Page:The English Reports v1 1900.pdf/1123

Andrews, as Provost, disputed the validity of the leases, and brought ejectments on the title for the recovery of the possession: and that, pending the ejectments, a resolution was entered in the register book of the college, in the words following, viz.

On the 6th of May 1760, resolved by the board, that if the tenants of the Provost's estate, as Provost, do, without a suit, give up the leases made by Dr. Baldwin, and should hereafter bring actions for damages against the late [523] Provost's representatives, the college will not take advantage of their not standing a suit to eviction, it being the opinion of lawyers consulted on both sides, that the leases are void.

Which entry, the appellant charged, was made at the request of Dr. Andrews, but that Dr. William Clement, the acting executor of Dr. Baldwin, by an entry in the same book, in his own hand-writing, immediately following, reserved to himself, as one of the executors, the right of proceeding as he should be advised. That by the first entry it appeared, that Dr. Andrews had represented to the board of senior Fellows, that the college was interested in the event of the suit, which the appellant charged would not have been the case, if Dr. Andrews had instituted the same for his own benefit only, and not for the benefit of his successors; and in manifestation that the senior Fellows were persuaded that such suit was for the benefit of Dr. Andrews, as Provost, and his successors, the appellant charged, that Dr. Andrews having evicted the lease made by Dr. Baldwin to Merick Shaw, Catherine Shaw, his executrix, brought her action in the King's Bench in Ireland against Dr. Clement and James Agar, Esq. as executors of Dr. Baldwin, to recover damages for such eviction, and obtained judgment against them; and a writ of enquiry of damages having been executed, Dr. Leland, then Bursar of the college, on the 13th of June 1765, paid to her, out of the revenues of the college, £4572 15s. 3d. for the damages found on the inquisition, and for her costs. And the bill charged, that the covenant from Dr. Baldwin, for making good the said lease, was for him and his successors only, and neither did nor could bind the college, nor extend to the representatives of Dr. Baldwin; which Dr. Andrews, who had been for many years a practising barrister, well knew, and yet, as Provost, directed Mr. Leland as Bursar, to pay the money out of the college funds to Mrs. Shaw. That Waller, having made defence to the ejectments brought by Dr. Andrews for recovery of the lands in Meath, but having afterwards relinquished his defence, and given up the possession to Dr. Andrews, brought his action, in Easter term 1760, against the executors of Dr. Baldwin, upon a like covenant contained in his lease, to make the same good; but the executors having pleaded that there was no eviction, he withdrew his defence, and judgment was had by covin: and on the 18th of January 1763, Waller filed his bill in the Chancery of Ireland against the executors, and against the Provost, Fellows, and Scholars; and on the 6th of July 1769, obtained a decree that he should be at liberty to bring his action for damages; and that the executors of Dr. Baldwin should, in their plea, admit that Waller had been duly evicted in the said action of ejectment. That Waller brought such action, and obtained judgment in the King's Bench in Ireland against the executors for £3500, but such judgment having been reversed by the King's Bench in England, Waller brought a bill in the Exchequer against the executors, and against the college; thereby charging, that he was induced to surrender his lease, and give up the possession, Dr. Andrews ha-[524]-ving shewn him the opinion of counsel, that Dr. Baldwin had no power to make any lease as Provost, save only for his own life; and that Dr. Andrews promised he should be paid his damages by the college, which suit was still depending: and that in such several suits, the college was put to great expences by the conduct of Dr. Andrews; and the bill charged, that Waller had not the least encouragement from the executors of Baldwin to surrender his lease; and in manifestation that the ejectments brought by Dr. Andrews were represented by him, and understood by the college, to be for the benefit of the succeeding Provosts as well as for himself, and not for the benefit of his representatives, the appellant charged, that the said suits were supported at the sole expence of the college, and that a survey had been taken by the direction of Dr. Andrews of the Galway estate, but the expence thereof was, at his instance, charged to and paid by the college. That Dr. Andrews having, at great expence and loss to the college, broke the leases made by his predecessor, under whose will the college had obtained a real and personal estate of £80,000, of which Dr. Andrews availed himself by obtaining, on account