THE CASE OF John Emmerton OF THE MIDDLE-TEMPLE, Gent.

THat the ſaid Mr. Emmerton and Mrs. Bridget Hyde, Daughter and Heir of Sir Thomas Hyde Baronet de­ceaſed, by Dame Mary his Wife (who was after­wards the Wife of Sir Robert Vyner, and now alſo De­ceaſed) were upon the firſt day of October 1674. To prove the Mar­riage 4 Witneſſes. To the Lady Vyners conſent 6 Witneſſes and her Letter. To Mrs. Hydes con­ſent 14 Witneſſes. To Sir Thomas Hydes intention 3 Witn.Lawfully Marri­ed together by one Mr. Brandley a Miniſter in Holy Orders, by and with the Free Conſent and Direction of the ſaid Lady Vyner, and at the Earneſt deſire of the ſaid Mrs. Bridget, and according to the full intentions of her ſaid Father Sir Thomas Hyde, all which the ſaid Bridget, hath ſince frequently declared and ac­knowledged.

That the ſaid Sir Robert Vyner was informed of the ſaid Mar­riage upon the third of January 1674. and did then declare he was ſatisfied with the Reality of it. Yet he ſaid,To this 3 Witneſſes. for other peo­ples ſatisfaction he would have ſome of the Witneſſes that were preſent at the Solemnity come up to London and make Oath of it.

That Mr. Edlyn and Mr. Brandly (two of Mr. Emmerton's principal Witneſſes did accordingly come up upon the Eleventh2 of January 1674.To this 4 Witneſſes. in Barkhamſteed Coach, and nigh the end of Grayes-Inn Lane, the ſaid Coach was beſet by about Ten armed men, among whom was one Chriſtian (then ſervant to the Earl of Danby) which ſaid Company violently pull'd the ſaid Mr. Brand­ley out of the Coach, (pretending a Warrant from Sir Joſeph Williamſon then Secretary of State) and Mr. Brandley then de­ſiring a friend might go with him, one of the ſaid Company Swore, that if any one ſtirred or offered to follow, he would Piſtol him;To this 1 Witneſs and Circumſtances. and ſo they forcibly carried the ſaid Mr. Brandley away, and tempted him with promiſes of 1000 l. (preſſing 20 l. upon him) and terrifying him with threats of Ruining and Piſtoling him, to force him to deny that he had Married the ſaid Mr. John Emmerton to the ſaid Mrs. Bridget Hyde.

That Mr. Brandley having never been in London before, and being thus threatned in a ſtrange place, and fearing leſt he ſhould be Kill'd if he did not comply with them, did, when he was carried late that night before the King at White-Hall, and there Examined, Prevaricate in his Teſtimony concerning the ſaid Marriage, the Earl of Danby, Sir Joſeph Williamſon and Sir Robert Vyner being then preſent: after which Examination Mr. Brandley was Committed to the Cuſtody of one Copley a Meſſenger, and by him detained ſome dayes.

That Mr. Brandley being troubled in Conſcience for what he had been forced to do,To this 4 Witneſſes. did get leave of the ſaid Meſſenger to go out, and did then of his own accord go to Sir Robert Vyner, and confeſs he had Married the ſaid Mr. Emmerton to the ſaid Mrs. Hyde, and begged his pardon for ſo doing, and threw down the 20 l. (that had been forced upon him) bidding Sir Robert Vyner take it, for he could not in Conſcience keep it.

That after the ſaid practices upon Mr. Brandley, Mr. Emmer­ton's Wife was taken from all his Relations, and put into the hands of Strangers;To this 10. Wit­neſſes. who kept her ſo, that Mr. Emmerton could not ſpeak with her ſince the death of her Mother the Lady Vy­ner to this day; and who by threats, promiſes and perſwaſions, and all other undue means, have endeavoured to divert her affe­ctions from her ſaid Husband Mr. Emmerton.

That the Lord Chief Juſtice Hale upon the Examination of the evil practices aforeſaid,The Records and 4 Witneſſes. did think fit to order a Tryal at Law at the King's Bench Barr in Eaſter Term 1675. where the only point in Iſſue was, Whether Mr. Emmerton was Lawfully Mar­ried to Mrs. Bridget Hyde or not, and the Jury were ſo well ſa­tisfied of the Strength and Validity of the Proofs and Evidence, that they gave a Verdict for the Marriage without going from the Bar, with the approbation of the ſaid Court.

Proved by the acts of that Court.That Mr. Emmerton having Exhibited a Libel in the Archies Court of Canterbury the ſecond of March 1674. for the Re­covering3 of his ſaid Wife, the Judge of the ſaid Court did de­clare (by Colour of an obſolete Canon) that his Witneſſes that were at the Marriage were Excommunicated (ipſo facto) for being at a Clandeſtine Marriage; and ſo put Mr. Emmer­ton to many long Debates, to great Charges and trouble be­fore they could be Reſtored and abſolved ad teſtificandum only: but as for Mr. Emmerton's Father and Mother (after four Termes Debate) the ſaid Judge did utterly Refuſe to abſolve or admit them to be Witneſſes at all in the ſaid Cauſe: againſt which unjuſt and unlawful Sentence Mr. Emmerton Appealed to the Delegates; But they unjuſtly and Illegaly did Confirm the aforeſaid Sentence, tho' Mr. Emmerton's Council did pray that his Father and Mother might be only examined (de bene eſſe) and to be believed as they ſhould ſee Cauſe, and as they agreed or Conteſted with other Witneſſes when the Examina­tions ſhould be publiſhed.

That ſince the ſaid Sentence, the ſaid Mr. Emmerton's Fa­ther is Dead, and his Mother is very Sickly and Antient,Proved by 4 Wit­neſſeſs. ſo that by the ſaid Sentence he hath utterly loſt the Teſtimony of his Father, and will in all Probability loſe the Teſtimony of his Mother (if he ſhould have further occaſion to uſe her) who both of them were the moſt Material Witneſſes, not on­ly to prove the ſaid Marriage, but alſo the Lady Vyner's deſire and conſent to and for the ſaid Marriage.

That the ſaid Judges Delegates did Retaine the ſaid Cauſe before them till the 12^th day of July 1680. at which time it was finally heard. Proved by the acts of Court.And altho' Mr. Emmerton loſt the Teſti­mony of his Father and Mother, and many of the moſt Ma­terial Articles of his Allegations were rejected, and all his Kindred admitted to Teſtifie only Sub omnibus Limitationibus, and the many other hardſhips were put upon him; yet he made ſo Clear a proof of his ſaid Marriage, that the ſaid Judges Delegates did give a Sentence for the ſame.

That notwithſtanding the Verdict at Law and Judgement, Execution and Poſſeſſion thereupon had, yet the Lord High Chancellor of England upon a Bill filed in that Court by the ſaid Mrs. Briget without over-ruling Mr. Emmerton's Plea thereunto (which he doth ſtill refuſe to hear) did order the Rents of the Eſtate in Queſtion in the ſaid Suite,Proved by the Or­ders of that Court. to remaine in the Tenants hands till a Sentence ſhould be given before the Delegates: And ſince the ſaid Sentence, his Lordſhip hath ordered the ſaid Rents in Arrears to be brought into Court, declaring that he will allow the ſaid Mrs. Bridget 1000 l. per Anum (which is half the yearly Revenue) during the Dependance of a Com­miſſion of Review which hath been granted her after almoſt ſix about 6000 l. ſo that Mr. Emmerton can have no fruit of his ſaid Verdict at Law, or ſaid Sentence.

That altho' ſhe was obliged to plead all new matter upon her Commiſſion of Review,Proved by the acts of the ſaid Court. and prove all by the 26th of October 1680. yet ſhe did not Exhibit any Allegation till the 9^th of this Inſtant November: and altho' the Allegation conſiſted of ſuch matter as ought not to be admitted by Law, yet the Biſhops and Civilians Impowred by the ſaid Commiſſion of Review then preſent, did admit it all, and gave her further time to prove (viz.) to the Firſt day of next Term.

So that by theſe tedious delays (not knowing but this Suit may laſt ſome years longer) and by theſe vaſt expences Mr. Emmerton is put to, having ſpent about 6000 l. in this Suit, and being debarr'd from Receiving any Rents and pro­fits of the premiſes by the Lord Chancellors order as aforeſaid, by ſuch like unjuſt and unreaſonable doings Mr. Emmerton is like to be utterly undone and Ruined.