BIRCHINSHAW against WILCOCK and Others. THE plaintiff, as rector of Lydford, in the county of Devon, MICH. TERMS 3. WIL.&MAR. The rector of Lydford, in Dea vonshire, claims tithes of lands lyingin the foreft of Dartmore. The defendants alledge that the tithes belong to The defendants alledged, that the grounds by them severally held do lie within the foreft of Dartmore; that the faid foreft was an ancient forest, park, or chace, belonging to THE CROWN; the crown, and that the tithes thereof, and of all afforted and improved grounds can only be therein, were only payable to THE CROWN, and by law no tithes, claimed by mator any thing in lieu thereof, could be claimed by any perfon ter of record. for the fame, but only by fuch as claimed by matter of record under the crown. The defendants' counfel infifted, that the grounds out of which the plaintiff demands tithes, are not within the parifh of Lydford, or the titheable places thereof. THE COURT directed the plaintiff to bring an action against Aniffue directed the defendants; the iffue to be, "Whether the tenements and to try whether "lands in the occupation of the defendants, out of which the the lands lie in the parish cf "plaintiff demands tithes, do lie within the parish of Lydford, Lydford. "or the titheable places thereof, or not?" to be tried by a fpecial jury. A trial was accordingly had by a fpecial jury out of the north A verdi& found grand divifion of the faid county, and a verdict given for the for the plaint., plaintiff. fufed. The defendants' counsel prayed a new trial; but THE COURT, A new trial refeeing no miscarriage in the jury upon the laft trial, nor any juft exception to the verdict, refufed to grant any further trial. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED BY THE COURT, that the defend- Tithes in kind ants fhall respectively account with and fatisfy the plaintiff for decreed. all fuch tithes as they have feverally had in the years 1688 and 1689 (a). NICH. LECHMERE. (*) See the cafe of Burnaford v Turrett, poft. Hilary Term, 3. Anne. THE DEEDS against LEWIS and Others. HE rector of Saint Dogmells, in the county of Pembroke, the parish and the titheable places thereof. I HILARY TERM 3. WIL. &MAR. The rector of St. broke, claims Dogmells, in Pem tithes of lands in The kind. but it appearing The defendants faid, that part of their lands was parcel of the poffeffions of the late diffolved abbey of Saint Dogmells, and enjoyed by the abbots thereof, and within the gate or wall of the abbey, and always in their own manurance; that fome part of their lands, which lay out of the clofe, wall, or precinct of the abbey of Saint Dogmells, doth lie within the faid rectory, and that the tithes have been conftantly paid for the fame, but that the other parts of the lands lay within the fcite, wall, clofe, or precinct of the faid abbey, and for fuch part thereof no manner of tithes, or any thing in lieu thereof, were ever paid or demanded, but have always been exempted or dif charged from tithes, either by real compofition or by fome ufage, law, cuftom, prefcription, or by fome other ways or means. But it appearing that the faid abbey was one of the leffer that St. Dogmelis abbeys, and was diffolved by the ftatute 27. Hen. 8. c. 28. was one of the kffer abbeys, The lards call THE COURT was therefore of opinion, that though it did not appear that the faid lands had for many years paft paid any tithes, yet that the faid lands ought, and are by law liable to the payment of tithes to the faid plaintiff as impropriator of the faid parish of Saint Dogmells. IT IS THEREUPON ORDERED AND DECREED BY THE COURT; that the defendants do feverally pay to the plaintiff the value of their tithes arifing upon the faid lands lying within the fcite, clofe, wall, or precinét of the faid abbey, for the refpective times and values in their faid anfwers fet forth, the faid plaintiff being willing to accept the fame at thofe values. EDGE against OGLANDER and Others. Suffex, 4th February 1691. THE HE bill ftated, that the plaintiff, fince June 1685, had been ed Kingfbam the lawful rector of the rectory of Saint Pancras, in the Farm, in the county of Suffex, and entitled to all tithes, both great and fmall, pay a medus of belonging thereto.. county of Suffex, lieu of all tithes. 81.on Michaelmas The defendants denied the plaintiff's title, and believed a Day yearly to the rector of St. Mr. Richards to be the lawful rector, but confeffed that Oglander Pancras, in the was owner, and the other defendants occupiers of a farm called faid county, in Kingham Farm, at eight pounds a-year; and infifted that no tithes in kind ought to be paid for the fame, there being time out of mind, the fum of eight pounds as a modus ufed and accustomed to be paid yearly at the feast of Saint Michael to the rectors for the time being, in lieu and full fatisfaction of all tithes arifing on the faid farm, and no other fum whatsoever. S. Rayn. 71 4 The The plaintiff replied; the defendants rejoined; and witneffes were examined on both fides; and on reading the depofitions, and on full debate, IT IS ORDERED AND DECREED, by the consent of the plaintiff, that the defendants fhall, before Eafter next, fatisfy and pay to the plaintiff, or his order, forty-eight pounds, being for fix years ending at Michaelmas 1690, for the faid modus of eight pounds a-year for the faid Kingfham Farm, together with five pounds cofts; but in default as aforefaid, then the deputy remembrancer is hereby ordered to tax cofts, to be paid by the faid defendants to the faid plaintiff. LECHMERE, Baron. EDGE against OGLANDER AND OTHERS. POWELL, Baron. CRESSNER against GALLY and Others. Cambridgeshire, 21st June 1692. THE "HE vicar of Soham, in the county of Cambridge, claims all small tithes in kind in a marsh ground called Scham Meere. The defendant ftated, that the vicar of Soham had never had - right to any tithes of hay arifing from the faid meere called Soham Meere; for that, time out of mind, there hath been yearly paid to the impropriator of the faid parifh of Soham thirteen fhillings and fourpence, in lieu and full fatisfaction of all tithes whatfoever, arifing or happening of and from the faid meere. A trial at law was directed; the iffue to be, "Whether the "fum of thirteen fhillings and fourpence, payable yearly to "the impropriator of the faid parish of Soham, be in lieu and "full fatisfaction of all the fmall tithes, as well as great tithes of "the faid meere, called Soham Meere, or not?" Upon which trial the jury gave a verdict for the defendants. The caufe now came on to be heard on the faid verdict, and the plaintiff's counfel prayed a new t'ial, and MR. BARON TURTON having fpoke with THE JUDGE who tried the fame, and he declaring that he thought the matter proper for a new trial, the Court ordered a new trial to be had upon the former iffue by a fpecial jury, and that the plaintiff fhall pay to the defendants cofts to be taxed for the laft trial. TRIN. TERM, 4. WIL & MAR. The marsh called Scham Meee, in Cambridgefire, pays a mo dus of 13s. 4d. propriator of Scham, in lieu of tithes. yearly to the im The cause was again tried at the last affizes, and a verdict was 11th May 1693. again given for the defendants; that time out of mind the fum of thirteen fhillings and fourpence hath been paid to the im propriator of Scham, in lieu and fatisfaction of all tithes arifing on the meere called Soham Meere. VOL. I. U The CRESSNER againft GALLY The caufe, being continued in the paper of caufes, came on again this day to be heard on the verdict, when upon reading both the AND OTHERS. aforefaid orders, and the poftea of the faid verdict, the plaintiff's counfel prayed a new trial, but the Court, having formerly granted two trials, did not think proper to grant any more trials. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED AND ADJUDGED BY THE COURT, that the defendants be difmiffed of and from the faid bill, and the matters and things therein contained, with moderate cofts. ROB. ATKYNS. JOHN POWELL. TRIN. TERM, 4.WIL.& MAR. The leffee of the in Weftmoreland, SHEPHARD against BIRKETT and Others. Westmoreland, 16th June 1692. tithes of Kendal, THE bill ftated, that for fourteen years laft paft, the plaintiffs had been farmers of the rectory of Kendal, in the demands a cuf- county of Wellmoreland, by leafe made by Sir 7. Otway; that tomary payment the defendants have been occupiers of feveral arable and other called tithe meal lands for one year laft paft, and ought to have paid to the fiver. plaintiffs, in lieu of the tithes of corn, feveral fums of money, as compofitions for the fame, viz. the defendant Birkett, one fhilling and fivepence; the defendant Steddall, tenpence; and the defendant Barwick, nine fhillings and ninepence; which fums they feverally refufed to pay. The defendants The defendants confeffed, that the plaintiffs were farmers of fay the plaintiffs the rectory, and that for the year 1690 they had feverally been leafe expired at Lady Day, and Occupiers of feveral arable lands therein; that the feveral fums the demand is of money, in the bill demanded, were yearly due and payable not due till Eof as a compofition in lieu of tithes, and is called tithe meal filver ; ter. The bill difmiff. ed. that the faid compofition money is, by the custom of the faid rectory, payable at Eaffer, and therefore not due to the plaintiffs, their leafe determining at Lady Day 1691, which was about three weeks before Eafter Day, and that the fame was due to the farmers of the faid rectory, and had been demanded by them. It fully appearing that the money was due and payable at the feast of Eafter yearly, THE COURT was of opinion, that the faid compofition demanded by the bill was not due to the plaintiffs, being payable after the determination of the leafe. IT IS THEREUPON ORDERED, that the faid defendants are dif- SHEPMARD miffed of and from the faid bill with cofts to be taxed (a). againft BIRKETT AND OTHERS. WALMER against STANFORD and Others. THE plaintiff, as rector of Great Comberton, in the county of to TRIN. TERM, 4. WIL.& MAR. The rector of Great Comberton, in Worceste foire, of the parish, and a right of I claims the tithes common on Comberton Hill. The defendants appeared and confeffed, that the tithe of hay The defendants and all small tithes were due to the plaintiff, and that they had confefs his right paid the fame to him for all the time he had been rector there, to small tithes, but they denied that the tithes of corn and grain are due to him, great tithes, and but deny it to or that his predeceffors ever had or received the fame, or that he to the right of hath any right of common on Comberton Hill. common. The defendant Dorothy Hanford faid, that by virtue of fome The defendant grant or legal prefcription, her husband and his ancestors had Hanford fays, taken and collected, in their own right, a portion of all the that a portion of the great tithes great tithes of corn and grain within the faid rectory and parish, belong to her, and that she and her farmers have, fince his death, yearly re- and the refidue ceived the faid portion, and that the other portion of the great to the dean and tithes belongs to the dean and chapter of Weftminfter, or their chapter of W.leffee, who have alfo conftantly enjoyed the fame. The defendants fet forth the quantities and values of their tithes, and faid, that Comberton Hill is in the manor of Woolalfball, and not in the parish of Great Comberton, and so no tithes of herbage are due to the plaintiff from Comberton Hill. minfier. The defendants fay Comberton Hill is not the parish. cupies Wefion's The defendant Cole faid that he rented of the defendant D. The defendant Hanford a farm called Weftmon's Farm, together with a portion of Cele fays he oc tithes called Hanford's Tithes, and that the plaintiff one year feized Farm fome theaves of corn that were set out by fome of the occupiers, and claimed the fame as rector. |