Page:The English Reports v1 1900.pdf/530

hie Lordship had any objections to the respondent, that she might claim the preference; provided she had the respondent's consent, without which, she would not make the least offer.

But Lord Powerscourt, coming to the knowledge of great waste and destruction committed by Chappel and the respondent, in woods of considerable value, growing on the demised premises, was, for that reason, unwilling to accept the offers made on the respondent's behalf, or to grant him a new lease; and having, about the same time, received proposals from other persons, and particularly from Mr. Thomas Richardson, who was the fairest bidder, a treaty was set on foot with him, whereof the respondent had notice; and during such treaty, viz. in November 1712, Mr. Richardson offered the respondent £800 for his interest in the said manor, but the respondent insisted positively on £1000; alledging, that there were about two years of his term then unexpired, that the clear profits, over and above the reserved rent, amounted to £400 per ann. and that he valued his tenant-right at £500; but Mr. Richardson refused to give the £1000, conceiving the respondent's tenant-right to be precarious, and of no value.

In consequence of this treaty with Richardson, Lord Powerscourt, on the 5th, of December 1713, executed a lease of the said premises to him for 21 years, to commence from the 1st of May following, at the yearly rent of £700.

Whereupon, on the 19th of October 1714, the respondent exhibited his bill in the Court of Chancery in Ireland, against Lord Powerscourt, the said Thomas Richardson, and others, stating the lease made to Chappel in 1692, and that before the year 1696, Lord Powerscourt agreed, that Chappel should hold the said manor for 21 years, or three lives, to be nominated by him, his heirs or assigns, after the expiration of the said former lease, under the same yearly rent; and that Lord Powerscourt should allow Chappel £10 per ann. for maintaining a school, and six acres of land, with a house and garden, for maintaining a schoolmaster; and that the tenants of six villages adjoining to the premises, which Lord Powerscourt held by lease from the Archbishop of Armagh, should [202] grind their corn at the mill of the said manor:—that Chappel, about three days before his death, had told the respondent that Lord Powerscourt had contracted with him for a renewal, and that Richardson had notice of such contract; and therefore the bill prayed an injunction to stay proceedings at law, and that Lord Powerscourt might be compelled to execute a lease to the respondent, according to the said contract.

Lord Powerscourt, by his answer to this bill, confessed the lease in 1692, but denied that be ever made any such agreement or contract with Chappel for renewal; and Richardson, by his answer, denied that be had any notice of such agreement or contract, at or before the execution of the lease made to him.

On the 11th of November 1714, the respondent filed a supplemental bill; and, for new matter, alledged, that a contract was found amongst Mr. Chappel's papers, under Lord Powerscourt's hand and seal, dated the 17th of November 1696, whereby it was agreed, that Chappel, after the determination of the former lease, should hold the said manor, with the appurtenances, for 21 years, or during the natural lives of such. three persons as should be nominated by him, under the yearly rent of £418; and that the tenants of the said six villages should grind at the said manor mill.

Lord Powerscourt, after a view and perusal of this alledged contract, put in his answer, and denied that any such deed or contract for renewal was ever executed by him and Mr. Richardson denied that he had any notice thereof before his taking the said lease.

On the 13th, 14th, and 10th of July 1715, the cause was heard; when the Lord Chancellor ordered the following issues to be tried by a jury of the county of Monaghan:—1st, Whether the deed dated the 17th of November 1696, was the act and deed of the Lord Powerscourt, or not? 2dly, Whether Richardson had notice at or before his taking the said lease from Lord Powerscourt, that Chappel or the respondent had any further interest than the lease for 21 years, commencing at May 1693?

Afterwards Lord Powerscourt, on affidavits of the value of the land, moved, that the issues might be tried at bar; and the rather, for that by the depositions of the respondent's witnesses it appeared, that the said contract, if genuine, was executed