HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.slavery/ssactsengr0724 and id is 1 raw text is: THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL V. GRIFFITH
upon a Bill of Review, or a Bill to set it aside for fraud. Where is the injustice of
not permitting the Defendant, against whom such a Decree has been made, to pro-
ceed collaterally 7 It is the effect of his own obstinacy, not putting in his answer.
He desires to do now what, I must take it, he wilfully and obstinately did not do
before. Either he was, or was not, in possession of all, that he now knows. If he
was in possession of all, he now knows, there is no pretence for dny indulgence : if
he was not, if any thing has since come to his knowledge, any new evidence, laying
a ground for impeaching the account, that is the foundation of a Bill of Review, to
impeach the Decree. Therefore quacunque via there is no pretence for this Bill. The
effect would be two inconsistent Decrees, in opposition to each other. A Decree
upon a [565] Bill, taken pro Confesso, according to the ordinary course of the Court,
is perfectly different from a Decree under the Statute. (Stat. 5 Geo. II. c. 25. See
Geary v. Sheridan, 8 Ves. 192.) In the former case, as at Common Law there can
be no judgment against a man without appearance, though the Plaintiff may pro-
ceed to outlawry, so here you may have all sorts of process ; but you cannot have a
Decree. But when the Statute interferes, to enable the Plaintiff to obtain a Decree
without an appearance, the Statute prescribes the rules, by which that object is to
be obtained.
The Bill must be dismissed with Costs.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL V. GRIFFITH. May 1st, 5th, 1807.
A long lease of a charity estate, in 1760, set aside, the trustees joining in the applica-
tion ; as a breach of trust, not only as against the express directions of the Founder,
but also, generally, as an improper administration of a Charity Estate: the
Relators not desiring to disturb under-leases. The Account was confined to the
filing of the Information, or previous demand. Such cases to be marked with
Costs.
The Information stated the foundation of the Charity, under a Decree, in the
second year of King Charles I. directing a trust as to the rents and profits of real
and personal estate for Henry Smith, the Plaintiff in that cause, for life, and for such
charitable uses and otherwise for the benefit and relief of his kindred, as he should
appoint ; and that the trustees, or seven of them at least, and their heirs and assigns
should after the Plaintiff's decease, dispose of the rents, issues, and profits, to certain
charitable uses, and such other charitable uses as he by his Will, [566] or any writing,
to be sealed and delivered in the presence of three witnesses, should appoint ; and,
in default thereof, to such charitable uses as should be declared by the trustees, or
any seven of them.
By a Deed Poll, dated the 26th of January 1626, Henry Smith directed, that
such leases or estates, as should be made or granted of the lands and premises therein
mentioned, should not exceed the term of 21 years, or three lives in possession;
and so as the said lands, so to be letten, should be in the best manner, that might be,
letten at the best improved yearly rents, and not for great fines and small rents,
except for copyhold lands, which might be granted on fines.
Henry Smith by his Will, dated the 24th of April, in the third year of King
Charles I. gave and bequeathed for the use of the poor captives, being slaves under
the Turkish Pirates, £1000, to be laid out in the purchase of lands of inheritance
of the value of £60 per annum at least. He also gave for the use and relief of the
poorest of his kindred another sum of £1000, to be laid out also in the purchase of
lands of inheritance: the rents and profits of both estates to be distributed among
the respective objects at the discretion of his executors, and their heirs, and of the
survivor, and of the Lord Mayor and Sheriffs of London, for the time being.
By Indentures, dated the 28th of June, 16th Charles II. the trustees of the lands,
purchased with the several sums of £1000 and £1000, in consideration of the rents
and covenants, and of the sum of £500, laid out by Christopher Blake in building
and improving, and of his releasing his title to several of the lands, demised to him
several premises in the parishes of Chelsea, [567] Kensington, and St. Margaret's,
Westminster, for a term of 70 years, at the yearly rent of £130.
The Information farther stated, that the lease to Blake expired in 1734; and
13 VES. JUN. 565.](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.slavery/ssactsengr0724&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)