express  devise the pound out of the residue of his estate after his debt and legacy  pay which do strong infer he mean no more than the pound not the whole residue
canning vers wright error c b Intr mich Geo b r rot SC Str Barnard b r a writ  of error will not remove a judgement give after the term of which the writ of  error be returnable error be bring by Canning to reverse a judgement give  against he in the common plea after verdict in ejectment wherein he be  defendant the writ of error be testae October Geo and returnable octabis  Martini mich term Geo and by the record Lord Raymond certify the judgement  appear not to be give till hill term follow Geo whereupon it be hold clear the  record be not well remove by this writ of error then Mr Parker for the  plaintiff in error move that the writ of error may be amend by the statute of  g but upon read the statute we be clear of opinion it can not be do for it  will be to amend the writ contrary to the truth of the case for the judgement  in fact be not give till hill term Geo and therefore this be not such a  variance Lord Raymond er p as be intend to be amend by that Act the motion for  a amendment be deny July see Siderf
cannon and hamon against agas in trespass by the plaintiff as executor for  take of several good of the testator holt except in arrest of judgement that  its not say when the good be take send non allocatur for they be asset in who  right soever hale say he know a trover not say when convert be intend in his  own time latch pl but here its well enough and judgement for the plaintiff
cantor against HURTNELL hill car rot visne in debt on obligation conditional  to pay a moiety of charge of suit at law by reason of recovery of a estate in  d the defendant plead payment general and say not where to which the plaintiff  demurrer because no visne be allege but per hale Ch just no place be here  necessary the plead be in the affirmative as to pay all amerciament that lie  not in the party knowledge this be only to put the plaintiff to assign a  particular breach but on non injure be a general plea it be good but to retain  uninjured must show how unless in case of sheriff for the infiniteness to  which the court agree and the defendant be not bind to show the particular  albeit he plead payment of the moiety and so know what it S Adjornatur
Cantrel administrator against graham this be a action bring upon a lease date  in for two year rend due since the year when defendant become a bankrupt  defendant move for a common appearance and produce his certificate allow  confirm and enrol upon hear counsel on both side neither the possession nor  the legal interest of the estate be in the defendant a common appearance be  order to be accept Skinner for defendant Hawkins for plaintiff
capel and allen Trin car banc Reg hill car rot demurrer upon a award capel  bring a action debt upon a assumpsit to stand to a award the defendant plead  nul arbitrament the plaintiff reply and set forth the arbitrement and the  breach the defendant demurrer and for cause show that the award be not good  because it be make but of one part for it be that one of the party shall do  such thing express and that the other party shall pay for the make the bind of  submission which can be award and so nothing be award for he to do and the  arbitrator can award this because it be not within the submission roll justice  hold this a good exception and say the charge for make the write be not within  the submission for the bind be make before the submission and it be hold James  that the word super to send forward in the award will not help a award make  but of one part
capel v MYM tenant in common to know the certainty a tenant in common of a  manor for long time occupy whole by the other tenant in common which know not  the quantity of the manor by reason the other have also sell land intermingle  have the sight of the court roll and write of his companion concern only the  quantity of the manor but not concern the sell land nor his title to the manor  and the other be order also to show the like on his part capel and Myn
capel versus allen hill car rot debt in debt upon a bind with condition to  perform a award the plaintiff upon no one arbitration plead by the defendant  set forth that the arbitrator do award de above proemissis modus form sequence  videlicet that the defendant shall pay so much to the plaintiff and the  plaintiff shall pay for the write of the award and it be adjudge a void award  because but of one side for it do not appear that the other party be bind to  pay for the write which be the only recompense for the defendant and this also  be matter subsequent to the submission and so can be intend a good recompense
Capenhurst against Capenhurst ante assignee Godbolt pl Cr pl Cr pl Cr pl  Wilmot conceive that this assignment by lessee of the land for so much of a  term as shall be unexpired at the time of his death c good and child against  bailiff case be by devise to I S of so much as shall be unexpired at the death  of the party which affix the devise to the land but per will the limitation be  uncertain what ever the devise be it be void as Gravenors case in die pl which  Twisden agree and that it have be the same in a grant contra where the  limitation have be certain and the commencement uncertain judgement for the  defendant foster and mallet absent
Capenhurst against Capenhurst ante I Brant b pl Cr pl Jones move for judgement  agree the assignment of the lease void as rector qf Chedingtons case but yet  the covenant that refer thereto shall stand by it self unless it be such  covenant as depend on the estate and go with the reversion as to build a house  but contra of collateral covenant as that the lessor be seize of a good estate  so p James Walter against dean and chapter of Norwich the defendant lease to t  and after to another for year Keble with covenant in the last for quiet  enjoyment which be resolve with this very difference here be but one covenant  in the indenture and so if it be void the bind be single bigland for the  defendant the court now waive that the bind be single and insist on the  covenant which here relate to a precedent grant a bind for performance of a  award if it be void the plaintiff shall never have judgement on the bind to  trip against Fletcher Yelvert because it be not for money but original to  perform a collateral thing Windham in the case of the dean and chapter of  Norwich covenant lie because no other remedy though the party can have the  whole effect of his suit but here the intent be that the covenant shall go  with the lease which if void that fall and Twisden conceive no difference  betwixt this and suffran fashionable idler in Yelvert the covenant be of in  all respects superius concession in form prediction foster cite lease of  tenant for life for year with covenant to enjoy during the term and bind  accord by his death the bind fall and the court grant a nil to take in hand  per billam nisi post
CAPPUR v harris if contract for S S stock be execute the court will not break  into it if executory the plaintiff must seek his remedy at law in this case  these rule be lie down by baron Gilbert in relation to contract for SouthSea  stock or subscription first that if a contract be execute a court of equity  will not unravel or break into it second if it be only executory and a Bunbury  man come to have it carry into execution there a court of equity will not aid  the plaintiff but leave he to such remedy as he can have by law in cam scacc
captain kirk S case mich W Mod captain Kirk be indict for the murder of Conway  Seymour Esq the question be whether he shall be bring to his trial this term  the chief justice think the prisoner ought to be try for that the prosecutor  have be too dilatory in his prosecution and man ought not to be restrain of  their liberty any long than a convenient time for they to be bring to their  trial but by the other justice the trial ought to be put off because the  prisoner after his surrender do not give timely notice to the prosecutor  afterward Mr Kirk be bring up by rule of court and it be move that he may be  admit to bail for he be dangerous ill by reason of the badness of the air and  inconveniency of the prison and it be insist that upon proof of such matter  the court have frequent bail person though the coroner S inquest have find  they guilty of murder and the reason be for that imprisonment in such case be  not design d as a punishment but only to bring the party to justice but it be  say on the other side that although the court have power to bail in treason or  murder it will not exert that power unless it be in extraordinary circumstance  here be no pretence of a malicious prosecution and this not doubt whether Mr  Seymour be un by this gentleman that too plain appear so that this but  reasonable he shall give account of spill his blood holt c j I do not think  that the prisoner S affidavit be full enough for it do not appear that by this  imprisonment he be in danger of his life it be adjudge d in Egerton S case  James that if there be any delay in the prisoner put off their trial or in not  give timely notice there can be no bail of they and here since the prisoner do  not give notice of his render to the prosecutor as this be good cause for  defer the trial so it be likewise the same for his not be bail d
car banc rea for quash a order of the session of peace for keep a bastard the  court be move to quash a order of session make for the keep of a bastard child  and these exception be take to the order first the order be that the party  shall pay a weekly sum for the keep of the child whereas no such order can be  make without the party consent for by the statute he be only compellable to  secure the parish where the child be bear that it shall not be any charge to  the parish another exception be that it appear not that the justice have any  power to make any order at all three the case for it appear not where the  child be bear and so it may be it be bear in another county where these  justice have no authority to act any thing concern it upon these exception it  be quash for a certiorari to remove indictment out of one of the cinqueport  the court be move for a certiorari to the court of Sandwich to remove four  indictment there for shoot in a gun and pull up of a post because the fact for  which the party be indict be not do within the jurisdiction of the court style  report er p but because Sandwich be one of the cinqueport and it have be a  question heretofore whether this court can send such a writ thither the rule  be only for cause to be show why a certiorari shall not be grant
car versus do sand Nels Abr in a action of trespass the plaintiff declare upon  a assault battery wound and imprisonment the defendant as to the way arms  vulnerationem plead not guilty quoad resid transgr insult imprisonment be  justify for that be obtain judgement against the plaintiff in the common bench  and that a capias ad satisfaciend be thereupon award to the sheriff which be  deliver to the sheriff he at the request of the defendant to put in hand  performance ind cuidan William broge baliv liberty domini king leadership  Himself Lancastr eastern quod execution rude extra the same freedom become non  to be able c which say bailiff have the return and execution of all warrant  precept mandate c by virtue of which the say bailiff calmly manus to place  upon upon the plaintiff and arrest he c upon a demurrer it be adjudge for the  plaintiff for a apparent fault in the plea which be that he have not plead to  the battery Powell say that the plea be also nought because it set forth a  mandate to the bailiff of the liberty and do not show that it be under the  hand and seal of the sheriff
carder against the inhabitant OF attle and LESSLESS pl Saturday may amendment  Siderf pl Symson on blackamoor case pray a amendment after a nonsuit of a  mistake in the name of the plaintiff which Keeling oppose and original be not  amendable at commonlaw and the statute Edward cap help only process and h cap  be to be only in affirmance of judgement after verdict c and then only such  misprision as be mistake contra to information of the clerk so Hub in  ejectment and Cr Aquila week be after a nonsuit but not on a original but on a  bill so Norton case but no precedent of any amendment of a original after a  nonsuit the party be out of court and to this the court incline and there can  be no new declaration on this original but the court conceive that be there no  nonsuit the court may amend the original this appear to be a mistake of the  name of a juror Edmond for Edward in debt on the statute of hue and cry post
carder against the inhabitant OF LESELESS Monday may amendment Symson pray a  amendment of a original be deliver to the cursitor of ken Edmond and make by  he Edward which Keeling pro defendant deny because the plaintiff have no day  in court and this be a writ of another court and to this the court incline  praeter Twisden who conceive this may be amend here and all agree it be  amendable in the proper court but be after a nonsuit the court will consider  and adjornatur
cardinal against SACEFORD master of the request Essex the lessor covenant and  grant to his tenant that he shall hold the land to he and his wife during the  life of the lessor this be neither a surrender nor confirmation but a covenant  only in evidence in replevin the issue be join upon a surrender make by the  lessee for year to the lessor it appear by a indenture that the lessor have  only a estate tail in the land the reversion to the queen in fee and the  lessor covenant and grant to the lessee that he shall have and hold the land  to he and his present wife and to any other wife who he shall chance to marry  during the life of the lessor without pay he any rend c but no livery of seize  be make upon this indenture and whether this shall enure as a surrender of the  term or as a confirmation to the lessee to enlarge his estate for the term of  the life of the lessor be doubt and by the opinion of three justice it shall  do neither one nor the other but be only a covenant notwithstanding dyer this  word grant but Weston think the contrary because of this word grant the same  case post east rot
care LXXX Elizabeth dyer prison and prisoner fleet salus poplar tree finch foe  upon a adjournment of the term to Hertford several prisoner be commit to the  castle there this castle be part of the duchy of Lancaster the queen have  grant a patent to a of the custody of this castle for his life resolve by the  judge that the warden of the fleet shall have the custody there of the  prisoner commit by the chancery common plea and exchequer for he be the  officer of those court and although the patentee have the custody of the  castle and though it be the prison of the county yet his interest ought to  give place to the public weal and common justice private citizen just public  to go from and the prisoner may be part in the room there
care wood against shepherd when to move in arrest of judgement S c salk S c  holt holt chief justice one shall not move in arrest of judgement until the  postea be bring in and the defendant shall give a rule upon the postea which  be in itself a notice to bring it in and it be against the ancient course of  the court to make a rule for stay of judgement until the postea be bring in by  the course of the common plea the clerk of the assize keep it until the day  for move in arrest of judgement be pass and the notice be give he and he have  his fee of six shilling and eight penny for attend with it and the clerk of  assize ought to deliver the postea to none but to the clerk in court and  notice to the clerk in court be good notice modern er p
CARESWELL against vaughan ante voucher quod si to be away f n b e the court on  the precedent in entry in Le who conceive judgement ought to be as   Entr raze  Entr affirm be a customary writ not at commonlaw as be express in Edward
carew against bawd mich banc sup Trin car rot demurrer to a plea of privilege  of parliament in a action of trespass Carew bring a action of tresspass  against bawd for enter into his ground and take away a certain parcel of tynn  the defendant plead that he be servant unto the Lord moon who be a Lord of the  parliament and that he take the tynn by his command and claim his privilege as  his servant not to be implead to this plea the plaintiff demurrer and for  cause show that the defendant do not show that he be the Lord moon menial  servant and attend upon his person and it may be he be his carter or ploughman  and such servant be not privilege roll chief justice say the privilege be not  claim here mere as his servant but he justify here as his servant in defence  of his master title to the tynn which he take by his command but let the  defendant plead in chief and the plaintiff waive the demurrer or else let the  plaintiff enter his suggestion upon the roll that the house of lord be now  dissolve and so let they take issue and go to trial or else let the party  plead what he will upon record and we will advice in the mean time
carew against warren in c b rot Gunter tenant in tail of land in ancient  demesne make a lease for year to I S and for security thereof levy a fine to  lee and Loveland who render to Gunter in fee who devise the reversion to his  wife for life the remainder in fee and die and then the Lord of Andover which  be a ancient manor by a show be we return in the common bench against lee and  Lovelace upon a to know facias award against they and two nihils return the  fine be reverse Anderson the to know facias be not well award for it ought to  be bring as well against those in possession as the conusors and this appear  by the Edward by which they in possession and those in remainder ought to be  make privy walmesley agree for the freehold which be in I shall not be take  from I without make I privy no less then if a bring a precipe against b of my  land and recover for I shall have a assize upon this also another matter be in  the case for the land now in question be allege to be parcel of the manor of  and over and therefore can be ancient demesne but no judgement be at this time  give because there be but two justice
carew v BURFFAM the defendant licence to depart after answer in a writ of  privilege Matthew Carew one of the master of this court plaintiff Thomas  Burfam defendant the defendant appear this term upon a attachment of privilege  at the plaintiffs suit have put in bail and answer to the declaration of the  plaintiff therefore the defendant be licence to depart till Pasche next year  Elizabeth
CAREWE v BURSAND the plaintiff demurrer on the defendant answer the defendant  appear upon a attachment of privilege at the plaintiff suit and have answer  the declaration whereupon the plaintiff have demurrer therefore the defendant  be respite choice case in chancery to depart until Crast Trin next Carewe one  of the master of this court plaintiff Bursand defendant year Elizabeth SC  caryi
carey against Stephens a action of swim across quare way arms be bring for  cast wine upon his velvet and well although that he may have bring for that a  action upon the case we h trespass for cast dung against his wall b bring  error upon a judgement give in the court of Lynne the case be b have sell  certain wine to a and warrant they to be the best wine in England when in  truth they be corrupt and nought and judgement be reverse because he have not  aver in that action that there be better or as good wine in England
carl case note it be adjudge in this case that if a man say of another that he  have kill a man a action upon the case will not lie for those word for he may  do it as executioner of the law or see to ward off so if one say of another  that he be a cutpurse a action will not lie for that a glover do and a man may  cut his own purse and the same term it be hold in the king bench that a action  will not lie for call one witch
Carleton against Wilkinson defendant be outlaw on special original and upon  reverse the outlawry put in bail with condition as usual to appear to a new  original to be file within two term plaintiff proceed to judgement and  defendant bring a writ of error a motion be make on behalf of the bail to  discharge their recognizance no original have be file within two term and a  rule make to show cause which be discharge the bail may plead as they shall be  advice Skinner for plaintiff agar for defendant
Carleton vers MORTAGH Intr mich Ann b r rot SC salk salk Mod upon the plea of  a release of error the defendant ought to state venue for the place where the  release be make error on a judgement in the king bench and want of a original  be assign for error the defendant plead a release of error but lie no venue  where the release be make to which the plaintiff in error demurrer and adjudge  the plea nought for want of venue and then the plea amount to a confession of  the error but the court make a question whether they can not award a  certiorari ad to shape knowledge curiae though the defendant can pray it just  as after in nullo be erratum plead for the court ought to examine the error  for if in error Lord Raymond er p a release be plead and find for the  plaintiff yet if there be no errorSC Mod holt a the court can reverse the  judgement and if the release be find for the defendant a different  judgmentVide post b must be give accord as the error assign be sufficient or  not for if it be a good error the judgement must be that the plaintiff be bar  of his writ of error and not that the judgement be affirm if it be not a good  error the judgement must be Lord Raymond that the first judgement be affirm  and a rule be make for hear counsel whether the court shall grant a certiorari  or not the certiorari be afterward grant gold powys and Powell justice concur  holt chief justice to differ
CARLOLUS against lynch prerogative court Hilary term February that  Administration which have be grant to a creditor revoke on the production of a  will Garrett carolus make his will date that October and appoint his daughter  mary carolus executrix and universal legatee decease be indebt to Lynch l S d  give he a letter of attorney to receive wage at the India house for payment of  his debt Lynch receive from the company more than his debt amount to but  nevertheless he pretend to be a creditor and that there be no relation obtain  administration the daughter call he to bring in the administration and to show  cause why probate shall not be grant to her of the will Lynch appear and  oppose the will mary carolus propound it and have full prove the execution c  of the will and that Lynch know she be decease daughter judgement sir george  lee I give sentence for the will and revoke the administration and condemned  Lynch in full cost
Carnock S case a man have a copyhold for life to he and his wife remainder to  the right heir of the husband remainder to the use of husband and wife for  life remainder to the use of his last will and this find by special verdict  that be make his will and therein give such land to his wife for life  remainder to a and his heir who be heir at law to the devisor and in another  place other land in like manner and then come the clause upon which the  question arise and all other my estate of what nature soever I give to my dear  belove wife and if this shall carry the feesimple of the copyhold to the wife  be the question or only a estate for life the jury likewise find that the  husband die d possess of a considerable estate not devise above debt and  legacy Thomson argue that it shall be only a estate for life be say where the  husband die d possess of nothing above debt c Skinner that the word estate  will extend to carry a copyhold but where the word estate may be otherwise  satisfy it will not and that if the copyhold do pass it be but for life and  put the difference where he devise all his estate there nothing passes but for  life but where this all my estate in such land a fee passes he cite style dod  on the other side say that all be a general word and go to the whole and that  estate extend to the value of a man in good and land as when we say such a man  have a great estate we understand it to mean all that he be possess of in good  and land and that a will ought to be take accord to common acceptance he cite  hob and the case of Wilson and Robinson Mod Rep though not cite as a case in  that book adjornatur puis
carpenter against davis the defendant a executrix allow to amend her plea of a  retainer by add profert of the letter testamentary after joinder in demurrer  and the cause set down to be argue action against a executrix to which she  plead a retainer and after a general demurrer and joinder therein and after  the cause be set down in the paper it be move last term by sergeant draper for  leave to amend the defendant plea by add a profert in curian of the letter  testamentary in order to show that she be a lawful executrix and be produce  the probate of the will and find his motion upon the statute of Elizabeth c  and a c S on the other side it be now argue by sergeant Azar that as by this  amendment the defendant will make a new title and the whole roll will be alter  from the beginning to the end this be not a case within either of these  statute the first of which only mention imperfection defect or want of form  neither of which this S and by mean of this ill plea to which the plaintiff be  oblige to demurrer a assize bath be lose but per probin just there be many  instance of amendment after the cause have be put in the paper and the probate  be here produce it will be accord to the honesty of the cause to suffer this  amendment and it Andrews be observe by he and chapel just that the word of the  Act of queen whether be very strong videlicet No advantage or exception shall  be take of or for the default of allege Andrews er p of the bring into court  letter testamentary c which be much strong than if it have be say that this  default shall be amend the court therefore lee c j absent grant the amendment  on the defendant pay cost note last term this cause be call on in the paper  but sergeant draper who be counsel for the defendant then say that he be not  ready whereupon the cause be adjourn sergeant agar on the other side mention  his objection and among the rest the want of a profert and immediate after  sergeant draper make the above motion
carpenter and Adam gamekeeper take away a gun trespass lie and the lord S  warrant no justification trespass for take away a gun defendant justify as  gamekeeper duly make within ten mile of London cur the plea be ill not say by  who he be make nor that the plaintiff be a unqualify d person by the statute  and the defendant ought to have have a warrant from a justice of the peace and  a authority from the lord of the manor be not sufficient judgement pro quer
carpenter and andrews London in action upon the case recite the statute car  cap of building and that he shall build four story and no high and that matter  of chimnies shall be determine by the lord mayor and that the defendant have  build a five story videlicet a turret per quod the plaintiff light be stop and  special verdict conclude that if this be a building high than by the Act for  the plaintiff but be incertain how many foot coveredroof make a story or  whether this exceed four story it be refer
carpenter and Chichester assumpsit error of assumpsit in c b to satisfy bind  on which I S be in execution and discharge be assign in not show the bind be  joint or several send non allocatur the party be in prison no matter whether  erroneous or not and judgement affirm
carpenter and smith Anders pl jane Capel tenant for life remainder to William  in fee William levy a fine to the use of John and his heir after the death of  jane and William but if John die in the life of jane and mary who have nothing  then to another William in fee which per curian be the very case of Cr of pell  and brown but John have first only a contingent estate and if John die in the  life time of William the father then to the right heir of the first William  and the heir and assign of such first heir under who the plaintiff claim as a  purchaser on   archer case but of this the court doubt and be but a record  adjornatur
carpenter versus fortune ux a prisoner receive a declaration against himself  and wife and she take in execution but supersede c the husband be in the king  bench prison and the wife at large he receive a declaration against both and  suffer judgement by default and now the wife be take in execution but the  court supersede the execution as irregular for there ought to have be a new  writ against the husband and wife and the wife must have find common bail she  must have give a bailbond to appear and so you may have proceed against both  in custodian mark holt say when the wife be take without her husband and  discharge upon common bail there go out a new capias versus l baron idem die  give to the wife
carrell against read in b r rot a lease for year be make of diverse fenny  ground in Cambridge sacred scripture and the lessee covenant to defend the  ground for be surround with water and to drain the water out of other land  that be demise to he in the say county and upon a action of covenant for not  perform the defendant plead that the plaintiff have enter in the land demise  and adjudge no plea by the court because the covenant be not in respect that  the lessee shall enjoy the land nor be it a covenant adhere to the land but to  a collateral thing but if it have be fn respect of enjoy the land there it be  a good plea to say that the plaintiff have enter Owen but where the thing to  be do be collateral it be otherwise and also if he do plead such plea yet it  be not a bar unless he hold he out of possession coke lib Edward the lord  shall not have a cessavit after entry in parcel Edward h bar Edward trin  Elizabeth in b r rot
carrell versus pask Trin James rotulo debt bring upon a obligation make at c  in the county of Surre the defendant plead the privilege of Cambridge grant to  they by the queen Elizabeth for scholar bachelor master and their servant upon  contract make within the university and show the bind be make in Cambridge and  that he be a servant of the scholar to wit bailiff of king college in that  university and inhabit within the town of Cambridge and precinct of that  university and therefore a privilege person of the same and upon read of the  record it seem that the defendant be a bailiff of the college be not capable  of the say privilege
CARRILL versus Cockran pasch W case W the question upon motion be whether they  will hold the defendant to special bail in a special assumpsit for money win  at play and Turton and gold seem to incline they shall not give he better  security than he be Willing to take at first but holt say they never ought to  enter into the merit of a cause upon a question about bail for to order common  bail upon merit will slur a man S cause of action and no man ought to have his  cause try with disparagement upon it and though this may be for money win at  play yet it be a lawful contract which the Act of parliament allow of and no  man ought to be wise than the law and to say that because he depend upon the  defendant S word at first he therefore shall have no special bail will be a  reason why there shall be no special bail in any simple contract and here  special bail be order and it be say to be so order in like case in common plea  holt KB er p
carrington v holly July although a cause be bring to a hear and a issue direct  till the issue be try and there have be a determination let the cause be in  what stage it may the plaintiff may upon motion dismiss his bill upon payment  of cost the plaintiff file his bill to establish his right to estate upon hear  the cause a issue be direct the plaintiff be advice he have not make a case by  the bill and the matter put in issue to support his claim apply by motion and  obtain a order of course to dismiss his bill upon payment of cost the  defendant apply the above da to discharge the say order for irregularity upon  the ground that the cause have be regular bring on to a hear dickens the bill  can not be dismiss but on a solemn judgement Lord Hardwicke c there have not  be any determination the direct of a issue be mere to satisfy the conscience  of the court prefatory to their give judgement that issue have not be try and  till there have be a determination I hold a plaintiff may in any stage of the  cause apply to dismiss his bill upon payment of cost and therefore take  nothing by the motion but his lordship say have there be a decree it will have  be otherwise for all party be interest in a decree and any party may take such  step as he may be advice to have the effect of it so likewise say his lordship  it will have be have the issue be try and a verdict in favour of the defendant  the defendant may have set the cause down on the equity reserve in order to  have the bill dismiss upon the solemn judgement dickens er p of the court so  as to make the order of dismission pleadable the language of the order direct  the issue show it for the court after it direct the issue reserve the  consideration of cost and of all further direction until after the trial of  the issue when any of the party be to be at liberty to apply to this court as  they shall be advice see booth v Leicester keen Curtis v Lloyd my Cr
Carruthers against lamb mich geo this be a action of trespass and assault and  for tear plaintiff clothes a general verdict be find for plaintiff damage  under S and no certificate the judge in the treasury sir George cook doubt be  of opinion that plaintiff ought to have full cost barn er p
Carruthers against lamb mich geo two prac ring barn S c cost in trespass for  tear and spoil the plaintiff clothes Vid beck v Nicholls ante p and case there  cite Denny v Wigg post p cook in a action of trespass for a assault and for  tear and spoil the clothes of the plaintiff with which he be then cloth a  verdict be find for the plaintiff and d damage and S cost give by the jury it  be question by the prothonotary what cost he shall allow the plaintiff  therefore a motion be make in the treasury for the direction of the court who  all agree that full cost shall be allow although no certificate be give by the  judge who try the cause for it be not a action of assault and battery within  the cook c p statute of pound car h c S for the tear and spoil the plaintiff  clothes which be join with it be find on a injury to his property and the  verdict be general for the plaintiff
carry against appleton November the husband devise the jewel which be  paraphernalia of his wife and die decree to the wife the husband devise his  good to be sell for raise of portion to be pay to his daughter at their age of  eighteen or marriage and that the same be raise out of his rend issue and  profit of his lease land if the good be not sufficient and the rest after sale  and profit of the good and lease as aforesaid to other use one sister be pay  the other come of age the good be not sufficient the dispute be whether the  lease may be sell for upon these case they be not to be sell the rend and  profit be liable the Lord keeper in the Lord cornbury case it be decree that  the devise of profit give power to sell otherwise if it be of the annual  profit a devise of the profit be a devise of the land and the father do as  much intend a provision for his daughter as for his son and I take the  difference where the devise be of the profit of a chattel lease and where of  land as in this case for if he have not direct a sale the lease have be liable  to the portion and so the affirmative word shall not bear a negative sense to  exclude the sale of the lease land
carry against pooly mich car rot Tuesday January asset in debt against four  coheir on several issue on riens per descent asset be find as to one and as to  the rest that they have nothing have alien before the writ whereupon judgement  be against her that have asset quod recupere debt is owed financial loss svan  general de good not common with others as per curian it must and on error here  of that judgement in c b judgement be affirm
carry and Calais show case for enter his liberty plaintiff need not show his  title case for enter his bailiwick of Westminster and set forth that he be  seize of the liberty and that the defendant enter d upon he and execute a  execution the defendant plead that he enter d by virtue of warrant from the  sheriff c to which the plaintiff demurrer it be object for the defendant that  the declaration be not good because there be no title make to the bailiwick  videlicet by grant or prescription Ch I somewhat may be if the sheriff bad  declare otherwise of the sheriff bailiff who be a stranger but per Ch I in the  case of caryi and Backhurst late such a declaration be hold good and affirm d  in error and so in the case of sir Robert Atkins in hale S time and per cur  ancient the title be set forth at large but of late this short way have obtain  and the declaration be adjudge good though per Ch I this case go further than  any before
carry and ware Sc fa against Leedhams executor and against two other survive  party against who a joint judgement be to which the defendant the executor  demurrer and the court on lady harvey and Norton conceive the charge survive  as on bail which be take joint and several but never so enter and though a  know fa lie against the heir of the decease and the survivor yet not against  the executor with the survivor as Feltham case in exchequer and in c b about  year since it be so rule so on Edward and judgement for the defendant so  whether recognizance be joint and several or not if the see f be joint no  advantage can be take of that
carry v corriton one appear on a Commission of rebellion be commit the  defendant appear upon a Commission of rebellion it be order that he be commit  to the fleet carry plaintiff corriton defendant year Elizabeth
carry V mrs jenkins double plea in debt for rend strange move for leave to  plead a tender and eviction which be grant vide baker v Westbrook post
carry vers holt in trespass the plaintiff need only falsify the defendant  title the plaintiff declare in trespass upon his possession the defendant make  title and give colour to the plaintiff the plaintiff reply de in an unjust  manner svan not common with others and traverse the title set out by the  defendant and upon demurrer and on the authority of Goslin v William p Geo Rep  fort a the court hold this a good replication for it lie the defendant title  out of the case and then it stand upon the plaintiff possession which be  enough against a wrongdoer and the plaintiff need not reply a title judgement  pro quer vide Vernon v Goodrich ante bull l n p strange report er p
carry versus crisp Pas will mark B R property not transfer out of the bankrupt  till assignment post vide lill burrow in a indebitatus assumpsit the defendant  plead that the plaintiff become bankrupt and commission be take out and so all  his good c belong to the commissioner oh the plaintiff demurrer and have  judgement for till a assignment the property of the good be not transfer out  of the bankrupt a vide statute James c a d act Str
carry versus king at the same sit although it be not particular lie in the  declaration the expense of savage may be give in evidence in a action on the  policy the plaintiff may give in evidence any loss immediate proceed from the  cause allege action on a policy of insurance for insure good on board the ship  a the plaintiff declare that the ship spring a leak and sink in the river  whereby the good be spoil and the evidence be that many of the good be spoil  but some be save and the question be whether the plaintiff may give in  evidence the expense of savage that not be particular lie as a breach of the  policy in the declaration Lord Hardwicke c j I think they may give it in  evidence for the insurance be against all accident the accident lie in this  declaration be that the ship sink in the river it go on and say that by reason  thereof the good be spoil that be the only special damage lie yet it be but  the common ease of a declaration that lie special damage where the plaintiff  may give evidence of any damage that be within his cause of action as lie and  though it be object that case tempt Hardwicke such a breach of the policy  shall be lie as the insurer may have notice to def end it it be so in this  case for they have lie the accident which be sufficient notice because it must  necessary follow that some damage do happen marsh
Carsey versus WO0D Trin car rot Winford devise Cr Ascoughs case ejectment a  special verdict a man seize in fee of land hold in capite devise the whole to  the corporation of the city of Norwich upon a charitable use and whether the  devise be good for the whole or only for two part be the question and whether  the statute of Elizabeth cap do make a good devise contrary to the statute of  h and resolve it be good but for two part only and by Maynard sergeant where  it be say that if a copyholder devise without a surrender or tenant in tail  devise that it be good against the issue it be not intend good by the  commonlaw but to be make good by the decree of the chancery ground upon the  statute of Elizabeth cap Raymond sir t er p
cart against marsh a appeal lie from the ordinary to the metropolitan in a  matter relate to the put up of a monument in a church SC stram a prohibition  be pray last term by Mr denison to a appeal depend in the court of arch and a  rule to show cause be then grant and the case be this the executor of one jane  cart petition the ordinary for a licence to erect a monument to the memory of  the say cart in a particular place in Dunstable church and there be also  another petition by the executrix of Barbara marsh for a licence to set up a  monument to marsh memory in the same place in the say church but the executrix  of marsh find the ordinary inclinable on be attend by the party to determine  the matter in favour of the other executor she appeal to the arch before any  licence be grant and be now proceed on the say appeal it be now argue by dr  Paul his majesty advocate general and by other against the prohibition and by  Andrews sergeant wright and Mr denison in favour thereof and by these last it  be urge among other thing that the grant of faculty in this case be a matter  of a discretionary and not of a contentious jurisdiction for a licence confer  no interest but the foundation of the power of grant it be only to prevent the  erect of any thing indecent or superstitious and therefore the ordinary have  the sole power all one as in the certify of marriage or bastardy and can be  control by the archbishop in the exercise thereof Inst hob   and though the  present question be a dispute between two ecclesiastical judge yet this court  may interpose by way of prohibition hob cro James roll and on this side many  other case be cite but by the whole court a appeal lie in this case from the  ordinary to the arch and therefore they refuse a prohibition ex relation of  one another
cart and mogg fifteen day between the testae and return need not be in a to  know facias on a judgement in ejectment to know facias on a judgement in  ejectment the defendant plead in abatement that there be not fifteen day  between the test and return c to which the plaintiff demurrer Selby the  statute car do not extend to ejectment because it be not a personal action      Peytoes case die cro curian this have be oftentimes overrule because a  ejectment be a mix action and per Powell a release of personal action be a  good bar in ejectment curian and Aston it be within the proviso of the statute  and help by it and a to answer ouster be award per astry the baron of the  exchequer have now agree that they may cause process to issue on a  recognizance estreated with a respectuatur but the court direct that in such  case the sum be scrape out in this court and then they can it proceed and the  court direct the officer of this court to proceed accord on a plea to the  jurisdiction on special privilege it be usual to grant a special imparlance as  in the common case of conusance c for Oxford c but they can t imparl general  in debt on a bylaw in London for exercise the trade of a tailor not have serve  seven year a procedendo be move for pro to ward off the defendant life in  blackfriars and so out of their jurisdiction but the court grant a procedendo  because in several case the party c may try their own jurisdiction as in the  case of the chancellor of Cambridge c Comberbach er p
cart vers marsh a appeal lie about set up ornament in the church and SC burn  ecclesiastical law a dispute arise between the party upon cross petition  exhibit to the archdeacon of Bedford and commissary of the bishop of Lincoln  for leave to erect a monument against a pier in Dunstable church to the memory  of their respective ancestor and upon allegation give on both side marsh  appeal to the arch against the admission of cart allegation upon which strange  cart move for a strange report er p prohibition insist that ornament be  discretionary only in the ordinary and therefore no appeal will lie or if it  do yet it must be to the bishop of Lincoln and not to the arch but the court  hold that though ornament can be set up without the consent of the ordinary  palmer v bishop exon ante yet it must be exercise accord to a prudent and  legal discretion which the superior have a right to look into and correct and  therefore the appeal well lie as it do in case of grant administration to one  where there be two in equal degree and as to its be a appeal to the arch it be  hold that wherever the act be do by a commissary it be consider as the act of  the ordinary himself and to he no appeal will lie from his own act and it must  consequent be to the metropolitan so the rule for a prohibition be discharge
Cartee and HANDERSON when a writ of error be bring upon a judgement in Ireland  how far the court will require the defendant to rejoin within a short day Mr  Moreton move in a writ of error out of Ireland that the defendant in error may  rejoin within four day or that the cause may be set down in the paper and the  motion be grant Barnardiston king b er p
carter a attorney against smith hill geo ill judgement on a warrant of  attorney take of a prisoner set aside no attorney for the defendant be by cook  a warrant of attorney take by the plaintiff to confess a judgement to himself  hold not good the defendant be in custody and no other but where the defendant  himself be a attorney the warrant be good though no other attorney be present  Vid Walton v Stanton ante p a attorney present whereupon the judgement and  execution thereon be set aside and restitution order note in this cause the  defendant be hold to be in custody though the officer leave the defendant some  time while the plaintiff carter get the warrant of attorney from the defendant  cook c p er p
carter against cod carter have recover against Codd in debt who be also commit  to the fleet for contempt by the Lord keeper carter sue a habeas corpus to the  warden of the flee to have Codd in court to the intent to charge he with the  judgement but after the delivery of the habeas corpus and before the return of  it Codd be discharge of the contempt by the Lord keeper and the warden return  the matter with a corpus parat to have and bring he to the court carter pray  that Codd may be keep in execution for he Codd pray that he may not for the  Lord keeper may commit by his word without a writ and so he may discharge the  party h but Codd will not confess that he be the same party against who the  judgement in debt be have note h and the plaintiff have not day in court to  take the issue upon that we h h outlawry m and also the court will not give he  his oath if he be the same person or not but yet it be pray by carter because  that he allege in court that he be the same person against who he have recover  and that he be now in court that he shall answer to a declaration in a action  of debt upon that judgement and that the justice grant and order that Codd  shall put in spectral tail to answer the action and for not do that he be  commit to the marshal and the warden of the fleet discharge of he
carter against low in a ejectment the case be a termor devise his term to I S  and make his wife executrix and die the woman enter and prove the will and  take husband who take a lease of the lessor and after the devisee enter and  grant all his estate to the husband and wife and herein two question be move  if by this acceptance of the new lease by the husband the term which the woman  have to another use videlicet to the use of the testator shall be deem a  surrender and the opinion of the court be clear without argument that it be a  surrender but admit it be no surrender but the first term continue then the  second question be if when the devisee enter into the term devise to he  without consent of the executor by which entry he be a wrongful seisor and a  seize and after he grant his right and interest to the executor if this grant  be good or no because he have not any term in he but only a right to the term  suspend in the land and to be revive by the entry of the executor and adjudge  that it be a good grant and it shall inure first as the agreement of the  executor by the acceptance of the grant that the devisee have a term in he as  a legacy and second the deed shall have operation by way of grant to pass the  estate of the devisee to the executor and so no wrong and the case be resemble  to the case of surrender to the grantee of a reversion which first shall inure  as attornment and after as surrender and so be it adjudge
carter against MANSBRIDGE easter geo wright move to make a submission between  the party a rule of court pursuant to the statute will Toller object that the  agreement to make the submission a rule of court be no part of the condition  of the bind but be thereunder write and not sign but it appear by affidavit  that the subscription be make before the execution of the bind it be take by  the court to be part of the submission as a endorsement by way of defeazance  be part of the deed and the submission be make a rule of court
carter against Stowell ordinary levins pray a prohibition to citation ex duty  to answer a oath to libel against he of extortion forgery cheat c in his  office of register of Rochester which the court say they may grant quoad the  examine upon oath but the court may still retain the cause to proceed without  oath to excommunicate or deprive be their own officer but before oath of plea  tender non holding responders super sacrament as to any crime the court refuse  to grant a prohibition
carter against wilson Thursday July administrator sir William Scroggs pray a  prohibition to evesque Lincoln in suit against a administrator of b  administrator of c husband of the executrix of I S on refusal of plene  administer plead which the court grant nisi and that this be not bare cause of  appeal
carter and CHILCOCK hill and car two rot joinder error of judgement in  assumpsit on two several promise one find for the plaintiff the other for the  defendant and judgement be for the plaintiff for one and for the defendant as  to the other that he be in pity not say eat ind without die which be hold ill  but hale chief justice say he shall have judgement as to the one and reverse  as to the other and so hale chief justice say he have know it adjudge on two  several covenant and several breach and damage also in dower one judgement of  land and damage may be reverse as to the one and affirm as to the other it be  ancient use thus only to reverse so far as there be defect in Edward the three  time but curian contra that it must be whole reverse or affirm against Hub in  Jacksons case in action upon the case for word roll et adjornatur
carter and full error in indebitatus in inferior court of new Windsor after  verdict error be assign in want of continuance which by wile justice be not  error the statute of h Keble er p cap of Jeoffayls extend to inferior court  and so resolve in parliament in the case of coal and forth error out of London  in waste but this be only a judgement by the defendant and not after verdict  as allege and the venire facias return before other judge then the court be  say to be hold judgement reverse
carter and haggard Saturday october in a ejectionae strong after plead not  guilty a release be plead puis darrein continuance whereby the first issue be  discharge which the court grant as Lewis and after judgement error and a writ  of enquiry on car cap Stroud pray to set all aside but per curian though the  justice can try it at nisi prius unless they think it but colour and  insufficient yet if it be sufficient he must sign a bill of exception for the  trial be error and so Yelverton pl and in this case the release of carter  lessor of plaintiff be but colour also the party can demurrer to such plea  also the agreement to try and stand on the title only be no cause to overrule  such plea and per curian the plea certify hither be allow notwithstanding such  agreement be gain after ex motion Stroud to set it aside
carter and other creditor of church against church alias westin and other  october legacy on a contingency vest though the legatee die before it happen  church devise some part of his land and tenement to his executor to sell for  payment of his debt and the rest of his land he devise to marry his daughter  in case in chancery er p fee be then a year old and declare that his executor  shall receive the profit of those land case in chancery until his daughter  come to the age of one and twenty year towards payment of his debt and legacy  the daughter die at five year old the Lord keeper be of opinion that the  charge the profit till the daughter attain one and twenty though she die  before amount to a term till she will have attain that age if she have live  and cite Borastons case cro and a case in dyer where land be give to a mother  for education and maintenance of the daughter till eighteen year old the  daughter die before eighteen yet adjudge a good term to the mother till she  will have attain eighteen have she live and he say that the principal case be  much a strong case the Lord keeper justice Windham
carter and whittle order of justice per cur where it appear that the justice  have no jurisdiction on the Act for poor prisoner there we can relieve for it  be only such poor prisoner as be there particular describe if it do not appear  we will suppose the justice have do their duty unless the contrary appear a  duplicate be evidence prima fancy
carter Ashby wife versus Billingsle wife parols a action on the case f or word  jezabel your daughter have a false key and have steal S out of my box broom  sergeant to say she have steal S be actionable but as these word be lie it do  not entitle to a action jezabel your daughter franciscan innuendo shall not  help it Yelv foe a innuendo shall not beget a action jezabel your daughter  innuendo Frances your daughter I think will not help it because it be not aver  she have a daughter wile justice dixit de these word follow will help it and  the jury find they be speak of her Vaughan chief justice jezabel be take  proverbial for a name of reproach and so I think a good action lie ad quod the  other concordarunt no more cost than damage carter boundary paschae car in c b
carter case action on the case for word William crow bring a action on the  case against Warham carter for speak of these word the say William be forswear  and perjure in swear at the common place bar upon the deed which he then have  in his hand Harris sergeant do move in arrest of judgement for that the word  shall be construe accord to the common and vulgar sense videlicet that he be  forswear upon the deed but the court be against he for the vulgar sense be  that man do not use to swear but upon a book and the plaintiff have judgement  hill Elizabeth in the king bench Bartues case Owen er William BARTUES case  prohibition Woodroffe and cook bring a prohibition against Bartue the case be  thus the abbot of Langley do let land to one raston for ninety nine year who  let the same to Woodroff for sixty year who grant parcel of the say land to  cook during the whole term and Bartue do libel against they both in the  spiritual court for tithe and they join in a prohibition Godfrey they may not  join in a prohibition for by the statute of h if two man be sue in the court  Christian for slander battery c which be several in themselves there they can  join in a prohibition but where they be sue for the find of a lamp c by reason  of their land there they shall join but in this case the tithe be several but  it be resolve that their join in the prohibition be good enough that the death  of one of they shall not abate the writ of prohibition because nothing be by  they to be recover but they be only to be discharge of tithe pasch Elizabeth  in the king bench rot
carter v cupper a legatee sue the executor to consent to the legacy the bill  be against the defendant as executor to have they assent to the Plaintiffto  enter into a lease devise unto he by the testator the defendant take a  Commission to take their answer in the country and order the defendant shall  not alien commit waste not leave the rend unpay during the suit carter  plaintiff cupper and other defendant year Elizabeth
carter v SAYWELL Nov condemnation Q whether it may be give in evidence without  plead special hard Carth carter buy a parcel of good that be condemned in this  court and these good be afterward seize and upon the trial of the information  of seizure of these good carter who be then defendant give in evidence a  condemnation in the exchequer court which Mr attorneygeneral say ought to have  be plead and upon this a case be state for the opinion of the court in mich  term per page and Montague baron it must be plead per price baron that it may  be give in evidence without plead it
carter vers fish in b r where no more cost than damage cite ld raym  declaration for word and it then go on quorum indeed falsor a word  propalationis pra woven fabric idem carolus non solum in good nomin et in pain  nest bonestis in many different ways strike et deterioratus step forth yes  etian occasion a word to say before per management of the defendant he be take  up and carry before a justice the word charge he with steal a hen there be a  verdict for the plaintiff and S damage and it be move the last term for full  cost and salk cro car salk cro car be cite and this term the chief justice  deliver the opinion of the court that the plaintiff shall have full cost  because this be not lie as a aggravation but as a distinct fact Philips v fish  Mod Anderson v Bucklon ante he speak the word and he procure he to be carry  before a justice
carter vers jewel the defendant be take up upon a escape warrant make by my  brother fortescue and a motion be make to discharge he and the warrant because  he be take upon it the that of January instant and my brother fortescue be  remove from his office of judge of the king bench in October before his patent  be determine upon the demise of the late king and the person be discharge and  the warrant also
carter versus CAWTHROP hill W m b r rot lev Mod SC where the plaintiff declare  for damage after the commencement of the action show SC Mod vent lev lev Jones  Writ of error on a judgement in the court of hull in a action on the case for  stop the plaintiff light by erect a new structure and conclude his declaration  thus videlicet per quod the plaintiff lose the light and comfort of his window  from such a day to the time of the plaint levy and then go far videlicet et  great pars predict niessuagii of the plaintiff occasion praemissor great  tenebritate darken to be thus far step forth unde to say c upon not guilty  plead the plaintiff have a verdict and upon a writ of error it be assign for  error that the the plaintiff have declare for damage after the time of his  plaint levy even to the time of his declare videlicet that his house be darken  thus far step forth which ought not to be for he shall not have damage for any  matter after the action commence because if another action shall be bring for  the same thing this former action can be plead in bar to it and therefore the  jury have give entire damage in this case this nought for they have give  damage for the thus far step forth darken which be matter subsequent to the  action and the case of Hamblelon and veer be rely on as a authority in point  but it be answer and so resolve per curian that this case be not like that in  sander for the thus far in this case shall refer to the time of the plaint t  levy and not to the time of the declaration wherefore the judgement be affirm  Carthew in the argue this case another be cite between Hext and Barton in c b  mich James rot which be a action for stop light c with a thus far step forth  as here and it be move in arrest of judgement upon the same exception of  entire damage but that court overrule it and hold the declaration good and the  plaintiff in that case have his judgement this last case be report in lev
carter versus davies Pas W m B R Carth S C show demurrer in bar to a plea in  abatement make a discontinuance show Mod case aid by verdict Indebitatus  assumpsit and quantum to deserve for ware as to the first count the defendant  plead non assumpsit and as to the second pet judgment de billa and plead in  abatement the plaintiff take issue on the non assumpsit and demurrer on the  plea in abatement quod placitum predict minus sufficient in lege step forth ad  Self ab action svan prcedict habend procludend et per cur the plaintiff have  demurrer in bar where the plea be only in abatement the suit be thereby  discontinue a but issue be join on the other promise the court stave proceed  on the demurrer say the discontinuance will be help by the verdict b a r send  for ld raym vide Str b r send for Henry Bl vide Str
carter versus DOWRISH hill James two b r rot Mod in a declaration the custom  of merchant ought to be set forth but this otherwise in a plea I show S c  error of a judgement in b r in a action of covenant which be to pay all bill  of exchange which one t S his the defendant S factor shall draw on he the  defendant Payable to the plaintiff or order the breach assign be that the say  t S bad draw a bill of exchange for l upon the defendant Payable to the  plaintiff or order and that the defendant bad accept the say bill but refuse  to pay the money c the defendant plead that the plaintiff secundum experience  a merchant bad endorse the say bill to one I n who endorse it to I d and that  he the defendant have pay part thereof to the say I d and tender the residue  to he which he refuse to accept and upon a demurrer to this plea the the  plaintiff have judgement in b r because the defendant do not set forth in his  bar special what the custom of merchant be for upon such a general allegation  ut above the court will not take notice ex duty what the custom be and now  upon error bring in b r the court seem to be of another opinion videlicet that  they ought ex duty to take notice of the law of merchant because this Carthew  er p part of the law of the land and especial they ought to take notice of  this custom concern bill of exchange because this the most general among all  their custom and moreover that the court of law have ex duty in several case  take notice de lege a merchant as for instance of the law of the survivor have  no right survivorship among joint merchant and likewise of scandalous word  speak of they in respect to their trade so they hold this plea good be general  ut above but probable it may have be otherwise in a declaration on a bill of  exchange for there the plaintiff shall set forth what be the custom of  merchant the judgement be reverse
carter versus freeman mich James a action of debt bring upon a bind with a  condition that the defendant shall appear before the king at a certain day  videlicet die Jupiter post eight Martini and upon a nul tiel record plead the  defendant bring his record of appearance luma post xv Martini and this be hold  by the whole court a appearance at the day in the condition by the whole court  Brownlow goldsborough demand necessary for a nomin Carthaginian
carter versus shepherd pasch will B R a receive money of b by the hand of c it  be a s money and he must abide by the loss see Mod salk Mod S C comb case B R  vide ante c ib Mod lev show Molloy lib c comb S C hob Mod upon a point refer  at nisi prius the case be h have a note of l upon a goldsmith go to receive it  while he be in the shop one Daly bring money in Salkeld er p to pay to the  goldsmith who thereupon order h to receive the money of Daly accord h receive  l part of his hundred pull a bag out of his pocket put the money into the bag  lie it down by he and proceed to tell the rest in the mean time Salkeld a  stranger come in catch the bag of from he and run away h bring trover against  the goldsmith for his note pretend the property of the remain in the goldsmith  though put into the pllaintiffs bag for he have still a right to count it over  and so it be not absolute pay to the plaintiff cur contra h have appropriate  the money by put it into his bag and may bring trover for the bag and money as  well as if he have put both bag and money into his pocket
carter versus shepherd salk a tell money after a goldsmith and put part of it  into his bag which while he be tell the residue be steal a must bear the loss  the plaintiff have a bill of upon the defendant a goldsmith he come to receive  it and after part of the be tell out the plaintiff take it and put it into his  own bag and while he be tell the other the bag be steal off the counter the  question be whether the plaintiff or the goldsmith shall bear the loss and it  be resolve upon a reference to the judge that the plaintiff must bear it for  by put up the money into his own bag he have thereby gain a property in it and  appropriate it to his own use and if the detinue have be bring for the money  in the bag it must be against the plaintiff and not the goldsmith wherefore c
carter WARCUPP versus Symonds debt action of debt against a executor executor  plead judgement and that he have not asset ultra the plaintiff reply that they  be keep on foot by fraud and covin the defendant rejoin that he do not keep  the judgement on foot by covin and because he do not say the judgement or any  of they be the exception that they take Vaughan chief justice the exception be  good for the rejoinder be a negative pregnant and per totan curian judgement  pro to express grief
Carthew andrews versus Whittingham Trin W m b r rot see low more company v  Stanley coal company limit lt Mod salk show SC comb SC Danv pl ejectment de  mine charcoal good Rep more pl cro palm roll Rep hard Noy roll Rep cro James  in ejectment in the county palatine of Durham the plaintiff declare upon a  demise de mine charcoal in parochian de d c general not say how many i c upon  not guilty plead the plaintiff have a verdict and judgement and upon a writ of  error bring the error assign be in the declaration because of the incertainty  thereof for not set forth the number of coalmine so as the sheriff may know of  how many to give possession and for this reason the court incline that the  judgement be erroneous but then the plaintiff produce several precedent in  Durham and allege that all the entry there in ejectment for coalmine be the  same as in this case the judgement be affirm
Carthew bisse versus Harcourt Mod a case between the same party but to another  purpose which see postea a attorney or officer of b r have no privilege to  alter a venue where he be defendant aliter where he be plaintiff show vide  salk Mr Harcourt the secondary of the crownoffice be defendant in two action  bring against he and lie in the proper county where the cause of action do  arise and it be now move to alter the venue and that the trial may be in  Middlesex by reason of the defendant S privilege he be one of the clerk of b r  and his attendance necessary and requisite there and a rule make in Andrew  Loder S case be now produce who be one of the clerk of this office have this  privilege allow but the court deny the motion in the principal case because  Harcourt be the defendant in those action and that a attorney or officer of  the court where he be defendant have no privilege concern the venue but where  he be plaintiff he have the privilege to lie his action in Middlesex and out  of the proper county and the venue shall not be change upon the common  affidavit by reason of his privilege and justice dolben remember a cause where  the venue be alter upon affidavit though a attorney be plaintiff because the  matter do arise and all the witness live in remote part of the kingdom
Carthew buckley ux versus collier mich W m b r rot Mod SC where the action  ought to be bring by the husband alone salk SC I Danv pl Indebitatus assumpsit  by husband and wife in which they declare that the defendant indebitatus to be  to they the plaintiff in such a sum of money for periwigmaker S work do by the  wife at the request of the defendant and conclude ad damnum Self c the  defendant plead a frivolous plea to which the plaintiff demurrer and the  question be whether this action be well bring by husband and wife or whether  it ought to be by the husband alone it be insist that they ought to join in  this case because the cause of action do arise from the particular skill of  the wife in make periwig and for which she may have a action after the death  of her husband and for that purpose the case in the margin footnote be cite to  which it be answer and so resolve that this case differ from those cite  because those be upon special promise make to the wife only and therefore in  cro cro Elizabeth cro car side Carthew er p such case the wife must be a party  to the action but here the action be upon a general indebitatus assumpsit on a  promise imply by law but that the law will not in this case imply any promise  to the wife for she be a servant to the husband who be at all the charge in  provide material as hair c to carry on the trade of periwigmaking therefore he  ought to have the recompense so that the law imply the promise be make to he  only quod notam judgement quod to express grief nil to take in hand
Carthew bush versus coal where a exception in a lease shall amount to a  reservation I show S c salk SC Danv p covenant against the assignee of the  lessee upon a indenture by which the plaintiff demise a certain message to the  lessee for so many year except such a room with free liberty of passage  ingress egress and regress through such other room of the demise premise unto  the room except c the lessee assign the premise c and the assignee stop d the  passage c and this be assign for breach of the covenant and after argument it  be resolve per totan curian that this exception amount to a reservation it be  a thing new create and not in be before videlicet a way or passage now upon a  reservation a action of covenant will lie as where rend be reserve covenant  will lie upon the word of reservation without any express word of covenant the  plaintiff have judgement
Carthew butcher versus andrews salk SC comb SC I Danv p Indebitatus assumpsit  will not lie against the father at who request the plaintiff lend money to his  son roll Abr vent raym count I vent say vent accord far sand lev cro James  salk action on the case on several promise one be for so much money lend by  the plaintiff unto r a the defendant S son at the instance and request of the  defendant upon non assumpsit plead there be a general verdict for the  plaintiff and entire damage and now it be move in arrest of judgement that a  general indebitatus assumpsit will not lie against the defendant upon this  lend of money unto his son for in respect to the defendant this a collateral  promise upon which the plaintiff ought to have declare special because upon  the lend to the son the law can raise a promise by the father but it will in  the son who borrow the money and the damage be entire make all nought and the  court be of that opinion say per holt chief justice if it have be a  indebitatus for so much money pay by the plaintiff at the request of the  defendant unto his son it may have be good for then it will be the father S  debt and not his son S but when the money be lend to the son this his proper  debt and not the father S the judgement be arrest
Carthew carter versus davis hill W m rot salk SC I show SC Danv p in a action  on the case the plaintiff declare upon two promise c the defendant plead quoad  the first promise non assumpsit general and quoad the other promise he plead a  frivolous plea and conclude in abatement videlicet petit judgment de billa  thereupon the plaintiff demurrer in form as to a plea in bar and so conclude  with petit judgment financial loss svan the defendant join in demurrer and  conclude likewise in bar per curian the whole plea be discontinue because the  demurrer in bar be no answer to the plea in abatement and a discontinuance of  part be a discontinuance of the whole and the rule be that all be discontinue
Carthew creamer versus WICKETT plea in abatement that there be another action  depend for the same matter in the same court v ante in a action of battery and  false imprisonment bring in b r the defendant plead in abatement another  action depend for the same matter in the same court the plaintiff reply quod  non to have some tale record petit quod record mock c inspicia without give  liberty to the defendant to rejoin quod to have tale record and upon a  demurrer to this replication the the plaintiff have judgement because this be  a record of the same court in which it be plead the plaintiff may pray Carthew  er p that it may be inspect by the court if any such there be as this report  in dyer which be the precedent by which the plaintiff be guide in this case et  per curian upon this plea the plaintiff may have pray oyer of the record plead  and for want of oyer may have sign judgement which be the quick method of  proceed Carthew de term PASCH E year William b r
Carthew cross versus gardener refer to derry v peek App Cas de Lassalle v  Guildford king b Mod case for false affirm the good to be his own when they be  the proper good of another without say sciens they be the good of another good  comb SC show SC Danv p case c in which the plaintiff declare quod cum on such  a day colloquium to be between the plaintiff and the defendant concern the buy  and sell two ox Carthew er p which the defendant then have in his possession  and he the defendant adtunc ibidem falsely wickedly affirmaba that those ox be  his the defendant S proper good to which the plaintiff give credit buy the say  ox of the defendant for so much money when in truth the say ox then be the  proper good of t S and that he the say t S postea c lawful recover the say ox  from the plaintiff and although the defendant often requisite to be yet he  refuse to give the plaintiff satisfaction for the same upon not guilty plead  the party be at issue and the plaintiff have a verdict and now it be move in  arrest of judgement that the declaration be ill and that this action will not  lie because the plaintiff have not lie in his declaration that the defendant  sciens that these be the ox of t S do affirm they to be his ox beside he do  not allege this to be do deceptive neither do he set forth any warranty but  general that the defendant do affirm these to be his the defendant ox which be  not sufficient to maintain this action because a man may be mistake in his  property and right to a thing without any fraud or ill intent but the court be  clear in opinion upon consideration of this declaration that the action will  lie upon a bare affirmation ut above and that this case differ from the book  cite because here the plaintiff have no mean to know to who the property of  these ox do belong but only by the possession and to prove that this action  will lie the authority in the Yelv cro in point roll Abr side lev margin be  cite judgement for the plaintiff
Carthew Dalbury Foston parishioner in Com derby Mod SC comb SC what notice be  necessary to be give of a poor man S come into a parish vide salk Mod comb two  justice make a order for the settle Robert blood and his wife recite that he  be by trade a smith and that at such a time he come from Dalbury the place of  his birth into the parish of Foston and there rend a smith S shop of a small  yearly Carthew er p value and work at his trade for a whole year and be employ  by most of the inhabitant there and particular by one Everard a justice of  peace and therefore they adjudge that this amount to notice as require by the  statute James and for this reason they by this order settle he at Foston and  upon a appeal to the session from this order in which all the matter above be  special set forth it be hold that this do not amount to such notice as be  require by the statute therefore they vacate that order and now the session  order be remove into b r by certiorari it be move that it may be quash for  that this matter appear in the order do in law amount to notice sufficient  within the meaning of that statute say per curian all this matter will not  supply the notice which be now require by the explanatory statute of W m and  they distinguish thus sacred scripture that when one Act be make explanatory  of another this court can carry the explanation far than be express in that  Act but upon a original statute the court will make construction accord to  equity wherefore the order of session be confirm
Carthew dicken versus Greenville Ant foe Writ of error on a judgement in  curian our men videlicet James when all the proceed be in the reign of car  this a variance incurable Mod show vent comb upon a special verdict in  ejectment all the proceed appear to be in the reign of car but the case be  argue and adjudge in the reign of James but the judgement be enter upon the  original roll which be a roll of car upon this judgement a writ of error be  bring in the exchequerchamber recite as follow sacred scripture jacobus  secundus God agreeableness c because in think over process ac etian in  reddition judgment loquelae who to be in curian our men in person we per  billam without shorten our men c upon this writ of error the judgement be  reverse in the exchequerchamber and the transcript of the record send back to  this court whereupon the plaintiff move that the court will give judgement for  he thereupon the counsel for the defendant show the variance above and say  that there be no such record in b r as be mention in the writ of error c upon  which the proceed have be in the exchequerchamber for the judgement which the  defendant bad obtain against the plaintiff be upon a speech in the reign of  car and not in the court of James and this be hold a incurable fault and  thereupon the plaintiff bring another writ of error c Carthew er p
Carthew dr GROENVELT versus dr Burnell all where a copy of proceed shall not  be deliver till after issue join salk the plaintiff bring his action against  the defendant who be late censor of the college of physician in London for  false imprisonment which be by colour of proceed have before they in that  college and that the plaintiff have request of the present censor to have a  copy of the say proceed but they deny to give he any copy thereof c wherefore  he now move for a rule of court to the censor c to cause a copy of the say  proceed to be deliver to he the plaintiff at his own charge but this be oppose  because there be only a plea plead but no issue join therefore the plaintiff  may demurrer if he think fit say per curian it be usual to make such a rule  for the sake of evidence after issue join but not by way of assist the  defendant to plead it be likewise usual for the judge of gaoldelivery to deny  a copy of a acquittal to he who intend to bring a action thereon when there be  a probable cause for a criminal prosecution for the court will never help any  litigious suit the court deny to make any rule in this case
Carthew drake versus cooper all where several and distinct thing may be join  in one declaration I Danv p Mod Allen style Syd keb vent Mod lev trespass  quare way arms the defendant enter his close contain acre c in which a fair  time out of mind have be keep on michaelmasday adtunc ibidem fregeru divulser  diverse booth c ibidem erect by the plaintiff for expose ware and merchandise  to sale there bring by person thither resort nec non eastern quod these  defendant adtunc ibidem impediveru disturbaveru the plaintiff in erect other  new booth c for the sale of merchandise by reason whereof the plaintiff lose  all the profit of picage and stallage upon not guilty plead the plaintiff have  a verdict and now it be object in arrest of judgement against the declaration  that the latter part thereof videlicet the disturbance in building new booth  find altogether in case and not in trespass and therefore this incompatible  with the first part of the declaration which be trespass way arms for these  several matter require several judgement against the defendant videlicet the  first be a to take in hand but the last be only a miscricordia and therefore  can be join in one declaration say per curian non allocatur for the  disturbance c be lie only in consequence of the first trespass c and this of  the same effect as a per quod in a declaration which be often use in action of  trespass way arms to let in the consequential damage c and one plea go to the  whole for if the defendant bad plead a licence from the plaintiff to enter the  close that will have be a good justification of the trespass quod notam  judgement for the plaintiff
Carthew fisher versus pomfret bill of exchange endorse and make Payable to the  order of the plaintiff the case be sacred scripture a bill of exchange Payable  to t S who endorse it in this manner sacred scripture pay the content of this  bill unto the order of Mr fisher who bring his action as endorsee aver he have  make no order to any body to receive the money the defendant demurrer to the  declaration suppose that fisher can not maintain the action because the  endorsement be not to he but to his order say per curian the action be well  bring against the endorsor for among tradesman this form of endorsement be  common use although this intend to be make Payable to the person who order be  mention the plaintiff have judgement
Carthew Gilmore versus harris power of revocation where well pursue Skinner SC  lev S c salk Danv p upon a special verdict in ejectment the case be as follow  sacred scripture Edward Mountford settle his land now in question to the use  of himself in tail remainder to Simon Mountford and the heir male of his body  lawful beget remainder to sir Edward Mountford in tail remainder in fee to his  own right heir in this deed of settlement there be a single power of  revocation reserve f to Edward Mountford to revoke the estate only limit to  Simon Mountford and to limit new use instead thereof afterward the say Edward  Mountford by a deed subsequent to the say settlement recite that whereas he  have a power to revoke the use limit by the say settlement unto Simon  Mountford and his heir male and so misrecites the estate of Simon by omit the  follow word videlicet of his body beget he declare that he do revoke the say  use to Simon Mountford and his heir male and afterward in the same deed by way  of new use he limit the say estate to the say Simon and his heir male without  say of his body beget and upon this verdict two question be make whether this  be a good revocation of the first use because of the misrecital of the estate  of Simon and adjudge that it be a good revocation for such be to be favour and  the intent of the party be to be observe the next question be whether this due  estate limit to Simon Mountford be a feesimple as spring out of all the estate  of Edward Mountford or otherwise whether it be the like estatetail by  intendment as before and adjudge that it be a estatetail for if it shall be  construe a feesimple then the remainder to sir Edward Mountford will be  destroy which Edward have not power to do
Carthew herbert versus water all Mod SC I salk SC skin SC comb SC Danv p Writ  of inquiry grant after a nonsuit in replevin where the defendant avow as  overseer of the poor to inquire of the Triple damage Mod in replevin c the  defendant avow the take c as overseer of the poor of the parish of h in the  general form accord to the direction of the statute the plaintiff reply de in  an unjust manner svan not common with others absq tali causan as the statute  likewise prescribe and at the trial the plaintiff be nonsuit and thereupon the  jury be discharge without any inquiry of the Triple damage give to officer by  the statute above and now it be move that the avowants may have a writ of  inquiry award to supply this defect and after much debate it be grant  videlicet to inquire of the damage sustain by the defendant and the difference  be this sacred scripture where the matter omit to be inquire by the principal  jury be such as go to the very point of the issue and upon which if this find  by the jury a attaint will lie against they by the party if they have give a  false verdict there such matter can be supply by a writ of inquiry because  thereby the plaintiff may lose his action of attaint which will not lie upon a  inquest of office but where the matter omit to be inquire by the principal  jury do not go to the point in issue or necessary consequence thereof but be  thing mere collateral as damage be in this case and the four usual inquiry on  a quare hinder such may be supply by a subsequent writ of inquiry without any  damage to the party because if the same have be inquire into by the principal  jury it will have be as to those particular no more than a inquest of office  upon which a attaint will not lie
Carthew HILYARD versus Jennings to go into Trin will b r adjudge this  HillaryTerm a will be attest by three witness of which the devisee be one he  be no good witness salk skin Danv p this be a issue direct out of chancery to  try the validity of a will and the jury find a special verdict sacred  scripture that Thomas Jennings be seize in fee of the land in question lie in  somersetshire and be of the age of twentyone year he by will date April which  they find in here word devise the say land to his cousin William Hilyard the  now plaintiff who he make sole executor thereof they find likewise that the  say Thomas Jennings sign seal and publish that will in the presence of the  same William Hilyard Walter Lewis and Elizabeth Bernard and no other person  and that those three witness do subscribe their name as witness to the say  will and attest the same in the presence of the say Thomas Jennings the  testator the question be whether this be a good will quoad the devise of the  land to the plaintiff within the statute of fraud by which this enact that a  will by which land be devise must be subscribe and attest in the presence of  the testator by three or four credible witness and upon the first argument the  court be of opinion that this will be void quoad the devise of the land to the  plaintiff because he be the person to who the land be devise can by law be  allow to be a credible witness to prove the execution of the will on his own  behalf wherefore with respect to this devise the will be attest only by two  witness which be not sufficient to answer the statute and judgement be give  for the defendant