Now it happened, tempore Charles I., that Sir Bevill Grenvill, being much encumbered with the debts of his ancestors, in order to free the same, sold for a valuable consideration this manor of Lanow and barton of Bryn to William Noye, Esq. Attorney-general to King Charles I. the which William Noye and his heirs quietly enjoyed the same for about thirty years’ space, till King Charles II. returned from his exile beyond the seas, and was restored to his dominions 1660; at which time Sir John Grenvill, Knt. afterwards created Earl of Bath, (son of the said Sir Bevill Grenvill) then also in exile with the said King beyond the seas, came back to his native country with the said King; and some time after delivered leases of ejectment, on writs of ejection, firme formedon, or right, to the tenants of Humphrey Noye, Esq. then in possession thereof, son of the said Attorney-general Noye, and brought down a venire facias and trial for the same, at Lanceston assizes, where, on the issue, the verdict passed for the said Earl of Bath; and after judgment was entered up and recorded thereupon, writs for possession were sued forth, and his lordship became seised of those lands, and forced the tenants thereof to double their accustomed rent, on condition of holding their leases. Afterwards Noye’s son aforesaid, files his bill in chancery, suggesting the wrong he had received by this verdict at law, whereby he lost his lands and purchase money, which matter coming to a hearing on bill and answer, an issue was directed out of Chancery to try once more this title at common law, on which Noye proved Sir Beavill Grenvill to be tenant in tail for those lands, and that he levying a fine thereon, _come ceo qui il eit de son done_, according to due form of law, with deeds declaring the same to be for the use of the said William Noye, his heirs and assigns for ever, that was a sufficient dock of the entail, and bar to the son and heir of the said Sir Beavill Grenvill, whereupon the sense and judgment of the Court then was, that according to law the verdict must be for Noye: as accordingly it then passed. Notwithstanding which, a cross bill was filed by the Earl of Bath against Noye, about the premises, praying a writ of injunction for stopping further proceedings at common law; whereupon his lordship still kept possession, and Noye grew weary of this controversy, who, otherwise, was a man much depressed with debt, and therefore an unequal contester with the then great Earl of Bath; wherefore he sold his title to those lands in dispute to Mr. Christopher Davies, of Burnewall in Buryan, who revived Noye’s drooping case and title to the premises, and delivered ejectments to the Earl of Bath’s tenants, then in possession thereof, and accordingly brought down a trial at Lanceston upon that plea and demise, tempore James II., when it was manifest his lordship relied more on his privilege as a Peer or Baron of this Realm than the