5. 10th June, Master Moore’s supplementary report, on a petition presented by defendant. Possession only established with plaintiff until the hearing of the case (Trinity Term Reports, 1616).
6. 11th November, Master of the Rolls allowed defendant to amend a clerical error in date (Lib. B, 1616, f. 146).
7. 31st January 1616-17, an order nisi for publication (ibid., f. 140).
8. 3rd November 1617, William files a bill against John, but, in respect of his poverty, is permitted to sue in forma pauperis (Reg. Lib., 1617, f. 132).
9. 18th November, Mr. Moore desired to consider the sufficiency of the answer of the defendants (ibid., f. 192).
10. Master Moore’s report in favour of plaintiff, Michaelmas Term, 1617 (Monro’s “Acta Cancellaria,” p. 222).
11. 22nd November 1619, an order for an injunction to restrain the defendant from putting plaintiff out of the possession of the premises at Rowington, and from suing plaintiff at Common Law upon a bond of £500, until defendant had answered plaintiff’s bill (Lib. B, 1619, f. 300).
12. 27th November 1619, an order for attachment against the defendant for not appearing.
Mr. Monro here omits the reply of William, filed on 6th May 1616, which should have come between 1 and 2. No. 4 refers to the reply to this, which should have appeared between 5 and 6; but it seems to have been lost.
Mr. Moore’s report of 16th May is favourable to John, whom he believes willing to pay, and the supposed forfeiture, if any, incurred by his reposing trust in another brother. Plaintiff might be relieved (Monro’s “Acta Cancellaria,” p. 221). But in his supplementary report he explains the “relief” to be only until decision. From the later Star Chamber case we know that the appointment of the commission of inquiry in Warwick should come in between 6 and 7 (13th January 1616-17). Mr. Moore’s report in Michaelmas Term 1617 is favourable to William, who should have the premises, if annuity not paid; and he finds the answers of the defendants defective (Monro’s “Acta Cancellaria,” p. 222).