Case of William Love, John Buckworth, Thomas Breton, Thomas Pearl, Edward Pearce, Nathaniel Letton, merchants, and others, appealants from a decree made in the high and honourable Court of Chancery, humbly offered to consideration of the Right Honourable

A ilv/ of William L&ve^fohn Buctyorth, Thomas'Breton, Thomas Tearl, SchfrardTearce,
J\(athaniel Letton, Merchants, and others, Appealants from a Decree made in the High and Ho¬
nourable Court ofChanceryjHumbly Offered to confideration of the Right Honourable the Lords
Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament Aflembled.
THe A ppealantS; together with Sir George Oxindea, ChriJlopher Oxinden, and William Neks, in the year 1656. Advanced a Joynfdtoclt of 13300 /.
and fentit in the Ship toChina^ and Eaji-India, upon the Adventurers aceompt, according to their refpedive proportions and Interefts
therein : And Chriftopher Oxindenv/zs tent Supra Cargo, Who among!* other his Inltrudions, had Exprefs diredion to buy feveral fpecific goods at China,
proper for fale at and mentioned and fet down in a writing or Schedule for that purpofedelivered unto him, to the value of yoco /.
Thefe goods fo to be by him bought at China, he had Order,with the Afliftance of Sir George Oxinden and William Noke,to fell at Surat in India, if he could fell to «ood
profit. ' - C : '' /
With the money fo to be raifed by fuch Sale, or fo much thereof as ftiould benecefiary, The faid Chri/lopher Oxdnden had Order and Diredion to pay Sir George
Oxinden and William Noke, for fuch goods as they, by the faid Adventurers diredion, had provided and bought for them in according to a Note of Particulars
fent to them, amounting in the whole to 10000/.
The remaining part of the faid 13 300/. Cargo, and the profit thereof, the faid Chriftopher was to in veil in fuch goods at China as were proper for the Englijh Market,
And to bring them home in the faid Ship King Ferdinando, if he could not fell them at Surat, to good profit 3 And becaufethe Adventurers had Agreed to pay 130 /. per
Menfem, for hire of the (hip, befides Mariners Wages and Viduals, Therefore the faid Chrifiopher had Exprefs Diredion, fo to Order his affairs,as that the fhip might
be difpatcht from Surat, and fet fail for England by the end of January, 1657.
The Books of Accompt of the faid Cargo, and profit thereby arifing, were Exprefiy Ordered to be kept by one Robert Wilnot, whom, for his great experience in ac-
compts, the Adventurers had hired, and Defigned for that very purpofe. But contrary to all thefelnfirudions, and theTruft repofed in him.
1. Chriftophir Oxinden (being brother toSiv George) after his arrival at fold all the goods he had bought at proper for fale in England, To him the faid
Six George, William Nokg, and others, at 34 /. per Cent, lefs than was paid for them in China, and for lefs by one half than the fame would have yeilded in England.
2. Thefaid finding that Sir and had, by their own confeffion, provided but the value of 7789/. 13*. of the 10000/. worth of goods
mentioned in the Appealants note of particulars aforefaid, Andthatthey had a great quantity of other goods lying dead on their hands fnot agreeing with the Note of
particulars aforefaid) he the faid Chrifiopher (as the faid Sir George and William Noke pretend) accepted of fo many of thofegoods, fo lying dead as aforefaid, upon the
Appealants Accompt, as amounted unto 7385 /. 13 s. od. more 3 and thereby, asthey pretend, made them Debtors to the faidSir andJT////^ for thofe goods,
and the fpecific goods, bought by their Direction, the fum of 151751.6 s.o d.
Whereas the fcidi Sit George William had direction to provide goods but to the value of 10000 1. in thewhole, of which, thofe pretended tobeprovided, fell
fhort nigh 3000 l.fo that this the faid C/jny/cpW his proceeding was a further breach of his truft, And beyond his power to run hislmployers in Debt, which he not
onely, as they pretend, did, but as an Addition to his fraudulent proceedings, took the faid dead goods at far higher rates than really they were worth; And to make
the fraud more clear, it appears by the Books ofAccompts, that the faid after his buying the faid goods, and before the Ships return to England, re-fold
part of them to the faid Geo. and Will, for above 900 L lefs than he paid Them, for them.
3. The faid having thus broken his lnftru<ffcions, and believing that the Appealants would never Accept of the goods not dire(fted to be bought, andat
rates beyond what ever they would fell for ; Contrived which way to avoid being called to Account, and to that purpofe kept the Ship and Cargo abroad, above One
whole year longer than he needed to have done, fhe being offered Fraighthome for her) all which time he traded with her and her Cargo into Per pa, at the Appealants
vaft charge for Fraight, Vidfuals, and Wages as aforefaid ; which done, (and the faid Sir and having with the faid Chrifiopher received the whole
Advantage thereof) They fo contrived among!* them, that Sir George came to England with, the fhip in July 1659; and left Chrifiopher his brother in India.
This being the Cafe, the Appealants in Hillary Term, 1660. Exhibited their Bill in Chancery againft Sir and Noke,ILxecutxiY.o{WilliamNokS'>
and Elizabeth Dallifon, TLxec\itxi-x.ot Chriftopher Oxinden, (or an Account-, To which Bill they not only anfwered, but Sir and Exhibited their Crofs bill
againfl: the Appealants for a pretended debt; who having anfwered thereunto, and in the Appealants Caufe, Ifiue joyned,Witneffes Examined, and Publication duly
pafled; the faid Caufes 14^. 14.th.Car.2d. came both to hearing together before the Right Honourable Edward Earle o( Clarendon late Lord High Chancellor
of England-, upon which hearing a reference was propo fed, and in 14. C^r,2<Z. It was referred to five Merchants, two nominated by the Appealants, ardtwoby
the Refpondents, and Six Samuel Mico (named as a fifth by the CourtJ or to any Three of them, to view the Books of Account, Examine Witnelfes to matter of
Fad, and, ifpoflible, to reconcile the matters indifference, otherwifeto Report fpeci ally to the Court.
Purfuant to the faid Reference, the Referrees,
1. Firfl calledfortheBooksof Accompt, but none would bo produced, butfuchas^werefignedby oneFr^w^T^^rw^, who ('after his coming into England, and
delivery of the faid Bo'oks into fome of the Adventurers hands) got them into his handsagain, and added (with other InkJ to his own name, formerly fubicribedf^
Order of Chrifiopher OxindenI\ , * -
2dly. It appeared to them by the Affidavit of Mr. aMerchant, that the faid Books were made up at Sea, in the voyage homewards, by Sir GWg*
Oxinden and the faid Taverner, partly by loofe papers they found, and partly out of the Conceptions of their own heads, without Willmot's privity, though with them in
the fhip all the while.
3dly. It was clear by the Depofitions taken in the Caufe,that though Willmot (according to the Appealants exprefs Order) kept the Books of Accompt during the firft
part of the voyage, yet afterward Sir George denyed to let him have any farther Infpedfion into the fame, or to aa any further therein.
Whereupon all the Referrees made a Queition, whether the faid Books ought to be made ufe of, or admitted as evidence.
The Appealants Referrees certified to the Court, that they ought not; but the Defendant’s Referrees prevailed with Sir (who was nominated by the
Court) to joyn with them, and they Certified as followeth.
1. In refpe&of Mr. Young s Affidavit, / which they annexed to their Report,and was, thereupon afterwards read in Court) they referred it to the Determination
ofthe Court, whether the faid Books fhould be allowed as evidence, which if the Court fhould think fit to do, then.
2. They certified, that by thofe Books made up and ballanced, it appeared that the Adventurers, and Joint-Stock, were Debtors to Sir George Oxinden, and Wil¬
liam Noke in India 36321. 19 s. 6 d. without confidering the particulars of the Account; whereas there were Errors and fur-charges in the Accompt, amounting
to more than the pretended Debt.
3. They certified, that Sir George and William Demanded for lutereft of that fummeOSy 1.6 s. 5 d. In all 4320 I.5 s. 11 d.
4. They Certified,that there was but 46961.4 s. 5 d. remaining in CafiVof the Joint-Stock ; befides the divident the Adventurers had then-to-fore had of 50 l.per Cent.
of their principall; And that out of that, Sir Oorg*,having loooh in the Joint-Stock,ought to have 5001. for his {hare.
Thefe Caufes coming to be again heard3^.iV(n/ff»;.i663beforethe Earl ofC/^rm/o#,he,upon reading the Certificates aforefaid,Decreed, ThatYoungs Affidavit fhould
be fet afide,And that the Appealants ihould pay 43 201.% j.i 1 d.to the faid Sir George and William,Sc 5001. more, to the faid Sir George for his Dividend as aforefaid; And
Decreed,to pay the Appealant 96/. 3 s. Which Decree Sir and Jane Noke, Executrix of William, gotlnrolled, whereupon the Appealant^
could have no relief by Bill of Review, till firfi: they had conformed thereunto; which having done, and the money paid,they exhibited their Bill of Review, Againfi: Sir
Henry and Sir James Oxinden ( Executors of Sir George Oxinden ) and againib Thomas Atkins the Executor of Jane Noke-, to Review and Reverfe the aforefaid Decree,
and Affigned feveral Errours contey ned in the body thereof.
And for which the fame ought to have been Reverfed,particularly, That there were ftot proper parties to the Decree,for that if fuch Debt had been due to Sir George
andWilliam,yct it was Contra&edby Chrifiopher contrary to Exprefs Inftru&ions ofthe Adventurers,and hewasno party to the Sute,though the onely proper party to
have Controverted the fame; And theAppealants being no way privy to the pretended debt, nor concerned therein,ought not to have been obliged thereby,the fame not
being contrafted by any power derived from them,or for goods ufeful to them,neither was the faid Chrifiopher authorized to run them into debtjbeyond the Joint-flock
he was intrufted with by them;nor was it Probable he had fo done,In as much as the Cargo and Joint-flock,and the proceed thereof,after three years voyage without any
LofsatSea, or otherwife, fell fhort one half ofthe Principal, Befides divers other material Errors in the faid Bill of Review fet forth.
The Caufe came to Hearing before the Right Honourable Orlando BridgmanMtt LordKeeper ofthe Great Seal of England,31 OHob.23th,Car.zd.who declared,
1 That the Errours affigned were Errours in Fact onely, and not in Law.
2. That the Court of Chancery, could not reverfe a Decree upon a Bill of Review,where the Errours Affigned were onely Errours in Fadl.
3. That had his Lordfhip heard the faid Caufe Originally, he fhould not have made the faid Decree, and
4. That the Appealants are onely Relieveable by your Lordihips in Parliament AfTembled,The Supreme Court of Judicature, of this Kingdom.
Whereupon the Appealants have Exhibited their Appeale to this Honourable Houfe, And mofl humbly pray
Firft, That the aforefaid Decree may be Reverfed.
Secondly, That they may be at Liberty to proceed upon their own Original Bill in Chancery for an Accompt.
Thirdly, That they may be reflored to the 43201. $ s. 11 d. which, purfuant to the faid Decree, they have paid, together with Intereft for the fame.
Fourthly, To receive fuch further Relief as to your Lordfhips {hall feem Agreeable to Equity and Juftice,and for that purpofe that Sir Henry and Sir James Oxinden,
Thomas Atkins, and others, may be Summoned to Appear and put in their Anfwer in Writing, And a Day appointed for the hearing this Caufe at the Barr of this
Honourable Houfe.