Page:The English Reports v1 1900.pdf/1117

Redman, or any under whom he claimed, ever received the tythes of the land in question.

On the other side it was argued (W. Bunbury), that tythes, in the hands of laymen, are now of a different nature, and come under another consideration from what they were at common law; for by the several statutes of dissolution, they were made and declared in the hands of laymen, as temporal inheritances and lay-fees; and more particularly, it is enacted by the statute of 32 Hen. VIII. c. 7. that lay persons shall have the like remedy for the recovery [514] of tythes in temporal courts, and are enabled to sue for them in like manner as they may for lands, tenements, and other hereditaments; and tythes have at this day all other incidents belonging to temporal inheritances. That the obliging the respondent to set forth his lessor's title, further than he had in general done, was binding him to a great difficulty, he being no way privy to, or conusant of his lessor's right, any otherwise than as appeared from his covenant in the lease. That the respondent's not setting forth the title, as required by the demurrer, was only matter of form, and could have no influence on the merits of the cause, or prejudice the appellant in his right to the tythes, if he had such right, or to any discharge or exemption from the payment of them. That this judgment was agreeable to former resolutions in cases of the like nature, and even in those where greater exactness and certainty was required, than in a bill of this kind; and therefore it was hoped, that the appeal would be dismissed with costs.

Accordingly, after hearing counsel on this appeal, it was ordered and adjudged, that the same should be dismissed, and the order therein complained of, affirmed: and it was further ordered, that the appellant should pay to the respondent £30 for his costs in respect of the said appeal. (Jour. vol. 22. p. 281.)

On the 29th of September 1703, Jasper Radcliffe, Esq. gave a bond in the penalty of £900 to Jane Davy, conditioned to pay her £450 at £5 per cent. interest, on the 30th of September 1704; and on the 19th of October 1703, he gave another bond to Mary Andrews, in £500 penalty, conditioned to pay her £250 with interest at £5 per cent. on the 20th of October 1704; both which sums of £450 and £250) were the property of Martha, the wife of Henry Mannaton, Esq. and were taken in trust for her and for her separate use, exclusive of her husband.

The said Jasper Radcliffe, by his will, dated the 7th of October 1703, gave £30 per ann. to his daughter Martha Radcliffe, the respondent's mother, till she should marry or die; and if married with the consent of her mother, he gave her £1400 for her fortune, payable within twelve months next after her marriage; he then devised real estates of £20,000 value, of which he was seised in fee, to his wife Jane Radcliffe, and to the said Henry Mannaton, for 500 years, in trust for payment of all his just [515] debts and legacies; and made Jasper Radcliffe his son executor and residuary legatee, and died in November 1704.

Martha Mannaton, who was aunt to the respondent's said mother Martha Radcliffe, by deed, dated the 18th of November 1707, appointed that immediately after her own death, the said £250, and the interest then duo, should be paid to the said Martha Radcliffe, for her separate use.