Page:The English Reports v1 1900.pdf/1024

and if any settlement ought to have been made, it should have secured the remainder to the other children, and not have made the eldest son tenant in tail, who, being of age, might bar the subsequent remainders.

To all this it was answered (T. Powys, S. Cowper), that the copies were attended with circumstances of undeniable credit, viz. a letter sent by the appellant to Sidney Lloyd, and proved to be of his hand wri-[377]-ting; her declarations to several persons that she did take such copies, and proof that the same were found among her papers after her death; and these concurrent circumstances rendered the copies proper evidence, especially when on viewing the bill or note for £300 it was visible that some part of the paper had been cut off. That if this debt had been real, it was not probable the appellant would have accepted the £46 soon after Meredith's death, and not mentioned the £300 but let it lie dormant for three years, till the assets were wholly exhausted in the payment of other debts. That trials at law are only proper to inform the conscience of the court concerning facts, which the court apprehends to be doubtful; but in this case the court was fully convinced of the truth of the fact, by the concurring circumstances which appeared to support it, and more especially upon viewing the paper so cut as aforesaid; and therefore there was no occasion for a trial. That as to the matter of costs, the court were satisfied that the appellant proceeded at law against conscience, and therefore he was justly condemned to pay such costs as he had so occasioned; nor was it at all material to this question, that the respondents plea was found against them upon the trial at law; because, though true in fact, it was not so in a legal sense, all the assets having really been administered in paying debts of an inferior degree, which, in the construction of law, was an undue administration, and therefore the plea was in that respect falsified. And as to the settlement of the estate, no decree could in strictness have been made to compel the respondents to make any such settlement; but, as they had offered so to do, the court founded its decree on such offer, and could not do it in any other manner than as the respondents had offered.

After hearing counsel on this appeal, it was ordered and adjudged, that the same should be dismissed, and the decree therein complained of, affirmed; and that the appellant should pay the respondent William Wynne, the sum of £10 for his costs. (Jour. vol. 18. p. 698.)

The corporation of Hertford, being about to purchase from the Crown the inheritance of a certain meadow, called King's Mead, which was expectant upon a term of ninety-nine years, vested in Sir John Walter and others, they thought fit, first to buy in the residue of this term, before the purchase of the inheritance was completed. Accordingly, on the 28th of January, 3 Car. I. an assignment was made of the term to certain per-[378]-sons, as trustees for the corporation; and, on the 30th of November following, the corporation obtained a grant of this meadow to them and their successors for ever, in consideration of £100, and under a fee-farm rent of £4 14s. 4d. but the assignment of the term was only mentioned to be in consideration of a competent sum of money.

Under this grant, the corporation enjoyed the meadow for a great number of years; and gave thereout an annual charity to the poor, of forty shillings, by the name of grass-money.

In 1645, a commission of charitable uses was issued; and by an inquisition taken thereon, 14th of January 1645, it was found, that this meadow was purchased by the corporation, in trust and for the benefit of the poor of Hertford; and accordingly the commissioners made a decree, that the same belonged to the said poor. Nothing,