Chancery Court Proceedings, 1677.  491

     aforesaid they not onely denyed and refused to pay or doe the Same Liber P C
     but had turned the Comp.'t out of the possession of the said Lands &
     premises soe built on & cleered as aforesaid & had lett the Same to
     one James Nathall who was then in Posession thereof contrary to
     Equity and good Conscience therefore and for that the Comp.It had
     noe wayes or means att and by the Comon Law to enforce a per-
     formance of the said agreement or to recover Satisfaction for the
     great Charges & disbursements by the Comp.lt Expended in and
     about the Premisses and other his Damages by him Susteyned by
     reason of the non performance of the said agreement and Contract
     aforesaid for that the Said Thomas and Nathaniell by their farie
     promisses and Perswasions aforesaid had borne the Comp.It Soe long p. 104
     in hand that he might att the Comon Law be Barred by the Statute
     of Limitations Therefore to be releived against that barr of the
     Said Statute and in all other the Premisses and that the Said
     Defend.ts might answer the premises and Sett forth the Particular
     agreements Contracts premisses meetings transactions & matter
     aforesaid and whether the said Thomas as attorney of Nathaniell
     did not agree to sell the premises to the Comp.tt as aforesaid and att
     the Rate aforesaid and was to procure such Conveyance w.th generall
     Warranty as aforesaid and that they might be Compelled by the
     order and Decree of this Court either to make a Sufficient Convey-
     ance and assurance of the said Land to the Comp.lt with General
     Warrantij as aforesaid & alsoe pay unto the Comp.lt what Damages
     and losse he had Sustained by the non performance of the Said
     agreement or else pay unto the Comp.lt all such Charges and dis-
     bursements as he had been att and laid out in and upon the Premises
     with his Damages for not performing the Said agreement as afore
     •said was the Effect of the Comp.Its Suite but it being alleadged by the
     Defend.ts Attorneij that Nath.ll Trueman one of the Defend.ts Since
     the comencement of this suite was dead and that he had by his will
     devised his Lands to Infants who were noe partyes to this suite and
     without makeing them parties this Court as to the Land could not
     proceed to Judgement whereupon the Comp.lts attorney alleadged
     that this cause had been long ready for a hearing and the Def.t
     Nathaniell in his life tyme had been served with proces to heare
     Judgment and this cause had before his death Received a finall
     determination if by this Court the cause had not been putt of and that
     the said Defend.t Thomas was the principall Defend.t against whom
     the Comp.It Sought releife for his Damages in case the said
     Land were not Conveyed to him as aforesaid and that as against
     the said Defend.t Thomas they might proceed to hearing this Court
     thereupon proceed to the reading of the Defend.ts answers and the
     Said Defend.t Thomas Trueman by answer Said that in the moneth
     of November one thousand Six hundred Sixty Seven (the other