whereas before this time that is to say in the term of hilary 1661 Jn Hunwick complainant exhibited his bill of complaint in the honourable high court of chancery against Thos Clerk defendant thereby declaring that Jn Hunwick the complainant's father was seised in fee of a messuage garden and orchard called Litmans and Giffards and a parcel of meadow called Bridge Meadow and of five crofts of lands called Kings alias Peacocks and of a meadow or two parcels of meadow called Holmes alias Goldwires Obitland lying in Earls Colne and White Colne Essex of the yearly value of 20li and about eighteen years before the bill exhibited for 100li or some other sum paid and lent to him by one Rich Stoakes did convey the premises to him the said Rich Stoakes and his heirs or made some lease thereof for some long term of years with power of redemption upon repayment of the said 100li or some such some lent with damages and soon after about the time of the late rebellion died and that the complainant being heir to his said father and much in troubles the said Rich Stoakes about sixteen years since entered into the premises and took the rents thereof to his own use for divers years and by combination with one Hen Whynn did convey his estate in the premises to him the said Hen Whynn which said Hen Whynn made some conveyance of the premises to one Thos Parish who for some time held the same and grubbed up and carried away much timber and wood growing thereupon worth 40li and more to encumber the premises and perplex the complainant's title of redemption he the said Parrish conveyed the premises to one Thos Grimwade who settled the same upon Francis Grimwade and that the said Francis Grimwade for 50li or some small sum conveyed the premises to the defendant who well knew that the premises were only security for 100li and that the confederates were long before satisfied and paid the same with advantages by the rents and profits of the premises and by timber and wood sold to the end therefore that the defendant might come to a particular account and accept what remains due and reconvey the premises was the scope of the bill for relief wherein the complainant prayed the aid and assistance of this honourable court that process of subpoena might be awarded and directed to the defendant which being granted and the defendant therewithal served he appeared and for answer to the said bill said he believed that Jn Hunwick father of the complainant and the complainant or one of them were seised in fee simple of the closes called Kings alias Peacocks and of the meadow or two parcels of meadow called Holmes alias Goldwires Obitland in the before recited bill mentioned containing together about 15a and in consideration of 100li paid by Rich Stoakes by their deed dated 1.8.8Jas1 and duly executed by livery of seisin did grant the premises to the said Rich Stoakes and his heirs with condition of redemption upon payment of 100li to the said Stoakes his heirs executors and assigns upon 1.8.1616 with covenant for quiet enjoying and further assurance of the premises if default were made of payment of the said 100li and the premises were then of the yearly value of 8li and not above as the said defendant believes and said that the said 100li or any part thereof was not paid according to the before recited condition or otherwise and that the said Jn Hunwick the father before 1.8.1616 did legally release and extinguish the said condition and as the defendant heard and hoped to prove one Jn Clerk claimed an estate in the premises by virtue of some conveyance made by the complainant and his father or one of them and brought a writ of ejectment and trespass against the said Rich Stoakes in which since and in defence of the title of the premises the said Rich expended several sums of money and the defendant further said that before the said conveyance made to the said Rich Stoakes the said Jn Hunwick the elder and the complainant or one of them did as the defendant believes and hopeth to prove in and by one deed or writing bearing date 30.9.3Jas1 convey and assign the said meadow or pasture or parcels of meadow with the appurtenances among other lands and tenements to or to the use of Grace the then wife of the said Jn Hunwick the elder for her life and after her decease to or to the use of Wm Hunwick one of the other sons of the said Jn Hunwick the elder and the heirs of the said Wm which conveyance was concealed from the said Rich Stoakes as the defendant believed and said that in consideration of 65li paid by the said Stokes to or to the use of Wm Hunwick he did by articles dated 13.5.1617 covenant and convey the said parcels of meadow to the said Stoakes and his heirs and that before the said conveyance made the said Rich Stoakes died and the land descended to one Robt Stoakes and from him to Thos Stoakes who by his deed of feoffment dated 1.7.2Chas1 in consideration of 150li conveyed the premises to Hen Whynn and yet Wm Hunwick in performance of the before recited articles by his deed of feoffment dated 3.10.2Chas1 did convey the said parcel of meadow and his estate in Kings alias Peacocks to the said Hen Whynn in fee and that afterwards the said Wm and Edith his wife did by fine with proclamations further assure the said parcels of meadow and all other the said premises to the said Whynn and his heirs and that the said Hen Whynn in consideration of 155li by his deed of feoffment duly executed conveyed the said premises to Thos Parrish in the before recited bill mentioned and to his heirs and that afterwards the said Thos Parrish in consideration of 185li conveyed the premises to Thos Grimwade and his heirs and the said Thos conveyed the said premises to Francis his son and his heirs and that the said Francis by his last will and testament dated 2.11.1643 gave the premises to Grace his wife and after her decease to the defendant and his heirs and died after whose death the said Grace entered and about two years before the answer died and that the defendant was seised of the premises by virtue of the said last will of the said Francis and claimed by that title only and the defendant said he knew not that the said several purchasers had notice of the original deed of mortgage and if they had he believed they had knowledge that the said condition was discharged and extinguished as is before herein recited and that the said Rich Stokes Robt Stoakes Thos Stoakes Hen Whynn Thos Parrish Thos Grimwade Francis Grimwade and Grace his wife did all their times quietly enjoy the said premises without the claim or interruption of the said Jn Hunwick the father or the complainant and further said that after so long and quiet possession and conveying the premises upon so just consideration as afore recited and so many years past since the said fine levied by the said Wm Hunwick and Edith his wife to the said Hen Whynn and no claim made and the condition of the said mortgage extinguished as aforesaid by the feoffment to Jn Clark the complainant ought to be barred from making this claim either in law or equity and therefore justified the keeping of the several conveyances and refused to reconvey and said that the complainant about four months before the answer and not before required an account and reconveyance and said that the complainant had not been in trouble since his father's death who died about twenty years since but hath lived ever since his father's death near where the lands lie and been able to sue for the same if there had been need and the defendant denied all combination and concluded his answer with the general traverse to which answer the complainant replied and so the parties descended to issue and divers witnesses were examined and the depositions only published according to the ordinary and usual rules of this court as by the said bill answer replication depositions of witnesses and other proceedings all of them remaining of record in this court whereunto relation being had may more a t large appear and afterward a day was by this court appointed for the hearing of the cause on which day the cause standing in the paper of causes to be heard the counsel for the defendant attended ready provided to make defence none attending for the plaintiff although he served the defendant with a subpoena to hear judgement therein this day as by the said subpoena produced in court appeared and for as much as the said defendant being present in court and making affidavit that he was served with the said subpoena on the plaintiff's suit to hear judgement in this cause this day it is therefore this present term of michaelmas that is to say friday 30.10.15Chas2 by the right honourable Edw earl of Clarendon lord high chancellor of England and by the authority of the said high court of chancery ordained that the complainant's bill be dismissed out of this honourable court with costs to be levied by sir Thos Byrd knight one of the masters of this court which the said complainant is to pay to the defendant if he shall ever trouble the defendant again in this court or in law touching the matters now in question between them