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
Lessee maketh waste and because he in the Fee hath no remedy by the common Law and waste is a wrong prohibited he shall be holpen in Chancery Crompton 48.6 And not every barre or stopell in Law ought also to bind in Chancery For if a legitimate daughter and her sister a Bastard do joyne in suing of their livery this ought not to barre in conscience howsoever it may estop in Law Doctor and Student 34. It is usuall in a Bill of Chancery ro object that the Case hath proper help at the common Law and 21. H. 7.41 where one assumed for 10 l. to Lands to another It was said he might have action upon his Case and not to sue in Chancery to compell him to make the Estate but these helps be divers and not the same for by the one he seeketh the Land and by the other he demandeth damages onely And therefore I see not but that the Petition in Parliament might have prevailed if it had stood upon that point onely and at this day it is taken for a good cause of dismission in most causes to say that he hath remedy at the common Law and where an action upon the Case for a Nusans and damages onely are to be recovered the party may have help here to remove or restore the thing it selfe quod est idem A Leassed lands for 21. years and let other lands at twill to B. that had lands in the same Town who makes a Lease for life to C. of his own lands and of A s. and then by Fine all is conveyed to B. he payes the rent to A. still the five years passe by the opinion of all the Judges delivered to the Lord Keeper this fine shall not Bar A. quia apparet per le payment del rent and cest case fit subscribe per Popham Andersan 12. Feb. 160 1.40 Eliz. Nota que Executor non poit estre a trust unlesse he have an especiall gift in the will and that may then be in trust otherwise the generall trust of an Executor is to pay debts and legacies and of the surplusage to account to the ordinary in pios usus 44. Eliz. 8. Iunii 1602. A woman sole takes consideration for making a Lease for 21. yeares and then marries and she and her husband made the promissed Lease at the 21. yeares end the Lessee surrenders and takes a new Lease for 21 years more the husband dyes the wife oustes the Lessee who sues in Chancery to have the first Lease continued rest for the first 21 yeares and not remedyed here the surrender being voluntary 44. Eliz. Two Joynt-Tenants the one takes the whole profits no remedy for the other except it were done by agreement or promise of account 8. Iunii 1602. 44. Eliz. A defeÌ„ not being a principall defendant might be read at a witnesse if he were examined on the plaintants party in another suit betweene other persons in Case of Kingston upon Thames 10. Iunii 1602. 44. Eliz. A custome of discent in a Mannor and many other things were in controversie between the Lord and Tenants and between the Tenants themselves And in the tenth Eliz. a generall agreement made by Deed indented and a Bill in Chancery for establishing the same but no Record to be found but the Deed inrolled though all the Tenants of the said Mannor shall be stopped in the Chancery to speak against this Cac est quae le Repes del realme notwithstanding pretence was made Philips being of councell with the defendants that agreement cannot alter a custome in Law that some were infants some â—eme coverts at the time that the Lord was but Tenant in taile of which opinion was Mr. Cooke Attorney generall and Justice Gawdy 10. Iunii 1602. 44. Eliz. If a Statute be acknowledged in my name by a stranger I shall have an action of disceat against him but I shall not avoid the Statute or recognizance but if it be acknowledged by one of the same name with me I shall avoyd it by Plea 23. Iunii 1602. 44. Eliz. The opinion of the Courts is that uses may be raised by covenant for Jointures but power to make Leasses in that sort cannot passe but it may be done by Fine or transmutation of possession if the covenant be that the owner will stand seize to those uses 27. Iun. 1602. 45. Eliz. Whether Copyholders may be intailed and held that they may not by the Statute de donis conditionalibus but by the common law denante and that surrenders or plaints in nature of fines and recoveries may bar these state tayles as well in the Court Baron as at the common law if the custome have been such which is the rule in these cases 3. Feb. 1602. 45. Eliz. Administrators in nature of a guardian to an infant being Executor exhibits on his behalfe a Bill in Chancery the infant depending the suit comes of full age this abates not the Bill by the opinion of the Lord Chancellor Egerton 7 Feb. 1602. 45. Eliz. Doctor Ford by his will devised certaine lands to his wife in these words non per viam fidei coÌ„missâ—â— for which his sonne might sue her but hoping if his Son grew thrifty that at her death she would leave the remnant of these Leases to him she married Greysill but before marriage Greysill wrote unto her that she should have the disposing of those Leases at her death after the marriage Greysill sells the Leases Ford brings his suite in Chancery and had no help by the opinion of the Court 31. Maii 1. Iacob 1603. Inter Tomley and Clench It appeared by testimony of ancient witnesses speaking of 60 years before and account Books and other writings that Francis Vaughan from whom Tomley claimed was mulier and Anthony from whom Clench claimeth was a Bastard and the possession had gone with Tomley 50 yeeres In this Case the Lord Egerton not onely decreed the possession with Tomley but ordered also that Clench should not have any tryall at the common law for his right till he had shewed better matter in the Chancery being a thing so long past it rested not properly in notice de pais but to be discerned by Books and Deeds of which the Court was better able to judge then a Jury of Plough-men notwithstanding that exceptions were alleadged against those ancient writings and that for the Copyhold-land the verdict went with Clench upon evidence given three dayes before Serjeant Williams that Anthony was Mulier 31. Maii. 1. Iacob 1603. Sir Edmond Morgan married the widdow of Fortescuhe had his wives lands distrained alone by the Grantee of a rent-charge from her former Husband and therefore sued the Grantee in Chancery to take a ratable part of the rent according to the lands he held subject to the distresse and notwithstanding the Lord chiefe Justice Pophams Report who thought this reasonable the Lord Chancellor
the defendant shewed no cause Thomas Hales plaintant Thomas Stanebridge defendant Anno 2. Eliz. fol. 244. The defendant exhibited his Bill into the Chancery for certaine Lands and afterwards sued the plaintant in the Common Pleas for the same Lands before the matter was determined in the Chancery therefore an Injunction was awarded against the said Body to stay his proceedings in the common Pleas Robert Bill and Thomas Gifford plaintants Iohn Body defendant Anno 2. Eliz. fol. 263. The undersheriffe of Middlesex brought into this Court the body of the plaintant by commandment of the Lord Keeper in execution upon a Writ of extent of 300 l. together with the said Writ at the suite of Sir Edmund Maliverer Knight and by order of Court he was taken from the Sheriffe of Middlesex and delivered in execution to the warden of the Fleet for the 300 l. and because the defendants shewed no good cause to the contrary upon a day given them therefore it was ordered that upon Recognizance by the plaintant and good sureties to stand to the order of the Court or else to yeeld his body prisoner to the Fleet in execution and there to remaine untill the defendant be satisfied he the plaintant shall have liberty to goe at large and that the defendant shall not sue for any manner of Execution by force of the said execution Robert Rosse plaintant Christopher Lassels and Alice defendants Anno 3. Eliz. fol. 90. The plaintant had Judgement in the Kings Bench against the defendant upon a Bond of 200 l. and another Judgement for 300 l upon an action of debt of arrerages of account in the Kings Bench and ordered they may proceed with execution upon the Bond of 200 l. and also to take execution of 100 l. parcell of the 300 l. provided alwayes and it is ordered the plaintant shall not in any wise proceed nor take execution of the 200 l. residue of the 300 l recovered upon the accompt without speciall license of the Court Iohn Brooke and Katherine his wife plaintants Thomas Apprice defendant Anno 3. Eliz. fol. 233. The plaintant sheweth by his Bill that the personage of Thekelye was holden by force whereby the plaintant could not be inducted whereupon a Writ of de vilaica removenda was awarded out of this Court and thereby the plaintant put in possession by the Sheriffe neverthelesse the defendant keepeth the possession of the said house appertaining to the personage and for that the plaintant is bound to pay his first fruits to the Queenes Majesty therefore an Injunction is granted against him Thomas Boult Clerk plaintant Sir George Blunt Miles and Alice defendants An. 3. Eliz. fol. 262. The plaintant made Title to the lands by a Lease paroll made by the defendant unto him whereupon he did sow the ground with Corne and the defendant entred upon him therefore the plaintant had an Injunction for the Corne Thomas Harrison plaintant Richard Chomeley Miles and Alice defendants An. 3. Eliz. for three hundred pound It is decreed the desendant and his Heires shall from time to time yearly pay to the plaintant and his heires Lords of the Mannor of Knebworth the rent of 3 s. 4 d. for the peece of ground called the Hawâ—e together with the arrerages thereof since the 6. of Ed. the 6 And shall from henceforth doe suite and service to the Court of the plaintant and his Heirs owners of the said Mannor and the plaintant and his Heires shall have and receive the fines and amercyaments presentable in the Court of the Mannor for any trespasse or lack of service done by the Tenants of the said Hawte Richard Litton plaintant Iohn Couper defendant An. 6. Eliz fol. 145. It is Ordered a Subpoena be awarded against the defendant to be examined upon interrogatories whether before his Answer he had knowledge that the plaintant was marryed and would take no advantage of the same marriage in his Answer then the matter to proceed without Bill of revivor Christian Fairefield plaintant Robert Greenfield defendant An. 6. Eliz. fol. 150. The question of the case drawn was whether the advowson in question did passe by the livery made in the view of the Church without deed or not the Church being full of an incumbent and resolved by the Lord chiefe Justice of the Kings Bench and Justice Manwood to whom the same was referred that the Advowson could not passe by that livery Pannell plaintant Hodgson alias Hodson defendant Anno 18. and 19. Eliz. A Subpoena Ducens tecum was awarded against the defendant to bring in certaine deeds and to shew cause why the same should not be delivered to the plaintant the defendant by his councell shewed that the Morgage was upon condition for payment of 40 l. at a day and before the day the Morgager sold the same over to the plaintant and delivered the Estate by livery and seizin whereby the condition was extinct and yet the defendant offered to give for the same 100 l. It is ordered that the evidences be delivered to the Usher of the Court but not to the plaintant without speciall order Wilford plaintant Denny defendant Anno 18. and 19. Eliz. The plaintant exhibited his Bill to be releived for a promise supposed to be made by the Lady Lutterell for a Lease of certaine lands and for stopping certaine wayes the defendant had a Commission to take her answer and demmurred for that the plaintant may have his remedy by Law which cause seemes insufficient and not to be allowed of and the rather for that the defendants having a Commission to take their answers in the Coâ—ntry did demurre therefore a Subpoena is awarded against them to make a better answer Stukly plaintant the Lady Lutterell Aliis defendants An. 18. and 19. Eliz. Stephen Smith made oath that he was present when one Iohn Maddock made these persons hereafter named privy to a Writ of execution upon a decree made for the plaintant viz. Iohn Ward Iohn Priddoâ—k Henry Pinly Lawrence Banks Iohn Kiddermaster and William Tuttle And the said Maddocks left the same Writ with one Thomas Smith from whom the defendant confesseth the receipt of the said Writ which said parties have not performed the said decree therefore an attachment is awarded against them Leake plaintant Marrow defendant An. 18. and 19. Eliz. The Bill is against the defendants as Executors to their Father who in his life time being Gardian in Soccage to the plaintant in right of the plaintants mother whom he married for and concerning profits by him taken of the lands of the plaintant during his minority for fines of Leases Woodsales and wilfull decay of houses and doth aâ—er assets sufficient to become to their hands the defendants demurre because not privy nor chargeable by Law but ordered to answer Burgh plaintant Wentworth defendant Anno 18. and 19 Eliz. Thomas Stapleâ—on made oath that he delivered
sollicitor of one of the parties was served with Subpoena to testifie in the cause in controversie and the Court discharged him by reason he was solliciter in the cause An. 20. Eliz. The plaintants Bill was for that he being a Coppyholder Leased to the defendant for years and the defendant hath digged gravell and sold the same away whereby the Coppyhold is prejudiced the defendant justified for that the Copyholders are not punishable in waste which cause this Court alloweth not of for though the Copyholders of the mannor are not punishable yet the Leasses of Copyholders of the Mannor are punishable therefore a Supoena is awarded to shew cause why an Injunction shall not be granted for staying his digging of gravell and felling Woods upon the Copyhold Lands Dalton plaintant Gill and Pindor defendants Anno 19. Eliz. Whereas the plaintant exhibited his Bill against the defendant for wilfull perjury the defendant hath demurred which this Court alloweth not of It is ordered a Subpoena be awarded to the defendant to answer Thomas Woodcock plaintant Giles Woodcock defendant An. 19. Eliz. Whereas there was an award in writing exhibited into this Court made between the said parties by Sir Christopher Wray Knight Lord chiefe Justice of England whereunto the Lord chiefe Justice hand as well as the parties are subscribed it was requested by the plaintants the same might be decreed by this Court which this Court refused to grant untill the defendants were made privy therefore processe is awarded Wakefield Vxor Aliis plaintants Hawson Vxor Aliis defendants An. 19. Eliz. The suit was to stay suit in the spirituall Court for a Legacy of 40 l. Ioan Banvill widdow plaintant Guy Banvill defendant Anno 19. Eliz. The suite was for common of pasture and Turbary the defendant demurred for that the plaintant may have remedy at the common law but ordered to answer Lawrence and Moregate Aliis plaintants Windham defendant An. 19. Eliz. Robert Goodwine made oath that at such time as he came to the house of the defendant to serve a Subpoena upon him according to an order of the 10. of May last one of his servants came forth and told him he was within who thereupon delivered the Writ to be delivered to the defendant his Master Goodwine plaintant Sullyard defendant An. 19. Eliz. The defendant made oath that he was served with a Subpoena by the plaintant in the name of one William Web utterly unknown to the defendant and now upon his appearance no Bill in Court against the defendant in the name of the said William Web or of the plaintant therefore 30 s. cost is awarded against the plaintants An. 19. Eliz. Forasmuch as the said Abel one of the defendants appeared and answered the last Terme and his wife did not therefore an Attachment was awarded against them both Monox plaintant Abel and his wife defendants Anno 19. Eliz. Whereas there was this present day exhibited into this Court a certificate under the Seale of the university of Oxford on the defendants behalfe testifying and declaring that the Chancellors of the said university and their successors from the time whereof the memory of man is not to the contrary as well by graunt and consideration of her Majesty as of her Majesties noble progenitors sometimes Kings of this Realme have had the cognizance and finall determination of all manner of Pleas strifes quarrels and controversies whatsoever Felony Maine and Franketenant onely excepted rising and growing as well within the precinct of the said City of Oxford as without within the Realme of England whereas one of the parties within the said suit action or plea is a Master or Schollor or common Minister of the same university or such a person as the Chancellor Vicechancellor Lieutenant or Commissary will certifie ought to enjoy the priviledge of the same university and that the same persons upon the shewing forth of the said certificate in any Court where they are impleaded ought to be discharged out of the same Court forasmuch as it appeareth by the said certificate that the said defendant who is brought up by a Subpoena to answer a Bill exhibited by the plaintant into this Court is a Batchelor of Law in the same university and for that also it appeareth by the plaintants said Bill of complaint that the matter therein contained is onely for certaine promises supposed to be made by the defendant to the plaintant touching certaine Goods Chattels and money therein mentioned and not Franktenement or any matter before excepted It is therefore ordered that the said defendant be of and from the said Bill of complant and matters therein contained from henceforth clearly and absolutely dismissed and the plaintant referred to take his remedy for the same before the Chancellor Vicechancellor Lieutenant or Commissary of the said University of Oxford according to the Tenor of the said Certificate Temple plaintant Foster Doctor of the Civill Law defen. Anno 19. Eliz. Thomas plaintant Mounson defendant produceth a Certificate of the University claiming jurisdiction of the same University therefore the cause is from hence dismissed to be tryed and determined there An. 19. Eliz. The plaintant in the end of Easter Terme by Master Griffeth his Attorney required the defendant to proceed to Commission for examining of witnesses and the defendant was ready to joyne sithence which time the plaintant contrary to the order of this Court as they alleage hath produced one of the Masters of this Court and one of the examinors to travell to the plaintants house in Wiltshire 60 miles distant from London there hath examined witnesses it is ordered that publication be stayed untill the matter be examined after publication is granted Darrall plaintant and Stukey defendant An. 19. Eliz. The plaint Father did purchase in Fee-Farm to him and his heirs the Mannor of Long Eason in the County of Deâ—y of one Kymwelmarch rendring 8 l. rent with a condition of reentry for non payment of the rent deviseth the Land to another for life A ducens tecum for the evidences An. 19. Eliz. Forasmuch as the defendant hath appeared in this court upon an Attachment of priviledge and attended from day to day according to his Bond made in that behalfe and hath also pleaded an issue to the plaintants Declaration therefore the defendant is licensed to depart Dugdell plaint Orrell defend An. 20. Eliz. The defend by his Answer confesseth he was joynt purchasor in trust with the plaintants Father to them two and to the heires of the plaintants Father of the Lands in question and that he never received any profits thereof and that he meant at the plaintants full age to convey the Lands to the plaintant and his heires according to the trust it is ordered and decreed the defendant shall forthwith upon notice to him given convey his Estate in the Lands to the plaintant and the Heires
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
Forasmuch as Richard Sâ—odard Justice and Portrive and others his brethren of the Borough of Minxhead have certified under their common Seale that one Nicholas Hooper made oath before them for serving of a Subpoena on the defend who hath not appeared therefore an Attachment is awarded Hooper Hooper plaintants Brace uxor defendants Anno 21. Eliz. Meerefield plaintant Cleverden defend upon certificate made by the Major of Torrinton of serving a Subpoena that Affidavit was made before him for serving it upon the defendant who hath not appeared therefore an Attachment is awarded Anno 21. Eliz. A decree was made for the plaintant for a Coppyhold tenement and yet the defendant put the plaintant out of possession notwithstanding the said decree and the Lord Keeper did write his Letters to the defendant to suffer the plaintant to enjoy the same Tenement according to the decree Lane plaintant the Lord Howard Viscount Bindon defendant Anno 21. Eliz. The defend was examined upon interrogatories upon the breach of an order of this Court and departed without lycense therefore an Attachment Boyle uxor plaintants Vivean defendant An. 21. Eliz. The defendant being served with a Subpoena the last Terme and coming up out of Cornwall to London heard by common voyce the Terme was adjourned and therefore did goe back againe and the plaintant got an Attachment against him who hath appeared gratis and put in his answer and therfor he shall be discharged of the Attachment paying 10 s. to the plaintant for his costs Strangman plaintaint Vivean defendant Anno 21. Eliz. The question was for a liberty of common Fishing and ordered for the plaintant and upon Affidavit made the defendants have broken the same ordered an Attachment shall goe against them Bayliffes Burgesses and Commonalty of the Town of Yarmouth plaintants William Paston aliis defendants An. 21. Eliz. The plaintant and his Father were bound to the defendant in 500 l. to stand to the award of Sir Iames Dyer Knight and Lord chiefe Justice who arbitrated that the plaintant who had the reversion in Fee and the Father who had the Estate for life should make such assurance as the defendant should reasonably devise The defendant did tender an assurance to the Father to be sealed who being old and blind desired time to confer with his friends the plaintant upon request sealed the assurance and his father afterwards sent word to the defendant he was willing to seale it but the defend answered he did not passe whether he did or no because he had but an estate for his life and the defend had his bond to enjoy it during his life which he did accordingly and yet neverthelesse the defendant put the bond in suite upon his Fathers said refusall but stayed by Injunction Knight plaintant Hartwell defend Anno 21. Eliz. A Commission of Rebellion for not payment of costs was awarded against the defend to one Iohn ap David who did thereupon apprehend the defend and for his more safe keeping delivered him to Thomas Moston Esq. High Sheriffe of the County of Flâ—nt who took charge of the prisoner accordingly and now refuseth either to deliver the prisoner to the Commissioner or to bring him himselfe into the Court at the day day is therefore given to the said Thomas Moston the late Sheriffe to bring into this Court the body of the said defend by Thursday next upon paine of 10 l. Evans Clerke Deane of Saint Asaph plaintant Ap Rees ap Bennet defendants Anno 21. Eliz. The defendant was served with a counterfeit Subpoena at the plaintants suit but answered not because he was told the Subpoena was counterfeit thereupon an Attach issued against him ordered that as well the defendant be discharged of the Attachment awarded against him as the said Baily who as the defendant made oath delivered the countefeit processe to him to shew where and of whom he had the Subpoena Baily plaintant Hawle defend Anno 21. Eliz. The Suit was to cause the defendant to performe an award of Arbitrators chosen by themselves contrary to which award the defendant hath put in suite an obligation of 100 l. wherefore an Injunction was granted for stay of the suit and upon the defendants shewing his readinesse to perform the award ordered that the said award shall be duly performed by both the said parties Reignolds plaint Latham def. A. 21. E. Mathew Carew one of the Masters of this Court plaintant Thomas Burfâ—am defend The defend appearing this Terme upon an Attachment of priviledge at the plaintants suit hath put in baile and answered to the Declaration of the plaintant therefore the defend is licensed to depart till 15. Paschae next An. 21. Eliz. Richard Champion a Commissioner in a Commission of rebellion returned a Rescue against Guy Bonvill which being examined and his examination referred to two Masters of the Court was found to have confessed the rescue whereupon he was committed to the Fleet and yet afterwards brought his action upon the case at the common law against the said Champion for his false returne ordered that a Subpoena be awarded against the said Guy Bonvill to shew cause why an Injunction should not be awarded against him for stay of his action upon the Case but afterwards viz. 21. Eliz. the defendant was allowed to goe forward in his action upon the case at the common Law because either of the parties there may plead his matter Ioan Bonvill widdow plaintant Bonvill and Mary Billinghay defendants An. 21. Eliz. The plaintants exhibited a frivilous Bill without a Counsellors hand and got an Injunction for stay of any suit to be commenced in any of her Majesties Courts but in this which Subpoena and Injunction being served seemed to be counterfeit therefore ordered a Subpoena be awarded against the plaintants as well to shew of whom they had the said Writ and to answer their misdemeanors as also to pay the defend costs for his unjust vexation Iohn ap Edward Ap Hugh and David ap Howel ap Ienkin plaintants Ralfe Ienkin defendant An. 21. Eliz. The defendants made oath they were served with Billets of Paper at the plaintants suit and upon their appearance no Bill in Court against them therefore the plaintant is adjudged to pay the defendants 40 s. costs Edmund Williams plaintant Evan Williams David Morgan and Merrick Granâ—owe defendants An. 21. Eliz. Brown alias Garris alias Pawdy plaintant Stuit defendant made oath that he was served with a Billet in Paper and upon his appearance no Bill in Court and the defendant hath lost the billet of Paper and yet costs is awarded Anno 21. Eliz. The defendant put in a demurrer to the plaintants Bill without shewing any cause of his demurrer it is therefore ordered that a Subpoena be awarded against him to make a better answer Offeley plaintant Morgan defendant Anno 21. Eliz.
aide in Chancery If a man grant a rent charge out of all his Lands and afterwards selleth his Lands by parcels to divers persons and the grantee of the rent will from time to time levy the whole rent upon one of the purchasors onely he shall be eased in Chancery by a contribution from the rest of the purchaseâ—s and the grantee shall be restrained by order to charge the same upon him onely A man recovered at the common Law a debt in one County where the obligation was made in another county against the Stat. 6. R. 2. c. 2. The Defendant sued and suggested in Chancery that by this meanes he was put from divers Pleas of which he might have taken advantage if the obligation had been sued in the very County and he had ayde there for the Chancellor said that he sued to hide the truth and against conscience also which cannot be so well found in any place as in the very County where a thing is done 9. E. 4.2 and 9. E. 4.15 A man shall not be prejudiced by formality or mispleading c. Touching Copy-holders Mr. Fitz-Harbert in his Natur. Brevium fol. 12. noteth well that forasmuch as hee cannot have any writ of false Judgement nor other remedy at common Law against his Lord therefore he shall have aide in Chancery and therefore if the Lord will put out his Copyholder that payeth his customes and services or will not admit him to whose use a surrender is made or will not hold his Court for the benefit of his Copyholder or will exact fines Arbitrary where they be customary and certaine the Copyholder shall have a Subpoe to restraine or compell him as the Case shall require Dyer 264. and 124 Fitz. Subpoena 21 First this Court forbeareth directly to examine any Judgement given at the common Law to which end the Statutes 27. E. 3. cap. 12.39 E. 3. cap. 14.4 H. 4. cap. 23. and 16. R. 2. cap. 5. were made and it seemeth that the common Law used some power to restraine such examinations of Judgements before all these Statutes for 13. E. 3. upon a recovery had upon a Quare impedit the Defendant sued for help in the Chancery and they sent a prohibition and upon that an Attachment against him Fitz-Harbert prohibition 21 the like hath been done upon suits in the courts of requests But yet 9. E. 4.65 one recovered debt upon an obligation in one county whereas the obligation was made in an other county and he complained in Chancery because he had lost some advantages which he might have taken if the triall had been in the other county which thing in effect was made a Law by the Statute 6. R. 2. c. 2. And in the Case of Paramore Ann. 3. 13. Eliz. A fine supposed to be levyed by an Infant was examined in Chancery after it had been allowed by examination of the Justices of the com Pleas but whether these and such other may seeme rather to examine the manner then the very matter and substance of the thing adjudged it is worthy of consideration Sir Will. Cordall Mr. of the Rols denyed to compell one to atturn here that was at liberty by the common Law in the Case of Sir Iohn Windham Chancellor Bromeley likewise denyed such compulsion generally but where the party quarrelled with the particular Tenants Estate or entreth iuto some part of the Lands in demise or hath covenanted for recompence for non atturnment there he utterly denyeth to inforce the atturnment Pasch. 21. Eliz. in Case of Philips and Doctor Sandford Such assurances as be used for the common repose of mens Estates the Chancery will not draw in question for a fine with Proclamation ought after the five yeares to be a bar in conscience as it is in Law so shall it be of a common recovery for docking the intaile Doctor and Student 33.155 So likewise it seemeth that the continued possession of the Bastard eisne shall prevaile in conscience against the right of the Mulier â—â—sne And albeit a feme covert may be thought to joyne with her Husband for fear in a fine of her lâ—nds yet after the five yeares it shall not be recalled for the generall inconveniences that may ensue to that highest assurance Doctor and Student 154. And if remedy in Chancery should be extended to a Collaterall Warrantye the same Saint Germaine saith that then all writings shall be examined If the extender undervalue the Lands as there is no remedy at the common Law 15. H. 7. Dupleges Case because the Debtor may help himselfe by payment of the debt so in conscience there ought to be no reliefe unlesse it were done by Covin. Idem Upon Nudum PactuÌ„ there ought to be no more help in Chancery then there is at the common Law neither against him that hath waged his Law in debt though peradventure falsely Idem Where a man made Title to a rent seck of which there was no seizin nor for which he had any action at the common law and prayed help here it was denyed upon conference had by the Lord Keeper with the Judges Michal 1596. A Copyholder dyeth leaving two daughters by divers Venters both which do enter and take the profits without doing fealties or paying fine and without any admittance by the Court and the eldest dyeth without issue This onely possession sufficeth to order the Copyhold to the collaterall heir of the eldest and not â—or the sister of the half bloud 12. Eliz. Dyer 291. A Copyholder in Fee hath issue a daughter and a son by two venters the Lord committeth the custody of the Land and of the son to the Mother who taketh the profits and the son dyeth before any admittance this Copyhold was ordered also for the Heire Collaterall against the Sister of the halfe bloud because the Mothers possession serveth for the son Anno 12. Eliz. Ibid. The Lord devised a Copyhold to C. for life and after passed the Freehold of the soyle thereof by livery of seizin thereof to B. for life reserving a rent and then by fine levyed doth grant the said Land to the said C. come ceo que il ad de son done c. And C. accepteth the said rent of B. and thereupon it was questioned whether or no the Copyhold of C. were gone in conscience 28. H. 8. Dyer 30. A Copyholder within age is admitted and the Lord committeth the custody to the Mother of the Infant whose under-Tenant cutteth down Timber Trees which being presented the Lord seizeth the Land for the forfeiture during still the nonage and keepeth it till he dyeth and it descendeth to his Heire who and his Father had kept it 40 yeares and for that the Copyholder moved suite in the Chancery 29. yeares since which was now revived and the forfeiture was taken during his minority he was restored to his possession
hath the deed shall be compelled here to shew it for the defence of the others Title 9. E. 4.41 A. made a Deed of Feoffment to his own use to B. but gave no livery of seizin A. dyeth C. his heire bringeth a Subpoena against B. but by Morton Master of the Rolls C. was denyed help here because B. had nothing in the Land and if he abate there is remedy at the common Law against him 18. E. 4.13 Where certainty wanteth the common Law faileth but yet help is to be found in Chancery for it for if the Queen grant to me the goods of A. that is attainted of Felony and I know not the certainty of them yet shall I compell any man to whose possession any of them be come to make Inventory of them here 36. H. 6.26 Cur. It is most usuall in Chancery to demand evidence concerning the complainants Lands to which he maketh Title which are not in Châ—sts Baggs or Boxes and whereof he knoweth not the Date c. And in that Case the Defendant made Title to the Lands and justified the detaining of the evidences for maintenance of his right whereupon it was ordered that the complainant should bring an action for the Land at the common Law to which the Defendant should plead in chiefe and that he for whom the verdict should passe should also have his possession stalled here 28. Eliz. If a man have cause to demand land by action and knoweth not the Tenant of the land by reason of the making of secret Estates it hath been lately used to draw them in by oath to confesse the Tenant but it is now doubted A Tenant in common of a Manor for long time occupyed wholly by the other Tenant in common which knoweth not the quantity of the Mannor by reason the other hath also sold Lands intermingled had the sight of the Court Rolls and Writings of his companion concerning onely the quantity of the Mannor but not concerning the sold Lands nor his Title to the Mannor and the other was ordered also to shew the like on his part Capell and Mym 1599. The Chancery also giveth help for perfecting of things well meant and upon good consideration As if in a Feoffment of Lands for money the word Heires be omitted in the deed Audeley Chancellor 9. H. 8. said that he would supply it A man bought debts due upon Obligations and gave his own Obligation for the money to be paid for them and because he had not quod pro quo but onely things in action and the seller would not use action upon them for the benefit of the Vendee It was ordered here by the assent of the Judges thereto called that the Vendor should bring in the Obligation to be cancelled 37. H. 6.14 But if a man pay money upon an Obligation or a Statute that is single the Obligee or Counsee shall not be called hither to cancell it though the other had no acquittance upon the payment made 22. E. 4. b. les Justices and Doctor and Student 23. who said that a man shall have no ayde here to supply his folly As if he pay a debt upon a single Obligation or Statute without taking acquittance But Robert Stillington Episcopus Bathoum said that deus est proâ—urator futurus I thinke if money be paid upon a redemption of a morgage by Indenture without taking an acquittance the morgage shall bring in the Indenture to be cancelled here So if a man sell lands in two Counties for money and maketh livery in the one onely he shall be compelled in conscience to perfect the assurance by another livery Doctor and Student 37. for the contract faileth onely in a circumstance or ceremony A lease is made of a House and Woods wherein it is covenanted thâ—t the Leassee shall have Housboot and Fireboot By this it is implyed and meant that he shall not have any of the Woods to any other purpose but that they belong to the Lessor and it is usuall to help him in the Chancery to them leaving sufficient for these boots A Messuage was demised cum pertinentiis onely but for that sundry Lands had been occupyed therewith for the same rent and by the same words the Lord Chancellor Bromley by advice of the Judges ordered those Lands should now passe also yet in Law they do not passe as some Justices hold The Lord North demised a Mannor excepting the Court Baron and perquisites c. the exception was found void in Law and the Tenant Lady Dacres would not make suite to the Court kept by the Lord North But the Lord Keeper Puckering assisted with some Judges decreed her to make suite for that it was plainly so intended A man made a gift of his goods of intent to defraud his creditors and yet continued the possession of them and took sanctuary and dyed there now his Executors having the goods were charged towards the Creditors 16. E. 4.9 So if a Lessee for years demiseth parcell of the Terme to another and covenously forfeiteth his whole Lease for any condition broken and taketh the Land back in Lease againe his Lessee shall find help in Chancery Crompton 64.65 And Stillington the Chancellor 8. E. 4.4 was of opinion that pro laesione fidei or breach of promise a man was at liberty to sue either in the spirituall Court Canonicae Injuria or else in the Chancery for the damage accrewed by the breach A man had Lands of ancient deâ—neasne in extent for debt and they were recovered from him by the sufferance of the Vouchee whereby he was ousted in this Case he shall be holpen here Morton Chancellor per Assent Bryan and Hussey Justices 7. H. 7.11 If one that is bound with another for the debt of the other payeth it at the day for fear of Arrest now if he sue his counter-bond which he hath to save him harmelesse non est damnificatus is a good Plea at the common Law against it but yet the Chancery will give order for his repayment Mich. 31.32 Eliz. And whereas such a surety paid the debt and sued the principal upon his Obligation to save him harmlesse the principall brought a Subpoena and alleadging that he having delivered goods into the hands of the surety to save him harmlesse prayed an Injunction to stay his suite but because the surety made another title to the goods the Court would not stay the suit for him 16. E. 4.9 Where Deeds and Mynuments do concern as well the defence of the Tenant for life his Title who also possesseth the Deeds as the right of another in reversion or remainder it is usuall to have them brought into this Court for the avoyding all perils and the indifferent custody of them Dixies and Hillary 40. Eliz. A Lease is made for life the remainder for life the remainder over in Fee the first