Crossle Record
Page 114
from him. That if any substance was taken from Betty, Plt. is wholly a stranger thereto, but Betty alleges that Plt. was one of said party who took his goods. That said John Betty was along with a party of his present Majesty King William’s army and that party of the English army skirmished with a party commanded by said Col. Charles Groghegan, and during the skirmish some of the wagons and tendants that attended the English party were seized by Col. C. Grogehan’s party and among the plunder some of John Betty’s goods and money were taken to the value of £100, though in truth no such money or goods ever came to Plt’s hands, and if any such were taken, Plt. is wholly ignorant thereof, and if same were taken it was by Col. C. Groghegan’s soldiers and was converted to the use of the army of King James, so that Plt ought not to be charged with same. That in case it could be proved that Plt. was among the party who seized said goods and inasmuch as Plt. hath been included in the Capitulation of Lymerick and was an officer of the Irish army on 23 Oct. 1691 and included in the benefit of said articles of Lymerick for the time during which Plt. was in the army of the late King James or when Plt’s superior officers skirmished with several parties and had taken prisoners and plunder, so that Plt. humbly thinks he ought not to be charged with same. Yet so it is John Betty charges Plt. with seizing said goods which is contrary to equity. That John Betty taking advantage inasmuch as he has commenced a suit against Plt. in the Pleas side of this Hon. Court for recovery of said goods, to the end that Plt. may be relieved in the premises and that John Betty’s proceedings at Common Law aforesaid may be stayed, by the judgement of this Hon. Court, may it please your Lordship to grant a writ of subpoena agst John Betty to answer in the premises.
Entered 12 May 1696
Exchequer Bill:
John Betty Plt. Brockhill Nughborow (Newborough), Deft.
Bill 28 Jan. 1696[-7]. No ans.
Plaintiff John Betty of the city of Dublin, glover, sheweth. That Plt. having some acquaintance with one Brockhill Newborough of co. Cavan, Esq. and meeting said Mr. Newborough did buy from him 100 bullocks at the rate of £33 per score, and Plt. together with one John Corneford entered into an obligation to Mr. Newborough to pay for the purchase. That Plt. received from Mr. Newborough 70 head of said bullocks by the hands of Thorlagh Ley O’Reilly who came to the city of Dublin with same. That O’Reilly received several sums of money from Plt. by his master’s orders on account of said cattle, and also that Col. Butler received by Mr. Newborough’s orders upon the account aforesaid the sum of £20 from Plt. That there remained 30 head of said parcel of cattle in custody of Mr. Newborough which Plt. never received. That Plt. paid to Mr. Newborough £40/- for 8 score cattle over and above the price plt. was to pay and which Mr. Newborough agreed to allow Plt. in the remainder of the cattle he detained. That Plt. sustained great loss by said bargain for the cattle sold badly to which
|
