THat whereas his principal House Belvoir Castle, is lately pulled down, by Order from the Coun­cel of State, to his great inconveniency for living in the Country; And being Tenant in pos­session of Wallingford House, having a just Title thereunto under the State, at least unto Lady day next; As may appear by the Case annexed, though the Commissioners for compound­ing refuse to confirm it: The Lord Howard pretending Title thereunto also, endeavours by his power to disturb, and by threats of force to dispossess your Petitioner thereof; contrary to the Law, and your late Act for ordering estates of Delinquents: Prayeth to be protected from force, and that the Lord Howard may be left to his Legal course, to whom your Petitioner will appear gratis; or else that it will please you to determine the Controversie your selvs, to whose judgements your Petitioner shall submit.

And pray, &c.

The Case betwixt the Earl of RUTLAND and the Lord HOWARD, is as followeth.

  • 1 THe Earl of Rutland was certainly Tenant in possession of Wallingford House, at the time of the Lord Ed­ward Howards pretended Lease from the Committee of Advance.
  • 2 That the said Lease to the Lord Howard, at 40 l. per annum, with the abatement of a fifth part for discovery, was upon pretence of his being a discoverer; though uncapable of a Lease, being a Member of the said Committee.
  • 3 That the discovery, if any were, was before that time made by another person to the Comissioners of Sequestrations for Westminster, to which it did properly appertain.
  • 4 That the Earl of Rutland, upon supposal of a Right in the Lord Howard, promised possession of Wallingford House; But the aforesaid pretended Title of the Lord Howard, was afterwards annulled by the Commissioners for compounding, and waved by the Lord Howard himself; by his taking a New Lease to commence within his former pretended Term, and all this, before such time as the said Earl was to deliver him possession; whereby the Lord Howard's supposed Right was extinct; and by consequence, the Earl of Rutland's engagement of ren­dring possession absolutely discharged.
  • 5 That before this new Lease of the Lord Howards, from the Commissioners for compounding, the Earl of Rutland had agreed with the Commissioners for Sequestrations, to continue in the said Wallingford House, till Lady day next, at the Rent of 136 l. 13 s. 4 d. besides all Taxes and Repairs, which is more then was yet offered by any other (being also willing to give the same or a greater Rent, for the term of 7 years) the said Commissioners for sequestrations having power by instructions, to continue the Tenants in possession till Lady day next.
  • 6 The Earl of Rutland is advised by Counsel, that the Lord Howard's new Lease is void, for that it is not made pursuant to the directions set forth in your Act of the 25 of January 1649, it neither being let for the best Rent offered, nor upon any contract made by the Commissioners for Sequestrations.
  • Lastly, It was Ordered by this Honourable House as followeth;

Die Martis 8. Decembr. 1646.

REsolved by the Commons assembled in Parliament, That no Member of either House shall have any Sequestrations whatsoever, either by Lease or Grant.

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Text Creation Partnership. Searching, reading, printing, or downloading EEBO-TCP texts is reserved for the authorized users of these project partner institutions. Permission must be granted for subsequent distribution, in print or electronically, of this EEBO-TCP Phase II text, in whole or in part.