Page:The English Reports v1 1900.pdf/664

the day the respondent should take possession of the house and premises, which should not exceed the 10th day of the same May, and all taxes whatsoever were to be discharged to Midsummer-day then next.

The respondent, by the desire of the Managers of the Club, and particularly of the appellants the Duke of Queensbury and Lord [399] Lucan, took possession of the house on the 24th of May 1775, with full resolution to perform every article of his undertaking, to the satisfaction of the Members of the Club; and the respondent expended large sums of money in altering, repairing, gilding, and beautifying the house and premises, and otherwise in fitting the same, and making it commodious for the purposes of the Club, and in purchasing the fixtures, and also in purchasing plate, china, linen, wines, and various other articles. The respondent also hired servants to do the business of the house, and to attend the company, and laid out large sums of money on various other accounts, by the desire of the Managers of the Club, to a very large amount in the whole.

On the 28th of June 1776, the respondent received a letter from Sir George Colebrooke, intimating, that the mortgagee of the house would foreclose, unless his mortgage was paid off on or before the 25th of July next. And the respondent having shewn this letter to several Members of the Club, the appellants the Duke of Queensbury, the Earl of Egremont, Lord Melbourne, Lord Macartney, and Lord Lucan, pressed the respondent to complete the purchase, assuring him, that they would to the utmost indemnify him, and make him ample satisfaction for the expence he should be at, and for his care and trouble in the conduct of the Club.

In compliance with such request, and in full reliance on the performance of such promise, the respondent applied to Sir George Colebrooke, and represented to him, that he had consented that £9000 of the purchase-money should remain on mortgage of the house and premises, at four and a half per cent. but Sir George Colebrooke having occasion for the money, application was made to Ralph Leycester, esq. who agreed to advance £9000 upon mortgage of the house; and Sir George Colebrooke agreed to take the respondent's bond for £450 the residue of the £9000 guineas. The respondent having informed the Members of the Club, and particularly the appellants, that Mr. Leycester had agreed to advance £9000 on those terms, they approved of the transaction, and Mr. Leycester gave directions to his attorney to prepare a conveyance accordingly; and thereupon, by indentures of lease and release, bearing date respectively the 22d and 23d of July 1776, the house and premises were conveyed to Mr. Leycester in fee, subject to redemption on payment by the respondent of £9000 and interest. The respondent also gave Mr. Leycester a bond for the like sum of £9000 and interest, and he likewise gave Sir George Colebrooke a bond for £450 the residue of the 9000 guineas, and the respondent afterwards paid that bond.

The Club met for some time at the house, and were accommodated in every respect according to the agreement with the respondent; but the number of persons meeting at the house beginning to decrease, the respondent expressed great uneasiness; but in consequence of repeated assurances to the respondent, that he should not suffer by his undertaking, he continued to provide all necessaries for the entertainment of the Club, and kept the house open for their reception for a considerable time, but at length the Members [400] of the Club entirely deserted the house, the last meeting having been on the 4th of June 1777.

The respondent paid many large sums, and contracted many debts on account of the house, and after the Club had deserted it, he was under the necessity of paying annually, for interest of £9000 due on the mortgage, and of £450 paid to Sir George Colebrooke, land-tax, and parish-taxes, servants for the purpose of keeping the house clean, and preventing its receiving injury, and wages, and board-wages of such servants, for repairs, and other expences, coals, candles, and other trifling articles, in the whole about £701 a year. Mr. Leycester also called on the respondent for payment of the £9000 and brought an ejectment to obtain possession of the house, and also brought an action against the respondent on the bond, and insisted on the benefit of a proviso in the mortgage deed, by which, in default of payment of the £9000 and interest, he was authorised to sell the house. In this situation, the respondent applied to the appellants, and requested them to direct him in what manner to act, and particularly to inform him whether the