Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	abate_v	act_n	action_n	24	3	6.6528	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A34042	An Appeal from the Supream Court of Judicature of Holland, Zealand and West-Friesland, to the king of Great Brittain, or, The Case briefly stated between George Carew Esquire, administrator of the goods and chattels of Sir William Courten, Knight deceased, with his will annexed, and the heirs of Sir Jacob Cats, late pensionaris of Holland and West-Friesland.		1674 (1674)	Wing C544; ESTC R34785	2,926	9

AN APPEAL from the Supream Court of Judicature of Holland Zealand and West-Friesland To the KING of GREAT BRITTAIN Or The Case briefly stated between George Carew Esquire Administrator of the Goods and Chattels of Sir William Courten Knight deceased with his Will annexed And The Heirs of Sir Jacob Cats late Pensionaris of Holland and West-Friesland Printed in the Year 1674. The Case between George Carew Esquire Administrator of Sir VVilliam Courten and The Heirs of Sir Jacob Cats late Pensionaris of Holland SIr Jacob Cats became bound in the City of London unto Sir William Courten of London Knight by a writing obligatory dated the 29 of July 1631. in the penalty of 3000. Pounds conditioned for the payment of 2080. Pounds on the 12. of February following according to the Custome of England The money was not paid but continued at interest during Sir William Courten's life who dyed in the Year 1636 indebted to severall Persons seventy thousand Pounds Sterling and upwards and leaves William Courten Esquire his Son and Heir his sole Executor William Courten the Executor having contracted many debts of his own became insolvent and absented himself in the Year 1643. from his Creditors and also from the further administration of his Fathers Estate but before he left the Kingdom Mr Jacob Pergens a free Denizon of England inhabiting at Amsterdam addressed himself to Mr. Courten for satisfaction of some money due to him from Sir William Courten and Mr. Courten himself as Pergens pretended William Courten the Executor by a Letter of Attorney and Assignment dated the 31. of October 1643 grants and transfers the said Bond of 3000. Pounds unto Mr. Pergens with power to sue Sir Jacob Cats for the said debt and dammages to his own use In the Year 1645. Jacob Pergens summons Sir Jacob Cats then Pensionaris of Holland into the Provinciall Court at the Hague and declares against him for the said moneys During the said controversie Sir Jacob Cats applyes himself to the Commissioners concerning Banckrupts in England who had a Commission grounded upon the Statutes in such cases made and provided to inquire after Mr. Courtens particular Estate for satisfaction of his own debts but being advised that the Commissioners had no legall Authority to intermedle with Sir William Courtens Estate which was lyable in another right for the payment of his own proper debts Sir Jacob Cats declined from any further Treaty with them Nevertheless the Commissioners by their writing Authentick prohibited Sir Jacob Cats to pay any money to Jacob Pergens upon the said Bond. Then Pergens soon after obtained a Decree out of the Provinciall Court to cite and admonish to Commissioners in England if they had any right or pretence to the said Bond or money due thereupon they should institute the same before the said Provinciall Court at a day certain or be condemned in perpetuall silence whereupon the Commissioners appeared by their Advocate Then Pergens by an insinuation prohibited Sir Jacob Cats from payment of any money to them or to any other or to make any agreement with them Yet notwithstanding de bene esse on the 18. of July 1653. Jacob Pergens procured an Assignment of the said Bond from the said Commissioners for 400. Pounds to the end they might let their Process cease whereby Pergens might proceed against Sir Jacob Cats which he did accordingly But pendente lite William Courten the Executor dyed intestate in Italy whereby the action abated against Sir Jacob Cats according to the known rule in Law Quod actio personalis moritur cum persona Afterwards upon the Kings most happy restauration Letters of Administration of the Goods and Chattels Rights Debts and Credits of Sir William Courten with his Will annexed were granted on the 14. of July 1660. to the said George Carew yet notwithstanding Jacob Pergens who had formerly by another fraudulent practise gotten into his hands 85000 gilders from the East-India Company upon pretended assignment from the said William Courten prevayled with the Provinciall Court on the 4. of November 1661. to give Sentence in the said cause against Sir Jacob Cats and condemned him to pay the said money due upon the said Bond unto Jacob Pergens and interest thereof at 8. per cent soon after Sir Jacob Cats dyed and his Heirs appealed from the said Sentence to the supream Court of Judicature at the Hague Then George Carew in his quality as Administrator intervened in the said cause before the Lords of the said supream Court in the month of May 1662 where having by his Request in writing to their Lordships made known his right and property to the said money concluded in his Demand that Pergens should be condemned to acquiess in the said cause and deliver up the Bond as having no right to the Money by the said Assignments from Mr. Courten or the Commissioners conformable to the Laws of England where the debt was contracted and the Bond made and also demanded that the Heirs of Sir Jacob Cats should be ordered to pay the Money due upon the said Bond to the said George Carew in his quality as Administrator of Sir William Courten the same being an unadministred effect of Sir William Courten's Estate Then the Advocates of both sides desired time to consult concerning the Laws of England in that point and to inform the Court therein accordingly The Case being drawn up and agreed by the Advocats of both parties severall of the Judges in England gave their opinions upon the same under their hands before a publique Notary which was transmitted to the supream Court of Judicature of Holland Wherein was affirmed that by the Law of England the Bond of Sir Jacob Cats could not be granted or assigned to Mr. Pergens either by the Executor or Commissioner That after the death of William Courten Executor in Auter droit the action against Sir Jacob Cats abated but when the Administration was granted to Carew the said action was properly to be received by him as having the only right in Law to the said debt the property being not changed by any Act of Mr. Courten or the Commissioners but remained as assets liable to the Testators debts according to the nature and priority in Law and the intervention of Carew in the said cause was a continuance of the said action Carew having the right of prosecution to receive the same allowing the said Pergens in equity his costs of suit Then Pergens made a dilatory impertinent exception that he was a Burger of Amsterdam although his dwelling-house was in the Hague and pretended he ought to be first impleaded before his Competent Judges there and not in the Hague before the supream Court of Judicature where the suit depended whereupon the Court rejected Mr. Carews suit and decreed that the Heer van Carnisse and the rest of the Heirs of Sir Jacob Cats should pay the said Money to Pergens with mitigation of the Interest and that Pergens should give them Caution to be saved harmless against Carew which was respectively done to the apparent wrong of Mr. Carew and severall of his Majesties good Subjects in England that claim under Mr. Carews administration the effects of Sir William Courten's Estate unadministred Wherefore they appeal to the King of Great Brittain for protection and means to recover their just rights being of most dangerous consequence against the Law of property to suffer Forreign Courts of Judicature to intrench upon the Laws of England or to wrong the Judicature thereof And the rather for that the Lords of the supream Court at the Hague were preadmonished by severall learned Advocates there as follows 1. That Mr. Carew being a Stranger was to be admitted at his first instance by the instructions of their own Court 2. That the Court were positively obliged to give judgement according to the Law of England where the Money was lent and the Bond was signed 3. That by the Laws of Nations all Courts of Justice were to give Sentences in Cases of Contracts according to the Law of the Country where such Contracts were made 4. That the supream Court was the proper place of Judicature in this Case of Intervention and that if they did not admit Mr. Carew prima instantia they would do him an apparent injustice and wrong both the Judicature of England and of the United Netherlands Yet the Pensionaris Iohn de Witt being a Kinsman to Mr. Pergens his Wife prevailed with some of the Lords of the supream Court to deny Mr. Carew that ordinary Justice which ought to be administred to all Strangers whereby he hath suffered to his dammage 5000. Pounds Sterling and upwards FINIS