case William borough appellant sir Francis Whichcote and another respondent  that April Mews dig way a decree of the court of chancery determine a matter  of right be good evidence of that right as to all person claim under the party  against who the decree be make though at the distance of year afterward there  be and have be time out of mind at latimers in the parish of Chesham in the  county of buck a chapel of ease of which the lord of the manor of latimers  have always nominate the chaplain and in the say parish of Chesham there be  two distinct rectory or parsonage impropriate the one call Chesham Woborne and  the other call Chesham Leicester with two distinct vicarages thereto belong  brown in the that year of the reign of king John a composition or agreement be  make between the abbot and convent of Leicester owner of the parsonage of  Chesham Leicester of the one part and Walter Foliott then lord of the manor of  latimers of the other part whereby it be agree that all the tithe of the  demesne of the say Walter Foliott therein mention and all other tithe  ablations and obventions of the house of the say Walter Foliott shall for ever  remain to the chapel of latimers but that all the other tithe as well small as  other and the ablations and obventions of all the man of the whole village of  latimers shall for ever remain to the church of Chesham which the canon of  Leicester possess together with one acre of wheat issue out of the demesne of  Walter Foliott neither of the best nor worst and that the chaplain who  administer in the say chapel shall have for their maintenance out of the  grainge of the say abbot five quarter of good clean wheat yearly upon the  dissolution of monastery the parsonage of Chesham Leicester be grant by the  crown to the family of the Ashfields who constant pay the chaplain of latimers  for the time be the five quarter of wheat issue out of the say parsonage  yearly until Thomas Ashfield Esq then owner of the parsonage of Chesham  Leicester and Mr mile sand the then lord of latimers some time before the year  come to a agreement that Mr Ashfield shall only pay to the chaplain of  latimers four quarter of wheat yearly and that in consideration of Mr  Ashfields forbear to receive of Mr sand the one acre of wheat issue out of the  demesne of Latiniers Mr sand will give the chaplain of latimers a equivalent  for the five quarter Payable by Mr Ashfield this agreement be observe for some  time till Richard balam clerk chaplain of latimers be dissatisfy with it and  claim the tithe of hay and corn of several close in latimers which Mr Ashfield  have receive as belong to he balam in bring his bill in chancery against the  say Thomas Ashfield as parson of Chesham Leicester and against Elizabeth  countess dowager of Devonshire then lady brown er p of the manor of latimers  and William dell her tenant set forth the say ancient composition or agreement  and pray to have the tithe of several close in latimers allot to he and that  Mr Ashfield the parson of Chesham Leicester may pay he one quarter of wheat  parcel of the five quarter of wheat wherewith the parsonage be charge Mr  Ashfield have only pay he four quarter of wheat yearly and detain the five  quarter to his own use to this bill the defendant put in their answer and Mr  Ashfield by his answer deny that the then plaintiff be entitle to the tithe of  any of the close mention in the bill but that the same belong to he as parson  of Chesham brown Leicester and he admit that he as parson of Chesham Leicester  have pay to the chaplain of latimers four quarter of wheat yearly and conceive  no more wheat be due or ever pay to the say chaplain but confess that he have  then in his custody a paper entitle a composition between the abbot of  Leicester and Walter Foliott which be take out of a book keep by the  churchwarden of the parish of Chesham the plaintiff have reply and issue be  join diverse witness be examine on both side and on hear the cause on the that  of June before the Lord keeper Coventry in the presence of counsel for all  party except the countess of Devonshire who make default the court be of  opinion that the demesne land of the manor of latimers ought to be charge with  the payment of tithe to the chaplain of latimers as ancient they have be for  discovery whereof a commission be order to issue direct to Henry Bulstrode  Edmund Waller and Thomas Hampson esqr to consider of the proof then take and  to examine such other witness as shall be produce by either party and thereon  and on view of the land to set out and distinguish what particular land be  tithable to the plaintiff or defendant Ashfield respective and final to  determine all matter in variance between the party as well touch the say tithe  as concern the one quarter of wheat yearly parcel of five quarter claim by the  plaintiff from the defendant Ashfield and the arrear thereof the court  conceive that the defendant composition with sand ought not to prejudice the  plaintiff in case he shall make it appear to the commissioner to be a ancient  duty the court also leave the defendant Ashfield to make proof before the  commissioner touch the acre of wheat claim by he and upon return of the  commissioner certificate such further order shall be take as shall be just a  commission issue accord and Mr Bulstrode Mr Waller and Mr Hampson the three  commissioner examine several witness and make their certificate take notice of  the ancient composition between the abbot and convert of Leicester and Walter  Foliott in the reign of king John and after certify their opinion touch the  tithe claim by the then plaintiff out of the demesne land of latimers they far  certify that they conceive that the one quarter of wheat claim by the then  plaintiff and the arrear thereof be due to the plaintiff which arrear they  value at pound and that the defendant Ashfield ought to have yearly one acre  of wheat out of the demesne land of latimers which acre be not to be of the  best nor of the worst but reasonable to be allot yearly to he upon hear the  cause on the that of January on this certificate and the proof take by the  commissioner the court of chancery decree that the plaintiff and his brown  successor shall quiet enjoy the tithe of the several close therein mention and  that the defendant Ashfield shall pay to the plaintiff the pound for the  arrear of the one quarter of wheat parcel of the five quarter claim by the  plaintiff and that the defendant Ashfield his heir and assign shall also pay  to the plaintiff and his successor for ever yearly the say five quarter of  wheat by another order make in the cause on the that of may upon the motion of  the defendant Ashfields counsel allege that inasmuch as by the composition  make between the lord of latimers and the abbot of Leicester the one shall  have five quarter of wheat yearly and the other shall have a acre of wheat out  of the demesne of latimers neither the best nor worst and see the parson have  no remedy for his acre but by detain his five quarter and pray that the  defendant may detain the five quarter till he have a allowance for the one  acre of wheat it be order that the countess of Devonshire shall have notice  thereof to the end she may show cause the first day of the then next term why  she shall not allow the acre of wheat out of latimers to Mr Ashfield it do not  appear that any further proceed be have in that cause but it be brown er p  suppose that a agreement be make soon after the last order between Richard  balam the plaintiff and the countess of Devonshire and Mr Ashfield that Mr  Ashfield shall pay to Richard balam four quarter of wheat yearly or pound per  and in lieu thereof and that the countess of Devonshire shall pay to balam S a  year in lieu of the quarter of wheat due to he and that in consideration of  her pay the S per and to balam Mr Ashfield will discharge her of the payment  of the one acre of wheat due to he out of the demesne of latimers this  agreement or manner of payment be observe many year during the time of several  succeed chaplain and lord of latimers and all the lifetime of sir Jeremy  Whichcote Bart who purchase the parsonage of Chesham Leicester of Mr Ashfield  and upon the death of sir Jeremy in the parsonage come to sir Paul Whichcote  his son and heir who all along pay to the chaplain of latimers pound a year in  lieu of the four quarter of wheat and the lord of latimers for the time be  also constant pay to the chaplain S a year in lieu of the five quarter of  wheat on the death of one Mr Hugh in the appellant be appoint chaplain of the  chapel of latimers where he duly perform divine service and receive yearly  from sir Paul Whichcote or his tenant of the parsonage from to the pound per  and in lieu of the four quarter of wheat and he also receive from the lord of  the manor of latimers S in lieu of the five quarter of wheat brown but in the  appellant and Robert Gainsford the lessee of the parsonage under sir Paul  Whichcote and who usual pay the appellant the pound per and in lieu of the  four quarter of wheat and have the same allow he in his account with sir Paul  have a dispute about the division of their tithing Gainsford declare he will  not pay the appellant the pound per and any long without be compel to it by  law though he at the same time acknowledge it be the appellant right but keep  the arrear in his hand and in order to encourage sir Paul to contest the  justice of the appellant demand Gainsford undertake to bear the whole expense  of a suit p which the appellant shall bring against sir Paul and for that  purpose give a note under his hand to sir Paul date the d of December whereby  he promise to pay to the chaplain of latimers the sum of pound if it appear he  be entitle to the same and to indemnify sir Paul from the payment thereof and  from all damage cost or charge by reason of the non payment thereof and if it  shall not appear to be due to the chaplain of latimers then he promise to pay  the pound to sir Paul on demand and sir Paul afterward suffer Gainsford to  keep in his hand the pound per and till about which time Gainsford die the  arrear whereof to that time amount to pound and the respondent sir Francis  Whichcote then be owner of the parsonage of Chesham Leicester he prevail on  Ann Harding the representative of Gainsford to pay he the pound for which he  give the follow receipt videlicet February receive then of mrs Ann Harding  administratrix of Mr Robert Gainsford decease by the hand of Mr Griffiths the  sum of pound which with pound receive of Mr Harding be in full of money detain  by Mr Gainsford in eleven several year out of the rend by the consent of sir  Paul Whichcote my father on account of a demand make out of his farm by the  chaplain of latimers and whereas the say Mr f Gainsford give my father a bind  or note to indemnify he on that account I do promise to deliver up and cancel  the same as soon as I go to Quy where it be and to indemnify mrs Harding on  account of pay I the say money Francis Whichcote sir Francis have thus receive  the money and refuse to pay the appellant the arrear of the pound per and from  the year though diverse application be make to he in the most friendly and  respectful manner the appellant therefore in Trinity term exhibit his bill in  the court of exchequer against the respondent sir Francis and the say Ann  Harding which afterward upon her death be revive against the respondent John  Harding to have the arrear of the four quarter of wheat yearly Payable out of  the parsonage of Chesham Leicester or pound per and in lieu thereof pay to he  the appellant admit by his bill that he have all along receive of the lord of  latimers S per and in lieu of the five quarter of wheat and also to have the  appellant right to the five brown quarter of wheat confirm and establish by  the decree of the court issue be join and diverse witness examine and the  cause come to be hear on the that of November and the that of December the  appellant offer to read brown er p as evidence for he the order or decree and  other the proceed in the court of chancery in the old cause wherein Richard  balam clerk be plaintiff and Thomas Ashfield and the countess of Devonshire  and William dell be defendant but the court be please to refuse to suffer the  appellant to read the say order and proceed and order that it shall be refer  to a trial at law to he have at the then next assize to be hold for the county  of buck upon this issue whether five quarter or any other and what quantity of  wheat have be ancient and yearly due and Payable by the impropriator or  impropriators of Chesham Leicester or by his or their tenant or tenant to the  chaplain of latimers for the time be and whether any and what sum of money  have be yearly pay in lieu thereof to the say chaplain by the say impropriator  or his tenant and that after the trial such further direction shall be give as  shall be just the trial be accord have at the ensue lend assize when the jury  find a verdict for the respondent and the cause be again hear on the saint of  June upon the equity reserve the court be please to dismiss the appellant bill  with cost both at law and in equity the appellant therefore appeal from both  these decree insist c Talbot I will that by the old decree and proceed in the  court of chancery his right to the five quarter of wheat Payable out of the  parsonage of Chesham Leicester be plain establish that decree be find upon a  certificate make by three gentleman of note and character in the county where  the matter in question arise and in a cause where all the necessary party be  before the court and particular Mr Ashfield the owner of the parsonage who  interest be thereby bind the court of exchequer ought therefore to have permit  this decree and proceed to be read as evidence and more especial as the  respondent sir Francis claim under Mr Ashfield and if the same have be so read  there will have be no occasion to direct a trial at law but the respondent or  one of they ought to have be decree to pay the appellant the arrear of the  pound per and from and the five quarter of wheat for the future on the other  side it be contend p York d Ryqer to be the constant and know practice of the  several court of law and equity not to permit any decree or order make in any  other cause in any other court to be read as evidence without first produce  the whole proceed in such cause that the court may be inform upon what  foundation such decree or order have be make and whether the same have be fair  obtain upon defence and debate of the matter or ex part and by surprise that  brown the appellant do not produce any answer of the defendant Ashfield and  there be recital in the decree the court can not be inform by any thing but  the act of the then plaintiff what be the matter in dispute whether Ashfield  be at that time impropriator of Chesham Leicester or whether he put in any  answer or make any defence or whether the decree have be fair obtain that it  will have be unjust in the court to have permit a decree make against Thomas  Ashfield to be read against the respondent sir Francis Whichcote as a  purchaser of the rectory impropriate of Chesham Leicester under he without the  appellant first show that Ashfield at the time of make the decree be seize of  the rectory and that he be apprise of the suit and have make his defence for  if the court have permit this decree to be read it can have be no evidence  against the respondent or any charge upon the rectory without show that  Ashfield be at that time impropriator beside it have be obtain near year ago  the appellant ought to have show a submission thereto and a continuance of  payment by the several succeed impropriators to the several succeed chaplain  in order thereby to have establish his right but as he fail to do this the  direct the issue be very proper even if the decree have be read and the most  that the appellant can have expect that if the decree have be proper evidence  in equity it will have be so at law and the appellant may have use and bad the  full benefit of it at the trial but he do not attempt to read it there from a  sense of its not be proper evidence and therefore have no cause to complain of  any injustice do he or of a verdict against evidence that the direct issue  touch matter of fact of which the court have any doubt be usual and proper in  order to inform the court of such fact as be necessary to be ascertain and as  the court have in this case direct issue which have be find against the  appellant it be insist that the dismission of his bill with cost be right and  ought to be affirm brown er p but after hear counsel on this appeal it be  order and adjudge that both the decree complain of shall be reverse and it be  declare that five quarter of wheat be yearly due and Payable and of right  ought to be pay to the chaplain of latimers out of the rectory of Chesham  Leicester in such manner as the same be claim by the appellant in his original  bill but inasmuch as he admit that he have in fact receive S per and from the  lord of latimers in satisfaction of one quarter of wheat parcel of the say  five quarter Payable yearly as aforesaid and as it appear that during the five  year the appellant be pay his demand before the stoppage complain of in the  bill he receive S a quarter in satisfaction of the say five quarter of wheat  yearly as well for the four quarter as for the one quarter it be further order  that the appellant shall be pay for the arrear of the remain four quarter of  wheat after the rate of pound per and from the time that the payment of brown  the say four quarter of wheat be stop till the fill of the appellant original  bill in the court of exchequer be fifteen year which be the time for which the  appellant demand satisfaction by this suit and that the same shall be pay to  he by the respondent sir Francis Whichcote he admit that he be to indemnify  the other respondent and consent to stand in his place and the appellant be  content therewith audit be also order that the respondent sir Francis  Whichcote shall likewise pay the appellant his cost of the suit in equity to  be tax by the proper officer deduct the cost of the trial at law which the  appellant be to pay or allow to the say respondent to be tax in like manner by  the proper officer and that the say court of exchequer shall cause this order  and judgement to be put in due execution accord jour vol p