Page:The English Reports v1 1900.pdf/334

The appellants stated: That John Hubbuck had been an upholsterer in London, in great credit, by a retail trade and foreign traffick, and entrusted divers persons with considerable parcels of wares, for which they became debtors to him, and occasionally borrowed money on securities, and took up wares upon trust, and thereby contracted many debts: And that the appellant Oades lent Hubbuck 300l. upon his single bond of 600l. and that all interest was paid thereon to 8th September, 1694, and 10th October following, 100l. of the principal; soon after which, viz. in the beginning of March, 1694, Hubbuck died intestate, indebted to the appellant Oades 200l. as aforesaid; to appellant Prissick 50l. and upwards, a book debt; and to other persons other sums, partly by specialities, but for the most part upon simple contract only; leaving several young children unprovided for: And that at a general meeting of all the creditors, notified by public advertisement, in May, 1695, appellant Oades, as principal bond creditor, and appellant Prissick, as a near kinsman, were made choice of by the majority of creditors to obtain letters of administration of the intestate's estate, in trust for themselves and all other the creditors; and that, 4th June, 1695, administration was accordingly granted to appellants, who within three months exhibited into the Prerogative an inventory of all the household goods, and stock, amounting to 283l. 19s. 7d. and soon after duly administered the same according to law, in the expences of the administration, and in payment of bond debts only, whereof that of appellant Oades was principal: And that in Michaelmas term, 1697, one John Vigures exhibited a bill in Chancery against appellants, and also against William Hester, son and heir of William Hester, deceased, thereby setting forth that, 3d September, 1688, John Hubbuck and William Hester borrowed 100l. of him, and for security became bound in a bond of 200l. and that, 4th September, 1693, John [345] Hubbuck borrowed 50l. more of him on bis single bond of 100l. penalty: And that William Hester the father made his will, and William Hester, his son and heir, sole executor, and died seised and possessed of a great real and personal estate: And that appellants, Hubbuck's administrators, refused to pay Vigures his said several debts, and prayed a discovery from William Hester of his late father's estate; and from appellants of their intestate Hubbuck's estate, and to have his debts thereout paid: And appellants answered, that they had taken the administration as aforesaid, but that appellant Oades never intermeddled farther save by disbursing some petty charges thereout, and that Prissick was the sole acting administrator, and had paid appellant Oades his said bond debt, so that his demands were well nigh satisfied, and he submitted to assign his said administration; and that appellant Prissick set forth a schedule of all his receipts and payments, whereby it appeared that his receipts amounted to 894l. 5s. 7d. and his disbursements touching the administration, and in the payment of bond debts only, to 888l. 7s. 5½d. so that there then remained in his hands (his own simple contract debt being wholly unsatisfied) only 5l. 18s. 1½d. but annexed another schedule to his answer of debts, standing charged in the intestate's books as owing to him, amounting to 1019l. 11s. 7d. supposed to be desperate; and that no witness had been examined in the cause; but appellant obtained an order to examine witnesses, viva voce, at the hearing to prove his bonds; and the cause was heard at the Rolls 28th of October, 1698, when the appellants did not attend, but Hester did and make his defence, and a decree was pronounced, that it should be referred to Sir John Hoskins, one of the Masters, to compute what was due for principal and interest on the bond entered into by Hubbuck alone, and to tar plaintiff his costs, which appellants were ordered to pay; and that Vigures and Hester should proceed to a trial at law, and after such trial had, each to come back upon the equity reserved; and that soon after the hearing Vigures died, leaving respondent his