Page:The English Reports v1 1900.pdf/286

reports and [245] orders complained of affirmed, with 20l. costs against appellants. Lords Journ. vol. xvii. p. 197.

The house took notice that in the appellants printed case there were reflecting words against the respondents, and being informed that Mr. Bendlowes had drawn the case, and ordered it to be printed, Mr. Bendlowes was ordered to attend next day; and was then reprimanded by the Lord Keeper, according to the order of the house. ib. and 198.

The appellant made this case: That respondent pretended his late wife Diana, appellant's half sister, was entitled to 3000l. portion, and 40l. a year maintenance, under a codicil, dated 7th July, 1684, annexed to the will of her grandmother, Anne Prise, charged upon freehold and copyhold lands in Wisteston, in the county of Hereford; and that respondent and his said wife had agreed to abate of the said demands, and accept from appellant 1000l. to be paid down, and 1500l. more in four years, and sixty pounds yearly interest, and afterwards full interest at 6l. per cent. And that appellant paid 810l. in part of the 1000l. and that it had been appellant's misfortune to make default at the hearing of this cause, and that thereby respondent, 12th June, 1702, obtained a decree, that the pretended agreement should be performed, and that appellant should pay 190l. residue of the 1000l. and should also pay the 1500l. with interest, and costs of suit; and in default thereof should account for the profits of the trust estate; and that the trustees should sell so much of the trust estate as would pay the same: And appellant stated, that he was a young, inexperienced gentleman, and was an hundred miles off all June and July, with several of his writings, and that his solicitor (one Reeves) persuaded him that he need not attend his cause until Michaelmas terms; and that respondent's solicitor had expeditiously got the decree made absolute the 3d of July, and inrolled the 9th, within six days after; and that appellant came up on being informed of it, and applied twice to the Lord Keeper, that the cause might stand in the paper to be heard, and offered to pay respondent's costs; but that his Lordship adhering to his general rule, of not setting aside any enrollments of decrees, refused; so that appellant was [247] without remedy, but by appeal; for he could not bring a bill of review, because his case depended on facts; and proofs not appearing in the decree, as respondent had enrolled it, and stated that he would not trouble the Lords with the merits of the cause, if the enrollment were opened, and the cause sent back into Chancery to be heard on the merits; and that he submitted to pay costs for his solicitor's neglect; but that respondent complained that appellant was guilty of great delays, in putting in four or five insufficient answers; whereas those answers were occasioned by the respondent's solicitor, who pressed appellant to discover the boundaries and value of all his freehold and copyhold land, which it was impossible for appellant, young as he was, to do to the satisfaction of a very nice solicitor, who got more by it than his client. And that appellant always offered to produce all his deeds, writings and copies; and to forward respondent in his cause, by consenting that publication should pass at Michaelmas, 1701; but that respondent insisted in his printed case, that appellant's cause ought not to be heard at all by the Lords; and that appellant could not read any of his proofs, because they had not been read in Chancery, which objection appellant insisted turned upon respondent himself, who was plaintiff in Chancery, and none of whose proofs had been read in Chancery; and that this objection was moreover contrary to the course of the Chancery, which in all cases of appeals, and re-hearings from decrees by default, heard causes upon the proofs and merits; and that it was against natural justice that a man should lose his estate without being heard; and that in all cases brought before the Lords, the whole cause upon bill, answer, and proofs, stood open for their judgment, as if the same had never been heard; but if the Lords should not send