Selected quad for the lemma: law_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
law_n esq_n john_n knight_n 12,800 5 10.3190 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
A24054 An abstract or abridgment, of a decree made, and often confirmed in the High Court of Chancery, concerning the payment of a tyth or 10th. part of lead-oar [sic] in the county of Derby 1705 (1705) Wing A147A; ESTC T114275 13,426 24

There is 1 snippet containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

AN Abstract or Abridgment OF A Decree Made and often Confirmed in the High Court of Chancery concerning the Payment of a Tyth or 10th Part of Lead-Oar in the County of Derby CAROLUS Secundus Dei Gratiâ Angliae Scotiae Franciae Hiberniae Rex Fidei Defensor c. Georgio Savile Willielmo Savile Jacobo Hopkinson Rogero Newton Alveredo Motteram Generosis ac cuicunque Personae sive quibuscunque aliis Personis quos Decretum vel finale Judicium aliqualiter tangit sive concernit corum Cuilibet salutem Cum quoddam finale Judicium sive Decretum coram Nobis in Curiâ nostrâ Cancellariae antehac fact extitit in haec Verba WHEN before this Time that is to say in the Term of St. Michael Anno Dom. 1628 Richard Carrier Clerk Vicar of Wirksworth in the County of Derby Complainant Exhibited his Bill of Complaint into the High and Honourable Court of Chancery against Ephraim Fern Richard Wigley Anthony Coates and William Debanks Defendants declaring by the same That whereas the Complainant and all his Predecessors Vicars of Wirksworth Time beyond the Memory of Man have had and received and used to have and receive and do of right ought to have and receive a certain Customary Duty of all the Lead-Oar or Lead-Mine which had been gotten within the said Parish of Wirksworth dressed and cleansed from the Earth and Rubbish at and by the only Costs and Labours of the Miners and Getters of the said Oar and Lead-Mine the said Complainant and his Predecessors allowing to the said Miners and Getters of the said Oar and Lead-Mine only one Penny for the dressing cleansing and washing every the said 10th Dish without Interruption of any Man until about the 18th Year of the Reign of K. James I. At which time the said Complainant exhibited his English Bill into the Court of Exchequer Chamber The first Suit in the Exchequer Court against divers Miners who refused to pay this Duty The Miners being served with Subpoena's from that Court appeared in Michaelmns Term 180 Jacobi but gave no Answer The Miners upon their Petition to the Privy Councel obtained an Order Removed together with the Suits of other Proprietors to the Privy Councel dated 22d of November Anno 180 Jacobi Primi to stay the Suit in the Exchequer Court and to bring it before the Councel where also the Proceedings at Law of John Gell Esq afterwards Sir John Gell Barr. for one third part of the Tyth-Oar and of Sir Francis Leak then Knight afterward Lord Deincourt for the other two parts of the Tyth-Oar in the Parishes of Bakewell Tiddeswall and Hope in the hundred of High Peak in Darbyshire were then and for divers Years before had been stayed And the whole Cause concerning the Tyth or Tenth of Lead-Oar within the said County of Darby The Cause of Tyth-Oar for the whole County before the Councel was then stayed at the Councel Board upon Auggession by the Miners of some Point of State So that divers Ministers Parsons and Vicars within the said County who had a great Part of their Maintenance out of the said Tenth of Lead-Oar were forced to forbear all Proceedings at the Law for the same and to be content to live without the same during the time that the Matter was in question at the said Councel Board And thereupon The Custom of the Payment of the said Tyth or Tenth of Lead Oar The Custom for this Tyth one and the same throughout the County being claimed to be all one and the same in all Partishes within the said County of Darby where the said Lead-Oar is gotten Their Lordships for the avoiding Multiplicity of Suits which otherwise would have ensued The Councels Directions for Tryal of the general Custom for the Final settling of this Cause thought sit for the whole County as well concerning the Parsons and Vicars as other Proprietors of the said Tyth and Customary Duty of Lead-Oar to refer the said Custom to a Tryal at Common Law which accordingly was done by an Order of that Court of 26th of November Anno Domini 1619 with special Directions how and in what manner the said Trial should be brought on and tryed and that onely the said Custom should be given in Evidence and both Parties to insist thereupon This Tryal was had at the Common-Pleas-Bar in Easter-Term 1620 where the Custom was onely in Issue A Verdict for the general Custom and both Parties onely insisted thereupon and after 4 Hours Evidence before the Judges in the hearing the said Cause A Verdict passed for the said Custom and with the Plaintiff in that Cause After which said Tryal The Miners litigiously desire a second Tryal the Miners not yet satisfied but endeavouring to weary out the said Complainant and the rest interessed in the said Duty upon Pretence of having some old Witnesses not before examined obtained from the Lords of the Councel an Order of the 21st of June Anno Dom. 1620 for another Tryal at Common Law under particular Directions as before which Tryal was had at the Common-Pleas-Bar in Michaelmas-Term Anno Dom. 1620. upon the very point of the said Custom And there also upon full and long Evidence A second Verdict for general Custom a second Verdict passed for the said Custom and with the said Plaintiff in that Suit viz. Mr. John Gell. Notwithstanding which Verdict The Proprietors Petition the King the said Complainant Carrier together with the said Mr. Gell and the Lord Deincourt and the other Ministers interessed in the said Customary Duty of the Tyth or Tenth of Lead-Oar within the said County of Derby in respect they could not quietly enjoy the same according to the said Verdicts were forced for their Relief against the said Miners being a Multitude and making a general Purse thereby to weary out the said Complainant and others interessed to petition His Majesty King James I. for to establish them in the said Tyth or 10th of Lead-Oar as aforesaid The King refers the Consideration of this to the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury The King refers it to some Lords and to the Lord High Treasurer afterwards Lord Privy Seal with special Directions that upon due Examination of the Cause they should take Effectual Order for the Petitioners Relief and to certifie what course might be taken to put them in Possession According to which Reference their Lordships having heard the said Cause at large debated thereof did in July 1621 Certifie unto His Majesty that they had seen the former Proceedings before the Councel and at Common Law by Directions from the Lords of the Councel that Mr. Gell aforesaid had prevailed at Law for his 3d part of this Tyth and the Lord Deincourt had obtained a Decree in the Exchequer for the other two 3d parts of this Tyth in the Parishes of Bakewell Tiddeswall and Hope So as it appeared unto them Iust and fit that the said Tyths or Tenth should be established according to the said Tryals at Law and the