Page:The English Reports v1 1900.pdf/1099

of March 1711, the period when, in strictness, the lease ought to have been renewed, down to that time; and a further sum of £100 for a second renewal, upon a supposition, that had the lease been renewed and a life inserted, on the 9th of March 1711, such life would have subsisted for seven years and no longer, and interest for the same, both which Mr. Rowley refused; and Charles afterwards acquainting Mr. Rowley that he was advised to make him a tender in specie, Mr. Rowley promised to meet him at Henry's Bank in Dublin, on the 30th of January 1719, where they accordingly met; and Charles, in the presence of several persons, tendered Mr. Rowley, in specie, the fines and interest aforesaid, and therewith a pair of indentures of lease to be executed, purporting to be a renewal of, and in every particular agreeing with the original lease, other than the change of the name of the said Alice Charles for that of Thomas Hendrick, the life named to be inserted in her place, offering and tendering to seal, deliver, and perfect as his act and deed, a counterpart of such new lease, and to surrender or cancel the former, in case [488] Mr. Rowley would execute the new lease; but which Mr. Rowley refused.

Whereupon John Charles, on the 29th of February 1719, filed his bill in the Court of Exchequer in Ireland, against the said Hercules Rowley, stating the several matters above mentioned; and praying to be decreed a renewal of his lease on payment of the sum so tendered, or such other sum as the court should think proper; and likewise to be decreed the costs and expences he had been at in defending the title of the lands.

Mr. Rowley, in the year 1720, put in his answer; and the cause being at issue, witnesses were examined, and publication passed; but notwithstanding John Charles fully proved the money expended by Sir Arthur Langford's directions, his promises both of repayment and renewal, and the several matters in his bill; yet the court, on the 21st of February 1723, pronounced the following order:

Cur. Dismiss the bill so far as relates to the renewal of said lease, and let it be referred to the Chief Remembrancer of this Court, or his deputy, to take an account as to the £150 which the said John Charles was at in defending the title and possession of the said lands and premises.

John Charles being ill at the time of pronouncing this order, continued so about three months, and died on the 2d of June 1724, leaving Richard Charles, his eldest son and heir, and by his death the suit abated; but had he lived, he intended either to have re-heard the cause, or appealed; being so well satisfied of his right of renewal, that, subsequent to this order, he made his will, dated the 30th of May 1724, whereby he devised the said lands and premises to his son Elijah Charles, Joshua Henzell, and Frances Charles, his eldest daughter, and to their heirs, (subject to some annuities and legacies, since determined and paid off,) to the use of the said Elijah Charles for life; remainder to his first and every other son in tail male; remainder to the said Frances Charles for her life; remainder to her first and every other son in tail male, (such sons and others descending from the said Frances, taking the surname of Charles;) remainder to his daughter Eleanor Henzell for life; remainder to her first and every other son in tail male; remainder to the issue female of the said Elijah, Frances, and Eleanor, equally to be divided; and appointed his son Elijah Charles, the said Joshua Henzell, and the said Frances Charles, his executors.

Elijah Charles entered upon the premises under his father's will; but being barely tenant for life, and having no issue, though married several years before his father's death; and being, through misfortunes in trade, obliged to secrete himself from his creditors, he did not, in his time, endeavour to compel a renewal of the lease.

Joshua Henzell died about the year 1728, leaving Eleanor his widow, and one son, Bigoe Henzell; and about October 1742, Mr. Rowley died, having by his will devised all his real and personal estate to the respondent his eldest son and his heirs, subject to some annuities and legacies; and appointed him, with Frances [489] Rowley, his widow, and Richard Wingfield, Esq. his executors; but the respondent only proved the will, and by Mr. Rowley's death the suit totally abated.

Frances Charles, the eldest daughter of John Charles, in the year 1727, married William Vipont, and had issue by him the appellant, her only child. The appellant's father died about the year 1740, having by his will appointed Luke Vipont the appellant's guardian during his minority; and Frances, the appellant's mother, also died