compel appellants to grind at, and do their suit to the said mills: And appellants answered, and witnesses were examined, and the cause heard, two of the Barons only being present, and an issue was directed to try the custom; and respondents council thinking they had a full proof for a decree, without a trial, and having omitted to read, several of their witnesses petitioned for a rehearing, which was ordered, and the cause was reheard before Sir Edward Ward, Chief Baron, Sir Nicholas Lechmere, Sir Littleton Powys, and Sir Henry Hatsel, Barons, and on full examination, the whole Court declared they were fully satisfied that there was such a custom, and that there was no ground for a trial at law, and confirmed the [52] said custom; but directed it to be inserted in the said decree, that if any of the inhabitants should bring corn or grain to the said mills to be ground, and that it should not be ground in forty-eight hours, that then such person should be at liberty to take away such corn and grain, and grind it elsewhere, as in many like decrees hath been used. (Q. Did not this latter part of the Decree introduce a new Custom?)
Die Jovis, 23 Februarii, 1698, after hearing council on this appeal, it was ordered and adjudged by the Lords, that the petition and appeal be dismissed, and the decree complained of affirmed. Lords Journ. vol. xvi. 388.
Case 11.—Hugh Griffith, Gentleman,—Appellant; William Anvill, and Jane, his Wife,—Respondents [1698].
[Mew's Dig. i. 227.]
The appellants stated, that Owen Wynne, Gentleman, respondent, Jane's former husband, and Ellin Wynne his mother, being severally seized of lands in Carnarvon and Anglesey, marriage articles, dated 12th May, 1683, were made between Thomas Lloyd, respondent, Jane's father, on the one part, and said Ellin and Owen of the other part; whereby it was agreed, that Ellin and Owen should, on request of Thomas Lloyd, settle the same on such persons as the said Thomas Lloyd should appoint, to the use of Owen Wynne for life, remainder to his issue on the body of Jane, and that in such articles there was a proviso, that the feoffees, should stand seised, to the intent that Jane, if she survived Owen, might, out of the profits thereof, receive and take 35l. per. ann. for her life in lieu of dower, with power to distrain for non-payment, and in failure of distress, to enter and enjoy; and a covenant, that Owen should pay Thomas Lloyd 800l. and that in consideration thereof, Thomas Lloyd should settle his estate, being 150l. per. ann. (though alledged to be 200l. per. ann.) as follows, viz. 50l. per. ann. thereof upon Owen and Jane, in possession for their lives, 30l. more for their lives after the death of the mother of the said Thomas Lloyd (who was then alive) and subject to 200l. [53] charged, after Thomas Lloyd and his wife's deaths (who were also then alive) remainder of all to the issue of Owen and Jane, in tail, remainder over unto Thomas Lloyd and his right heirs for ever; and that Thomas Lloyd received the said 800l. and settled his estate according to the said articles, 13th February, 1684, and the 800l. went to pay his debts; and that Jane, in 1686, three years after marriage, left her husband Owen, and went and lived with her father in a remote country, separate from her husband, during his life; that Thomas Lloyd never requested a settlement from Ellin and Owen Wynne; and Ellin died about 1688, so that her estate comprised in the articles, descended to her heir at law, and was lost to her son Owen, by Lloyd's neglecting to request the settlement: Appellant, in 1690, became intimate with Owen, and did him several services till death; and 17th October, 1691, Owen Wynne, by agreement with Thomas Lloyd, granted Jane a separate maintenance of 29l. per. ann. out of the 50l. per. ann. which they had out of Thomas Lloyd's estate, after which Owen had but a small matter towards his 800l. and it was fully proved that Jane, and his own next relations, had disobliged him, and that having no children, and having particular kindness for appellant, he, long before his death, resolved to give appellant both his real and personal estate, and so declared and published; and several of his friends and relations often endeavoured to dissuade him from it; and appellant had, at Owen's
176
