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
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
bestowed the land upon the Earl of Devon for his service done in Ireland This Lease the Earl sought to avoid by the law Haule prayes to have the matter examined in Chancery and to have the suit stayed by Injunction which was denyed for that the Lease was granted by fraud and the Fee simple to the Earl in possession and not in reversion nota that the Lord Chancellor said that where lands are granted in reversion if the Grantee will avoid the lease for a rent paid but not at the day in that case he will releeve but not where the Lease is granted upon a false suggestion for that were to relieve fraud in the Chancery it was further objected that this grant was made to the Earl upon consideration of service done and the Lord Chancellor said that the service done to the Realme was as valuable as if the Earl had given 500 l. for the Land but the Earl offered to give the Leassee 1000 l. recompence in honour 23. Ian. 1. Iacobi In a Case moved by Mr. Chamberlaine where the Lord Chancellor had referred the matter to be tryed at the common Law touching remainders upon a Lease whether good in law or no and the Judges had given Judgement upon the case in another point in the Kings Bench so as the Lord Chancellor remained still uncertaine of that point called the Judges into the Exchequer Chamber 1. Iacobi For as much as the plaintant hath served processe upon the defendant to appear in this court return 15. Micha and exhibited no sufficient Bill against him and further for meere examination sued out a Writ of Attachment against the defendant before the returne of the subpoena it is ordered that the plaintant shall pay unto the defendant 10 s. costs and also that Hugh Tildesley who made the processe against the defendant without a sufficient Bill shall pay unto the defendant other 10 s. for his costs William Garneston plaintant Thomas Bradwell defendant Anno 5. Hen. 6. Philip and Mary fol. 11. For as much as a Commission to examine witnesses in perpetuam rei memoriam issued out of this Court and the witnesses examined by vertue thereof have remained in court by the space of a year It is ordered that publication shall be granted Richard Gravenor and Iohn Gravenor plaintants Bryan Brearton defendant An. 5. and 6. Phil. and M. fol. 12. Episcopu Cicestrens publication of witnesses in perpetuam rei memoriam An. 5. and 6. Phil. and Mar. fol. 30. Willington plaintant Agar defendant publication of witnesses remaining since 33. H. 8. fol. 42. Anno 5 and 6. Phil. and Mary An Injunction is granted against the defendants to deliver to the plaintant certaine Plate contained in their Petition or else to appeare and shew cause in crur. anim prox Anno 5. and 6. P. and M. fol. 13. David Geoffry and Iohn Geoffry plaintants and Thomas Davis defendant A decree is made for the plaintant as by the Record thereof signed with the Lord Chancellors hand plainly appeareth and the said Record is delivered to Iohn Millisent Attorney for the plaintant to be inrolled the Deane and Chapter of Lincolne plaintant Bevore and Alice defendants Anno 5. and 6. Phil. and Mary fol. 15. Glanffell plaintant Strickley defendant a decree is made for the defendant for dismission of the cause as by the Record thereof signed with the Lord Chancellors hand and the same put to the inrolment Anno 5. and 6. Phil. and Mary fol. 22. Iames Iervis hath made oath for the delivery of a subpoena to the defendant whereby he hath knowledge that witnesses are to be examined in perpetuall memory so that he may if he will examine the same witnesses in this court therefore the examinors in this court may proceed to the examination of the said witnesses accordingly Hatcham plaintiffe Winchcombe defendant 5. and 6. P. and M. fol. 19. Porter plaintant Baker defendant the examinor may proceed to examination of witnesses in perpetuall memory if the plaintant have served a Subpoena upon the defendant to give him notice to examine likewise An. 5. and 6. P. and M. fol. 32. Forasmuch as the plaint hath taken oath in this court that there are sundry witnesses contained in a Schedule exhibited in this court which he desireth to have examined â—n perpetuall memory so impotent and sick that they are not able to travell up to be examined in court without danger of their lives therefore a Commission is awarded to Sir Humfrey Bâ—adburne Knight to examine the same witnesses in perpetuall memory Bagshawe plaintant defendant An 5. and 6. P. and M. fol. 22. Robins plaintant Foster defendant a Commission is granted to examine witnesses in the Countrey being impotent in perpetuall memory Anno 5. and 6. P. and M. fol. 26. The plaintant is adjudged to pay to the defendant costs three pound for that he was served to appear before the Lord Mayor of London to testifie in a matter depending before the said Lord Mayor between the plaintant and one Iohn Gresham and others without any precept directed from the Lord Mayor unto the said defendant to appeare Rowe and Alice plaintants Thomas Guybone defendant Anno 5. and 6. P. and M. fol. 24. Iohn Manlye hath taken oath the deposition of witnesses examined on the behalfe of the plaintant and remaining in this Court are to be given in evidence at a Court Baron holden at Potton in the County of Bedford on Mâ—nday next therefore publication is granted William Manlye Clerke plaintant Thomas Simcote defendant Anno 5. and 6. Phil. and Mary fol. 24. An injunction is awarded against the defendant to stay his proceedings in the Sheriffes Court of London or elsewhere upon debt of 100 l. not to proceed to triall judgement or to execution if judgement be given Iohn Ayland plaintiffe Francis Bacon defendant Anno 5. and 6. P. and M. fol. 29. Forasmuch as the plaintant served processe upon the defendent by the name of Magaret Hastings and at that instant was marryed to William Brown and also for want of a Bill therefore the said William Brown and Margaret are adjudged to pay to the defendant 20 s. costs Margaret Hastings plaintant Nicholas Iugges defendant Anno 5. and 6. P. and M. fol. 30. Forasmuch as the Sheriffe of Denâ—igb hath returned a Languidus in prison therefore a Commission is awarded to Richard Griffeths and others to take the answer of the defendant Iohn ap Thomas plaintant Engharard Hoell widow defendant An. 5. and 6. P. and M. fol. 33. Forasmuch as the defendant was in possession of the lands at the time of the Bill exhibited and the plaintant hath sithence entered therefore an injunction is granted to the defendant against the plaintiffe to avoid the possession William Hawkes and Ieâ—nit his wife plaintants Iohn Champion and others defendants An. 5. and 6. P. and M. fol. 35. It
precedent before the Judgements and not matter of agreement aâ—â—â—â— 8. We find in the said cases not onely the Bill preferred but motions orders injunctions and decrees thereupon for the discharging and releasing of the Judgements or abiding the possession thereupon obtained and sometimes for the meane profits and the release of the costs c. 9. We find in some of the cases in this very point that Judgement hath been given hath been stood upon by the defendants and alleadged by them by way of demurrer and overruled 10. We find that the Judges themselves in their own Courts when there appeared unto them matter of equity because they by their oath and office could not stay the Judgements except it be for some small time have directed the parties to seeke reliefe in Chancery 11. We find that this hath not onely been in the times of the severall Chancellors but by the Judges themselves and that without difficulty when they sate in Chancery in the vacancy or absence of the Chancellor 12. We find the hands of sundry principall Councellors at Lawâ— whereof divers of them are now Judges â—â—d some in chieâ—e place in Bills of this kind 13. Lastly here were offered to have beene shewed unto us many other presidents whereof we heard some read and found them to be of like nature with those contained in the note Francis Bacon Randell Crew Henry Mountague Hen. Yelverton And whereas also our said Attorney received one other Letter from our said Chancellor with a case there inclosed written likewise by our expresse commandment dated the 27. of March 1616 directing requiring him and the rest of our learned Councell together with the Attorney of our deare sonne the Prince to confer together upon the said cause and to consider advisedly of al the parts thereof and thereupon to peruse all the the Statutes of Praemunire or Provisoes and all other Statutesâ— as they shall conceive to be necessary to be considered of for the resolving the question propounded in that case and thereupon to report unto us their opinions in writing concerning the same which Letter and Case there inclosed follow in these words MAster Attorney His Majesty hath perused this case inclosed and hath commanded me to send it to you and his will and pleasure is that you call unto you Mr. Sarjeant Mountague Mr. Sarjeant Crew Mr. Sollicitor and Mr. Walter the Princes Attorney and you confer together thereupon and conâ—ider advisedly and deliberately of all the parts thereof and thereupon to peruse all the Statutes of Praemunire or Provisors and all other such Statutes as you shall conceive to be necessary to be considered of for the resolving the question propounded in this case this his Majesty would have be done with mature deliberation and yet with as much speed as conveniently you can and when you have sufficiently informed your selves therein then to report to him your opinions in writing and so I committ you to God and rest Your very loving friend T. Ellesmore Canc. At York house the 27. of March 1616. A. hath Judgement and execution in the Kings Bench or common Pleas against B. in an action of debt of 1000 l. And in an ejectione Firmae of the Mannor of D. B. complaines in the Chancery to be relieved against those Judgements according to conscience and equity allowing the Judgements to be lawfull and good by the rigour and strict rules of the common Lawes and the matters in conscience and equity such as the Judges of the common Law being no Judges in equity but bound by their oathes to doe the Law cannot give any remedy or reliefe for the same either by error or attaint or by any other meanes Questio Whither the Chancery may relieve B. in this or such like cases or else leave him utterly remedilesse and undone and if the Chancery be restrained by any Statute of Praemunire c. Then by what Statute or by what words in any Statute is the Chancery so restrained and conscience and equity banished excluded and damned and whereas according to our said commandment our said learned councell and the Attorney of our deare Son the Prince returned unto us a Certificate of their opinions upon the said Statutes under all their severall hands concerning the same case which Certificate followeth in these words According to your Majesties Commandment we have deliveratly advised of the case sent unto us by the Lord Chancellor and of the Statutes as well those of Praemunire as others as far as we take it may concerne the case and for our better information therein wee have thought fit to send for and peruse the originall Records themselves remaining in the Tower of London of those Statutes not onely appearing upon the Roll of Parliament with the Kings answers which is the warrant to the Roll of Parliament We have also taken into consideration as well Booke Lawes as divers other Acts of Parliament which may give light unto the Statutes whereupon the question properly growes together with such ancient Records and presidents as we could find as well those which maintaine the authority of the Chancery as those which seeme to impeach the same and upon the whole matter we are al of opinion that the Chancery may give reliefe to the case in question and that no Statute of Praemunire c. or other Statute restraines the same And because we know not what use your Majesty will be pleased to make of this our opinion either for the time present or future we are willing to give some reasons of the same not thinking fit to trouble your Majesty with all those things whereupon we have grounded our selves selecting out some principall things which moved us to be of this opinion to the end this same may be a fuller object of your Majesties Princely Judgement whereunto we alwayes submit our selves And first we must lay for a sure foundation that which was contained in our former Certificate concerning the continuall practise by the space now of six score yeares in the times of King Hen. the 7. King Hen. the 8. King Edward the sixt Queene Mary and Queene Elizabeth of this authority and that in the time when the same authority was mannaged not onely the Bishops which might be thought lesse skilfull or lesse affectionate towards the Lawes of the Land but also divers great Lawyers which could not but know and honour the Law as the meanes of their advancement Sir Thomas More and the Lord Audly the Lord Rich Sir Nicholas Bacon Sir Thomas Bromley and Sir Iohn Puckering and further that most of the late Judges of the Kingdome either as Judges when they sate in Chancery by Commission or as Councellors at Law when they set their hands to Bills have by their judgement and councell upheld the same authority and therefore for as much as it is a true ground That optimus legum interpres consuetudo especially when the practise or custome passeth not amongst vulgar persons but
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
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