the original leafe intended to have been granted Mr. Haugh by the Company?

It does not appear to me, whether the leafe from the Apothecaries Company originally agreed for, was a building leafe or not. It feems to have been a very obfcure and infufficient agreement that was made between Mr. Haugh and Mr. Harrison, but if Mr. Harrison was fully apprifed of the nature and duration of the Company's leafe to Mr. Haugh when he agreed for his under-lease, then, unless Mr. Harrison agreed to have the advantage of any further leafe that Mr. Haugh fhould obtain, he could not intitle himself to a further leafe in equity from Mr. Haugh; and though the agreement is obfcurely and inaccurately expreffed with regard to the duration of Mr. Harrison's derivative leafe, for 'tis faid to be for the term of years as Mr. John Haugh's leafe from the Company fhall determine, which seems to me to be nonfenfe, but all that could be meant thereby, feems to be no more than this; that Mr. Harrifon's leafe fhould determine, at the fame time, that the leafe to Mr. Haugh fhould determine, which must mean the lease then in being, for no other leafe was then in contemplation, but the first leafe for twenty-one years; the order of the 18th of August 17, fhews that the Company then had agreed for a leafe for twenty-one years,

and

At the time of entering into this laft agreement with Mr. Harrison, (at which were only prefent Mr. Haugh, his carpenter and Mr. Harrifon) no leafe had been executed to Mr. Haugh by the Company, in confequence of their agreement of 6th December 17-, but it was well known, at the fame time that the Company had agreed in manner above, to grant unto Mr. Haugh a term of twenty-one years, commencing as aforefaid.

Harrison entered accordingly, and has built an alebouse upon part of the ground which might coft him between three and four hundred pounds.

Mr. Haugh having laid out a large fum in building upon the premiffes, afterwards applies to the Company for a further term of ten years to be allowed him in confideration thereof, and accordingly by an agreement dated 18th August 17, entered in the faid Company's book, taking notice that in confideration of Mr. Haugh's laying out near one thousand pounds in erecting buildings on the premiffes in queftion, and that he would affign the policies of infurance from fire, that thirty-one years fhould be granted him, to commence from Christmas 17-, and the buildings to be erected fhould be left on the premiffes and infured by the Company.

A leafe was granted accordingly to Mr. Haugh by the Company for a term of thirtyone years, commencing from Christmas 17—.

It being particularly provided in this leafe, that no demife or affignment of the premiffes, or any part thereof, was to be made to any perfon or perfons without the consent and licence of the Company firft had: Mr. Haugh on the 7th August ¡7--, obtains leave likewise entered in the Company's book) for granting a leafe to Harrifon for the remainder of his term therein, or any shorter term.

Mr. Harrison now infifts that he is intitled to have, and claims by virtue of his agreement above, a leafe for the whole term of thirty-one years, and not for the twenty-one years only.

But

At the time of Mr. Harrison's agreement, please to observe, that Mr. Haugh was intitled himfelf only to twenty-one years leafe, and nothing, it is apprehended, could have given birth to a demand of this fort, or even created a doubt; but the loofe inaccurate manner in which the agreement is penned, viz. "for the term of years as John Haugh's leafe from the Worshipful Company of Apothecaries fhall determine." when it comes to be confidered that at that time Mr. Haugh, by virtue of his agreement with the Company, had a certain abfolute term only for twenty-one years, and no more, it is apprehended Mr. Harrison cannot, with any colour of justice, claim or be intitled to a longer term. Mr. Haugh infifts he was to have a fine exclufive of the rent, but as nothing of that fort is mentioned in the agreement, he, it 3 T

VOL. III, No. XIII.

is

is apprehended, however the fact may be, cannot be intitled to it.

Qu. Whether under the circumstances of this cafe Mr. Haugh is compellable to grant unto Mr. Harrison any further or other term than that of twenty-one years, commencing from Christmas 17—, according to the original lease intended to have been granted Mr. Haugh by the Company, and if Mr. Haugh can demand any fine in respect of the fame upon parol proof of that fact?

ANS. I apprehend that Mr. Haugh, under the circumstances of this case, will not be obliged to grant unto Mr. Harrison a further lease of the premiffes agreed to be demifed to him. than for twenty-one years from Christmas 17—, and that Mr. Haugh hath no right to demand any fine or forfeit of Mr. Harrifon, nor will be allowed to make parol proof thereof.

F. CAPPER.

Dortgages.

Mortgages.

A Mortgage of Leafebold Premiffes, together with a Bond entered into by the Leffor for fecuring to the Mortgagor the Poffeffion.

THIS INDENTURE made the 6th day of

November, in the feventeenth year, &c. 17-, between William Phills of, &c. gentle, man, of the one part, and John Shield of, &c. of the other part; Whereas by indenture of leafe, tripartite, bearing date the ift day of January 17, and made, or expreffed to be made, between Sarah Cony of the parish of Saint John the Evangelift, in the Liberty of Westminster, and in the faid county of MiddleJex, widow, and executrix of the laft will and teftament of Henry Cony, her late husband, deceased, of the first part; Mary Cony and Elizabeth Cony, both of the parish aforefaid, children of the faid Henry Cony, deceased, of the second part; and the faid William Phills, by his then name and defcription of William Phills, late of

Street, Liecefter Fields, but then of, in the faid county of Middlefex, woollen-draper, of the third part; Reciting, that the faid Henry Cony, deceased, by his laft will and teftament, amongst other things, did give and bequeath all those meffuages or tenements and premiffes, 3 T 2

therein