Page:The English Reports v1 1900.pdf/509

William Ridges, an alderman of London, being seised in fee of certain lands in the counties of Meath and Wexford in Ireland, did, by his will in 1670, devise the same to his eldest son William, for life; and in case of his death, without issue, amongst the testator's six younger children, Joseph, John, James, Charles, Mary, and Sarah, in fee.

William, the son, in 1672, made a lease thereof for forty-one years, to one Robert Quelsh, at the rent of £240 per ann. and in 1691 died without issue, whereby the lands vested in the said six younger children, in fee.

The appellant having purchased the shares and interest of Joseph, John, James, Charles, and Sarah, in the lands, and the respondent Francis Creswick having married Mary, the other daughter, and being thereby intitled to a sixth part of the lands in her right, and Sir Richard Holford, being a creditor of Creswick's, and having outlawed him in Ireland in 1696, and obtained a custodiam of his said sixth part of the lands in Meath; the appellant, in 1697, agreed to take the same of the said Sir Richard Holford, at the rent of £40 per ann.

The appellant being thus in possession of the sixth part of the said lands in Meath, under Sir Richard Holford, the respondent Francis, in 1702, proposed to sell his wife's interest in all the lands in Meath and Wexford, to the appellant; whereupon, certain articles were executed by them, dated the 20th of September 1702, whereby the respondent Francis agreed, that he and the said Mary his wife, together with one Knight, his brother-in-law and trustee, should, on or before the 25th of March then next, by fines, common recoveries, or such other conveyances as the appellant should advise, convey to him and his heirs, all their estate, share, and demand, in and to the said lands, discharged from all incumbrances. And the respondents and Knight were, before the 28th of November then next, to swear what incumbrances affected the said estate; and the respondent Francis did thereby assign and release to the appellant, all rent and arrears of rent and mean rates, due before the articles. And before the perfection of such conveyance, he was to procure a discharge from Sir Richard Holford, of all his demands upon the said lands. And for the appellant's better security from Sir Richard's debt, he was to retain so much of the purchase-money in his hands, as should satisfy Sir Richard, which was to be allowed the appellant, in part of the purchase-money; and the remainder thereof, if any, was to be paid as after mentioned, And by these articles, the appellant [172] was to account with Sir Richard Holford as formerly, viz. for one half year, commencing the 1st of May, and ending the 1st of November 1702; from which time the respondent Francis was to indemnify the appellant, from any further account with Sir Richard.

And in consideration of this conveyance, the appellant agreed to pay £1500 sterling in England, viz. £100 upon perfection of the articles, and £200 more to John Scroop, esq. as soon as the said John Scroop and the respondent Mary should notify to the appellant their consent and approbation of the articles; (which sum of £200 was to be for the sole and separate use of the said Mary;) £600 more immediately after perfecting the conveyances; and the remaining £600 after Sir Richard Holford should be satisfied his debt, if any remained, to be paid to the respondent Francis on or before the 25th of December then next.

Although by these articles the appellant made the purchase-money but £1500 and therein blended together the arrears of rent and the purchase money for the lands; yet the agreement was made for two distinct sums, viz. £1200 for the lands, and £500 for the arrears; of which last sum, £190 was supposed to have been then