case Burgundy brown appellant richard bradford executor of Willoughby pond  respondent d march appellant have bring debt against respondent as executor  upon a bind date that November execute by pond and Leonard Upsall Colles  senior and Leonard Upsall junior for l condition to pay l with interest and  respondent bring his bill in chancery allege he pay the debt to the appellant  who in his answer deny this bind pay but confess respondent pay he l S in  discharge of another bind for l date July execute by pond and Upsall the elder  only and though there have be three verdict against appellant that the bind in  question be satisfy yet he allege that the bind of be pay in and that the  executor of Upsall the young have on that November pay l for interest oh the  present bind and as the respondent allege he pay one bind only when there be  in truth two bind it be against conscience to decree he to deliver up the bind  not pay and further to pay l cost and insist if as allege the bind be indeed  pay the respondent can have so prove it at law and need not come into equity  and insist further that the two first trial have not satisfy the conscience of  the court or a three will not have be direct and that it appear full at the  last hear that there be two bind and but one pay and that the judge Powel be  not satisfy with the last verdict and that the decree ought to be reverse the  respondent on the other hand aver that pond and the two Upsalls in or be bind  to appellant in l to pay l and interest and that respondent have after pond  death pay that debt to appellant with interest and charge and take his receipt  that appellant pretend he have not then the bind but acknowledge pond owe he  no other money and complain by his bill that appellant sue he on a old bind of  twenty year stand for l enter into by pond and the two Upsalls which be for  the same money the cause be hear at the roll that October and a issue direct  whether the bind date that November be satisfy or not which issue be try and  find for respondent and the cause hear on the equity reserve and appellant  decree to deliver up the bind to be cancel and to pay the cost at law and in  equity and afterward on a rehear at the respondent instance in the court  direct a new trial on this issue whether there be two brand or not and whether  both be satisfy or not which issue be try at Nottingham and a second Colles  verdict in favour of respondent and on a further rehear at appellant instance  a further issue be direct whether the several bind in question be satisfy or  not which be try at Nottingham and a three verdict in favour of respondent and  appellant several time move for a new trial and be refuse and that June the  cause be hear on the equity reserve and appellant decree to deliver up the  bind of and to pay cost as before which be tax to l and in December appellant  again petition for a rehear which petition be dismiss and the respondent  insist that the say order and decree of the that June have satisfy the  conscience of the court and be agreeable to the rule of law equity and justice  and that the appellant ought to be conclude after so many solemn hear and  proceed and that the appeal ought to be dismiss and accord after hear council  the lord adjudge that the petition and appeal shall be dismiss and the decree  affirm journ vol xvi Colles er p