The Case of Elizabeth Fenton Widow, the Relict and Administratrix, of Richard Fenton Gent. deceased Respondent to the Petition of William Crabb and Tho. Goldsmith Appealants, Humbly offered to the Consideration, of the Right Honourable the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament Assembled.  
THE said Richard Fenton being Owner of the ⅜ parts of the Ship Rainbow of Bristol, whereof William Crabb and Thomas Goldsmith, (now Appealants from a Decree of the High Court of Chancery) And Richard Crabb, Alexander Grace, and Henry Haines, had each of them one 8th. part. They together in the year 1655. let the Ship to Freight, on a Voyage to Virginia; which she performed, and returned safe to Bristol, where the Appealants and Richard Crabb received her Freight, and other Profits arising by the said Voyage, ⅜ parts whereof Appertained to the aforesaid Richard Fenton.  
The said Part-Owners gave no Account of the aforesaid Frieght and Profits to the said Fenton, but instead thereof set forth the said Ship a second Voyage to Virginia: Whereto she was Freighted, and set Sail, made her Voyage, and returned safe; but before such her return the said Richard Fenton died intestate. After whose decease Letters of Administration of his Goods and Chattels were granted to Elizabeth his Wife, whereby she became justly entitled to all his Personal Estate. And particularly to ⅜ parts of the Freight of the Ship Rainbow, for the aforesaid two Voyages. All which the said Part-Owners Received.  
Elizabeth Fenton demanded her Husbands and Intestates proportion of the said Ship, for the aforesaid Two Voyages from the Appealants, and other the Part-Owners; who refused to Account for the same, pretending that one Stafford was employed by all the Owners, to Let the said Ship and receive the Freight thereof, which he had done, and therefore was only Accountable for the same. And thereupon prevailed with the said Elizabeth Fenton to refer the aforesaid matters in controversy to Arbitration. And Arbitrators for that purpose were appointed, before whom (when the said Elizabeth was absent, and could not Attend) the Books of Account of the aforesaid Stafford were produced, relating to the aforesaid Ship, and two several Freights. And they thereupon (by surprise upon the said Elizabeth Fenton made their Award, whereby they directed and ordered only 14 l. to be paid her for her proportion, of the Profits and Freight of the aforesaid two Voyages, (when there was 1000 l. due.) And the Appealants having Let out the Ship a third Voyage, at 24 l. 7 s. 6 d. per Month. in which Voyage she continued about 16 Months. Attached the said Fentons' proportion thereof to compel her to submit to the said Award.  
Thereupon she preferred her Bill in the High and Honourable Court of Chancery, 
Hillary 1660.  to have an Account of the said three Voyages, and to set aside the undue Award made as aforesaid, which cause came to be heard 12 July 17 Car. nunc.  
Whereupon the aforesaid Award was set aside, and Account directed to be taken by a Master, who (being assisted by Merchants) after Examination of Witnesses, and hearing Council, reported, 747 l. 16 s. 6 d. due to the Respondent, Elizabeth Fenton.  
The Appealants prevailed for a Reference, upon which the Report aforesaid was confirmed, and afterwards decreed, and the decree Signed, and Enrolled.  
Whereupon the Appealants and Richard Crabb aforesaid, brought their Bill of review, assigning the same Errors they now do in their Appeal to this most Honourable House, upon which they obtained an Order that paying 247 l. 16 s. 6 d. And securing 500 l. more (remainder of the 747 l. 16 s. 6 d. decreed) all proceeding upon the said Decree should be stayed.  
To which Bill of review the said Elizabeth put in her Answer, and Witnesses being thereupon examined, and publication past, the Cause also came to be heard on the 22 April 22 Car. nunc. Upon which hearing the Court proposed, That the said Fenton should go back to the first Referrees to review the account. Or that she should pay back the 247 l. 16 s. 6 d. aforesaid (which was impossible for her to do) And then the Court would name new Referrees.  
The said Elizabeth Fenton being necessitated to make Choice of One of these two proposals, chose to go back to the former Referrees, who made their second Award without hearing the Respondent, which was afterwards set aside also; and a second reference made to a Master to take an Account of the aforesaid three Voyages, which reference being transferred to Sir John Coell be proceeded therein, and 10 April. 1675. made his Report, That the Respondent declaring her unwillingness that Stafford should be employed, and that the Appealants had promised she should have a just Account of the aforesaid three Voyages, and that no wrong should be done her, but that she should receive her proportion of the Profits of the said Ship, And that the Appealants undertook the management thereof; after which he proceeded upon the said Accounts, stated the same, and Reported above 500 l. due to the Respondent Elizabeth.  
The Appealants procured a new Reference, 
July 23, 1675.  with Order, that the aforesaid Stafford should be Examined, which was done accordingly: upon which, the said Master made another Report, and made some further Abatement by the Respondents consent in order to an Accommodation.  
To which Report, though in their Favour, the Appealants took Exceptions.  
The said Exceptions coming to be Argued, 
Feb. 26.27 Reg. nunc.  the Lord Chancellor approved, and Confirmed what the Master had done in Rejecting Staffords Evidence; and upon some of the Exceptions, referred it back to the same Master, who having the Assistance of many Eminent Merchants in London,  
Made his Third Report; 
May 25, 1677.  To which the Appealants excepting, many Hear were thereupon had, and a Re-referrence made, with Direction for the said Master to State the Particulars of the Account, with the Values of the Cargo; which being done, he made his Fourth Report, and thereby certified 555 l. 8 s. 5 d. ½ due to the Respondent. To which Report, the Appealants also Excepted.  
The Exceptions being Argued, 
Feb 20, 1678.  were overruled; and the Report confirmed by Decree of the Court, since Signed and Enrolled.  
From which Decree, after Twenty Years proceeding in Chancery, and above 1000 l. Charges spent by the Respondent, by the Appealants Vexatious Prosecution (to Her, and her five children's Ruin) the Appealants for further Vexation, have Appealed from the Decree pronounced upon the aforesaid Bill of Review, above Ten years since; Alleging,  
That the Award aforesaid is set aside by Surprise, 
First.  without consent of Parties or proof of any undue Means used in obtaining thereof.  
That the Appealants, 
Secondly.  Grace and Haynes two of the Part-Owners in the said Ship Rainbow, were no Parties to the Decree; Nevertheless the Sum Reported due to the Respondent, is Decreed to be paid by them; Therefore, and forasmuch as Staffords Evidence was suppressed, and the Decree made only against the Appealants, who were but two of the five Part-Owners, with the said Richard Fenton in the said Ship: And Forasmuch as they Received never one penny of Money for the Freight of her, for the first two Voyages, but only for the Third, for which they were ready to Account.  
Therefore pray a Reversal of the aforesaid Decree.  
But the Respondent humbly Hopes for, and Prays the Justice of this most Honourable House and then doubts not but to be Discharged from this Supreme Court, and receive all Costs for the Charge and Vexation she is put unto.  
And, For Reasons for Dismissing the Appealants Appeal, this Respondent Humbly Offers.  
That all the proceedings in the High Court of Chancery, have been and are Just and agreeable to Equity; and such as against which the Appealants ought not to expect Relief.  
Because by Sir John Coells Report, 
First.  It Appears, the Appealants did themselves undertake and agree to Account for, and make Good what should be due to the Respondent for the Freight aforesaid, and so no need to make other Parties which otherwise would have been done.  
It Appeared, 
Secondly.  the Awards beforementioned were obtained on False Allegations, and by Surprise; And (as so procured) were justly set aside.  
Staffords Evidence was set aside for very good Reason, 
Thirdly.  it appearing he had sworn an Account to be Perused and Allowed by the Respondents Husband, whenas by Substantial Evidence it was made Appear, that he was Dead long before the Account was Writ; besides other Falsities,  
Upon the whole Matter, the Respondent Humbly lays herself, and five Fatherless Children, with this her Sad and Deplorable Condition, at your Lordship's Feet; And submits it to your Grave Judgement and Serious Consideration.  
Whether, After two several Decrees of the High Court of Chancery, and Twenty Years Litigation, merely upon Matters of Account 〈◊〉 where Masters have since the Decree been Attended above 100 times upon those Accounts, and no Exceptions all that time taken to the Decree, nor any Appeal to this Honourable House from the same, till after four several Reports made, and those duly Confirmed; (after Exceptions put in thereto by the Appealants, were Argued) Whether, after all these Solemn proceedings, The Appealants, now finding that they are to pay this Respondent Money, (though not half so much as the Charges she hath been put unto for Recovering the same) They shall be admitted to Appeal to this most Honourable House to be Relieved, against a Decree to which themselves have submitted by all their Subsequent proceedings before the Master in that Court; Whereas if there had been any Just Cause of Complaint against the said Decree, they might have Appealed from the same before their proceeding to Account, which (it is Humbly Conceived) is no less than a Submission to the same, and owning it to be Just.