The transactions of the High Court of Chancery, both by practice and president,: with the fees thereunto belonging, and all speciall orders in extraordinary cases, which are to be found in the registers office as they are quoated by tearmes yeares & bookes. Collected by that famous lawyer William Tothill Esq; late one of the 6 clearks. And since reveiwed [sic] by Sir Ro: Holborne, bencher of Lincolns-Inne.

[ 120] Priviledge.

* 1.1Cases against the Court of Chancerie for Priviledged places, and for the County Palatine of Chester over-ruled.

Hulst contra Daniel, Mich. or Hill. 5. Car. li. A.

Dom. Morley contra Martin, 25. Eliz.

Brereton contra Donne, 24. Eliz.

Egerton contra Comitem Darbie, Deter∣mined here, yet decreed there, in▪ 11. Jac.

Inter Swinnerton q••er' contra Savage, Defendant; It was ordered, that in respect the suit depended there, that the cause should be determined there in 37. H. 8.

Pope contra Thatcher, in Pasch. 2. Car.

Croker contra Holme, dismissed in 22. & 23. Eliz. li. A. fo. 520.

Nevill contra Nevill, 26. Eliz. li. A. fo. 329. in the Dutchie over-ruled, between Barnard and Langley, 9. Car.

* 1.2Beare contra Stockhall, the matter remit∣ted to be tryed at Oxford, in 1. & 2. P••. & Ma.

Davis contra Corpus Christi, Mich. 19. Jac.

Huntley contra He••ney, 4. Iac. li. B. fo. 303.

Cotterell contra Standish Pasch. or Trin. 12. Jac. or Hill. li. B. fo. 925.

Wingfield contra Fleetwood, in 21. Eliz. li. A. 137. li. B. 138.

Bent contra Oldfield, Pasch. 1. Car. lib. B. fo. 1044.

* 1.3Priviledges of Chancerie against the Cinque-Ports.

Brown contra Biggs about 36. Eliz.

Merwithie contra Johnson, Mich. 44. E∣liz. li. A. fo. 35.

Hilton contra Lawson, 2. Eliz. li. A. fo. 199.

Smith contra Delves, Mich. 2. Jac. li. A. fo. 133. Chester.

Starkey contra Starkey, a Report in Mich. or Hill. 16. Jac.

Langham contra B••••champe, the Defen∣dant

committed because he would not An∣swer, the land lying in the Cinque-Ports, 40. Eliz.

Fitton cont' Fitton, & Wrenham 13. Car.

Fenwick contra Barnard, Julii 10. Car.

* 1.4Stannary Court priviledged.

Daw contra Derry. Trin. 23. Eliz. li. A. fo. 477.

Trewynard contra Killigrew, 4. & 5. E∣liz. fo. 287.

Dutchie Court of Lancaster.

Hulst contra Daniel, Mich. 5. or 6. Car. contra pauperes de Wogston, the Court will not hold Plea against the Dutchie Court of Lancaster, in 10. Eliz. li. B. fo. 853.

Proces into Cinque-Ports, and touching priviledged places, as also into Coun∣tie Palatines.

No Checquer-man hath Priviledge a∣gainst a Subpaena, Tuke cont' Clark, in 3. Car.

Guillielm. contra Welsh, for a Cause be∣tween parties where the Queens Interest commeth not in question, Tran. 36. Eliz.

Cutts contra Peters, 23. Ap. 28. Eliz. li. A. fo. 403. Exchequer-man not priviledged but to Answer.

Equivolent is to have priviledge, and not e∣very servant. Putton con' Green, Tri. 36. Eliz.

Browne contra Riggs, a Demurrer

over-ruled about 34, or 35. Eliz.

Blackley contra Laneston, a Corpus cum causa to remove the Plantiffe out of the Cinque-Ports, Pasch. 4. & 5. Eliz.

Langham contra Beckham, Trin. 40. E∣liz. & 41. li. A. & 34. li. A. & 40.

Cinque-Ports priviledged against Chan∣cerie.

Hudson contra Taylor, 41. Eliz. li. A. fo. 147. pro Chancerie.

Shutterton contra Nevill, 34 Eliz. li. B. fo. 249.

Francklin cont' White. 41. Eliz. li. B. fo. 726 Cinque-Ports over-ruled.

Harbie contra Saltonstall, in 5. Feb-1. & 3. Jac.

An Injunction out of the Exchequer dis∣allowed, and the partie which procured it sent for it by a Pursivant, because her Maje∣sties Revenue not in question here, Hartopp contra Hartop, in 1594.

Ellords widow, claymed her priviledge, because her Husband was priviledged, and if it were for her Husbands act, it was hol∣den cleere that she should be priviledged, but this was for her own act, and yet hac vice priviledged.

Lloyd contra Lloyd▪ Pasch. 35. Eliz. but this is no order to priviledge others, in li. A.

Barkley contra Hussey, the Defendant

not allowed his Priviledge, because his wife joyned with him, 21. Nov. 32. Eliz.

Oxford priviledged against Chancery. Hopper contra Eastmond, 1587. in 33. E∣liz. li. A. fo. 21.

Onewry contra Glasier, Trin. 1588.

White contra Howger, in 17. & 18. E∣liz. li. A.

Over-ruled between Horwood contra Smith, in Mich. 12. Iac. li. B. fo. 308.

Court of Requests not allowed Privi∣ledge here, Garnons contra Maddox, 39. Eliz.

County Palatine of Chester.

Any dwelling there, must appeare upon the Proces, and plead their Priviledge, by the Master of the Rolls opinion, in Heren∣dens Case in 36. & 37. Eliz.

Priviledge in Chancerie.

* 1.5 In what cases the Chancerie doth privi∣ledge.

The Defendant comming to execute a Commission was arrested, and had a Corpus cum Causa, and set him at libertie, Jackson contra Vaughan, Trin. 23. Eliz.

Fowler contra Ayhurst, removed from Rochester, in 22. Eliz. li. B. fo. 557.

The Plaintiffe arrested when he came up to examine Witnesses, and discharged by Supersedeas of Priviledge, Barnardiston

contra Bawd, Trin. 1591. or 32. Eliz. fo. 738.

A Defendant comming up upon an At∣tachment would have had his Priviledge a∣gainst a Citation in the Arches, and had not, because a Citation is no stay of his per∣son. Cooke contra D••x, Pasch. 30. Eliz.

Marshall contra Moore, the Plaintiffe comming up to follow his suit halfe a yeare after his Bill exhibited was arrested in Lon∣don, and had his Priviledge 1588.

Hughes contra Middleton, in Hillary Terme, and paid costs for the same 4. & 5. Car.

Diggs being committed by the Court of Requests for not answering a Bill there for the same matter for which hee had a Bill here, had a Corpus cum causa, in 36. Eliz. li. A. fo. 539.

Because Master Bridgeman served a Clark in Master Shugboroughs Office, a Comman∣dement from _____ _____ to stay here, he was committed to the Prison of the Fleet, at the suit of Carleton, Pasch. 37. Eliz. li. A. fo. 135.

Inter Carleton & Bridgman, with the opinion of the Court, that no Court can hinder the point of Equitie of this Court.

Binion contra Thimble, in Pasch. 1632. or 1633. concerning the Priviledge of the University of Oxon.

Morgan contra Richardson, & al', the Plaintiffe having a Writ of Priviledge was taken in Execution, ordered to goe abroad by Habeas corpus, and the partie that arre∣sted him to be committed, about Hill. 17. or 18. Jac.

Iohnson contra Obbin, the Plaintiffe deli∣vered out of Execution, 12. & 13. Eliz. fo. 238. li. A.

Mathew contra Com' Arundell, a De∣murrer, because an Exchequer-man, over∣ruled, 6. Car. li. B.

Welbore cont' Collins, concerning Kings Colledge in Cambridge over-ruled, 7. Car.

Bancks Attorney Dom' Regis by Infor∣mation, where an Inquisition was awarded to inquire of Rookes Estate in the Cinque-Port of Sandwich, a Writ of seizure awar∣ded about 11. Car.

Pepwell contra Goldsmiths London, an Attorney at Law joynes with another in Action, thereby to avoyd a priviledged man in this Court, the suit stayd, and the Priviledge allowed, in 28. Eliz. fo. 247.

Mostin contra Thomas, though the De∣fendant (a Clerke in the Court of Requests) because the suit had prioritie there, Demur∣red in respect of that, and of Priviledge over-ruled, in Hill. 14. Car.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Priviled∣ged places over-ru∣led.
• * 1.2

  Oxford.
• * 1.3

  Against the Cinque Ports.
• * 1.4

  Stannary.
• * 1.5

  Chancerie Privi∣ledge.