Page:The English Reports v1 1900.pdf/310

sole end of his suit; and that the chief matter of the appeal was between appellant and respondent Alice, and not relative to this respondent; who insisted the appeal ought to be dismissed as to him with costs, unless directions should be given for due taking and stating the accounts, and applying the rents and profits of the trust estate, as received in discharge of the 4000l. and interest, and freeing the respondent's estate accordingly. (Wm. Whitelocke.)

Die Veneris, 19 Februarii, 1702. After hearing council upon this appeal, it was ordered by the Lords that the same should be dismissed, and the order and decree of the 4th of May, in 5th year of King William and Queen Mary, and the report of the 20th December, 1701, and the order of the 4th of June last, for confirmation thereof, should be affirmed, as against Dame Elizabeth Northcote, but that the right and interest of the respondent, Sir Francis Northcote, should not be in any ways prejudiced thereby. Lords Journ. vol. xvii. p. 297. (Vin. iv. 477. vii. 398. viii. 299. Prec. ch. 115. cited in Sparing v. Lynn. 2 Vern. 137. cited in Roberts v. Bennett.)

The appellant for reversal of the judgment made this case; that in an Indebitatus assumpsit. brought by appellant, against the respondents in the Exchequer, for 200l. and non assumpsit. pleaded, a special verdict was found; that by the act of tunnage and poundage, 12 Car. 2. there was granted to the crown 1s. for every 20s. value of goods imported according to the book of rates; that by the 17th rule in the book of rates, the merchant was to be allowed 5l. per cent. for the subsidy so appointed to be paid: That by an act 2 W. and M. there was granted to their Majesties upon yarn of flax or hemp, imported between 25th December, 1690, and November, 10th 1695, an additional duty of as much as was then charged upon the same book of rates; that for this double duty, the importer was upon security to have four three months to pay it, or after the rate of 10l. per cent. per annum discount upon prompt payment; that this double duty was by the said act, to be collected and paid in the said manner, and with such advantages, and by such rules as expressed in the book of rates, and the rules thereunto annexed: That appellant imported a parcel of yarn, and paid the old subsidy, and had an allowance of 5l. per cent. and gave security for the new impost, or double duty, and had no allowance at all upon it: That for another parcel imported, he paid the old subsidy and the new impost or double duty down, and had after the rate of 10l. per cent per annum discount, for four three months, which came to 6¼l. per cent. but had not the allowance of 5l. per cent. according to the 17th rule in the book of rates: So that the question was, whether appellant ought not to have an allowance of 5l. per cent. according to the 17th rule in the book [296] of rates, upon payment of this new impost, or double duty, over and besides the four three months discount after the rate of 10l. per cent per annum for prompt payment: Judgment was given in the Exchequer for respondents by two of the Barons, against Baron Lechmere (the Lord Chief Baron not giving any opinion upon the merits of the cause), and this judgment was affirmed in a writ of error: And appellant stated that the words of the act were, for all yarn an additional duty of as much as what is now charged in the book of rates, and contended that the plain meaning was that yarn should pay a double duty, or as much again as it paid before, and to this the appellant submitted, and stated that the duties upon the act of tunnage and poundage, were usually called the old subsidy, and the duty upon this act of 2 W. and M. the new impost; and he put the case, that the duty upon the tunnage act for a parcel of yarn came to 100l. and said that the 17th rule in the book of rates gave an abatement to the merchant of 5l. so that the King's duty would be but 95l. and that this was not denied by re-