CRANE v. HILL (Ex. 1697)
PRO E.126/16, f. 420v (2 July 1697)
Whereas William Crane, Gentleman, did this term twelve months [ago] exhibit his bill in this
Court against Susan Hill, widow, relict, and administratrix to John Hill therein setting forth that
William Hill, father of the said John Hill, being seised in fee of divers messuages and lands in the
counties of Norfolk and Suffolk, after whose death the same descended to the said John Hill part
encumbered with mortgages the rest with judgments, some of which were entered by the said
William Hill to the plaintiff for moneys owing, and the said John Hill being greatly indebted to
the plaintiff and not able to pay the debt due upon the estate, the said complainant and the said
John Hill in the year of our Lord 1675 came to an agreement for the purchase of the said estate
subject to the debts that were charged upon the said lands and to settle on the said John Hill out
of the said lands for the first five years after the sale thereof an annuity of thirty pounds per
annum, and after that term expired, forty pounds per annum for eighty-nine years if the said John
Hill should so long live free and clear of all manner of deductions of taxes, that the said John Hill
by lease and release dated the twelfth and thirteenth days of October, 1675, did convey to the
plaintiff and his heirs all his said messuages, lands, tenements, and other premises descended to
him and did thereby covenant that the plaintiff should enjoy the said premises free from
encumbrances and that he should make further assurances and would surrender so much of the
premises as was copyhold, that thereupon the plaintiff by indenture dated the fourteenth of
October, 1675, devised to the said John Hill such part of the premises as was agreed upon for
eighty-nine years determinable upon his death to secure the payment of the annuity, that ever since
such purchase, the plaintiff enjoyed the premises and discharged the encumbrances that were upon
the lands out of which the annuity issues and constantly paid the annuity of forty pounds per
annum at Lady Day and Michaelmas without any abatement or deduction of taxes till of late, that
the said John Hill absconding himself, he constantly made a tender of the said annuity at the
church porch of Beccles according to the covenant in the said indenture upon the days it ought to
be paid where he might have received the same, that John Hill being indebted to Robert Freeman
in forty pounds upon bond was arrested and the plaintiff at his request became bail, the said John
Hill promising to indemnify him out of the annuity, that the plaintiff was sued upon the bail bond
and forced to pay the debt and charges amounting to four and forty pounds seven shillings, which
the plaintiff paid, hoped the said John Hill in his lifetime would have reimbursed him out of the
annuity, there being three half years due to him at the time of his death, that the defendant, Susan,
having taken out letter of administration and combining with several persons to deprive the
plaintiff of the money paid to Freeman and to burden the purchased estate and taking advantage
by reason [that] the annuity was not paid at the precise times, has delivered declarations in
ejectment to the tenants in possession and threaten to recover the possession and to hold the same
for the remainder of the term or force him to pay the arrears and will not pay the debt and charges
paid to Freeman nor subject the same to be assets in her hands to discharge the judgments
acknowledged by the said John Hill, to which the plaintiff's estate is liable, that the defendant has
likewise brought an action of covenant for the annuity, that the defendant Ampleford pretends to
have judgments against John Hill precedent to the plaintiff's conveyance and concealed the same
but if any such judgment was obtained the same was obtained by collusion between the said Hill
and Ampleford which is since paid that the personal estate of the said John Hill ought in the first
place to make good the money paid by Freeman and next to satisfy the judgment obtained by
Ampleford, the plaintiff being a purchaser without notice and the defendant ought not to have the
arrears of the annuity but the same ought to be applied in discharge of [the] encumbrances, that
the defendant Susan may set forth what she claims due to her for the arrears of the annuity and
when and where John Hill died and set forth an inventory of the estate of John Hill and that the
plaintiff may be satisfied out of the annuity due to Hill at his death the money paid to Freeman
with interest, and that the residue may be applied towards payment of Ampleford's judgment and
that [the] proceedings at law may be stayed is the scope of the bill and prayed process.
And the defendant, Susan Hill, being served therewith appears and put in her answer and
thereby set forth that William Hill in the bill named died seised of divers lands and tenements in
the counties of Norfolk and Suffolk, after whose death the same descended to John Hill, her late
husband, as his son and heir, has heard [that] the complainant upon fraudulent pretense before he
did know of his father's death got the estate from him, knows not that John Hill was indebted to
Freeman or that he was arrested or that the plaintiff became his bail and paid his debts to Barbara
Freeman, or that he assigned the bond, says that the plaintiff in the fifth year of the reign of his
now Majesty and the late Queen exhibited his bill in this Court against John Hill, her late husband,
the said Thomas Ampleford, Ann Barber, administratrix of James Barber, and Barbara Freeman,
administratrix of Robert Freeman, to the same effect as the bill now exhibited, to which bill the
defendants to put in their several answers, and the plaintiff replied, and the defendants rejoined.
And the cause, being at issue and witnesses examined and the depositions of such witnesses
being published and the cause put in the paper of causes, came to be heard on Monday the
eighteenth day of February, 1694[\95], upon hearing whereof, the said defendants Ampleford and
Barber were dismissed with costs. And upon a further hearing of the said cause against the said
defendant John Hill in Michaelmas term, 1695, it was ordered that the plaintiff should pay unto
the said John Hill the arrears of the annuity of forty pounds per annum and for the future to pay
the same as it should become due according to the agreement. And to clear the estate secured for
the payment thereof from encumbrances that at the time of making such order, there was two half
years due and at the death of the said John Hill, three half years at Lady Day last was twelve
months which the plaintiff ought to have paid to her husband and since his death to this defendant
as administratrix to her said husband, confesses that she endeavored to have arrested the plaintiff
at common law to have recovered the arrears of the said annuity but could not and thereupon
delivered [the] declarations in ejectment and recovered judgment and hoped she should hold the
premises for the residue of the term being a willful forfeiture in the plaintiff's not paying the
annuity or decree her the arrears without making them liable to pay the debts of Freeman or
Ampleford, the plaintiff by agreement being to pay all of the debts of the said John Hill, denies
that her husband left any goods or personal estate other than his wearing apparel, some chairs, a
nest of drawers, an old trunk, fire irons, and some necessary things used in his chamber, which
after his death the landlord distrained for rent and were appraised at six pounds, nineteen shillings,
sixpence, says that her husband died at Norwich the fourteenth of May, 1696, and was buried the
next day at the parish of St. Peter of Maucroft there and concluded with the general traverse, to
which answer the plaintiff replied and the defendant rejoined.
And the cause being at issue and witnesses examined and the depositions of such witnesses
being published and the cause put into the paper coming this day to be heard at Serjeants' Inn Hall
in Fleet Street before the Right Honorable Sir Edward Ward, Knight, Lord Chief Baron, Sir
Littleton Powis, Knight, and Mr. Baron Blencowe, two other of the Barons of this Court, upon
opening of the plaintiff's bill by Mr. Turner of the answer of the defendant, Susan Hill, by Mr.
Dodd and hearing of Sir Thomas Trevor, Knight, his majesty's Attorney General, Sir Thomas
Jenner, Knight, serjeant at law, and Mr. Newport, of counsel with the plaintiff, and reading the
order made on the hearing [of] the cause the seventh of December, 1695, and hearing of Mr.
Ettrick, of counsel with the said defendant, Susan Hill, it is this day ordered, adjudged, and
decreed by the court that upon the plaintiff's paying to the defendant Susan Hill or her order the
sum of sixty pounds for the three half years arrears of the annuity with interest for the same from
the several times the same ought to have been paid, together with costs both at law and in this
court to be computed by the Deputy [King's] Remembrancer, to whom it is hereby referred to
compute and tax the same, that the said defendant Susan Hill shall deliver up to the plaintiff or
his assigns the said lease whereby the said annuities were granted, but in case the plaintiff shall
not pay the arrears of the said annuity with the interest and costs to be allowed by the said Deputy
Remembrancer, then the said defendant shall be and is hereby at liberty to proceed at [common]
law.
[The original language is English, but modern spelling and punctuation has been used for this
transcription.]
[Earlier proceedings in this case are reported at Lincoln's Inn MS. Misc. 559, f. 10, and
Georgetown Univ. Law Sch. MS. B88-8, p. 257 (Ward's Reports), and Public Record Office
E.126/16, f. 303 (7 Dec. 1695).]
[Return to the Home Page]