The case of Mrs. Mary Stout, widow.

Date:
[1700?]
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: The case of Mrs. Mary Stout, widow. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    3/4
    SIPTBIHEIIC.mntay nJKebeen touM : As, fUppoung the Writ 'of Appeal had been accidentally burnt when in the Sheriff’s Cuftody, as it really was, when it was out, in refpedt to have a Difcovery of Truth, the Court, which firft gave the Writ (fhe was advifed by Counfel learned in the Law) could fupply the lofs of it. Had (he imagined, that ail the Appellees would have fo much as inftanced their total Ignorance, as to the Deftrudtion of the Writ, /lie could have much better prepared her felf to have given them an Anfwer-—She could have fet forth how the Infant, his Mother, and the Appellees Atorney, went in a Coach with Four Horfes, to the Under-Sheriff at Hertford, and there took the Writ of Appeal from him, and from thence brought it to London: She could have informed the Court of a more particular Intelligence, lately confirmed, concerning the Deftrudtion of the Writ, by whofe Order, and at whofe Chamber, the fame Was burnt: Which mat¬ ters, if yet Examined, will fufficiently Evince, whether the Appellees, or foihe one of them, were privy or not to the Definition of the Writ. There was an Objedlion againft Mrs. Stouts Petition, That the Writ of Appeal was never well Sued out, (the Infant nor his Mother, not knowing of the fame till afterwards.) But to that, befides the Proofs Mrs. Stout could have given to the con¬ trary, fhe was and is ftill advifed. That her being duly admitted Guardian, by the free Confent of the Infant, (tho* fubfequent in time to the Suing out of the Writ) the fame in Law is very Authenciclc, and makes the fame well fued out. And it is prefumed, that no Perfon will fay. That the Lord Keeper, and the other Judges did all agree to the contrary, upon debate of the Matters before them. It was mightily infilled upon by the Counfel for the Appellees, at the hearing of both Petitions, as if Mrs. Stout fhould caufe her felf to be admitted Guardian to the Infant, only to protedi her Eftate from the Infant, and that without the privity of the Infants Mother, or any of his Relations i But ( befides the very Admittance if felf, which is purely for Profecudng the Appeal, and for nothing elfe) Mrs. Stout was always ready to difeover the Title of her Efface^ and never but declared, That the Infant had no right thereto. And as to the Infant’s Mother’s not knowing of Mrs. Stout s Defigns, it is very eafily anfwered, for it is not only Sworn, and the Affidavits filed in the Kings-Bench, That Mrs. Stout wrote to the Infant’s Mother, what her Defigns were: But alfo, a particular Account is in thofe Affidavits fee forth, How willing the Infant’s Mother was to fend her Son to Mrs. Stout? Order¬ ing one of his Uncles to carry him to her, for Mrs. Stout to do with him as her Oceafions required , and withal diredting fuch Uncle to deliver her Son to Mrs. Stout? and to none but her, and to do according to her Diredtions. It hath commonly been Reported, as if the Profecutidn in this Appeal, hath been purely Vexatious, Begun by a Body of Quakers, and Efpoufed by a Fadtion at Hert¬ ford^ againft Mr. Confers Imereft. But whoever the Fonienters, or Spreaders abroad of fuch Reports are, they would do well to confider, if it were their own Cafe, to have an only Child murthered, and her Reputation rendered Infamous to Pofteri- ty, whether Nature and Duty would not oblige them to ufe all means to make a Difcovery of the Caufe thereof? And whether they would not think it hard, to have their own Endeavours refledled on, and their utmoft Diligence accounted to be the Caufe of a Party ? ^ It hath alfo been Reported, and perhapsby fame of the Appellees maybe objedted. That the very Method, in the Procefs of this Appeal, Hath been Malicious, in de¬ laying the Suing out of the Writ, until the time was almoft Elapfed, thereby to keep the Appellees in an uneafie Sufpence. But in Anfwer to that, ’tis confeffed, That it was much longer before the Writ of Appeal was Sued out, than was de~ ' fired or expedted ; becaufe it was near half a Year before Mrs. Stout could find out (tho’ all that while fhe made a diligent Search ) the proper Perfon to make an Appellant $ and after fhe had, fhe was forced to Examine moft of the Regifters in London and Southwark, to make out his Pedigree j and which as foon as fhe had done, the very next day fhe canfed the Writ of Appeal to be Sued out $ fo that it was her Mif-fortune, and not her Malice, in being under the neceflity of fo long a delay. It is commonly urged, as a ftrong Argument, againft a fecond Trial of the Ap¬ pellees, That there is no new Evidence, that Mrs. Stout hath againft them, but fuch
    digitised image 1
    digitised image 2
    digitised image 3