The case of Sr John Champante, Kt. respond to the appeal of Sir Robert Dashwood, Knight and Baronet, Sir Samuel Dashwood Kt. John Perry and Edward Noel, surviving executors of George Dashwood, Esq; deceased appellants. Champante, John, Sir, d. 1708. 1685 Approx. 15 KB of XML-encoded text transcribed from 1 1-bit group-IV TIFF page image. Text Creation Partnership, Ann Arbor, MI ; Oxford (UK) : 2009-03 (EEBO-TCP Phase 1). A78559 Wing C1924B ESTC R213759 99896904 99896904 135517 This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal . The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. Early English books online. (EEBO-TCP ; phase 1, no. A78559) Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 135517) Images scanned from microfilm: (Early English books, 1641-1700 ; 2456:9) The case of Sr John Champante, Kt. respond to the appeal of Sir Robert Dashwood, Knight and Baronet, Sir Samuel Dashwood Kt. John Perry and Edward Noel, surviving executors of George Dashwood, Esq; deceased appellants. Champante, John, Sir, d. 1708. Dashwood, Robert, Sir, 1662-1734. 1 sheet ([1] p.) s.n., [London? : 1685?] Lpro copy found with items from the 1680s; May 1685 is latest date in text. Reproduction of original in the Folger Shakespeare Library, Washington, D.C. Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford. Re-processed by University of Nebraska-Lincoln and Northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. Gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO. EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor. The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines. Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements). Keying and markup guidelines are available at the Text Creation Partnership web site . eng Dashwood, Robert, -- Sir, 1662-1734 -- Trials, litigation, etc. -- Early works to 1800. England and Wales. -- Parliament. -- House of Lords -- Early works to 1800. England and Wales. -- Court of Chancery -- Early works to 1800. Finance, Public -- Ireland -- Early works to 1800. Complex litigation -- England -- Early works to 1800. 2008-03 TCP Assigned for keying and markup 2008-05 SPi Global Keyed and coded from ProQuest page images 2008-06 Mona Logarbo Sampled and proofread 2008-06 Mona Logarbo Text and markup reviewed and edited 2008-09 pfs Batch review (QC) and XML conversion The Case of S r John Champante , K t Respond . TO THE APPEAL of Sir Robert Dashwood , Knight and Baronet , Sir Samuel Dashwood Kt. John Perry and Edward Noel , surviving Executors of George Dashwood , Esq Deceased Appellants . RICHARD Earl of Ranelagh , and Eight others ( whereof George Dashwood the Appellant's Testator was one ) by Indenture under the Great Seal of England , contracted and became Undertakers with King Charles the Second to receive the whole Revenue of Ireland , and to pay the whole Charge of that Kingdom contained in the Civil and Military Lists for five Years , ending the 26th of December , 1675 ; and had two Years time afterwards for Collecting the Arrears , and making good the Payments grown due within the five Years . A Commission under the Great Seal of England , issued to the said Undertakers , and in their absence in Ireland , to others therein by them named to be their Representatives ; wherein Mr. Edward Roberts was named by the said George Dashwood , to be his Representative , and to act on his behalf . In Virtue of which Commission the now Respondent was duly constituted Deputy-Receiver-General , Vice-Treasurer , and Treasurer at War , who entred into Bonds of 10000 l. penalty , for the execution of the said Places and Performance of his said Trust , which he all along faithfully performed . But the said Revenue proving defective , or at least not coming in fast enough to answer the Ends and Uses of the said Undertaking ; and the Undertakers being pressed to make payments according to their Contract , the said Undertakers and their Representatives , or so many of them as were requisite in that behalf , to comply therewith , did by several Orders and Letters importune and direct the Respondent to Advance and Lend , and to procure from others what Money he could , upon the credit , and towards the support of the Undertaking , and Undertakers , under promise of being repaid and indempnified , and for which there was to be an allowance of 10 per Cent. ( the usual Interest in Ireland ) besides Gratuity and Commission-Money : Many , if not all of which Letters and Orders were signed by George Dashwood , or the said Roberts his Representative . Pursuant whereunto , in order to support and preserve the Credit of the said Undertakers and Undertaking , the Respondent did lend and advance great Sums of his own , and by direction of the Undertakers in England , did become bound to Sir John James , and others , residing in England , then unknown to the Respondent , for great Sums of Money which were procured by the Undertakers ; all which Money so lent and procured by the Respondent , were duly applied to the Uses of the Undertaking , and the Undertakers for so much were discharged against the King upon their Contract . Two several Accounts , the one ending Christmas 72 , the other at Christmas 73 , between the Undertakers and the Respondent , touching the Undertaking , were made up , stated , and examined by the said Roberts , and others employed by the Undertakers for that purpose , and duly signed and passed , upon the foot of which last Account there was a ballance of 5622 l. due to the Respondent , which together with the other Moneys afterwards lent , and secured by the Respondent for the Use and Credit of the Undertakers and Undertaking ( besides what the Undertaking produced ) did amount to above 24000 l. principal Money ( besides Interest , Commission-Money , & Gratuity ) . To obtain satisfaction wherein , and to have his Accounts setled , the Respondent used great Importunities with the Undertakers , who all along owned the great service and kindness he had done them , by crediting them and the Undertaking so far , and promised to give Directions for stating and setling Accounts , and to take effectual care for his payment and satisfaction . And in order thereunto about June 1677 , Sir James Hayes one of the Undertakers went into Ireland ; and he with John Stepny , Esq another Undertaker , and John Hayes Brother of Sir James , and interessed in the Undertaking , having sufficient power , as they pretended , and as the Respondent believes , from all the Undertakers , to settle and conclude the Affairs of the Undertaking ( they being the only persons then acting therein ) , in August 77 , impowered the said Roberts by an Instrument under their hands , to make up , state , and certifie the Respondent's Accounts , from the 25. of Decemb. 73 , to the 24th of June 77. In pursuance whereof the said Mr. Roberts , ( who was the same person imployed and relied upon by the Undertakers to make up the former Accounts ) with the assistance of the Secretary of the Undertaking , and two of their Clerks , spent several Months in stating the Respondent's Accounts , and comparing them with the Vouchers , which justified the said Accounts in all things ; and after the strictest scrutiny imaginable , two distinct Accounts were made and closed in the same method as the two former Accounts ; the one commencing the 25th of Decemb. 73. and ending 25 Decemb. 74 , and the other going on from thence to 24 June 77 , upon the foot of which last Account there remained a Ballance for principal Money , ( not reckoning Interest , Commission-Money , nor Gratuity ) , the Sum of 36454 l. 8 s. 8 d ¼ : And thereupon all the Respondent's Vouchers were delivered up , and Abstracts thereof , and of the Accounts were delivered to the Undertakers , or their Representatives . But the Sum of 12295 l. ( which the Respondent had received from Sir John Jame's Agent as borrowed Money , and as such had given Bond , and became lyable for the same , by the direction of the Undertakers ) not appearing at the time of making up the said Accounts , but afterwards to be Money due to the Undertaking , the said Edward Roberts thought it proper to enter a Memorandum thereof in the Accounts , which caused a change and transcribing of some of the leaves , but no alteration of any Sum , Article , Figure , or other thing in the said Accounts , save the entry of the said Memorandum , which reduced the ballance to 24159 l. 8 s. 8 d ¼ as is fully in proof in the Cause , and hath been cleared to the satisfaction of the Courts of Exchequer , both in England and Ireland , at the respective Hearings of the cause , notwithstanding any seeming Reflections upon the Respond●nt concerning the same . It being evident , that the Respondent had not , nor could have any Advantage if the said Memorandum had not been incert●d , for 〈…〉 obliged to pay the 12295 l. as above ; and when it was ●●●●●vered to be paid in England , and so not to be allowed again to the said Sir John James in Ireland , he had his Security delivered up , which made the matter equal to this Respondent . The Respondent ( notwithstanding many promises ) not being able to get the Money due to him , was forced to exhibit his Bill for that purpose , in the Exchequer in Ireland , against the said Undertakers and their Representatives , some of which being brought to hearing , and the Bill against others taken pro Confesso , a Decree was made for the now Respondent's recovering the said 24159 l. 8 s. 8 d. ¼ , against the then Desendants , with his Costs ( no mention being made of Interest , Commission-Money , or Gratuity , but that left to be recovered afterwards ) . But the Earl of Ranelagh exhibiting a Cross-bill against the now Respondent , procured a Re-hearing of the Cause , which being had , and taking up six several days , in June 1684. The said Court of Exchequer approved the Authority given to Roberts , and the Accounts by him made , the Undertakers and their Representatives having free access to all the now Respondent's Books , and to all the Offices of Cheque in that Kingdom , and having in their Custody the Respondent's Vouchers delivered up , with several other particular Accounts of his daily Receipts and Payments , the said Court upon full and mature deliberation of the whole matter , was pleased to affirm the former Decree , as well against the said Earl , as other the Defendents , for paying to the Respondent the said 24159 l. 8. s. 8. d. ¼ . That Decree proving in a great measure ineffectual in Ireland , in regard the Appellant's Testator , ( upon whose credit and ability the Respondent mainly depended in his whole proceedings ) and some other of the Undertakers having no Estates nor Effects there , but living in England , the now Respondent was forced to exhibit his English Bill in the Exchequer in England , in Easter-Term 1685 , against the surviving Undertakers , and the Executors and Administrators of those deceas'd , for obtaining what was due to him ; being at that time about 56000 l. for Principal , Interest , Commission-Money , and Gratuity ( and no part thereof since paid ) . The Defendants to the said Bill ( whereof the now Appellants were some ) used so great delay , that it was four years before the Cause could be brought to an hearing . And for further delay a Cross bill was exhibited by the now Appellants , and other the Defendants in the same Term , the Respondents Cause stood for hearing , with design to put off the hearing of the Respondent's Cause ; however it came to hearing in Easter-Term 1689. And then , and in Trinity-Term following , it took up eight days ; and the Court did decree the two first Accounts made up by the said Mr. Roberts to be final and conclusive . And as to the two last Accounts , made up till Midsummer 1677 , the Court considering the impossibility the Respondent lay under , by reason of the length of time , and the present state of Ireland , and delivery up of his Vouchers to come to a new Account for the same , did not think fit to adjudge them conclusive , nor to reject or disallow of the same as stated and closed Accounts ; but in case the Defendants had any material Objections to offer against the particulars thereof , it was referred to the two Auditors of the Imprests to inspect and examine the same ; and also whether the same were made up and stated in the method of the two former Accounts , and wherein they did agree or differ from the same ; and decreed the Respondent to be examined upon Interrogatories , and the Auditors to resort to the Court for Directions , in , case of difficulty . That some of the Defendants pretending they could shew Reasons why they should be exempted out of the said Decree , from going to an account before the said Auditors , there was a Clause in the said Decree , viz. That such of the Defendants as sought to be exempted from accounting , should bring their Case to the Barons to consider of ; whereupon ( amongst others ) the now Appellant's , whose Testator lived till the year 1682 , brought in their Case , pretending their Testator in May , 1674 , assigned his Interest in the Undertaking to the said Sir James Hayes , and pretended that the Respondent had notice thereof ; and that therefore they ought not to be accountable from that time , or at least longer than Christmas 1675 , when the time of the Undertaking ended . Upon hearing of which , and upon full debate of the matter , the Appellants not having proved any Notice , ( though they had opportunities for that purpose ) the Court did ( as is humbly conceived was just ) declare their Opinion , and so ordered that the Appellants should be included in the whole Account , they having not filed any Interrogatories pursuant to the Decretal Order , though the Respondent all along offered himself to be examined . Against which said Orders the said Appellants have appealed to the most Honourable House of Lords , under pretence as if the Court of Exchequer refused to hear their Witnesses , viva voce , to prove Notice to the Respondents of their Testators Assignmment . When as in truth none such were ever produced , and it was in issue in the Cause , and Roberts , Dashwoods Representative examined upon Interrogatories , as to Notice of the Assignment , and all opportunities offered for such proof , if it could have been made out , but it was and is evident that none was ; and Mr. Dashwood wrote several Letters , which were prov'd by several Witnesses , and his Representative acted in Ireland as concerned in the Undertaking , after the time of the pretended Assignment , and during the two Years after the Undertaking ended , which by their Indenture with His Majesty , they had to collect their Arrears in , and to make good the Payments grown due within the five years . As to passing the Orders complained of , they were done in usual method , and the Appellants had time and opportunity to incert what of the Answers they pleased , the draught of the Decretal Order being left with their Clerk in Court and Soliciter , a Month before it was entred . And as to the incerting the pretended Allegations of Council into the last Orders , they being meer Suggestions , and no Memorial taken of them by the Register , the Order was drawn up without them , as is conceived was both just and usual . Wherefore , and for that the Appellant's pretences are some of them vain and groundless , others utterly untrue , and all of them made only for delay , to keep the Respondent from recovering so great a Sum of Money justly due to him , his being kept out of which for above twelve Years last past , hath reduced him and his Family to great straits , and all further delays will tend to his utter and inevitable Ruine . It is therefore most humbly prayed , that the Appeal may be dismissed , and the Respondent left to proceed and Prosecute upon the said Orders ; and Decrees . Notes, typically marginal, from the original text Notes for div A78559-e10 4 Aug. 1671. 23 Sept. 71. 8 Nov. 71 . 12295 l. Nov. 1678. May 1685.