Lord Altham v The Earl of Anglesey
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1709 |
| Date | 01 January 1709 |
| Court | High Court |
English Reports Citation: 25 E.R. 12
COURTS OF CHANCERY AND EXCHEQUER
[16] Lord altham versus The Earl of anglesey. [1709.] What will make a good Tenant to the Prcecipe, for suffering a Eecovery. See 2 Salk. 568; 1 Show. 347; Cumb. 425. See Lucas's R. 40, &c.-Depositions of Witnesses. -Construction of the Statute 29 Gar. 2, c. 3, as to Declarations or Trusts, &c. On an Issue directed out of Chancery, to be tried in B. R. The Case appeared to be thus : Tenant in Tail, Remainder in Tail, with Remainders over. Tenant in Tail, having a Mind to dock the Intail, and bar the Remainders, levies a Fine with Proclamation sur Conusance de droit come ceo, &c., to /. S. and his Heirs, in order to make him Tenant to the Prcecipe ; but no Use of this Fine was declared. Seven Years afterwards a Prcecipe was brought against J. S. who came in and vouched the Conusor of the Fine, who vouched over the common Vouchee ; and the Question here was, if /. S. were a good Tenant to the Prcecipe, and the common Recovery well suffered. Another Point was, if Depositions of Witnesses, taken by Virtue of a Commission, out of the Court of Chancery in England, for the Examination of Witnesses in Ireland, in a Cause between the same Parties, and their proving Copies of the said Fine and Recovery in Ireland, were good Evidence, and should be allowed to be read as such here, seeing the Witnesses only swore that they were true Copies at the Time of their Examination. But this Objection was answered, in as much as it appeared, that those Copies were kept in the Hands of a certain Person, without any Alteration. As to the first Question, it was resolved by Holt, Powel, Powis, and Gould, that the said J. S. was a good Tenant to the Prcecipe, and that the Recovery was well suffered, and all the Remainders barred. This Question doth arise principally upon the Statute of Frauds and Perjuries, 29 Car. 2, c. 3, Wher.eby 'tis enacted, that all Declarations or Creations of Trusts, or Confidences of any Lands, Tenements, or Hereditaments, shall be manifested, and proved by some Writing signed by the Party, who is by Law enabled to declare such Trust, or else by his last Will in Writing, or else they shall be utterly void, provided always, that where any Conveyance shall be made of any Lands or Tenements, by which a Trust or Confidence shall or may arise, or result by Implication or Construction of Law, or be transferred or extinguished, by an Act or Operation of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Ltd Anglesey v Ltd Altham
-
Tregame v Fletcher
...Citation: 91 E.R. 574 COURTS OF KING'S BENCH, CHANCERY, COMMON PLEAS AND EXCHEQUER. Ld. Anglesey and Ld. Altham Pasch. 8 Will. 3, B. R. Gilb. Rep. 16, S. C. 2. ld. anglesey versus ld. altham. [Pasch. 8 Will. 3, B. E. Gilb. Rep. 16, S. C.] Fine levied and common recovery suffered, wherein co......