Page:The English Reports v1 1900.pdf/745

This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
BATEMAN v. CONWAY [1753]
I BROWN.

ATTACHMENT.

[519] Rowland Bateman, and another,—Appellants; Hugh Conway, and others,—Respondents [5th March 1753].

[Mew's Dig. iii. 2158.]

[The brief of a party in the cause is clandestinely taken out of the chamber of his attorney, and made an improper use of by the opposite party. The Court ordered the brief to be returned, and granted an attachment, not only against the person who had obtained it, but also against those who had made use of it. Though a brief is not of itself evidence against the party for whom it is prepared, yet as a discovery of the secrets and merits of his case may be productive of perjury, or subornation of perjury, and thereby obstruct the justice of the Court in which the suit is depending; the obtaining of it in a surreptitious manner, is an offence highly deserving the censure and punishment of that Court.]

The respondent Hugh Conway being seised for three lives, with a covenant for perpetual renewal, of the lands of Portrinand, in the county of Limerick, by lease from the Right Honourable Lord Southwell, and having a large family and no fortune but the profits of this farm, he was under the necessity of contracting many debts; and being much pressed for the payment of them, he mortgaged the farm to the Honourable John Fitz-Maurice for £700; but being still necessitous, be afterwards offered the equity of redemption of the premises to sale, and after some treaty, the appellant Bateman agreed to become the purchaser for £1250. Accordingly by lease and release, dated the 2d and 3d of June 1748, the respondent Hugh Conway, together with Sarah his wife, and the respondent John Conway, his eldest son, in consideration of £1250 conveyed all the said lands and premises to the appellant Bateman and his heirs; subject to the mortgage, on which there was then due for principal and interest £730.

After the appellant Bateman had agreed for this purchase, but before the deeds were executed, the respondent Hugh having occasion for money, Bateman advanced him several sums to the amount of £150 on account of the purchase-money; and it being agreed, that he should have an allowance thereout of the principal money and interest due on the mortgage, and also of the £150 so advanced, an account was stated between them of these allowances on the day of executing the purchase deeds; when it appearing, that the balance coming to the respondent Hugh was about £370 the appellant Bateman then paid him the same in cash, except twenty guineas, which by his direction was paid to the respondent John Conway; and thereupon the tenants attorned, and the appellant Bateman was let into the receipt of the rents and profits.

About a year and an half after this transaction, the respondent Hugh set up a pretence that he had not received the whole of [520] the purchase-money; but that the appellant Bateman had, at the time of executing the deeds, given him several promissory notes for part thereof, viz. one for £60, another for £75, three for £50 each, one for £30, another for £33, and another for £45, amounting in the whole to £473. And some time in December 1749, Mr. Bateman received a letter from one Robert Bentley, importing, that a promissory note of his to Hugh Conway, had been indorsed by Hugh to one Hickie, and by him to Bentley, who thereby required payment thereof; and not long afterwards, Bateman received letters from several other persons, informing him, that they held divers notes given by him to Hugh Conway, which they had negotiated, and now requested to be paid.

The appellant Bateman having not only paid Hugh Conway the whole of the purchase-money which was coming to him, but had also paid off Mr. Fitz-Maurice's mortgage, was much alarmed by these letters, and by further intelligence, that all the notes therein mentioned had been forged by the respondent Hugh and his sons John and Edmund; and therefore he preferred bills of indictment against them to the grand jury of the county of the city of Limerick, at the general assize there held in the spring 1749. Which bills having been found, and the parties apprehended

729

This article is issued from Wikisource. The text is available under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 unless otherwise noted. Additional terms may apply for the media files.