" [Footnote: Palfrey, iii. 388, note 1.]
All that could be resolved on was to retain Robert Humphrys of the Middle
Temple to interpose such delays as the law permitted; but no attempt was
made at defence upon the merits of their cause, probably because all knew
well that no such defence was possible.
Meanwhile, for technical reasons, the _quo warranto_ had been abandoned,
and a writ of _scire facias_ had been issued out of chancery. On June 18,
1684, the lord keeper ordered the defendant to appear and plead on the
first day of the next Michaelmas Term. The time allowed was too short for
an answer from America, and judgment was entered by default. [Footnote:
Decree entered June 21, 1684; confirmed, Oct. 23. Palfrey, iii. 393,
note.] The decree was arbitrary, but no effort was made to obtain relief.
The story, however, is best told by Humphrys himself:--
"It is matter of astonishment to me, to think of the returnes I haue had
from you in the affaire of your charter; that a prudent people should
think soe little, in a thing of the greatest moment to them.
"Which charge I humbly justify in the following particulars, and yet at
the same time confess that all you could haue done would but haue gained
more time, and spent more money, since the breaches assigned against you,
were as obvious as vnanswerable, soe as all the service your councill and
friends could haue done you here, would haue onely served to deplore, not
prevent the inevitable loss.
Pages:
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404