Page:The English Reports v1 1900.pdf/689

dent Dean Bolton, in trust for the said daughters; and £300 to remain in the respondent Alderman Bolton's hands, to satisfy the appellant Lady Irwin her demands; being what she and her husband had claimed for her interest in the said premises, and what was adjudged to be the value thereof, in regard she had only an estate for life, after the mortgage was discharged.

In pursuance of this agreement, the said daughters and the respondent Dean Bolton, as their trustee, by deeds of lease and release, bearing date the 26th and 27th of January 1704, in consideration of £900 paid to the said respondent Dean Bolton, for the use of the said daughters, and of £1200 to be paid and retained as aforesaid, did convey and assure unto the respondent Alderman Bolton and his heirs, all their estate, right, and title, in and to the said premises.

In May 1706, the respondent Alderman Bolton, came to an account with the Governors of the Hospital, and there then appeared to be due on the mortgage, for principal, interest, and costs, £805 15s. 2d. and no more; they having, since the Alderman's purchase, received several sums of money out of the said premises: whereupon the said Governors, by deeds of lease and release, dated the 9th and 10th of May 1706, in consideration of £805 15s. 2d. paid to them by the respondent Alderman Bolton, did assign the aforesaid mortgage to one Richard Weldon, in trust for the respondent Alderman Bolton. And by virtue of this assignment, the Alderman became possessed of all the said mortgaged premises, which, as they were then let, yielded about £120 per ann.

The premises were at this time in a very ruinous condition, and the expences which the respondent Alderman Bolton was constantly at in repairing the same, amounted to very considerable sums, so that the yearly income thereof did not answer the interest of his purchase-money; and finding that no tenant would improve on the premises, and that unless the same were rebuilt, they would in a very few years be of little or no value; he therefore let part of the said premises to several tenants, for long terms of years, who were obliged to rebuild the said houses, and who accordingly laid out great sums of money in such rebuilding, and made use of the old materials in the new buildings; so that the yearly rent of the premises, by the improvements made thereon, was increased to £166 per ann.

The appellant Lady Irwin, being fully acquainted with all these proceedings of the respondent Alderman Bolton, seemed very well satisfied therewith, and proposed referring her demand out of the premises, to the arbitration of the respondent Dean Bolton, or any other disinterested person; but she not returning into Ireland till June 1710, and then perceiving that by the Alderman's manage-[437]-ment, the premises were in a flourishing condition, and of a much greater value than when he first purchased the same; she, and her then husband William Broughton, esq. on the 11th of November 1710, exhibited their bill in the Court of Chancery in Ireland, against the respondents and others, praying to have the possession of the houses, which were built on the house and gardens particularly devised to her, and an account of the profits thereof, and also to have the possession of one-third part of the houses built on the rest of the estate.

Pending this suit, the said William Broughton died; whereupon Dame Elizabeth, on the 29th of September 1715, obtained an order to proceed in the cause in her own name.

Accordingly, on the 21st of November 1716, the cause was heard before the Lord Chancellor; when his Lordship was pleased to order and decree, inter alia, that the appellant Lady Irwin should recover from the respondent Alderman Bolton, the house called the One Tun, with the garden, stables, and appurtenances thereto belonging; and that so much of the premises as were let to Milburne, should be accounted for at £55 per ann. during Milburne's lease; and after the expiration thereof, that the appellant should have, during her natural life, the rents of the said demised premises then let by the respondent Alderman Bolton; and a third part of the rest of the real estate during her natural life, as the same was then let by the respondent Alderman Bolton, subject to a fifth part of the mortgage assigned by the Blue-Coat Hospital, to the respondent Alderman Bolton; and that the fines received by him from the tenants, should go towards discharge of the incumbrances.

The respondent the Alderman, apprehending himself aggrieved by some part of this decree, intended to apply for a rehearing of the cause, but was prevented by