Selected quad for the lemma: child_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
child_n sir_n thomas_n william_n 8,060 5 10.2909 5 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A59975 The Case in law and equity of Tristram Wodward, Esq. for the mannors of Tuddington, Harlington, and Tyngrith, and other lands in the county of Bedford / reported to the Commissioners of Obstructions by Mr. St. Nichlas the councell for the Common-wealth. St. Nichlas, Thomas. 1652 (1652) Wing S346; ESTC R37140 13,482 26

There are 2 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

thereof in Fee 16 of April then last past 12 Jacob. And I finde Thomas Wentworth Kinght Lord Wentworth her Cozen and next heir as by a Copy of the said Inquisition deposed by George Becke to be a true Copy of the Originall appeareth But I finde in a Suit depending in Chancery between the Petitioner his wife and others Plaintiffs and Thomas Earl of Cleveland and others defendants upon opening and long debate of the matter 26 Novemb. 5 Carol. in the presence of Councel learned on both sides the Lord Keeper being assisted with the Lord Chief Justice of the upper Bench and M. Justice Crook his Lordship and the said Lords the Judges were of opinion and did so declare that they held it not fit that the said Defendant should shew his Evidences or that he should make any further Answer to the said Bill and th●t they found no such Consideration expressed in the Plaintiffs Deeds as was fit for that Court to give any allowance thereof and therefore did order that the matter be cleerly and absolutely dismist out of the said Court as by a Copy of the said Order hereunto annexed deposed by John Willis to be a true Copy of the originall Record appeareth And in pursuance of the Order of Jan. 1. 1651. I finde it is deposed by Sir John Thorowgood Knight That about the yeare One thousand six hundred forty and two the Petitioner Tristram Wodward came to this Deponents house in St. Jones and shewed a Case formerly drawn up and signed by two or three eminent Lawyers which did intitle the said Wodward to the Lands of the Earl of Cleveland in Bedfordshire as descending to him by Title derived from the Lord Cheyne his Proposition to this Deponent was that this Deponent would compound with him the said Wodward for the Mannor of Harlington in the County aforesaid which was morgaged to the said Deponent by the said Earl and that he would use this Deponent well in it This Deponent was apt to imbrace the motion which might free the Mannor from all former incumbrances and give him a Title before the Earl and therefore he desired that he might have the said Wodwards Title in writing to advize with his Councell upon it which the said Wodward willingly delivered to this Deponent The Opinion of this Deponents Councell was That M. Wodward had not rightly stated the Case to his Councell because there was nothing more talked of in Westminster Hall then that supposed Title which had passed the Court of Wards and other Courts of Judicature And he did beleeve that if the Right had been on Wodwards side one Court or other would have relieved him and therefore disswaded this Deponent from trusting to his Title or to give him any thing for it M. Wodward coming to receive an Answer this Deponent told him that his Councell would not advize him to deal with him M. Wodward then told this Deponent of one M. Smith an able Gent. and a Lawyer of the Middle Temple who as he said did rightly understand his Title beleeved it to be good and intended to deal with him the said Smith having likewise an Ingagement upon the said Earls Estate and prayed this Deponent to speak with the said Smith This Deponent went to M. Smith being willing to secure his Debt and found him strongly possessed with an opinion that M. Wodwards Title was good and not being able to convince him this Deponent proposed that we should all three go to M. Hales of Lincolns Inne M. Wodward should shew him his Evidences and M. Smith and this Deponent should joyn in the Fee We did so M. Hales desired three or four dayes time to consider of the business after which time we repaired to M. Hales who said that if such a Deed which he had then in his hands which this Deponent taketh to be a Counterpart or a Copy of the Deed of Pooley and Glenham could be proved which to this Deponents best remembrance was witnessed with seven or eight witnesses some of them persons of quality then M. Wodwards Title to the said Lands was nothing worth then this Deponent asked M. Hales if the Witnesses were dead how it could be proved his Answer was that if it could be proved to be their hands it would be sufficient with which Answer M. Smith and this Deponent were so well satisfied that they moved no more in the businesse only M. Wodward came afterwards to this Deponent setting forth his wants and saying that a very small matter would content him and this Deponent verily beleeveth that much lesss then one hundreds pounds would at that time have bought his Title to the Mannor of Harlington which was morgaged to this Deponent by the said Earl And at another time meeting with the said M. Wodward he desired this Deponent that he would not disswade other men from dealing with him the said Wodward for his Title or words to that effect And Tristram Wodward Esq deposeth that Richard Ruffin the father of Eliz. Cheyne took an Administration after the death of Anne Ruffin his wife mother of Elizabeth Cheyne and Grandmother of this Deponent And that the said Richard Ruffin 2 Eliz. did by Fine purchase a Lease for 65 years of divers Lands called Swinford Lease in which Lease is mentioned to be demised one hundred Acres of Meadow and five hundred Acres of Pasture and one hundred Acres of Wood together also with the Ferry of Swinford as by a Copy of the said Aministration and Fine deposed by George Becke Gent. to be true Copies appeareth And this Deponent further saith That 4 Eliz. there was an Administration taken after the death of the said Richard Ruffin wherein there is also mentioned divers other Leases of Lands called Great twelve acres Cloddings the Free Lands Wersey Tiffins the Mills and Mill Mores Perts Close Gloverse Close Millers Close and Lintorne and about two thousand six hundred Sheep eighteen Oxen forty seven Kyne fifty five young Beasts sixty Horses of all kinds divers ounces of silver and gilt Plate and some ready Money besides Houshold goods of severall sorts and Corn and Hay in severall Reekes and Barnes and that in the foot of the Inventory there appeareth to be Eleven hundred twenty five Pound thirteen Shillings four Pence due to the Children of Anne Ruffin by her former husband William Seacoll alias Salkell as by the Inventory under the Seal of the Prerogative Court appeareth of which Children this Deponents mother was a survivor And this Deponent further saith that 14 Eliz. this Deponents Aunt Eliz. Cheyne married with Thomas Cheyne Esq found heir to the Lord Cheyne by three Inquisitions And that the father of Thomas Cheyne before the marriage of Elizabeth Cheyne did Covenant to assure to Eliz. Cheyne in recompence of her Lands the Mannor of Kynburie and impropriate Parsonage of Kynburie which this Deponent hath heard and doth verily beleeve to be of the value of seven or eight hundred Pound per annum and
Councell for the Commonwealth such Conveyances as he hath in his custody or can come by as were made by the Lady Jane Cheyne deceased in the 29 of Eliz. to Pooley and Glenham and from the said Pooley and Glenham to Thomas Earl of Cleveland or to any other for his use to be made use of in the defence of the Common-wealths Title and then to be safely redelivered to the said M. Penington Copia Examinatur Edw. Noell May 27. 1652. By the Commissioners for removing Obstructions in the Sale of Delinquents Lands and Estates VVHereas the Cause upon the Petition and Claim therein of Tristram Wodward Esquire out of the Estate of Thomas Earl of Cleveland one of the persons named in the Act intituled An Act for the Sale of severall Lands and Estates forfeited to the Commonwealth for Treason to the Mannors of Tuddington Harlington and Tyngrith in the County of Bedford came according to former Order to a hearing this day and the Certificate or Repert of Mr St Nichlas of Councell for the Commonwealth made in this Case being read and Councell for the Petitioner being heard what they had to offer in reference to the said Claim and the same being had in serious debate and consideration it was upon the Question resolved That the Claim of the said Tristram Wodward Esq to the said Mannors of Tuddington Harlington and Tyngrith be dismissed Copia examinatur Edward Noell That the Act of Parliament for Sale of Delinquents Lands doth appoint all Just Claimes both in Law or Equity to be heard determined and allowed The Reasons of learned Lawyers why the Claim of the said Tristram Wodward Esq is Just in Law and Equity I Am of Opinion That the Plaintiff M. Wodward ought to have a Decree for the Lands and profits since the death of the Lady Cheyne 12 Jacob. of those parcells of Lands whereof the Fines Sur concessit were levied 20 Eliz. and 27 Eliz. and whereof the Recovery was suffered 24 Eliz. for that the Ladies power was interrupted from making the Lease for 30 years of those parcells notwithstanding the Deeds to Pooley and Glemham supposed to be made by the Lady Cheyne 29 Eliz. were true Deeds but I suspect those Deeds to be false antidated Deeds made of purpose to bring the Reversion to the Earl of Cleveland the Lady Cheynes heir contrary to the intent of the Lord Cheyne in the Deed of 13 Eliz. wherefore I am also of opinion the Plaintiff ought to have a Decree for the Reversion of all the rest of the Lands after the expiration of the Lease for 30 years made by the Lady Cheyne 10 Jac. to Sir John Crofts to begin from her death 12 Jac. which ended the 16 of April 1644. I am also of opinion That the Lands and Goods of Eliz. Cheyne are good and valuable Considerations in equity for Thomas Cheyne her husband to Convey his own Lands to the Plaintiff who was sisters son of Elizabeth Cheyne by the said bargain and sale made 6 Jac. and that the Lands mentioned in the Deed of Bargain and Sale ought to be decreed for the Plaintiff in equity according to the Conveyances and Covenants of Thomas Cheyne I am also of opinion That the new Assurances made 11 Jac. by Thomas Cheyne to Sir Thomas Pelham Sir John Hungerford and others do in Law raise the uses to the Plaintiff and his Children being made for marriage between the Plaintiff and his wife the daughter of Sir Edmund Pelham and Kinswoman of Thomas Cheyne and of the Lord Cheyne and that the Conveyance of 11 Jac. and the Statute of Forty thousand Pounds are good in Law and equity EDWARD ATKINS July 18. 1645. I Am of opinion That for those parcels of Lands wherein the Ladies power was interrupted by the Fines of 20 and 27 Eliz. and by the Recovery of 24 Eliz. and for the profits thereof since the death of the Lady the Plaintiff ought to be releeved in equity albeit the Deeds to Pooley and Glemham should fall out to be true Deeds but those Deeds seem to be false and antidated after the Lady Cheynes Revocation of her Limitation 35 Eliz. and therefore I also conceive that the Plaintiff ought to be releeved for the Reversion of all the rest of the Lands after the expiration of the Lease for 30 years which is now ended and the great Estate in Lands and Goods of Eliz. Cheyne the Plaintiffs Aunt whereof she was defrauded were great and valuable Considerations for Thomas Cheyne to convey this Reversion after the 30 years to the Plaintiff being the sisters son of Eliz. Cheyne and I think that the bargain and sale to the Plaintiff 6 Jac. Regis and the new Assurances 11 Jac. Regis and the Statute of 40000 Pound ought to be decreed for the Plaintiff in equity according to the Covenants of Thomas Cheyne I hold that the Lady Cheyne by the Deed of 13 Eliz had only power to make one Limitation and no more and therefore that Limitation of the uses of the Recovery of 13 Eliz. in the bottom of the Deed of 35 Eliz. were void and idle if those Deeds to Pooley and Glemham were made 29 Eliz. and true Deeds which I conceive are repugnant to those Deeds 35 Eliz and also to the last Will of the Lady Cheyne which Declares that she never made any Limitation nor ever intended to make any without power of Revocation If those Deeds to Pooley and Glemham had been true Deeds it is not probable that Sir John Crofts the Lady Cheynes Commissioner would have omitted the proving of them at the finding of the Lord Cheynes Office in 35 Eliz. or have suffered the Lady Cheyne to have omitted the pleading of them in the Exchequer 36 Eliz. neither would the Earl have omitted the proving of them in his own Office 12 Jac. Regis after the death of the Lady Cheyne nor in the Court of Wards Councell-Table and Chancery where he hath been called to prove them It appears that the Earl in the Court of Wards pleaded the Plaintiffs bargain and sale and Considerations to barre Thomas Cheyne and therefore it will be a kind of contradiction for the Earl to plead in Chancery against the Plaintiff that now the Considerations are not valuable I am of opinion That the Clarks undue entring up in the dismission at large in the Court of Wards against Thomas Cheyne that the Court was satisfied of the Earls Title to be good and sufficient in Law without any such words or warrant in the Order for dismission and after pleading the same at the Councell-Table and in Chancery against the Plaintiff is unduly done and ought to be suppressed The Lord Cheyne taking the Fee-simple from the Lady Cheynes heirs given by the Deed of 6 Eliz. and setling it upon his own heirs by the Deed of 13 Eliz. after the expiration of the Lady Cheynes Estate doth cleerly shew that he meant his wife should leave the Reversion after 30 years to his heirs