Oldalképek
PDF
ePub

the said messuages lands tenements hereditaments and premises were at the time of the death of the said intestate Thomas Smelt holden of Her Majesty Queen Victoria in free and common socage but not subject to any services in respect thereof except fealty and did devolve to Her Majesty Queen Victoria by virtue of Her Royal Prerogative as an escheat as by the said inquisition it was found All and singular which the said Sarah Smelt is ready to verify as the said Court of our Lady the Queen shall now consider.

Wherefore the said Sarah Smelt prays judgment and that the said inquisition be quashed and that the hands of our said Lady the Queen be amoved from the said messuages lands tenements hereditaments and premises and that she the said Sarah Smelt to the possession thereof and of every parcel thereof together with the issues proceeds and profits thereof from the time of the taking of the said inquisition and the said seizure of the said messuages lands tenements hereditaments and premises into Her Majesty's hands be restored. [Signed by Counsel for the Traverser.]

REPLICATION.

And Sir Richard E. Webster Knight Attorney-General of our said Lady the now Queen who for our said Lady in this behalf sues being present here in Court in his proper person on the day of in the fifty-third year of

the reign of our said Lady saith that by reason of anything by the said Sarah Smelt in the said traverse above alleged the said inquisition ought not to be quashed nor ought the hands of our said Lady from the said messuages lands tenements hereditaments and premises nor from any part thereof to be amoved nor ought the said Sarah Smelt to be restored to possession thereof together with the issues proceeds and profits thereof and every part and parcel thereof from the time of the taking of the said inquisition aforesaid in the meantime received as in the plea of the said Sarah Smelt is prayed Because protesting that the said plea of the said Sarah Smelt and the matters therein alleged are not sufficient in law and that he the said Attorney-General is not bound by the law of the land to answer the same Nevertheless for plea in this behalf the said Attorney-General who sues as aforesaid for our said Lady the Queen says that the said messuages lands tenements hereditaments and premises in the said inquisition mentioned were at the time of the death of the said Thomas Smelt holden of our said Lady Queen Victoria in free and common socage but not subject to any rent or service in respect thereof except fealty and by reason of the premises devolved to our said Lady as an escheat by virtue of Her Prerogative Royal and in right of Her Crown in manner and form as in the said inquisition is found Without this that before and at the time of the death of the said Thomas Smelt the said messuages lands tenements hereditaments and premises in the said inquisition mentioned devolved upon Christopher Anthony Smelt as heir-at-law of the said intestate Thomas Smelt in manner and form as the said Sarah Smelt as above in her said plea in that behalf alleged And this he the said Attorney-General who sues as aforesaid is ready to verify Wherefore he prays judgment and that the said messuages lands tenements hereditaments and premises in the said inquisition mentioned may remain in the hands and possession of our said Lady the now Queen And for a further plea in this behalf the said Attorney-General who sues as aforesaid for our said Lady further saith that the said messuages lands tenements hereditaments and premises were at the time of the death of the said Thomas Smelt holden of our

said Lady Her Majesty Queen Victoria in free and common socage but not subject to any rent or service in respect thereof except fealty in manner and form as by the said inquisition is supposed and found And this he the said Attorney-General who sues as aforesaid prays may be enquired of by the country, &c. &c.

REJOINDER.

The 31st day of July 1889.

And the said Sarah Smelt by her said Attorney as to the said plea of the said Attorney-General for our said Lady the Queen firstly above pleaded in bar of the said plea of the said Sarah Smelt by way of traverse of the said inquisition above pleaded says that for and notwithstanding anything by the said AttorneyGeneral for our said Lady the Queen in that plea alleged the said inquisition ought to be quashed vacated and discharged and that the hands of our said Lady the Queen ought to be amoved from the possession of the said messuages lands tenements hereditaments and premises and that she the said Sarah Smelt ought to be restored to and rendered the possession thereof together with the issues proceeds and profits thereof and every parcel thereof from the time of the taking of the said inquisition and the said seizure of the said messuages lands tenements hereditaments and premises into Her Majesty's hands Because protesting that the said messuages lands tenements hereditaments and premises were not at the time of the death of the said Thomas Smelt holden of our said Lady Queen Victoria in free and common socage but not subject to any rent or service in respect thereof except fealty and that they did not by reason of the said premises devolve to our said Lady as an escheat by virtue of Her Prerogative Royal and in right of Her Crown in manner and form as in the said inquisition is found and in the said plea of the said Attorney-General is alleged for plea in that behalf the said Sarah Smelt says that at the time of the death of the said Thomas Smelt the said messuages lands tenements hereditaments and premises devolved upon the said Christopher Anthony Smelt as heir-at-law of the said intestate Thomas Smelt in manner and form as she the said Sarah Smelt has in her said plea in that behalf alleged and this she prays may be enquired of by the country And the said Attorney-General who sues as aforesaid doth the like and the said Sarah Smelt as to the plea of the said AttorneyGeneral of our Lady the Queen lastly above pleaded in bar of the said plea of the said Sarah Smelt so by her by way of traverse of the said inquisition pleaded as aforesaid and which the said Attorney-General hath prayed may be enquired of by the country she the said Sarah Smelt doth the like.

REPLICATION.

(Another Form.)

[As in the previous precedent down to the words "because protesting” on p. 457, and then continue as follows:] Because protesting and not acknowledging anything by the said A. B. pleaded to be true the said Attorney-General of our said Lord the King who sues as aforesaid for our said Lord the King saith that the said C. D. was not the heir-at-law of the said E. F. and of the said G. H. as in the plea of the said A. B. alleged and this the said Attorney-General who sues as aforesaid prays may be enquired of by the country.

REJOINDER.

(Another Form.)

The 10th day of June in the 1st year of the reign of our Lord
King Edward VII. A.D. 1901.

And the said A. B. being here present before our said Lord the King in His said High Court of Justice by K. L. her said Solicitor on the tenth day of June in the first year of the reign of our said Lord as to the plea of the said AttorneyGeneral for our said Lord the King above pleaded in bar of the said plea of the said A. B. by her by way of traverse of the said Inquisition above pleaded and which the said Attorney-General hath prayed may be enquired of by the country the said A. B. doth the like.

In the Petty Bag

(In Chancery).

Confession of the Attorney-General.

The 4th day of May in the 63rd year of the reign of Our Lady Queen Victoria

The Queen

against

Westmacott.

and in the year of Our Lord 1900.

And Sir Richard Everard Webster Bart. the Attorney-General of our said Lady the Queen who for our said Lady the Queen appears in this matter being present here in Court now to wit on the 4th day of May the said 63rd year of the Reign of our said Lady the Queen and having seen read and heard as well the said plea and traverse as the said Inquisition and having fully understood the same and having a warrant from the Right Honourable the Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty's Treasury for his so doing saith for our said Lady the Queen that he having received full information concerning the same doth not deny but that at the time of the death of the said William Mann in the said plea named and thence until and at the time of the taking of the said Inquisition the said messuages or tenements and their appurtenances in the said Inquisition mentioned devolved and belonged to the said Catherine Mary Moss as the second cousin and heiress-at-law of the said William Mann and that at the time of the death of the said Catherine Mary Moss that is to say on or about the 20th day of November 1877 the said messuages or tenements and their appurtenances devolved and belonged to and have since belonged to the said Arthur Young Seymour Westmacott as the second cousin once removed and heir-at-law of the said William Mann in manner and form as the said Arthur Young Seymour Westmacott hath in his plea above alleged and he doth confess the said plea of the said Arthur Young Seymour Westmacott in manner and form above pleaded in all things to be true. RICHARD E. WEBSTER.

Judgment in favour of the Crown.

Afterwards on the seventh day of July in the year of Our Lord One thousand nine hundred and two and in the 2nd year of the reign of Our said Lord the King before the Honourable Sir John Charles Bigham, one of the Judges of His Majesty's High Court of Justice and as well the said Attorney-General of Our said Lord the King who for Our said Lord the King in this behalf prosecuteth as the said Emily Manning by her Counsel in Court Whereupon all and singular the premises being seen and fully understood by the said Court of Our said Lord the King now here it is considered and adjudged by the said Court here that the said Inquisition be not quashed and that the hands of Our said Lord the King be not amoved from the said messuages lands tenements hereditaments and premises in the said Inquisition mentioned, but that the same remain in the hands and possession of Our said Lord the King together with the issues proceeds and profits thereof And that the said Emily Manning pay Our said Lord the King His costs of the proceedings to traverse the said Inquisition to be taxed.

Judgment of Amoveas Manus.
After Trial.

[As in the last precedent down to "adjudged by the said Court here," and continue] that the said. Inquisition be quashed and that the hands of Our said Lord the King be amoved from the said messuages lands tenements hereditaments and premises and that the said A. B. to the possession thereof with the issues proceeds and profits thereof and of every parcel thereof from the time of the taking of the said Inquisition and the seizure of the said messuages lands tenements hereditaments and premises into His Majesty's hands be restored saving the right of every one.

[NOTE.--With regard to the restoration of the mesne profits, see above, p. 443.]

After Confession by the Crown.

And thereupon mature deliberation being had of the premises on the same day of in the

year of the reign of Our said Lord the King It is considered declared and adjudged by Our said Lord the King's right trusty and well beloved Counsellor C. D. Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain and the Judges of the Chancery Division of Our said Lord the King's High Court of Justice aforesaid that the said Inquisition be quashed and that [continue as in the last preceding form].

[blocks in formation]

ment be entered for the Crown with costs [on the higher scale to include the costs of shorthand notes] It is this day adjudged that judgment be entered for the Crown with costs to be taxed [on the higher scale to include the costs of the shorthand notes].

The above costs have been taxed and allowed at £ taxing officer's certificate dated the

.

as appears by a Entered at the

day of

19

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

Commencement of Roll of Proceedings.

Pleas before our Lord the King in His High Court of Justice at the Royal Courts of Justice in the County of Middlesex of Trinity Sittings in the second year of our Sovereign Lord Edward VII. by the grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland and of the British Dominions beyond the Seas King Defender of the Faith.

Mittimus to the Queen's Bench Division of a Traverse of Escheat in the Duchy of Lancaster.

Victoria by the grace of God &c. To our right trusty and well-beloved Sir Alexander James Edmund Cockburn Bart. our Chief Justice assigned to hold pleas before us and to our right trusty and well-beloved justices [setting out the names of the judges of the Queen's Bench] greeting. We send to you enclosed in these Presents the tenor of a certain Commission under the Seals of our Let this Duchy and County Palatine of Lancaster bearing date the 29th Writ issue day of August in the 34th year of our reign directed to [names of Henry W. the Commissioners] commanding them [stating the terms of the West Commission]. AttorneyGeneral

of the

Duchy of Lancaster.

Together with the tenor of the Return to the said Commission thereunto annexed returned unto us in the Chancery of our Duchy of Lancaster and there remaining of record,

And also the record and process in the Chancery of our said Duchy in the matter of a traverse by James Moreton of our title in right of our said Duchy to an Escheat of the said messuages or dwellinghouses and premises.

Commanding you that inspecting the tenor of the Commission Return record and process aforesaid you cause further to be done thereon what of right and according to the law and custom of our kingdom of England you shall see meet to be done.

[blocks in formation]
« ElőzőTovább »