Daniel v Wilkin and Others
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 10 February 1852 |
| Date | 10 February 1852 |
| Court | Exchequer |
English Reports Citation: 155 E.R. 1016
IN THE COURTS OF EXCHEQUER AND EXCHEQUER CHAMBER
S C 21 L J Ex 236 See, as to costs, 8 Ex 156
[42$] daniel v wilkin and others Feb 10, 185J -Queen Elizabeth, in the 9th yeai of her reign, granted the lordship of Denbigh in fee to the Earl of Leicester, who mortgaged it to the Corporation of London, and dred in the 30th Ebz In the 3.3rd Ebz the corporation conveyed the lands to the Crown, and covenanted to deliver up all muniments of title, surveys, &c, and the property has ever since remained in the possession of the Crown In the reign of Charles I, the Crown granted in fee farm "a messuage and escheat lands and tenements, containing by estimation 112 acies of arable, &c lands, situate in the vill of Keinynyved, now or late in the tenute or occupation of David ap John ap David " In replevin of a distr ess for this rent, made in cei tain clot.es of a fai in called Plaa Bach, the defendant, foi the purpose ef proving that Plas Bach was parcel of the 112 acres of escheat lands out of which the rent issued, tendered in evidence the following Suivey, from the office of Land Revenue Records - " Lordship of Denbigh-Survey taken in the reign of Queen Elizabeth 11th The Comat of Kynmereh The piesentment of the jury of survey for ferm lauds within the Comot of Kynmereh " Varrous townships were then mentioned, and amongst them Kernynyved , as to which it was stated, that David ap John ap David occupied certain parcels of land, and, amongst them, one messuage called "y Place Baghe," and in the margin were the woids, "Acres 112, 11 3s 4d," The defendants also gave in evidence the accounts of the Crown Ministers foi the lordship of Denbigh, in the time of Elizabeth and James I, containing references to othei parts of the Survey -Held, that the Survey was not admissible in evidence [S C 21 L J Ex 236 See, as to costs, 8 Ex 156 ] and lordship of Denbigh, in manner and foim, &c , on which issue omed t the trial, before Wighttnan, J , at the last Denbighshne Assizes, it appealed that the rent in question was reserved by letters patent of the 25th of September, 4 Car 1 (1628), whereby the King granted to Edward Ditchheld and others, and their heirs (amongst other hereditaments in the county of Denbigh and elsewhere), "All those escheat lauds and tenements,, with the appurtenances, containing by Replevin The defendants made cognisance as thu leceivers and bailiffs of the Crown, for arrears of a fee farm tent of 50s per annum, whereof hei Majesty, at tb& time in the declaiation mentioned, was seised in fee in light of the Crown of Ejngland, payable half yearly, on &c, in respect of certain tenements holden of aur ^aid Lady the Queen, in the said county of Denbigh, as of her castle and lord ship pf Denbigh, of which the said closes in which &c were parcel Plea in bar (amcngst others), that the said closes m which &c, were not parcel of the said tenements holden of our Lady the Queen in the said county of Denbigh, as of hep castl - - - - - was ' 7 SX. 130 DANIEL V. W1LKIN 1017 estimation L12 acres of arable, meadow, feeding, pasture, and woodland, with the appurtenances, situate, lying, and being in the vill of Kernenevett, now 01 late in the tenure or oecupation of David ap John ap David, 01 his assigns, and by a particular thereof mentioned to have been lately demised to Thomas Middletoti, and to be of the yearly rent or value of 60s , which premises, by the [430] particular thereof, were mentioned to be pat eel of the loidship of Denbigh, parcel of the possessions annexed to the Principality of Wales, and late parcel of the possessions of Kobeit Eail of Leicester, and foitneily paicel of the possessions of the Eail of Maich " Habendum to the giantees in fee farm for ever, to hold of the King, his heirs and successors, as of his castle and lordship of Denbigh, by fealty only, in fiee and common socage, and not in chief, nor by knight's service, tendering yearly to the King, his hens and successors, 50s of lawful money, &c , at the feasts of &c , yearly &c The closes in which the distiess was taken weta part of a small faim called Plas Bach, occupied by the plaintift as^tenant of a Mt Petets, the ownei of an estate called the Plas Postyn estate, in the parish of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Pipe against Fulcher
...: the map, in this case, does not.] That objection goes rather to the weight than to the admissibility of the evidence. Daniel v. Willdn (7 Exch. 429) will probably be relied on by the other side. But there all that the survey which it was sought to put in as evidence shewed was, not the po......
-
Hassim v Naik
...duty by authorised public officers, and public access was not regarded as essential; see Doe v Arkwright, 2 A. & E. G 183; Daniel v Wilkin, 7 EX. 429, 437; Wigmore, supra, para. 1634; Baker, supra, pp. 133 - 135. It is also significant that none of the other members of the House of Lords in......
- Daniel v Wilkin and another
-
Hammond and Others v Bradstreet
...manor, on a question as to the boundaries of the manor, was rejected, no authority for taking the survey being proved . Daniel v. Will in (7 Exch 429) In Pollaid v Scott (1 Peake N P 18), Lord Kenyon, C J., ruled, that a copperplate map, taken by the direction of [393] the overseers of a pa......