The reports of Sir Peyton Ventris Kt., late one of the justices of the Common-pleas in two parts : the first part containing select cases adjudged in the Kings-Bench, in the reign of K. Charles II, with three learned arguments, one in the Kings-Bench, by Sir Francis North, when Attorney General, and two in the Exchequer by Sir Matthew Hale, when Lord Chief Baron : with two tables, one of the cases, and the other of the principal matters : the second part containing choice cases adjudged in the Common-pleas, in the reigns of K. Charles II and K. James II and in the three first years of the reign of His now Majesty K. William and the late Q. Mary, while he was a judge in the said court, with the pleadings to the same : also several cases and pleadings thereupon in the Exchequer-Chamber upon writs of error from the Kings-Bench : together with many remarkable and curious cases in the Court of Chancery : whereto are added three exact tables, one of the cases, the other of the principal matters, and the third of the pleadings : with the allowance and approbation of the Lord Keeper an all the Judges.

Some Remarkable and Curious CASES IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY. Termino Sanctae Trinitatis Anno 22 Car. II. In Cancellaria.

Marsh versus Lee.

A Bill in Chancery was brought by Marsh, and an Answer put in thereto.

The Case was thus:

One English being seised of the Mannor of Wicksall, and of the Mannor of Morfield, in 1649. Mortgages part of the Mannor of Wicksall to Burrell for 1000 l Afterwards in 1655. he acknow∣ledges a Statute to Burrell of 800 l for the payment of 400 l Afterwards in 1662. English Mortgages both these Mannors to Mrs. Duppa for 7000 l Afterwards in 1665. English Mortgages the Mannor of Wicksall to Lee for 2000 l Lee having no notice of the former Mortgages. But afterwards Lee coming to have notice of the Mortgage to Duppa, purchases in the two Incum∣brances to Burrel, (Viz.) the Mortgage of part of the Mannor of Wicksall, and the Statute. And now Marsh, Executor of Duppa, sues Lee, who pleads this whole Matter.

My Lord Keeper, assisted with Hale Chief Baron and Justice Rainsford, held, That Lee might make use of these Incumbrances to protect his own Mortgage. For they said, that he had both Law and Equity for him.

First, He had Law; for that he had a precedent Mortgage in 164••. (which indeed was but upon part) and also the Statute in 1655. so that while these remained in force, Marsh could not come in.

Next, He had Equity; for he having a subsequent Mortgage, (yet) it being without Notice, he ought to be relieved in this Court. And therefore my Lord Chief Baron put the Case, as if the first Mortgage had been of the Mannor of W. to Burrel, and after∣wards it had been mortgaged to Duppa, and afterwards to Lee, not having notice; if afterwards Lee bought in Burrel's Mortgage, he shall hold the Estate against Duppa, until he be satisfied for both the Money which he paid Burrel and also his own Money lent upon the last Mortgage: And for that he said, that it had been so Adjudged in Camera Scaccarij, in the Court of Equity, since the King came in, in one Shelley's Case▪ Next he put the Case of the Statute which English entred in to Burrel in 1655. and was after∣wards bought by Lee from Burrel. He held that Duppa shall not bring Lee to any Account upon this Statute here in Equity, any otherwise than he may do at Common Law.

Nota, It was agreed, that the Lands were extended upon the Statute at the third part of the true value. Now at Common Law the Conusor, or he that claims under him, must bring a Scire facias ad computand', as in the 4 Co. 69. b. But then the Conusee shall not account according to the true value, but according to the extended value, and also for the whole Statute: And if the Conusee is satis∣fied by the extended value the Conusor shall recover; or if the Conusor will pay down the rest of the Money which is behind with Damages, he shall also recover. But if the Conusor will sue the Conusee in a Court of Equity, then he shall bring him to Ac∣count for what he hath received of the Profits above the extended value.

Now then our Case here is somewhat more; for Lee has also Equity on his Side, and therefore Duppa shall not bring him to Account for what he has received above the extended value, unless he has also received enough to satisfie his own Mortgage of 2000 l as well as the Statute; and therefore if Marsh will take off this Statute by a Suit in this Court, he must be content that Lee doth account upon the extended value for the whole 800 l and Damages.

Secondly, They held, that whereas part of the Mannor of W. was mortgaged to Burrel; but that now the whole Mannor was mortgaged to Lee, that (yet) the first Mortgage should not extend to protect more than that part of the Mannor which was first mort∣gaged to Burrell.

And my Lord Chief Baron Hale put the Case thus: If a man is seised of 60 Acres, and mortgages 20 to A. and then mortgages the whole to B. and then mortgages the whole to C. and after∣wards C. purchases in the first Mortgage, that shall not protect more than the 20 Acres; but it shall protect those 20 Acres so as B. shall never recover that until he pay C. all the Money upon the first and last Mortgage.

But Hale said, That he thought that in this Case, inasmuch as the Mortgage to Lee was only of part of W. that therefore Marsh might bring Lee to an Account upon the extended value, where∣upon these two Mannors were extended upon the Statute; and if Lee had received the Money due upon the Statute by receiving of the Profits according to the extended value, or if she will pay down the residue of the Money due upon the Statute, or if she will pay down so much as the proportion will come to for Monfield, that then she may discharge the Mannor of Monfield.

But then my Lord Keeper asked him, how he would have it appointed, and how much should be laid upon Monfield, and how much upon Wicksal; for that part of W. is under that Extent.

To which Hale Answered, That if Marsh did sue Lee for the dis∣charge of this Statute from Monfield, that Monfield should be Dis∣charged by her paying down as much as the proportion comes to; or when Lee shall have received so much according to the extended value, and that he thought there might be a proportion found out by the Court.

Nota, Sir H. Fynch, Counsel for Lee, cited Primate and Jackson's Case, Grove and Grove's Case, and Mrs. Calamy's Case: All which were Resolved in this Court, That a Purchasor or Mortgagee coming in upon a valuable Consideration without Notice, and purchasing in a precedent Incumbrance, it shall protect his Estate against any person that hath a Mortgage subsequent to the first, tho' before the last Mortgage; tho' he purchased in the Incum∣brance after he had Notice of the second Mortgage.

White versus Ewer.

AT a Re-hearing before my Lord Keeper, assisted with Justice Vaughan and Turner, concerning the Redemption of a Mortgage which had been made above 40 years since.

My Lord Keeper Declared, That he would not relieve Mort∣gages after 20 years; for that the Statute of 21 Jac. cap. 16. did adjudge it reasonable to limit the time of ones Entry to that number of years: Vnless there are such particular Circumstances as may vary the ordinary Case, as Infants, Feme Coverts, &c. are provided for by the very Statute; tho' these Matters in Equity are to be go∣verned by the Course of the Court, and that 'tis best to square the Rules of Equity, as near the Rules of Reason and Law as may be.