releived upon a bond after Judgement and execution and because no material matter alleadged for maintainanâ—e thereof therefore dismissed Adams plaintant Doddesworth defendant Anno 21. and 22. Eliz. The Bill was to be releived for egresse and regresse into a garden of the defendants for drying of cloaths promissed by word only by the defendant to the plainant therefore dismissed for that the Court ought not to be burthened with such small maâ—ers Hamby plaintant Northage defendant Anno 21. and 22. Eliz. Guilliam made oath that he saw a subpoena served on the defendanr who hath not appeared therefore an attachment Morgan plaintant Evon defendant Anno 21. and 22. Eliz. An Attachment was delivered to the Sheriffe to execute who did not returne the same and upon affidavit of the delivery a day was given to returne the Writ upon paine to be amerced 5 l. Crompton plaintant Meridith defendant Anno 21. and 22. Eâ—iz Affidavit made for the delivery of au extent to the Sheriffe which he hath not returned therefore a day is given to the Sheriffe to returne the Writ upon paine of 10 l. Hambey plaintant Wight defendant Anno 21. and 22. Eliz. Three Bonds put in suite in the Kings Bench and stayed by Injunction by Order because the Queene was hindered of her fine Pascall plaintant Smith Miles defendant Anno 21. and 22. Eliz. Calveley plaintant Philips defendant Bonds put in suite in the K. Bench stayed by Injunction because the Queene was hindered of her fine Anno 21. and 22. Eliz. The Bill prayeth reliefe against the defendant as brother and Heire for that the plaintant paid to his brother deceased a fine of 34 l. for a lease who dyed before the same was made and therefore desireth either to have the Lease made by the Heire or his money againe thereupon it is ordered the defendant shall answer an Injunction Kreme Alias Mogge plaintant Meere defendant Anno 21. and 22. Eliz. The defendant got costs for want of a Bill and bespake of Robert Bayles a Clerk a Subpoena for those costs who made her a Subpoena ad sectam whereupon the plaintant got costs this being moved for discharge of these costs so gotten by default of the Clark It is ordered that the defendant shall be discharged and the plaintant also of the costs gotten by the defendant and neither of them should have processe against the other for the same but the defendant might take a Subpoena against the Clark that made the erronious processe for the 40 s. costs which she should have had against the plaintant Franckblanck plaintant Domina Metham defend An. 21. and 22. Eliz. Oath is made for the delivery of a Subpoena to the wife of the defendant at his house who hath not appeared therefore an Attachment Pilgrime plaintant Read defendant Anno 21. and 22. Eliz. The plaintant desireth to be relieved against an Obligation of 100 l. which had an intricate and insensible condition put in suit for that the plaintant being desired by the defendant to Seale a release desired onely time to be advised thereof which the defendant would not yeeld unto but hath put the bond in suit though no wayes damnified and now the plaintant is ready to Seale the release therefore an Injunction is granted Rowles plaintant and Rowles defendant An. 21. and 22. Eliz. The defendant took out a Commission to take his answer in the Country and thereby answered he could not directly answer without sight of evidences which are in Nottinghamshire far distant from Dorsetshire the defendant afterwards made a perfect answer and yet the plaintant took out Attachment and Attachment with Proclamation both which were discharged paying the ordinary Fees and 2 s. 6 d. to the Warden of the Fleet Trussell aliis plaintants Willoughby Miles defendant Anno 21. and 22. Eliz. Iohn Cotten the plaintant brother devised divers goods to his two Sons to be delivered at their full age and made the plaintant and defendant Executors 100 l. of the goods came to the plaintants hands 250 l. came to the defendants hands The plaintant desireth by his Bill that in respect of the trust and joynt charge which may survive that the plaintant and defendant may each be bound to the other to pay the children their Portions in their hands at their full age and if either plaintant or defendant dye before then the Executor shall pay that which was in the testators hands to the survivor which this Court thought in conscience to be meet because the defendant by answer confesseth the trust and receit of 250 l. Therefore a Subpoena is awarded against the defend to shew cause why it should not be decreed Cotton plaintant Causton defend Anno 21. and 22. Eliz. An Attachment and other processe of contempt issued out of this Court for not returning the defendants answer by Commission is discharged paying the ordinary Fees because the plaintant named one Commissioner who refused to joyne with one of the defendants Commissioners in taking the defendants answer and a new Commission is granted to indifferent Commissioners named by the defendant Marshall plaintant Harwood defendant An 21. and 22. Eliz. It is moved that where a prohibition was six moneths since granted for stay of a suite in the Ecclesiasticall Court at Herford upon surmise the lands are held in Capite whereas it appeared by Letters Patents thereof the lands holden of Eastgreenwich therefore consultation unlesse cause shewed and the party to pay double costs according to the Statute whereby the prohibition is granted Wolfe plaintant Merrick Clums defendant An. Forasmuch as the Major of Totnes hath certified under his common Seale that the defendant made oath before him that he was served with a Billet in Paper at the plaintants suit and upon his appearance no Bill therefore costs White plaintant Carpenter defendant An. 21. and 22. Eliz. Brent an Attorney at common Law for the defendant being present in Court is enjoyned in open Court upon paine of 200 l. not to proceed at common Law upon an action of debt upon an Obligation against the plaintant Bishop plaintant Iessop and Wats defendants Anno 21. and 22. Eliz. Forasmuch as the said Thoroughgood made oath that the matter in the Bill is for a Portion of Rent of 10 s. by year being of small value it is dismissed Knighton plaintant Allen and Thoroughgood defendant An. 21. and 22. Eliz. Iohn Vaux made oath that he saw a Subpoena served upon the defend therefore for not appearance an Attachment is granted Vaux plaint Glasiers defendant An. 21. and 22. Eliz. Iohn Leigh made oath for the serving of a Subpoena on a witnesse to testifie on the plaintants behalfe before certaine Commissioners who hath not so done Therefore an Attachment is awarded against the defendant Middleton plaintant Speright defendant An. 21. and 22. Eliz. The plaintant made oath that he heard the
oath he saw a Subpoena served upon the defendant Dinnis plaintant Morgan defendant An. 21. and 22 Eliz. The plaintants Bill is to be relieved for Copyhold lands the defendant doth demurre for that the lands are Ancient demeasne lands of her Majesties Mannor of Woodstock and there onely pleadable it is ordered a Subpoena shall be awarded to the defendant to make a better answer Wilkins plaintant Gregory defend An. 21. and 22. Eliz. Upon a Subpoena in perpetuall memory the defend appearing assented to joyne in Commission so as the Lord Bacons orders touching examination of witnesses in perpetuall memory might be observed but upon motion it was ordered that the Commission should be made generall as in like cases where the parties joyne for that it seemed to the Court the Lord Bacons orders were intended to be observed where the plaintant hath a Commission alone Dominus Dacres uxor plaintants Southwell defend Anno 21. and 22. Eliz. The plaintant desired to be relieved for a Lease made by the defendant to him for yeares which the defendant endevoureth to impeach because in the premises of the Lease there is no Leassee named but onely in the Habendum and the cause being referred to the two Lord chiefe Justices and the Lord chiefe Baron they certified their opinion in Law that the Lease was good in Law notwithstanding the Leassee was not named in the premises of the Lease but in the Habendum and therefore decreed accordingly that the plaintant should hold the said Lease Butler plaintant Dodton defendant An. 21. and 22. Eliz. The case is that the Lord Wray and Sapcotes father were made executors to the use of Children Sapcotes father having gotten a great part of the testators estate into his hands deviseth divers Legacies to strangers maketh the defend his Son Executor and dyeth and the defend by answer confesseth his Father had divers goods of the first testators in his hands but said that the defendant had not goods sufficient more then would satisfie the Legacies given by his Father therefore ordered that the defend shâ—ll first pay to the plaintant the goods which were the first testators and so much of his Estate as came to his Fathers hands Wray chiefe Justice plaintant Sapcote defendant Anno 21. and 22. Eliz. The plaintant setteth forth in her Bill that she joyned with her husband in sale of part of her inheritance and after some discord growing betweene them they seperate themselves and one hundred pound of the money received upon sale of the Lands was allotted to the plaintant for her maintenance and put into the hands of Nicholas Mine Esquire and Bonds then given for the payment thereof unto Henry Golding deceased to the use of the plaintant which bonds are come to the defendant as administrator to the said Henry Golding deceased who refuseth to deliver the same to the plaintant and hereupon she prayeth reliefe the defendant doth demurre in Law because the plaintant sueth without her husband and it is ordered the defendant shall answer directly Mary Sanky alias Walgrave plaintant Goulding defendant An. 21. and 22. Eliz. The plaintant served the two defendants with one Subpoena but exhibited two Bills the defendants appeared and answered the one but not being served with any other Subpoena to answer the second departed whereupon an Attachment is awarded against them and ordered the defendants answering the second Bill be discharged of the Attachment Ap Rice plaintant Granoe Grannoe defendants An. 21. and 22. Eliz. The defendant demurred generally without shewing any manner of cause and therefore ordered that a Subpoena be awarded against him to make a perfect answer Duffield plaintant Greaves aliis defendants Anno 21. and 22. Eliz. The plaintant as sole Executor to Robert Maunder exâ—ibited a Bill against the defendants for the same matter for which the plaintant and David Gome as Executors to the same Maunder exhibited another Bill and ordered that both Bills should be referred and if both for one cause the defendants shall be dismissed from one of the Bils with costs Iohn Maunder plaintant Iohn Wright aliis defendants An. 21. and 22. Eliz. Christopher Askame hath made oath that Iohn Bleverhasset being a deponent in perpetuall Memory is dead and Iohn Harrison another of the deponents is and hath been of long time sick and not able to travell without danger of his life and that their depositions are very needful for the plaintant to be given in evidence in a matter now depending at the common Law Senhawes plaintant Senhawes aliis defendants An. 22. Eliz. The defend made oath the plaintant caused him to be served with a Subpoena the Saturday before the end of the Terme returnable the Thursday following being but two dayes before the end of the Terme he the defendant dwelling in Devonshire sevenscore miles distant from London wherefore the defend could not conveniently appear and make answer by the returne of the said Subpoena and yet neverthelesse the plaintant had procured out an Attachment against the defendant therefore and for that the plaintants Bill is but for evidences it is ordered the defend be discharged of the Attachment putting in his answer Smith plaint Weare defendant An. 21. and 22 Eliz. Upon certificate of Henry Vgheard and Thomas West two Commissioners that Thomas Marshall one of the defendants witnesses being warned by precept from them refused to appear before them and that Roger Taylor another witnesse appeared but refused to be examined because he sollicites the plaintants cause it is therefore ordered that the defendant shall examine before one of the examinors of this court before the end of this Terme as well the said Roger Taylor upon any Interrogatory which shall not be touching the secrecie of the title or of any other matter which he knoweth as sollicitor onely as also the said Marshall or any other necessary witnesse whereof the defendant shall first set down their names so that the plaintant may likewise examine them if he will Kelway plaintant Kelway defendant An. 22. Eliz. It is informed that the plaintant exhibited his Bill without a Councellors hand or retaining an Attorney and the same is for matter formerly decreed therefore ordered if cause be not shewed to the contrary and if the Bill be to bring the matter in question that was decreed then it is ta be dismissed Bingham plaintant Warren defendant Anno 22. Eliz. The defendant demurred upon the Bill for incertainty which was certaine enough And also for that all the parties are dwelling within the Jurisdiction of the Marches of Wales which is no cause of demurrer for title of Lands therefore ordered if cause be not shewed a Subpoena is awarded against the defendant to answer Keyes plaintant Hill uxor Defendants Anno 22. Eliz. The plaintant exhibits his Bill touching a practise and mis-behaviour supposed by the plaintant to be used by the
till the Lord should recover it for the forfeiture by the common Law in the case of Mr. Litton Mich. 41. and 42. Eliz. Justice Clench and the Masters Tenure by Tenant Right as it is usuall towards the borders of Scotland shall not pay any uncertaine fine or incombe at the change of the Lord by alienation but by death which is the Act of God for otherwise the Lord might weary the Tenant by frequent alienations but it may be fine uncertaine upon the alienation of the Tenant as well upon death as discent for that it is the Act of the Tenant and in his power Sir Thomas Egerton Mich. 1599. Case Mannor de thwaites les Iustices accord the same holdeth in Copyholders for the custome must be reasonable A Copyholder in Fee surrendreth to the use of one and to his Heires upon condition of redemption writeth downe his debts and willeth part of his Copyhold to be sold for payment of his debts after his death one of the creditors payeth the money at the day to the morgage who neverthelesse inrolleth the surrender afterward this other creditor complaineth against him and the Heir in Chancery and had a decree that the Copyhold should be sold for the payment of debts and the remainder of it if any were should discend to the Heire 41. Eliz. For although the devise of the Copyhold be void yet to take it from the surrendree who held it onely for money to be paid and to pay him and the other creditors therewith hath good warrant in equity and the Heire hath no wrong for that it was gone from him by the surrender lawfully Termino Trinitatis 40. Eliz. the Lord Keeper Sir Thomas Egerton pronounced openly that he for avoyding perjuries and other abuses would not give help to a Lease claimed by paroll onely One Cutting brought an action upon Assumpsit for one hundred pound against the Executors of a Testator that promised the money in marriage with his daughter and recovered at the common Law which judgement was reversed in the Chequer Chamber but Cutting sought help in Chancery where it was proved that the Executors had Assets for Funeralls Debts and Legacies with a good overplus to satisfie the complainant and therefore after hearing and report thereof by Doctor Stanhope and Mr. Lambert it was decreed for the complainant but the Executor exhibited his Bill for remedy upon which Justice Owen thought he was not to be heard till he had satisfied the decree and then also but onely upon new matter not thus resting the Executor exhibits a second Bill which was referred to Master Lambert but he excused himselfe that he was not to judge in his own cause and recommended it to the censure of the Lord Keeper who ordered the Executor to performe the first decree Micha 40. Eliz. 1598. Trinity 41. Eliz. The Lord Egerton pronounced openly that he would give none aide in Chancery â—or the maintenance of any perpetuities nor of any Lease for hundredâ— or thousands of yeares made of lands holden in Capite because the latter be grounded upon fraud and the former be fights against God A. was bound in a Statute to B. And one C. lendeth 100 l. to A. with which A. bought lands and assured the same to C. for his hundred pound A faileth in payment B. extended that land C. was denyed help in Chancery although the land was bought with his mony for B. hath priority of right in Law without Covyn Crompton 63. a. A. delivereth twenty pound to B. to the use of C. a woman to be delivered her the day of her marriage before her marriage A countermandeth it and calleth home the money C. shall not be ayded in Chancery because there is no consideration why she should have it Dyer 49. A Term or devised his Terme and whole Lease to B. Provisoe that if B. dye living C. Then the Terme shall wholly remaine to C. B. selleth the Terme and dyeth living C. And by the opinion of the Justices C. shall have no remedy Dyer 74. The Vice Countesse Mountague claimed the Wardship of the body of the Heire of a Tenant of hers which was esloyned from her 〈◊〉 she suspecting some of the Heires friends exhibited her Bill in Chancery and it seemed they should not answer to charge themselves criminally especially in this Case where so great a punishment as abjuration may follow c. Cromer and Peniston married two Sisters joyntly possessed of a Lease for yeares the wife of Cromer dyed Peniston claimed the whole by Survivor Cromer exhibited a Bill suggesting that Peniston had in her life time severed the joyneture by some act â—ecretly The Lord Keeper over-ruled that the defendant should not answer Mich. 39. and 40. Eliz. As concerning confidence secretly knit to Estates it hath manifold considerations first if my Feoffee upon confidence doe infeoffe another bona fide that knoweth not of the confidence I am without remedy Fitz Harbert sub 19 But if the second Feoffee have notice of the use he shall be compelled here to performe it 5. E. 4.7 So if my Feoffee dye and the land discend to his Heire I have no remedy against him 8. E. 4.6 All the Justices and this confidence extendeth not onely to the taking of the profits but also that the Feoffees shall doe acts for the good of the Feoffor and if the Feoffor require him to make an estate to any other he oâ—ght to doe it but thereof he ought to have request in writing for he is not to doe it upon a bare message or upon desire by word onely 37. H. 6.35.36 And if the Feoffor will have him make an Estate to I. for life the remainder in Fee to B. though I will not take the Estate yet B. shall compell him to make Estate to him in the life of I. ibid. 36. Finch So if the Feoffee be disseised the Feoffor shall compell him to sue an Assize 2 E. 4.7 Neverthelesse those Feoffees might grant necessary Offices as Stewardships Bailyweeks c. though they may not grant Annuities to learned men to defend the Land 8. H. 7.12 They may also as it seemeth give Fees to Councell and shall have allowance thereof so far as they are from being maintainors If I give money to one to purchase Lands therewith to him and his Heirs and to permit me to take the profits thereof during my life and he with-holdeth the profits he shall be compelled by Subpoena Crompton Fol. 48. b. If Cesti que use be attainted of Felony the Lord shall not be ayded by Subpoena to have his escheat and if the Heir be barred by the corruption of his bloud then the Feoffee as it seemeth shall retaine the Land to his own use 5. E. 4.7 Feoffments of use Brooke 34. When the use is to the Feoffee and his Heirs without any other intent there Cesti que use
is ordered the plaintant shall between this and Friday next bring into this Court a certificate from the officers of the Queens house or otherwise whereby this Court may credibly understand that his attendance in Court is necessary and that he cannot conveniently be absent or if he cannot so doe then the matter is remitted to the determination of the Commissioners in the marches of Wales Phillip Mannering plaintant Henry Smallwood and Alice defendants Anno 1. Eliz. fol. 51. Mannering plaintant Smallwood and Alice defendants for want of a certificate that the plaintants attendance in Court is necessary the cause is dismissed into the marches of Wales Anno 1. Eliz. fol. 62. The plaintants husband was bound in a Statute of 160 l. to pay 160 l. and after by Indenture the defendant did grant unto the plaintants husband that if he failed in the payment of the said 160 l. the same should be levyed of certaine lands then the said plaintants husbands lands called Stirbeck and some other lands specially named lying in Hawthorne in the County of Lincolne the husband dyed and the defendant sued execution as well of other lands in the occupation of the plaintants late husband as of the said lands mentioned in the Indenture And Sir Nicholas Bacon Lord Keeper of the great Seale of England granted an injunction against the defendant immediately to remove from the possession of all the other lands except of those onely contained in the Indenture and that he should quietly suffer the plaintant to enjoy the same Margaret Pulvertost widdow plaintant and Gilbert Pulvertost defendant Anno 1. Eliz. fol. 51. An Injunction was granted to the plaintant upon the surmises of his Bill with this clause si ita sit that the plaintant be in possession by good conveyance in Law as he alleadgeth Nota it was then usuall to grant Injunctions upon surmises with a proviso si ita sit Fodringham Christopherus plaintant Richard Chomeley defendant Anno 1. Eliz. fol. 67. Forasmuch as the defendant is under age and by inspection not above the age of fifteen yeers therefore George Wyat is by this Court named and appointed Gardian to the defendant Hugh Langley plaintant and Philip Mark defendant Anno 1. Eliz. fol. 73. A Commission is awarded to the Sheriffe of Nottingham and â—erby to put the plaintant in possession of certain lands for which he formerly had an Injunction against the defendants which they have disobeyed William Boles plaintant Richard Walley and Alice defendants Anno 1. Eliz. fol. 84. The defendant is enjoyned in open court upon paine of 200 l. not to proceed any further in an action upon the case by him commenced in the Kings Bench against the plaintant nor that he procure the Jury to be sworne in the issue but onely to record their appearance untill to morrow at which time further Order shall be taken by the Court George Riche plaintant Edmond Foard defendant Anno 1. Eliz. fol. 88. Upon information the defendant disobeyed a writ of subpoena brought to be served against her and that they which should have served the said writ were beaten and wounded therefore an Attachment was granted against the defendant and a subpoena against Edmond Pirton returned immediate William Rove and Rose his wife plaintants Agnes west widdow defendant Anno 1. Eliz. fol. 90. and 97. Where the said Edward Pyke hath of long time been aâ—d yet is in execution upon a Statute at the suite of the late King Edward the 6. Forasmuch as upon the examination of the matter befoâ—e the Lord Keeper of the Great Seale of England in open Court it manifestly appeareth that there was not just cause why the said Pyke should remaine in execution as Gâ—lbert Gerrard and Rosewell Esquire the Queenes Majesties Attorney and Solliciter Generall being present did confesse and agree It is therefore now ordered that a Writ of supersedeas be directed to the Warden of the Fleet in whose custody the said Pyke now is commanding him by the same forthwith upon the receipt thereof to deliver out of prison the body of the said plaintant provided alwayes before his deliverance he be bound to her Majesty by Recognizance in 100 l. not onely to make his further appearance to answer her Highnesse any thing hereafter shall happen to be laid to his charge concerning the said execution but also to stand to and obey all such order and determination as the said Lord Keeper of the Great Seale and this court shall hereafter take in the matter in variance between him and the said Graunt Edward Pyke plaintant Robert Graunt defendant Anno 1. Eliz. fol. 166. Pakine the Husband onely appeared and put in a demurrer in both their names without oath of impotency or otherwise for non appearance of Ioan his wife whereupon an Attachment is awarded against the defendants Thomas Spicer and Katherine his wise plaintants Iohn Pakine and Ioanâ— his wife defendants An. 1. Eliz. fol. 170. Thomas Hodge plaintant William Smith defendant the defendant demurred by his Counsell not appearing in person therefore a Subpoena was awarded against him to make a direct answer An. 1. Eliz. fol. 230. Iohn Iackson Attorney for the defendant at the common Law is in open Court enjoyned that neither he nor any other by his means do further proceed in an action of tresp commenced against the plaint and depending at the coÌ„mon law nor call for Judgement untill further order shall be therein taken by the Lord Keeper of the great Seale of England and high Court of Chancery Iohn Sedgewick and Alice plaintants Will Redman defendant An. 1. Eliz. fol. 212. The plaintant served the defendant with a Subpoena to appear in Chancery whereof he made oath and because the defendant did not appear and Injunction was awarded against the defendant his Councellors and Attorneyes upon paine of 200 l. not to proceed in Judgement in an action of debt of 40 l. in the common Pleas against the defendant An. 1. Eliz. fol 213. Thomas Knot plaintant Thomas Iackson defendant David Eyre was served with a Subpoena ad testificandum for the plaintant in a cause depending in this Court and Thomas Eyre made oath that the said David Eyre was at the serving of the said Subpoena upon him and yet is so sick that he is not able to travell hither to testifie therefore a Commission is granted to such Commissioners as the plaintant will nominate to examine him Iohn Wade plaintanr Gwye and Alice defendant An. 1. Eliz. fol. 240. An Attachment was awarded against the defendant for his not appearance upon oath he was served with a Subpoena who now appeared gratis and would have excused himselfe that he had no notice of the Subpoena but he that served the Subpoena deposed he did hang the same upon the defendants doore and within halfe an houre after saw him abroad with a writ in his hand which he supposed to be
the cause to be dismissed Iohn Fyfield plaintant Iohn Vinore and Alice defendants An. 2. Eliz. fol. 122. The plaintant at the day appointed for hearing appeared not therefore the defendant is dismissed with costs Richard Fincham plaintant William Backwood defendant An. 2. Eliz. f. 125. The defendant notwithstanding an Injunction delivered unto him got a Judgement upon an action of debt in the common Pleas and decreed upon the hearing of the cause that the defendant shall within 14. dayes next after the decree resort to the Record in the common Pleas whereupon the said judgement is entered and there to confesse of record a full satisfaction of the said Judgement Nota the action of debt in the common Pleas was for not delivering to the defendant a Statute which by the depositions of witnesses appeared to be delivered and by the Clarke of the Staples cerficate the record was discharged Nicholas Colverwell plaintant Ralph Bongey defendant Anno 2. Eliz. fol. 126. It is decreed the plaintant his heires and assignes and his or their Farmors of the said Farme or Tenement called Stubles shall from henceforth hold and enjoy as appendant to the same Farme or Tenement called Stubles all the same Fould course or common of pasture for the full number of 300 sheep within the said fields of Wentforth alias Wentford Basill Fielding and Alice plaintants Thomas Wren defendant Anno 2. Eliz. fol. 137. and 155. The plaintant exhibited his Bill thereby shewing that there is question and controversie between two defendants for the reversion of the Mannor of Aldwell which he holdeth for yeares by Lease made thereof to him by one Anthony Marmyon and that he doth not know to which of them the rent and reversion is due and therefore desireth that upon payment of his rent into this court according to the Covenants and articles of his lease he may be discharged saved harmelesse from molestation suite and trouble for the same rents by the defendants or either of them wherefore it is ordered an Injunction be awarded against the defendants not to molest the plaintant for his said rent during the said contention so as the plaintant pay his rent into this Court Iohn Alnete plaintant Christopher Bettam and Edmond Marmyon defendants Anno 2. Eliz. fol. 141. Upon hearing of the matter three witnesses examined by Commission did in open court depose that the commissioners have set downe their depositions otherwise then they did depose therefore it is ordered those depositions shall be void and the same witnesses shall be examined again Iohn Peacock plaintant Edward Collens defendant Anno 2. Eliz. fol. 146. For that the Court was credibly informed the plaintant was in peaceable possession at the time of the Bill exhibited and three yeares before an Injunction is awarded Iohn Sapcote plaintant William Newport defendant Anno 2. Eliz. fol. 173. The suite was concerning the custome of Tenant right for Lands in Dent in the County of Yorke and for that both parties confessed that Justice Dallison and Serjeant Rastall Justices of Assizes in that County had made an award in the cause between the parties therefore it was decreed that both parties should performe it and an Injunction is granted to either party against the other for that purpose and where an Injunction was the last Terme granted against the defendant for stay of execution upon a Judgement in the common Pleas it is ordered the said Injunction shall stand in force and the defendant shall obey the same and the defendant shall answer the plaintants Bill William Burtet and Alice plaintants William Redman defendant An. 2. Eliz. fol. 174. It is ordereâ— the Injunction formerly granted the defendant for stay of his action in the Kings Bench be dissolved and the defendant to be at liberty to take Judgement upon his action of bebt of 500 l. Provided if the plaintant doe bring into court on Munday next 223 l. then execution for the rest is to be suspended untill this Court take other order Thomas Stanebridge plaintant Thomas Hales defendant An. 2. Eliz. fol. 176. The plaintant exhibited his bill in this Court and before the defendant answered had a Commission to examine his witnesses upon pretence the witnesses were old and in danger to dye Sir Radnus Bagnold Miles plaintant Greene defendant An. 2. Eliz. fol. 178. The defendant first exhibited her Bill in this Court for land conveyed to her in joynture and evidences of the same land and after did molest the same plaintant by distresses after answer and replication put into this Court therefore an Injunction is granted Richard Kidnere plaintant Agnes Harrison defendant An. 2. Eliz. fol. 173. The plaintant setteth forth that his Father and he are joyntly seized for life of the Lordship of Barrington in the County Palatine of Durham and that the defendant sues his Father for those lands before the Chancellor of Durham and for that it was informed that the plaintant dwelleth in Ratcliffe in the County of Middlesex and that the plaintants Father is an old diseased man and not able to follow his suite therefore a Certiorare is granted directed to the Chancellor of Durham to certifie into this Court the whole matter depending before him William Hilton and Alice plaintants Râ—â—â—rt Lawson and William Lawson defendants Anno 2. Eliz. fol. 200 l. The plaintant being sonne and heire to his Father who dyed intestate entred into the house whereof his Father dyed seized in Fee and possessed himselfe of certain small parcels of goods to the value of 5 s. of his Fathers goods who dyed intestate and the defendant having an Obligation of 400 l. made by the Father unto him for performing the covenants of an Indenture sued the son as Executor to his Father who dyed intestate and upon the testimony of some witnesses that the plaintant had sold or given away the said small parcels of goods a verdict passed for the defendant for the whole 400 l. which appeared by Certificate of the Justices of Assizes and thereupon an Injunction was granted to stay Judgement and all other actions to be commenced by the defendant against the plaintant upon the same Obligation untill the matter be heard or otherwise determined by the Court Edward North plaintant George Keâ—ewich defendant Anno 2. Eliz. fol. 237. It is ordered if the defendant shew not cause on Friday next then the Injunction before granted for the defendant against the plaintant to stay his Execution in the Kings Bench shall be dissolved or else the money for which the plaintant lyeth in Execution at the defendants suite shall remaine in his hands in part of payment of such money as is due unto him by the defendant and afterwards upon Fryday because the Lord Keeper did not sit in Court to hear such cause aâ— was offered further day was given and afterwards the plaintant was left at liberty to call for Execution upon the Judgement because
a Subpoena to the defendants wife being in the defendants house who hath not appeared therefore an Attachment is awarded Barlow plaintant Baker defendant Anno 18. and 19. Eliz. It is decreed by Assent that the defendant being Lord of the Mannor of Alderswasley shall have for a fine of a Coppyholder upon a Surrender one whole yeares value as the same is reasonable worth according to the usuall rates of Lands in that Countrey Blackwall and Alice Tenants of the Mannor of Alderswasley plaintants Low defendant An. 18. and 19. Eliz. The defendant confesseth by her answer the having of a Tablet or Pomander in Gold demanded by the plaintant and as to the 20 l. likewise demanded by the plaintant by him left with the said dâ—fendant as a token at such time as he was a suter for marriage to the defendant she confesseth the same was left with her against her will and she delivered the same over unto one Sydole her brother who was a dealer with her on the plaintants behalfe to the end hee should deliver the same over to the plaintant It is ordered the Tablet be forthwith delivered by the defendant to the plaintant which was done presently in Court and as to the 20 l. the plaintant shall call in the said Sidole by processe Young plaintant Burrell and Elizabeth uxor ejus defendants Anno 18 and 19. Eliz. The plaintant by his Bill sheweth that the Copy of the Court â—oll whereby the defendants pretend title was indirectly entered by the Stewards Clarke of the mannor the defendants demurre for that the plaintants shall not be received by surmise to object against or impeach the said Court Rols and alleadgeth further the Copy was found by the homage to be true which causes seem to this Court very insufficient It is therefore ordered if cause be not shewed before Wednesday for maintenance of the demurrer then a Subpoena is awarded against the defendants to make answer Holden and Holden plaintants Cleark and Alice defendants Anno 18. and 19. Eliz. The plaintaint hath exhibited his Bill of Revivor against two where the first Bill was against three and the personage in question is named by another name then in the former Bill therefore ordered if cause be not shewed by a day the defendant shall be discharged Heines plaintant William Day Deane of Windsor and Hatchines defendants An. 18. and 19. Eliz. William Lowgher appeared and answered but Rob. Lowgher claimed the priviledge of the university of Oxf. but because the said Doct. Lowgher was joyned with William Lowgher in the bill who was not subject to the same Jurisdiction therefore ordered processe to be awarded against him to shew other cause why he should not answer White plaintant Rob. Lowgher Doctor of Divinity and Will Lowgher defend An. 18. 19. Eliz. The defendant is adjudged to pay to the plaintants 40 s. costs for suing out processe of contempt against him being discharged by her Majesties generall pardon Iones and Parris plaintant Iones defend An. 18. and 19. Eliz. There is more presidents of the like case Walter Ieames made oath that he hanged a Subpoena on the door of one Stacy Barry widdow and that the defendant used to resort thither as he heard reported before that time who hath not appeared therefore an attachment was awarded Ieames plaintant Morgan defendant An. 18. and 19. Eliz. The plaintant exhibited his Bill against the defendant by practise of purpose to examine witnesses and did examine witnesses accordingly whereas the cause chiefely concerned one Thomas Staunton and Will Bayes and therefore ordered that the depositions should be suppressed and that the said Staunton and Bayles shall exhibite a Bill into this Court against all such as they thinke to be parties to the fraudulent abusing of this Court Walford plaintant Walford defendant An. 19. Eliz. It is informed that the parties dwell in the County Palatine of Lancaster and the matter of the Bill is for a supposed trespasse in entring upon the defendants lands and consuming his grasse and hay upon the same which this Court doth not use to hold Plea of therefore ordered if it be true then the cause is dismissed and the plaintant to take his remedy in the County Palatine of Lancaster Hameâ—heson plaintant Tounstall Covell Rigmaden and Baldwin defendants An. 19. Eliz. The plaintants suit is to have an award made by Master Tilbey and Mr. Chambers Arbitrators indifferently chosen performed and both parties were bound each to other for the performance of the award and one part of the award was that if any question did grow between the parties the arbitrators should end it It is ordered a Subpoena to shew cause Launcellot Barker plaintant Peter Barker defend An. 19. Eliz. The plaintant exhibiteth a Bill of complaint against Luce and Maulde two of the defendants and after Commission Maulde marrieth Iohn Bourne the other defendant and the plaintant then exhibited a Bill of Revivor against the defendants which needeth not as it seemeth to this Court therefore ordered if there be no cause of revivor that Bourne and his wife who are called up by processe to answer the same Bill are licenced to depart without answer to the Bill of revivor and the plaintant to pay him such costs as this Court shall award Iackson and Vxor plaintants Luce Smith Iohn Bourne and Maulde his wife defendants An. 19. Eliz. The plaintant by his Bill pretends title to certaine lands and Freehold Lands which lands the defend claims to hold by Copy of court Roll to him and his heires of one Thomas Stedolph Esq. Lord of the mannor of Milcklam in the county of Surrey whereof the said lands are parcell and prayed in aide of the said Stedolph neverthelesse the plaintant served the said Arnold with processe to rejoyne without calling the said Stidolph thereunto which this Court thinkes not meet therefore ordered the plaintant shall no further proceed against the defendant before he have called the said Stidolph in by processe Lucas plaintant Arnold defendant Anno 19. Eliz. The said Holgate maketh oath he left an injunction in the house of the defendant and that the defendant Elizabeth White Thomas Crimore and Robert Watkins have disobeyed the same therefore an Attachment is awarded against them Holgate and Vxor ejus planitants Grantham defendant An. 19. Eliz. The defendant this day made his personall appearance upon a Commission of Rebellion for saving his bond made to the Commissioners in that behalfe Brown plaintant Derby defendant Anno 19. Eliz. Commonly it is used to take the Bonds in the name of the Lord Chancellor Lord Keeper of the Great Seale of England the Master of the Rols or to any two of the Masters of the Chancery all which are good and allowable by the practise of the Court of Chancery Upon affidavit made by the plaintant that since publication granted he had divers witnesses setting down their
names come to his knowledge which formerly he had not knowledge of therefore ordered he may examine them before the examinor ad informanduÌ„ conscientiam Iudicis The plaintant comming to the defendant shewed him a Writ but did deliveâ— him neither note of the day of his appearance neither did the same appear unto him by the Schedâ—le labell or any other paper and the defendant appearing found no Bill It is ordered the defendant be allowed good costs and an Atâ—achment against the plaintant for such serving Brightman plaintant Powtrell defendant Anno 19. Eliz. The plaintant called the deâ—endant dwelling in the County Palatine of Châ—â—ter by processe to anâ—â—er a Bill for lands lyiâ—g in the said County Palatine contrary to a generall order lately certified into this Court by her Majesties appointment touching the said County Palatine according to the said generall order Willoughby plaintant Brearton defendant An. 19. Eliz. The plaintants Bill is that he leassed a house to the defendant and did covenant to build and repaire it before a day which being at hand and shewed that he had prepared Timber and workmen to performe the same but the defendant as well to have him breake his Covenant as to free himselfe from his Covenant to keep it in reparations did interrupt and threaten the workemen whereby they durst not proceed to repaire and so the houses are decayed and the plaintant hath no remedy to force the defendant to suffer him to repaire the defendant demurred upon the Bill alleadging the plaintant hath sufficient remedy by Law which kind of answer this Court alloweth not therefore a Subpoena is awarded against the defendant to answer Wood plaintant Tirrell defendant Anno 19. Eliz. Where it appeared by a Booke heretofore presented to the Queenes Highnesse under the hands of Sir Iames Dyer Knight Lord chiefe Justice of the commou Pleas Mr. Justice Weston late a Justice of the same Court Mr. Justice Harpar late another Justice of the same Court and Mr. Justice Carus late a Justice of her Majesties Bench and remaining by force of her Majesties Warrant of Record in the Court of Chancery touching the Jurisdiction of the County Palatine of Chester that before the raigne of King Henry the third all Pleas of Lands and Tenements and all other causes and contracts and matters residing and growing within the said County Palatine of Chester are pleadable and ought to be pleaded and heard and judicially determined within the said County Palatine of Chester and not elsewhere out of the said County Palatine and if any be heard pleaded or judicially determined out of the same County then the same is void and coram non Iudice except it be in case of error Foraign Plea or forraigne voucher and also that no inhabitant within the said County Palatine by the Lawes liberties and usages of the same be called or compelled by any Writ or processe to appear or answer any matter or cause out of the said County Palatine for any the causes aforesaid as by the said Book among other things more at large appeareth and where now of late the plaintant hath exhibited a Bill of complaint into this Honourable Court for and concerning certaine lands and tenements lying within the said County Palatine and hath taken processe against the said defendant in that behalfe who hath thereupon appeared and by his Councell made request to this Court that for the causes aforesaid the matter here exhibited against him might be from henceforth dismissed wherefore forasmuch as William Sayler hath made oath that the said lands doe lye within the said County Palatine and that the said defendant is inhabiting and dwelling within the said County therefore the said cause is from henceforth dismissed and remitted to the Chamberlaine of Chester and other her Majesties Ministers there according to the Tenour of the same Booke Wllloughby Miles plaintant Brearton defendant An. 19. Eliz. Iearvise Wheatly made oath for the serving of a Subpoena upon the defendant to testifie on the behalfe of the plaintant at the Guildhall in London who hath not thereupon appeared therefore an Attachment is awarded against him Batt plaintant Rookes defendant An. 19. Eliz. A Bill was exhibited by the plaintant against Roger Haule supervisor of the last will of Thomas Clifton and one Roger Haule was served with processe that was no supervisor of the said Cliftons will and alleadged that the said Roger Haule who was the supervisor was dead and ordered the defendant shall put in his allegation upon oath by way of Answer and then desire Judgement whether he shall be compelled to answer the said Bill or not and therein pay his costs for his wrongfull vexation which shall be thereupon allowed to him Harrison plaintant Haule defendant An. 19. Eliz. The plaintants are adjudged to pay to the defendants 20 s. costs comming upon processe of Subpoena to testifie on their behalfe and having no charges tendered unto them nor any interrogatories put in for them to be examined upon Pearce and uxor ejus plaintants Crawthorn and White defendants Anno 19. Eliz. Lawrence Hide gentleman being called upon by processe by the plaintant to testifie informed this Court that he was ready to depose so that he might first have his costs to him allowed which this Court thought reasonable Belgraâ—e plaintant Edward Earle of Hertford and William Drury deâ—endants An. 19. Eliz. Thomas Hawtry gent was served with a Subpoena to testifie his knowledge touching the cause in variance and made oath that he hath been and yet is a Sollicitor in this suite hath received severall Fees of the defend which being informed to the Master of the Rols it is ordered that the said Thomas Hawâ—ry shall not be compelled to be deposed touching the same and that he shall be in no danger of any contempt touching the not executing of the said processe Berd plaintant Lovelace defendant Anno 19. Eliz. The plaintant exhibited his Bill as well in his own as in his wives name concerning a promise made by the defendants to the plaintant and his wife to make them a Lease of the Mannor of Appescourt during their lives the defendants demurre for that the plaintant ought to have a Bill of Revivor against them for that his wife is dead since the Bill exhibited which cause of demurrer this Court alloweth not for that the promise was made during the Coverture and the plaintant claimeth not the same in right of his wife therefore the defendants are ordered to answer directly to the Bill Thorne plaintant Brend Wilkinson and Alice defendants Anno 19. Eliz. Austen plaintant Vesey defendant the defendant is served with a Subpoena to testifie and for that it appeared by Affidavit that he was Sollicitor in the same cause to one of the parties he was discharged and not admitted to be examined An. 19. and 20. Eliz. Hartford plaintant Lee and Alice defendants the
of his body begotten with such remainder over as in the last Will and Testament of the plaintants Father is expressed at the costs of the plaintant Young plaintant Leigh defendant Anno 20. Eliz. Bittenson one of the defendants demurred for that he was a Clerke of the Exchequer and ought to be priviledged there and the said Mary demurred without shewing any cause forasmuch as it was openly affirmed by the common voyce of the officers of the same that the said Bittenson may be impleaded in this Court notwithstanding any priviledge in the Exchequer and for that likewise if there were any such cause of priviledge yet he could not have the same in this suite by reason another party who ought not to have any such priviledge is joyned with him therefore a Subpoena is awarded against the defendants to answer East and Scudamore plaintant Bittenson and Mary Valence defendants An. 20. Eliz. It is ordered that in a Bill of perjury put in against the defendant he having put in his answer should not depart untill he be examined upon interrogatories according to the generall order and course in that behalfe accustomed for it was affirmed by the Officers of this Court that by the order and custome of this Court he ought to be examined upon interrogatories Philips plaintant Benson defendant Anno 20. Eliz. The defendant made oath the plaintant came to him on Easter day last in Barrington Church and commanded him in the Queenes name to appeare in Chancery the 17 day after which said defendant demanded the processe and the plaintant answered him he was to serve another and therefore would not leave him any note for his appearance and yet upon his appeance no Bill found in Court therefore the plaintant is adjudged to pay him 20 s. costs Syers plaintant Cotts defendant Anno 20. Eliz. Robert Hodgeson made oath that he left a Subpoena to make a better answer upon the doore of the lodging of the said defendant being at the signe of the Maidenhead without Temple bar whereas both by the report of divers of the neighbours thereabouts as by the recourse of her servants to and fro at the same time by all presumptions she the said defendant was then in the said house and yet she hath not made a better answer therefore an attachment is awarded against the defendant Croker plaintant Hampden defendant An. 20. Eliz. The said defendant hath this present Terme appeared upon a Subpoena at the plaintants suit 15 Pascha and no Bill in Court and for that the defendant hath lost the said Subpoena he cannot demand his charges for want of the said Bill it is ordered no processe of contempt issue out of this court against the defendant upon the said Subpoena Blanch Parvy plaintant Morgan defendant Anno 20. Eliz. The defendant made oath that one of the plaintants servants shewed him a Subpoena tres Pasch. return but would not deliver him the Writ or Labell and now upon the defendants appearance there is no Bill against him in court therefore costs Gray plaintant Gurney defend An. 20. Eliz. The defend by his answer disclaimed of the Clarkship of the Peace in question and confessed thereby that he delivered all the Records and Titlelings of Sessions which he had to Master Treutham Custos Rotulor in the County of Stafford and yet the plaintant hath replyed to the same to examine the manner of assault and other matters touching the death of one Ashbrook and goeth about to examine witnesses thereupon it is ordered that if cause be not shewed to the contrary that no witnesses shall be examined touching the manner of assault or death of Ashbrook or circumstances thereof Archbald plaintant Borrold defendant An. 20. Eliz. The defendant in a scir. fac upon a recognizance to pay 100 l. at Martine in the County of Surrey pleaded payment at Bristow where the Justice of Assize without speciall Commission commeth not to the intent onely to delay the party therefore it is ordered the defendant shall by Friday next either be sworne to his said Plea or else put in such a sufficient issuable Plea as he will stand unto at his perill Lovell plaintant Hopkins defendant An. 20. Eliz. The defendant demurred upon a Bill of Revivor exhibited by the plaintiffes against her for that she was a woman Covert during the time the first suit depended but ordered to answer for that she was party to the suit with the said Twynnehoâ— her husband Ruthel uxor ejus plaintants Dom. Elizabeth Litton late wife to Edward Twinnehoe defendant Anno 20. Eliz. The plaintant and her husband exhibited their Bill against the defendant the husband dyeth the wife now plaintant exhibiteth a Bill of Revivor and goodw Alice Parrot widdow plaintant Randall and Cowarden defendants An. 20. Eliz. It is ordered that from henceforth no entry be made by any the Attorneyes into the Registers Book of this Court of any appearance of or upon any Attachment or Commission of rebellion but that the party so appearing shall first enter into sufficient Bond by Obligation to this Court to be taken by the Register of this Court with condition to attend from day to day and not to depart before he be specially licensed by this Court Pascha 20. Eliz. The defendant refuseth to answer the receit of rent and demurred for that the plaintant may have remedy by Law for the same therefore ordered a Subpoena be awarded to make direct answer Dixe Cantrell plaintants Lintoft defendant Anno 20. Eliz. Whereas information was made to this court on the behalfe of George Stidenham Esq. now Sheriffe of the County of Somersetshire That whereas a Capias upon a Recognâ—zance of 133 l. 6 s. 8 d. issued out of this Court in Hilary Terme last to the Sheriffe against the said defendant the said Sheriffe had a Capias also for a debt due to her Majesty to him directed out of the Court of Exchequer both which Capiasses the Sheriffe returned into the said severall Courts the last Terme a cepi corpus languidâ—â— in prisona whereupon a duces tecum issued out of the said Court of Exchequer to the said Sheriffe for bringing in of the body of the defendant into the said Court of Exchequer whereupon the said Sheriffe hath brought up the said defendant and made request this present day to this court that some order might be taken by this court that the defendant may remaine in execution for the debt of the said plaintant after he hath answered his said debt to her Majesty so that the said Sheriffe may not hereafter be charged by the returne made by the Capias upon the said Recognizance in this court it is therefore ordered by the advice of the right honourable the Lord Treasurer and the Lord chiefe Justice of England being present in court that a Habeas corpus be awarded to the Warden of the Fleet to bring
defendant confesse he was served with a Subpoena and hath not appeared therefore an Attachment is granted Stow plaintant and Maddock defendant An. 21. and 22. Eliz. The defend and one Thomas Butcher whose Executors the said Ioane Alexander have purchased certaine lands joyntly the defend promised the said Thomas upon his deaâ—h bed hee would take no advantage of the survivorship but that the said Thomas might by his will dispose them Thomas by his will devised his part of the lands towards payment of his debâ—s therefore decreed by the assent of the defen. that the defeÌ„ should make estate accordingly Spring uxor Alexander Buthcer plaintants Vpton defend An. 21. and 22. Eliz. Robert Medigate Esq. was served with Subpoena to testifie and hath not answered to certaine interrogatories administred unto him on the plaintants behalf at the time of the executing of the said Commission excusing himselfe that he could not to some for want of certaine court Rols and to some other interogatories he referred himselfe to former depositions but doth not shew where they remaine nor when they were taken it is therefore ordered that the considerations of the depositions of the said Medigate be referred to Mr. Doctor Carew one of the Masters of this Court and if he certifie that he hath not sufficiently answered then order shall be taken that he shall directly answer the same Fish plaintant Mountford aliis defendants An. 21. and 22. Eliz. It is ordered that upon Affidavit made that the defendants dwell within the County Palatine of Chester and the cause of the Bill is to be relieved of certaine debts there the cause is therefore dismissed into the said Countrey Heyward plaintant Sherington defend An. 21. and 22. Eliz. The effect of the suit is for a Hawke and certaine evidences supposed to be come to the defendants hands and because it seemeth to the Court the matter of evidences was onely inserted to give colour to the court to hold Plea and the matter of the Hawke is no meet matter for this Court therefore the matter is dismissed Glasiers plaintant Massie defendant An. 21. and 22. Eliz. The Bill is dismissed because that Mr. Massies name was put to the same as of Councell without his privity Gristing plaintant Hore and Hore defendants An. 21. and 22. Eliz. The plaintant is adjudged to pay to the defeâ—d 50 s. costs for prosecuting processe of contempt against him and no contempt proved Wrayford plaintant Weight and Hingeston defendants An. 21. and 22. Eliz. The Bill setteth forth that Gibone one of the defendants in consideration of 286 l. did bargaine and sell unto the plaintaint certaine lands in the Bill mentioned and made unto him a deed of Feoffement and a Letter of Atturney to make livery and seizin and before livery made a Lease to Cateline who knew of the bargaine and he Leassed to Brown who knew also of the bargaine and this appearing to this Couâ—t to be true an Injunction is granted to the plaintant untill the cause should be heard and determined Ireby plaintant Gibone Cateline and Browne defendants An. 21. and 22. Eliz. A speciall Certiorare to remove a cause out of London the plaintant proveth the surmises of his Bill the defend beginneth suit in the Kings Bench for the same cause therefore stayed by Injunction Cliffe plaintant Turnor defendant An. 21. and 22. Eliz. The plaintants suite is to be relieved for a common and a Subpoena is awarded against the defend to shew canse why an Injunction should not be granted to stay the suite at the common Law Chock plaintant Chea and Wast defendants An. 21. and 22. Eliz. The matter is dismissed because the suit is for 6. l. onely Marber plaintant Kempester defendant An. 21. and 22. Eliz. The said Edmund Barker defendant maketh oath that he received a Billet of Paper of Iohn Barker his brother who affirmeth likewise upon his oath the same Billet was delivered to him by the plaintant and because upon the defendants appearance no Bill is in Court therefore 26 s. 8 d. is adjudged against the plaintant Cook plaintant Barker defend An. 21. and 22. Eliz. The Mayor of Totnes certified under his common Seale that the defendant made oath before him that he was impotent and not able to travell therefore a Commission is awarded to take the defendants answer in the Countrey Wotten plaintant Lewescomb defendant An. 21. and 22. Eliz. Dodderridge plaintant Lasty defendant upon oath made before the Mayor of Exeter of the defendants impotency and unfitnesse to travell a Commission is granted to take his answer in the Countrey An. 21. and 22. Eliz. Thomas Fursden made oath the defendant is above 70 yeares of age therefore a Commission is awarded to take his answer in the Countrey Vivean plaintant Napper alias Sande defendant Anno 21. and 22. Eliz. George Elliot made oath that all the parties are inhabitants and dwelling within the Marches of Wales and that the matter contained in the bill of complaint is for no Title of land therefore the cause is dismissed to the determination of the said Commissioners Morgan plaintant Bithell and Evon defendants An. 21. and 22. Eliz. Philips alias Phelps Long and Spincke plaintants Powell and Singleton defendants upon oath made that all the parties dwell within the jurisdiction of the Marches of Wales the cause is dismissed to be tryed there An. 21. and 22. Eliz. Forasmuch as the Bayliffes of Mountgomery have certified under their common Seale that the plaintant made oath before them for the serving of a Subpoena on the defendant who hath not appeared therefore an Attachment is awarded against the defendant Griffeth plaint Ap Edward Ap Iohn defendants An. 21. and 22. Eliz. Forasmuch as the Major of Exeter hath certified under his common Seale that the plaintant hath made oath before him for the serving of a Subpoena on the defendants who have not appeared therefore an Attachment is awarded against them Preston plaintant Smith uxor defendants An. 21. and 22. Eliz. Ap Richard maketh oath the Lands complained of is under 40 s by the yeare therefore dismissed Morgan plaintant Ap Richard and Lewis defendants An. 21. and 22. Eliz. An action upon the case commenced in the Kings Bench to the defendants dammage 100 Markes is stayed by Injunction for that her Majesty is hindred of her fine which should have been paid upon the originall Brockhurst plaintant Cotton defend An. 21. and 22. Eliz. An Action upon the case commenced in the Kings Bench to the dammage of the defendant 5 l. is stayed by Injunction for that her Majesties fine was not paid Ward plaintant Cobone defendant An. 21. and 22. Eliz. Attachment is granted for not appearing upon a Certificate by the Major of Totnes under his common Seale that Iohn King made
defendant against him in bringing him up by Subpoena at the suite of one Anthony Hinck whereas the plaintant never knew any such maâ— and for divers other misdemeanors used by the defendant in this Court towards the plaintant the defendant demurred for that both parties dwell within the jurisdiction of the Marches of Wales where hee supposes the plaintant is to seek his remedy which kind of demurrer this court alloweth not for that misdemeanors committed in this court are most meet to be here examined Griffeth plaintant Penrine defendant Anno 22. Eliz. The plaintant sheweth by his Bill that his house and the defendants are joyning together and supported by one main wall standing partly upon the Freehold of either of the said parties and the plaintant having also an entry Garret and other necessary roomes standing upon the Kitchin of the defendant he the defend went about to pull down the said Wall and thereby to overthrow the said Garret the defendant made title to some of the upper rooms and hath pulled down part of the Wall an Injunction is awarded to stay the defendant to pull down any more of the Wall or any other part of the said house whereby the said upper Roomes may be overthrown or impaired untill the matter be heard Bush plaintant Field defendant An. 22. Eliz. A Commission to examine witnesses on both parts upon 14. dayes warning to be given to the defendant Lucy one of the defendants made oath that neithen he nor Varney had any warning but if any warning was given it was given to Smith the other defendant who is little interessed in the cause but made a party as the defendants councell supposeth to take away his testimony from the other defendants Therefore ordered a Commission be awarded whereof the said Lucy shall have the carriage directed to the former Commissioners and 14. dayes warning shall be given to the plaintant and he to examine if he will Hollingworth plaintant Lucy Varney and Smith defendants Anno 22. Eliz. Humphrey Loyde made oath that he saw one Lewis leave a Subpoena in the Hall of the defendant and that the defendant was at home the same time who hath not appeared therefore an Attachment is awarded against the defendâ—nt Anno 22. Eliz. A Commission to examine witnesses issued but the plaintant at the place and day appointed brought not his Commissioners nor the Commission whereby the defendants Commissioners could not fit to examine but the plaintant procured certaine witnesses to be examined before one of the Town Clarkes of Yorke touching the matter in variance but ordered no witnesses so taken shall be received into this Court nor the plaintant take any benefit thereby and a new Commission is awarded Hareforth and Lowther plaintants Gates defendant Anno 22. Eliz. Iohn Davis made oath that his boy served a Subpoena upon the defendant for the which the said boy was apprehended and imprisoned in the Marches of Wales therefore an Attachment is awarded against the defendant Dastoines plaintant Apprice defendant Anno 22. Eliz. The defendant made oath that both the said parties dwell in the Jurisdiction of the Marches of Wales and that the matter of the plaintants Bill is but for a lease for yeares and no title of Freehold therefore dismissed Moore plaintant Mashall defendant Anno 22. Eliz. Iohn Lord Zouch deceased late Father to the plaintant did give the Mannor of Winford Eagle with th' appertenances in the County of Dorset intailed to the Father of the defendant reserving 40 l. a yeare rent to him and his Heires and after about three yeares last past granted 25 l. parcell of the said rent to the plaintants for their lives and the defendants Father did atturne and pay the rent to the plaintants untill about two or three yeares before his death which was about six years since sithence which time the defendant being issue in taile and seized refused to pay the said rent but ordered by this court to pay it if he shew not good cause to the contrary Zouch uxor plaintants Siddenâ—am defendant Anno 22. Eliz. The plaintant seeketh reliefe by way of contribution for that one of the defendants hath a rent charge out of this the plaintants lands and out of one other of the defendants lands and yet seeketh to lay the whole burthen of the rent charge upon his the plaintants lands and because the defend would not answer therefore an Injunction is granted for staying of the suits of the rent Dolman plaintant Vavasor aliis defendants Anno 22. Eliz. It appeareth by oath that the defendant is both senselesse and dumbe and therefore cannot instruct his Counsell to draw his answer and therefore ordered that no Attachment or other processe of contempt be awarded against the defendant for not answering without speciall order of this Court Altham plaintant Smith defendant An. 22. Eliz. The plaintant bought of the defendant the reversion of a Copyhold which he could not enjoy confessed by the defendants answer thereupon a Subpoena is awarded against the defendant to shew cause why he should not repay the money received upon the bargaine Picketon plaintant Littecote aliis defendants An. 22. Eliz. The defendants were not served with processe and yet the plaintant brought up divers witnesses to be examined but ordered they should not be examined untill the defendants have answered Episcopus Sallesbury plaintant Hinde and Hinde defendants Anno 22. Eliz. The plaintant was drawne to drinke and filled with drink spoke some words against the defendant for which he brought an action upon the case at the common Law whereupon the plaintant exhibited his Bill of complaint and got an Injunction pro non solutione Finis It is ordered that the defend paying the Queenes fine shall have liberty to proceed and the Bill to be dismissed Qui peccat ebrius luat sobrius Kendrick plaintant Hopkins defendant Anno 22. Eliz. Forasmuch as the Major of Barnestable hath certified that Iohn Barker made oath before him that he did shew and offer to deliver to the defendant a Subpoena which he would not accept and hath not appeared therefore an attachment Peris plaintant Thomas defendant Anno 22. Eliz. The plaintants made motion to have publication of witnesses taken 1. and 2. Philip and Mary betweene one Thomas Shrub then plaintant and now deceased whose daughters and Coheires the plaintants wives are and Henry Barnard then defendant now likewise deceased touching lands in the occupation of the defendant and ordered the plaintants shall exhibite a Bill for publication against the defendants and call them by the Subpoena to answer and then order shall be taken Clarke uxor Papwell uxor Stockes plaintants Eve Mellers and Wodham defendants Anno 22. Eliz. The defendant was served with a Subpoena at the suit of Hanmer and for want of a Bill got costs and the plaintant upon Affidavit that the
defendant was served with a Subpoena at his suit got an attachment against the defendant whereupon he was apprehended and returned languidus It is ordered that the attachment be discharged by supersedeas the defendant paying 20 s. 6 d. to the Warden of the Fleet and the ordinary charges to the plaintant Brearton plaintant Ap Roberts defendant Anno 22. Eliz. It is informed that Coleston one of the defendants examined his own wife as a witnesse It is thereofore ordered the plaintant may take a Subpoena against her on his behalfe and if Colston will not suffer her to be examined on the plaintants party then her examination on the said Colstons party is suppressed Bent plaintant Allot and Colston defendants Anno 22. Eliz. Upon the hearing of the cause it appeared that the suit was to be releived of a promise made by the defendant to the plaintant to surrender a lease upon payment of 100 Markes by the plaintant unto him and for that the matter is meet for the common Law therefore dismissed Grevill plaintant Bowker defendant Anno 22. Eliz. The Court was informed by one Palmer that the three defendants are his servants and were served with Subpoena to be examined before the Town Clark of London who refused to be there examined because the matter is not depending in London but in her Majesties Bench and yet Attachment is gotten against them which kind of examination of witnesses this Court taketh to be unorderly and therefore ordered the Attachment be discharged Price plaintant Tench Holland and Packhouse defendants An. 22. Eliz. The Earle of Huntingdon Presedent of the North signified by his Letters to the Lord Chancellor that the lands for which the Bill is exhibited were ordered for the defendant by the Counsell of the North parts where the parties dwell and land lyeth and the now plaintant upon serving his Subpoena was ordered by the councell there to surcease his suit in this Court and stand to the order of the said counsell and yet the plaintant hath procured an Attachment against the defendant therefore ordered the Attachment be discharged and the matter dismissed Harrison plaintant Harrison defendant An. 22. Eliz. The defendant demurred because he is the Lord Treasurers man and therefore ought to be priviledged in her Majesties court of Exchequer which cause of demurrer the Court allowed not for that the defend can have no priviledge unlesse it were in such a case as the plaint might have remedy in the Court of Exchequer Lewin plaintant Fawdesley defendant An. 22. Eliz. The defendant made oath the plaintant shewed him a Subpoena holding it in his own hand and said it was against him but would not let him have it or see it so that he might read it neither would he deliver him any note of his appearance nor tell him the same but took witnesse that he had served the Subpoena and about an hour after came again to the defendant saying you were desirous to see the Subpoena here it is and thereupon shewed the labell to the defendant but in such sort as he could not see the returne whereupon the defendant appearing found no Bill therefore Attachment against the plaintant for misdemeanor Mead plaintant Crosse defend An. 22. Eliz. The plaint is Grandfather on the Mothers side to whom the Lands cannot come by the death of the infant exhibiteth a Bill against the Grandfather on the part of the fathers side to have the education and bringing up of one Richard Edge an infant who is seized of an Estate Taile of Lands the remainder to the defendant and to have the disposing of the profits of the Lands But ordered with the defendant for that it appeared there were divers remainders between the defendants and the infants estate Sweetman plaintant Edge defendant An 20. Eliz. Francis plaintant Sacheverill defendant The defendant is adjudged to pay to Iohn Hide 20 s. costs he appearing upon a Subpoena to testifie on his behalfe An. 22. Eliz. The plaintant purchased Lands of the defend An. 2. Eliz And had a Recognizance then acknowledged unto him for performing Covenants of the bargaine and sale and put one in trust to get both the indenture and â—ecognizance inrolled and paid him for the same and now being evicted out of the possession of the lands came to take out a scir. fac upon the Recognizance but finds it not inrolled and therefore desireth the same might now be inrolled It is ordered that a Subpoena be awarded against the defendant to shew cause why it should not and M. Solliciter who is present at the motion is to give notice to some of his Clients who have purchased as he alleadged parcell of the lands to shew cause why it shall not be inrolled Siddenham plaintant Harrison defendant An. 22. Eli. The defendants informe that the Bill is exhibited for certaine Lands parcell of the Dutchy of Lancaster and therefore ordered that for so much it shall be dismissed Price plaintant Lloyd Owen and Read defendants Anno 22. Eliz. The matter upon hearing appeared to be for a promise wherewith the defendant chargeth the plaintant and 12 d. in money accepted upon the said promise whereupon some trials or non suits have passed it is orded that for the ending of the said matter of promise that the matter be referred to the Common Law to be tryed Sutton plaintant Erington defendant An. 22. Eliz. The defendant informed he was called upon by Subpoena dated the 8. of February and by answer saith the said Iane Piers was married the 8. of February and so at that time purchasing the Writ a woman Covert therefore the defendant is dismissed with 13 s. 4 d. costs Iane Peirs plaintant Iohn Cawse defendant Anno 22. Eliz. The defendant was in possession at the time of the Bill exhibited the plaintant entered upon him the defendant desired that either he might have an Injunction for his possession or else that the cause might be dismissed which the Court thought reasonable it is ordered the plaintant shall shew cause why it should not be granted Hill plaintant Portman defendant Anno 22. Eliz. The plaintant Thomas Hilliar exhibited his Bill against the said William Kendall that the said Thomas Hilliar was seized in Fee of two Messuages 70. Acres of Pasture Furzes and Heath in Lanlivery parcell of the Queenes Majesties Dutchy of Cornewall and thereupon a prohibition against the said Will Kendall libelling in the Spirituall Court for Tithes as Farmer to the said Batten Vicar there pretending that right of Tythes for lands holden of her Majesty as of her Dutchy of Cornewall ought to be determined in this Court and also that the said Iohn Hilliar had exhibited the like Bill and procured a prohibition out of this Court against the said Batten It is ordered a Subpoena be awarded against the plaintant to shew cause why a consultation should not be granted Hilliar and Hilliar
The matter complained of by the Bill is for 5 l. debt for Fish therefore dismissed Foord Foord plaintants Richards defendant Anno 21. Eliz. Symonds Brocebridge made oath that the said Elizabeth and Anne two of the defendants are above the age of 70. yeares a peece and that the said William was comming up to London in his company and they were both robbed and William his horse taken from him whereby hee could not come to make his appearance therefore a Commission is granted to take all the said defendants answers in the countrey Hill plaintant Elizabeth Worley widdow William Stapleton and Anne his wife defendants Anno 21. Eliz. Memorand that the 20. day of February last Sir Nicholas Bacon Knight Lord Keeper of the Great Seale of England dyed at York house and the Seale being the same day sent for by the Lord Treasurer remained with the Queenes Majesty till the 12. day of April last on which day the same was delivered to Sir Tho. Bromly Knight Lord Chancellor of England Paschae 21. Eliz. Whereby an order of the 10. of Feb. last a Subpoena was awarded against the defendant to shew cause wherefore an award therein mentioned should not be ratified Now Mr. Flowerdew of councell on the defendants behalf informeth that the said award was not made by any order of this court and therefore desired that the said defend may not be compelled to performe the same It is ordered that Councell on both sides shall attend the morrow sevennight and then order shalll be taken Barkley Miles plaintant Moore defendant Anno 21. Eliz. The plaintant exhibited his Bill as a priviledged man to Sir Francis Kempe Prothonotary of this Court for Lands lying in the County Palatine of Chester and for that it appeared by Letters Patents openle shewed in Court under her Majesties Great Seale of England that this Court by any priviledge should not hold plea of any Lands lying within the said County Palatine It is therefore ordered to be dismissed if the plaintant shew not good cause William Lomley plaintant Thomas Greene Thomas Marlow Robert Taylor and Iames Wagge defendâ—nts An. 21. Eliz. The plaintant was adjudged to pay the defen. 37 s. 6 d. costs for that he being served with Subpoena in Hillar Terme appeared and by his answer disclaimed and yet after the plaintant served him with a Subpoena to rejoyne but afterwards the same costâ— were discharged by motion for that the defendant had before the costs put in his rejoynder but upon a disclaimer no costs is to be allowed Read plaintant Hawstead alias Lane defendants Anno 21. Eliz. The defendant was taken upon a Commission of Rebellion at the plaintants suite required his costs to be allowed him the Court asking the opinion of the Clerkes it was agreed with one consent that he should have his costs allowed therefore ordered accordingly Morgan plaint Ap Iohn Gowge defendant Anno 21. Eliz. The defendant maketh oath that he was served with a Billet in paper at the plaintants suit which Billet he lost by misfortune and upon his appearance no Bill is in Court against him therefore costs is awarded Brown alias Garris alias Pawdy plaintant Stoyck defend Anno 21. Eliz. The plaintant exhibited his Bill to examine witnesses in perpetuall memory touching a lease of Lands which hee and those by whom hee claimeth hath enjoyed 40. yeares the defendant by answer claimeth the Lands as Coppy-hold of inheritance to Mr. Sowthwell who is owner of the inheritance and within age and therefore prayed that no witnesses might be examined till Mr. Southwell be of full age and yet because the witnesses being old and may dye in the interim therefore a Subpoena is awarded against the defend to shew cause why a Commission should not be granted Hearing plaintant Fisher defendant An. 21. Eliz. Iohn Budden maketh oath that the defendants confessed unto him they were served with a Subpoena at the plaintants suite and have not appeared therefore an Attachment is granted Perry Ar plaintant Gatter alias Sharde and Cole defendants An. 21. Eliz. Upon the hearing of the matter for the Mannor of Laughtor and the Advowson of the Church of Laughton in the County of Bucking it appeared that the defendants and they from whom they claimed have beene in possession 100 yeares with divers discents therefore the defendants are dismissed Kinston plaintant Pigot aliis defendants Anno 21. Eliz. The defendant in Hillar Terme made oath that he could not answer without sight of evidences in the Country and having day given him he now hath put in no answer but a demurrer contrary to the orders of this Court therefore an attachment is awarded against the defendant Farmer aliis plaintants Fox defendant Anno 21. Eliz. Iohn Harry made oath for the serving of a Subpoena on the defendants to rejoyn therefore Munday next is given to the defendants to rejoyne or else to lose the benefit thereof Ioanes aliis plaintants Whitney Miles aliis defendants An. 21. Eliz. Whereas a Commission issued out to examine witnesses on both parties which is returned executed upon oath made by Giles Brever that he served precepts from the Commissioners upon W. S. Tho. Lin T. C. and Io. Peers to be examined on the defendants behalf before the said Commissioners who appeared not it is therefore ordered that a new Commission be awarded to the former Commissioners at the defendants charge as well to examine the said four witnesses as any other Shepheard plaintant Shepheard aliis Defendants An. 21. Eliz. The Duke of Northumberland acknowledged a Recognizance of 1000 Markes to the Lord Crumwell and after granted certaine Lands to the defendant afterwards both the Duke and the Lord Cromwell were attainted of Treason whereby the Recognizance came to the Queen and in her name was put in suit by one Lane to whom her Majesty had granted the same recognizance who sought to extend the defendants said Lands alone whereas there are divers other Lands to a great valew in other mens hands lyable to the said Recognizance therefore it is ordered that no Liberate goe out upon the said extent untill the Court order the same The Queenes Majesty plaintant Colborne defendant Anno 21. Eliz. The plaintant sought to be relieved upon an Obligation of 300 l. which he entred into to make a joyneture unto his wife in consideration of 174 l. promised to him by the defendant in marriage which was never paid unto him therefore an Injunction is awarded if cause be not shewed Osborne plaintant Havers defend An. 21. Eli. The plaintant and defendant both joyned in Commission to examine witnesses and the plaintant having the carriage of the Commission did not execute the same but did examine witnesses here in Court therefore ordered the defend should have a new CoÌ„mission to the former Commissioners wherein the plaintant might also examine if he list and