The CASE of WILLIAM now Earl of DERBY Executor of CHARLOTTE KATHERINA SAVAGE Deceased, Only Daughter of Thomas Lord Colchester deceased, in aan Appeal Depending before the Right Honourable the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament Assembled, from a Dismission made in the High Court of Chancery, of a Bill Exhibited by Thomas Earl Rivers Plaintiff, against the Earls of Derby and Strafford, Frances Richardson Executrix of John Richardson, and Thomas Munne Dfendants.  
THomas Lord Colchester eldest Son of the Earl Rivers in the life time of Charles Earl of Derby Father of the now Earl, Married Charlotte Henrietta Daughter of Earl Charles, and Sister of the now Earl of Derby: And Earl Charles paid 2850 l. part of the Portion in his Life time; And he dying, the now Earl of Derby after his Death agreed to pay, and accordingly did pay 4500 l. in full. And thereupon.  
John Savage and Robert Pickering Esquires, 
11/ 12. May, 78.  by Indentures of Lease and Release for the Consideration therein mentioned, at the Request of the Earl of Rivers and Thomas Lord Colchester his Son, Granted and Settled the manors of Chich, St. Osith, Great Clacton and Little Clacton, and other Lands and Hereditaments commit' Essex upon the Lord Colchester for Life Remainder as to part, to his Lady for Life in jointure, Remainder to the Sons of that Marriage in Tail Male; Remainder to the Earl Rivers in Tail Male, with Remainder over, Remainder to the Earl Rivers right Heirs.  
With a proviso, and upon Condition that if the Lord Colchester and all his Issue Male by the Lady Charlotte should die, or that for want of Issue Male by her, the premises, or any part thereof, should after his, or her Death remain, or come to any other Heir Male of him, or to any other person by force of those Limitations: And that if there should be any Daughter or Daughters of Thomas Lord Colchester on the Body of the Lady Charlotte begotten, living at his Death; That then the said Earls of Derby and Strafford, Mr. How and Mr. hid and their Heirs, should stand and be Seized of all the said manors and premises, other then except the premises limited to the Lady Chorlette in jointure, and after her Death: Then thereof likewise, to the intent and purpose that such Daughter and Daughters should and might receive, perceive and take the Sum of 10000 l. out of the Rents, Issues, Revenues and Profits thereof( except ut supra) to the use of such one Daughter, if there be but one, and if more, then the 10000 l. to be equally divided and distributed amongst them, together with the several Sums of 100 l. a piece yearly for the Maintenance of such Daughter and Daughters, from the Death of their Father, until payment of the said 10000 l. which is intended for their Portion and Portions as aforesaid.  
By virtue whereof the Lord Colchester became Seized of the premises, and received the Rents and Profits thereof during his Life; and about October 1679. dy d without Issue Male, leaving Issue by his said Lady who Survived him, one only Daughter Charlotte Katherina Savage, whereby his Lady became Seized of the jointure, premises, and the Trustees of the Residue for raising the 10000 l. and Maintenance.  
The Joynturess entered and enjoyed her jointure, and of the Residue the said John Richardson being bailiff or Receiver to the Lord Colchester, continued to Receive the Profits, and paid the 100 l. per Annum Maintenance during his life, and died there, being then in his hands about 387 l. 15 s. 3 d. which came to the hands of his said Executrix.  
After his Death, the Earls of Derby and Strafford, being the surviving Trustees, authorised the Defendant Minne to manage the Estate and receive the Profits, and he paid the 100 l. per Annum Maintenance during the said Charlotte Katherina's life time, and at her Death had about 140 l. 11 s. in his hands.  
The said Charlotte Katherina Savage died without Issue and unmarry'd, 
ult Marcii, 1687.  being of the Age of 17 years and upwards, having after 17 made her Will, and the Earl of Derby her Uncle Executor, who proved the Will.  
That the Earl Rivers upon her Death, entering and denying Possession, and Demanding the Moneys in Mrs. Richardson and Mr. Munn's hands, the Earls of Derby and Strafford, Michaelmas-Term 3 Jac. 2. brought an Ejectment, and hilary 1687. had judgement to recover by Confession of the Earl Rivers, who,  
Exhibited his Bill in Chancery, 
31 Jan. 87.  setting out the Settlement and Proviso, and that Charlotte Katherina dying before 21 and unmarry'd, the Portion was sunk into the Inheritance, and ought not to be raised, and prayed Relief and a reconveyance by the two Earls, and payment to him of the Money in Mrs. Richardson and Mr. Munn's hands. The Defendants Answered, and  
The Cause coming to Hearing before the Lord Chancellor, 
18 July last:  and the Case appearing to be ut supera, and the Question being, whether the said Charlotte Katherina being dead before 21 or Marriage, the Money already raised towards the 10000 l. should be paid to the Plaintiff or her Executor, and whether the remainder of the 10000 l. should be raised and paid, or sink into the Inheritance. And upon long Debate, the Court Declared, That the 10000 l. was an Interest vested in Charlotte Katherina, and was, and became due and payable as fast as the same could be raised after the Death of her Father, and that the Moneys raised, and the Residue of the 10000 l. did belong to, and ought to be raised and paid to the Earl of Derby as Executor, and was not sunk into the Inheritance. And therefore dismissed the Bill.  
That after this Hearing, the Earls Defendants Sued out a Writ of Possession which was executed about August or September last, and Mrs. Richardson and Mr. Munne( who had till then detained it) paid the Moneys in their hands, being( after Deduction for the Sheriffs Fees) in all 518 l. 10 s. to the Earl of Derby, which is all has been Received.  
And now the Earl Rivers has brought his Petition of Appeal in Parliament to have the Dismission in Chancery reversed, and a Decree made according to his Bill there.  
And the Question in General is, Whether the Limitation being only quousque, the 10000 l. raised, and the Appellant both by his Petition and Bill, and the Confession of the judgement, admits the Law to be against him. Whether a pretence of Equity shall so far interpose, as to control the exposition of Law in this Case, and the express Letter of the dead, no previous agreement being so much as alleged to make the dead otherwise than as it is penned, nor limitation of any certain term for a security, nor of time either of Age or Marriage for Payment.