is in the poffeffion of the mortgagee, and that J. B. the fon and pretended affignee paid intereft upon this mortgage, which laft circumftance I advife the leffor of the plaintiff to be prepared to prove upon the trial of the ejectment. May 15, 1767. J. Burland. CASE. PAUPER, aged about 72, born at H. N. in B. and had been hized to and lived in feveral services. Laft Michaelmas (old ftyle) was 38 years fince, to the best of his remembrance, he was hired to one Mr. B. M. of W. I. in B. yeoman, for the term of one year, ferved the whole year, and received all his wages, and continued in the fame fervice under yearly hirings for 6 or 7 years, when he married, and was then hired by the faid B. M. as a weekly fervant, and continued in his faid mafter's service in W. I. aforefaid by the week, for upwards of 9 years more. From W. I. pauper removed to S. S. in O. without a certificate, (and where he is now refident, and rented) a house and premises of 41. a year, and kept fheep to pen to hire, but never paid any rates or taxes, or erved any officein S. S. aforefaid. Before he came to 8. S. he purchased part of a small eftate in D. in C. (under 30l.) and fome years afterwards, he had the other part left him, the whole amounting to 21, 55. by the year. At the fame time he was poffeffed of two small life-hold eftates in H. N. aforefaid, the one of the rent of 1l. 51. the other of 41. a-year. That foon after, being poffeffed of the faid eftates he fold that at C. but for how much money does not appear. The other two in H. N. he now lets, and receives the rent; and that the quit-rent and land-tax have been always deducted out of his rent by the tenant, and that on tenant's complaining of the bargain's being hard, asked pauper to allow fomething towards the poor's rate in H. N. and that he has allowed money to his tenant on that account, but knows not whether it was the whole the premis-s were charged at to the poor, or whether pauper was rated and affeffed in his own name, cannot fay, as he never paid the fame to the officers of the parish, but allowed the fame to his tenant. Pauper and his wife are both old and infirm, and in want of collection, and the parish of S. S. and having applied to IV. I. and H. N. they difown them as parishioners. Against the above fettlement by fervice, it is urged, that thofe eftates in H. N. and paying as above, must be a fettlement in that parish. On the contrary, pleafe to obferve, that there has never bcen been any refidence of the pauper fince he had thofe eftates, either in the parifh of C. or H. N. And it is faid, without refidence he could gain no fettlement. Please to give your opinion hereon. Opinion. It is extremely certain, that refidence, at leaft for forty days, in the parish where his eftate lies, is effentially neceffary to the gaining a fettlement; otherwife, a man by having 5 or Ic different houfes in different parishes, would gain 5 or 10 different fettlements at a time; befides, the word fettlement, is a term relative to the person only; and it would be ftrange to fay a man can be fettled where he never refided. For these reafons I think the fettlement is at W. I. May 15, 1767. G. Nares. CASE. G. had a fifter courted by T. R. his father's apprentice, who got her with child, but refufed marrying her, her father not complying with his terms. Some time after her delivery, her faid brother, who was entitled to the reverfion and inheritance of an estate in fee after the death of his father, propofed giving R. 100l. if he married her; which money was to be fecured to be paid him within fix months after the death of his father, that the said eftate came into his poffeffion. This was accepted by R. a bond was given by the faid 7. G. to R. for the faid 100l. payable, without interest, within fix months after the of his father; and they were married. f. G. died 4th October, 1766, and his father not till the 1ft April. following, fo that he was never poffeffed of the estate. He died greatly in debt, inteftate, leaving a widow and an infant heir; and his eftate and effect are infufficient to difcharge his bond debts, independent of this. The administration of his perfonals was granted the 11th November 1766, by the ecclefiaftical court of the diocese to three of his bond creditors, who are enjoined by bond, to fatisfy his creditors by fpecialty in proportion to their refpective debts, and fo far acted as to fell and difpofe of a confiderable part of the effects, and make one divifion, which divifion was not made till the 11th May 1767, and then the adminiftrators had no knowledge of this bond, or till the the month of November after, that it was demanded by R. who was during this interval in L. a foldier in the guards. There are affets undivided fufficient to pay R. his proportion with what has been paid the other bond creditors. Your opinion is defired. Query. Whether the bond to R. would be confidered voluntary, and (under the circumftances of this cafe) void against the bond creditors; or whether the adminiftrators must pay him in proportion with the bond creditors, according to the condition of their bonds; or how otherwise must they act. Opinion. I conceive the bond was for a good confideration, and cannot be confidered as voluntary; and, that the adminiftrators are obliged to pay R. equally in the fame proportion with themselves and the other bond creditors. 14th April 1768. W. Rivet. W CASE. Green v. Vernon, an Attorney. HEN G. applied to Mr. V. firft, he defired V. to recover a debt, of which G. delivered V. his bill against W. which was under 40s. V. then informed him he must fue for his debt by common law in one of the courts at Westminster, and that there was not any other method; for that he could not get it by proceeding in the county court, or any hundred court, the defendant being a parfon and not a housekeeper, and no diftress could be taken by proceeding in a county court or hundred court. An action was brought in the Common Pleas ; the cause was brought on to be tried at Worcester fummer-assizes, 1763, V. at the affizes told G. the best way would be to enter into arbitras. tion bonds; for as the debt was under 40s. the court would fhout at them upon the trial, and he could not recover cofts: fo G. and W. entered into arbitration bonds to leave it to Mr. J. W. of B. Mr. H. of H. arbitrators, and Mr. I. of B. umpire. Meetings were had, but no award was made; the arbitrators declared the debt juft, but being under 40s. could not tell how to give cofts for the plaintiff G. fo the arbitration dropped. G. has from time to time applied to V. to bring on the cause to be tried, and V. has conftantly promised that he would, but never has. About a month before the laft affizes, V. pretended to G. that he would bring on the caufe to be tried at the laft affizes, and ordered G. to bring his witneffes to Worcefler at the affizes: G. had his witneffes in readiness, but on the commiffion day V. informed G. that he muft not take his witneffes to the affizes, for that the caufe could not be 3 tried, tried, by reafon the defendant W. was entitled to a term's notice of trial, the caufe being of long standing; fo then plaintiff G. was put off again, and obliged to go to his witneffes to tell them not to go to W. In August 1766, the plaintiff G. applied to his attorney V. for him to bring on the caufe to be tried at the prefent affixes, and that he would have money in readiness against the affizes to defray all expences. V. promised it should be brought on, and G. has still continued going to V. every week or fortnight ever fince, ordering and defiring V. to bring the caufe on to be tried at this prefent affixes, which V. has conftantly promised. On Sunday laft was a week, and the Sunday before that, G. went to V. ftill defiring him to bring on the cause, and took with him ten guineas for that purpose, but V. did not receive the money, but ordered G. to bring it to the Star and Garter in W. at the affixes, and there to bring his witneffes, and that the caufe fhould be tried. Now G. has brought his money and his witneffes to the Star and Garter in W. where they have attended according to V.'s directions, but no caufe is entered with the marshal, nor is fuch caufe intended to be entered. 1 This is not the only treatment that G. has received from V. On the 21st Sept. 1765, V. delivered his bill to G to the amount of 231. 45. 6d. in this caufe, and gives him credit for 81. which he received of G. and there remains a balance to V. of 15l. 4s. 6d. The 18th January 1766, V. issued out a writ from the King's Bench, at his own fuit, against G. a copy of which G. was ferved with in Eafter term 1766, a declaration was filed for his, V's bill of cofts, judgment was figned by default, and on the 28th of August 1766, a writ of inquiry was executed at the Talbot in S. after which final judgment was figned; ever fince V. has had fieri facias and writs againft G. which has obliged G. to go out of his neighbourhood, or otherwise he would have been fent to gaol, and has been obliged to lie out of his business, all which he has entirely loft, and which has been his entire ruin, and he durft not venture to be at home, only on a Sunday. Query. What is the beft method Mr. G. can take for fatisfaction of V.? Muft he move the court of King's Bench, wherein V.'s action is brought against him? Is it adviseable that G. fhould ftand in V.'s way to be arrested? or should he pay the money if he can raise it? or should he go to gaol for a few days? Opinion. Opinion. I think the most advifable method for G. to pursue in arrested. April 6, 1767. E. Bearcroft. CASE. the August 20, S H. by her will of this date duly executed and attefted, 1762. gave and deviled unto T. M. and E. H. all her meffuages lands, tenements and hereditaments whatfoever, with all and every rights, members and appurtenances thereunto belonging, fituate, lying and being within the parish of N. E. or elsewhere, as well leafehold as freehold, whereof or wherein the then was or fhould be feized, poffeffed, or any ways entitled unto, either in poffeffion or reverfion, and whereof fhe had power to difpofe, together with all the rents, iffues, and profits thereof, To hold the faid meffuages, lands, tenements, and hereditaments, with the rents, iffues and profits thereof, unto the faid T. M. and E. H. their heirs, executors, administrators and affigns; In truft, nevertheless, that they the faid trustees, and the furvi- · vors of them, their heirs, executors and adminiftrators, fhould from time to time pay over and apply the rents, iffues and profits, of all and fingular the faid meffuages, lands, tenements, hereditaments and premises unto her daughter E. then the wife of G. H. fince deceased, for and during the term of her natural life, for her Teparate ufe and difpofal and from and after her decease teftatrix gave and devifed the faid meffuages, lands, tenements, hereditaments and premifes, with the appurtenances, unto her grandfon R. H. now about 16 years of age, only fon of the faid G. and E. H. for and during the term of his natural life, and from and after the determination of that eftate, fhe gave and devifed the faid premises with the appurtenances unto the faid M. and H. and their heirs, during the natural life of the faid R. H. In truft to-preserve the contingent eftates, &c. And from and after the decease of the faid R. H. fhe gave and devifed the faid premifes with the appurtenances, to his firft and other |