Selected quad for the lemma: lord_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
lord_n	henry_n	richard_n	thomas_n	16,150	5	7.3172	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
B02578	The case of Elizabeth Fenton widow, the relict and administratrix, of Richard Fenton gent. deceased respondent to the petition of William Crabb and Tho. Goldsmith appealants, humbly offered to the Lords spiritual and temporal in Parliament assembled.	Fenton, Elizabeth, fl. 1680.	1680 (1680)	Wing C911B; ESTC R173517	3,315	1

The Case of Elizabeth Fenton Widow the Relict and Administratrix of Richard Fenton Gent. deceased Respondent to the Petition of William Crabb and Tho. Goldsmith Appealants Humbly offered to the Consideration of the Right Honourable the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament Assembled THE said Richard Fenton being Owner of the ⅜ parts of the Ship Rainbow of Bristol whereof William Crabb and Thomas Goldsmith now Appealants from a Decree of the High Court of Chancery And Richard Crabb Alexander Gray and Henry Haines had each of them one 8th part They together in the year 1655. let the Ship to Freight on a Voyage to Virginia which she performed and returned safe to Bristol where the Appealants and Richard Crabb received her Freight and other Profits arising by the said Voyage ⅜ parts whereof Appertained to the aforesaid Richard Fenton The said Part-Owners gave no Account of the aforesaid Frieght and Profits to the said Fenton but instead thereof set forth the said Ship a second Voyage to Virginia Whereto she was Freighted and set Sail made her Voyage and returned safe but before such her return the said Richard Fenton dyed intestate After whose decease Letters of Administration of his Goods and Chattels were granted to Elizabeth his Wife whereby she became justly intituled to all his Personal Estate And particularly to ⅜ parts of the Freight of the Ship Rainbow for the aforesaid two Voyages All which the said Part-Owners Received Elizabeth Fenton demanded her Husbands and Intestates proportion of the said Ship for the aforesaid Two Voyages from the Appealants and other the Part-Owners who refused to Accompt for the same pretending that one Stafford was imployed by all the Owners to Let the said Ship and receive the Freight thereof which he had done and therefore was onely Accountable for the same And thereupon prevailed with the said Elizabeth Fenton to referre the aforesaid matters in controversie to Arbitration And Arbitrators for that purpose were appointed before whom when the said Elizabeth was absent and could not Attend the Books of Account of the aforesaid Stafford were produced relating to the aforesaid Ship and two several Freights And they thereupon by surprize upon the said Elizabeth Fenton made their Award whereby they directed and ordered only 14 l. to be paid her for her proportion of the Profits and Freight of the aforesaid two Voyages when there was 1000 l. due And the Appealants having Lett out the Ship a third Voyage at 24 l. 7 s. 6 d. per Month. in which Voyage she continued about 16 Months Attached the said Fentons proportion thereof to compell her to submit to the said Award Thereupon she preferred her Bill in the High and Honourable Court of Chancery to have an Accompt of the said three Voyages and to set aside the undue Award made as aforesaid which cause came to be heard 12 July 17 Car. nunc Whereupon the aforesaid Award was set aside and Account directed to be taken by a Master who being assisted by Merchants after Examination of Witnesses and hearing Council reported 747 l. 16 s. 6 d. due to the Respondent Elizabeth Fenton The Appealants prevailed for a Reference upon which the Report aforesaid was confirmed and afterwards decreed and the decree Signed and Enrolled Whereupon the Appealants and Richard Crabb aforesaid brought their Bill of review assigning the same Errors they now do in their Appeal to this most Honourable House upon which they obtained an Order that paying 247 l. 16 s. 6 d. And securing 500 l. more remainder of the 747 l. 16 s. 6 d. decreed all proceeding upon the said Decree should be stayed To which Bill of review the said Elizabeth put in her Answer and Witnesses being thereupon examined and publication past the Cause also came to be heard on the 22 April 22 Car. nunc Upon which hearing the Court proposed That the said Fenton should go back to the first Referrees to review the account Or that she should pay back the 247 l. 16 s. 6 d. aforesaid which was impossible for her to do And then the Court would name new Referrees The said Elizabeth Fenton being necessitated to make Choice of One of these two proposals chose to go back to the former Referrees who made their second Award without hearing the Respondent which was afterwards set aside also and a second referrence made to a Master to take an Account of the aforesaid three Voyages which referrence being transferred to Sir John Coell be proceeded therein and 10 April 1675. made his Report That the Respondent declaring her unwillingness that Stafford should be imployed and that the Appealants had promised she should have a just Account of the aforesaid three Voyages and that no wrong should be done her but that she should receive her proportion of the Profits of the said Ship And that the Appealants undertook the management thereof after which he proceeded upon the said Accounts stated the same and Reported above 500 l. due to the Respondent Elizabeth The Appealants procured a new Referrence with Order that the aforesaid Stafford should be Examined which was done accordingly upon which the said Master made another Report and made some further Abatement by the Respondents consent in order to an Accommodation To which Report though in their Favour the Appealants took Exceptions The said Exceptions coming to be Argued the Lord Chancellor approved and Confirmed what the Master had done in Rejecting Staffords Evidence and upon some of the Exceptions referred it back to the same Master who having the Assistance of many Eminent Merchants in London Made his Third Report To which the Appealants excepting many Hearings were thereupon had and a Re-referrence made with Direction for the said Master to State the Particulars of the Account with the Values of the Cargo which being done he made his Fourth Report and thereby certified 555 l. 8 s. 5 d. ½ due to the Respondent To which Report the Appealants also Excepted The Exceptions being Argued were Over-ruled and the Report confirmed by Decree of the Court since Signed and Inrolled From which Decree after Twenty Years proceeding in Chancery and above 1000 l. Charges spent by the Respondent by the Appealants Vexatious Prosecution to Her and her five Childrens Ruine the Appealants for further Vexation have Appealed from the Decree pronounced upon the aforesaid Bill of Review above Ten years since Alledging That the Award aforesaid is set aside by Surprize without consent of Parties or proof of any undue Means used in obtaining thereof That the Appealants Gray and Haynes two of the Part-Owners in the said Ship Rainbow were no Parties to the Decree Nevertheless the Sum Reported due to the Respondent is Decreed to be paid by them Therefore and forasmuch as Staffords Evidence was supprest and the Decree made only against the Appealants who were but two of the five Part-Owners with the said Richard Fenton in the said Ship And Forasmuch as they Received never one peny of Money for the Freight of her for the first two Voyages but only for the Third for which they were ready to Account Therefore pray a Reversal of the aforesaid Decree But the Respondent humbly Hopes for and Prays the Justice of this most Honourable House and then doubts not but to be Discharged from this Supream Court and receive all Costs for the Charge and Vexation she is put unto And For Reasons for Dismissing the Appealants Appeal this Respondent Humbly Offers That all the proceedings in the High Court of Chancery have been and are Just and agreeable to Equity and such as against which the Appealants ought not to expect Relief Because by Sir John Coells Report It Appears the Appealants did themselves undertake and agree to Account for and make Good what should be due to the Respondent for the Freight aforesaid and so no need to make other Parties which otherwise would have been done It Appeared the Awards before-mentioned were obtained on False Allegations and by Surprize And as so procured were justly set aside Staffords Evidence was set aside for very good Reason it appearing he had sworn an Account to be Perused and Allowed by the Respondents Husband whenas by Substantial Evidence it was made Appear that he was Dead long before the Account was Writ besides other Falsities Upon the whole Matter the Respondent Humbly layes her self and five Fatherless Children with this her Sad and Deplorable Condition at your Lordships Feet And submits it to your Grave Judgment and Serious Consideration Whether After two several Decrees of the High Court of Chancery and Twenty Years Litigation meerly upon Matters of Account 〈◊〉 where Masters have since the Decree been Attended above 100 times upon those Accounts and no Exceptions all that time taken to the Decree nor any Appeal to this Honourable House from the same till after four several Reports made and those duly Confirmed after Exceptions put in thereto by the Appealants were Argued Whether after all these Solemn proceedings The Appealants now finding that they are to pay this Respondent Money though not half so much as the Charges she hath been put unto for Recovering the same They shall be admitted to Appeal to this most Honourable House to be Relieved against a Decree to which themselves have submitted by all their Subsequent proceedings before the Master in that Court Whereas if there had been any Just Cause of Complaint against the said Decree they might have Appealed from the same before their proceeding to Account which it is Humbly Conceived is no less than a Submission to the same and owning it to be Just Hillary 1660. July 23 1675. Feb. 26.27 Reg. nunc May 25 1677. Feb 20 1678. First Secondly First Secondly Thirdly