Bill of Complaint.

PARTIES: 1. Mary Jane Youde. Plaintiff.

2a. Henry Woollright and

b. Mary, wife of 2a.

c. Robert Henry Hurst. Defendants.

SUBJECT OF TRANSACTION: In Chancery.

1. suit instituted to set aside an annuity of £251 created by an indenture of 19 Jan. 1836 which the plaintiff was induced to execute as surety for her father.

2. Plaintiff is only child of Edward Youde and Mary his wife, formerly Mary Greenaway, spinster, the dau. of Giles Greenaway the testator.

3. - 5. similar to 3.-5. in cat. no. Hey/XI/ii/6.

6. For details of indenture of 19 Jan. 1836 see no. 15. in cat. no. Hey/XI/ii/5.

7. Memorial of the indenture of 19 Jan. 1836 enrolled and on 29 Feb. 1836 Joseph Toogood in pursuance of warrant of attorney of 19 Jan. 1836 signed judgement v. Edward Youde and M.J. Youde for £3,200 and costs of suit.

8. Edward Youde d. July 1846. No application was made to the plaintiff either in the lifetime of Edward Youde or afterwards until the filing of the Bill for the payment of the annuity of £251.

9. - 13. similar to nos. 10 - 14 in cat. no. Hey/XI/ii/6. but the year of d. of James Gibbs is given as 1846.

14. Recites cat. no. Hey/XI/ii/5.

15. Under the circumstances the plaintiff is entitled to have the security of 19 Jan. 1836 set aside and also entitled to have it declared that the judgement of 29 Feb. 1836 is not binding on her and that in the event of the event of the security of 19 Jan. 1836 being set aside Henry Woollright and wife Mary ought not to be allowed to avail themselves of the judgement or to take any proceedings founded thereon.

16. The security of 19 Jan. 1836 should be set aside because it was one of the deeds which she was induced to execute as surety for her father. From the age of 5 (at the time of her mother's d. in 1817) she was under the control of her father who was a manor strong temper and from the time she attained 21 desired her to execute deeds to operate as a security for sums lent to him, she was ignorant of the effect of the deeds or of the names of the persons in whose favour they were executed. James Gibbs (heretofore a partner in Howard and Gibbs and since deced) secured the money and would either come to Ostend or send one of his clerks and dine and after dinner produce the deed ready for execution which Edward Youde then desired her to do, she believed her father to be borrowing money on the security of his reversionary interest in the Plas Madoc estate or some other property and no one told her that she was making herself liable for her father's debts or that she was charging property belonging to her with the payment of any annuity and no negotiation was entered in with her before she executed such deeds.

17. similar to 18. in cat. no. Hey/XI/ii/6.

18. Re. the execution of the indenture of 19 Jan. 1836 the plaintiff has ascertained that from 1824 to and after the date of the indenture Joseph Toogood had used James Gibbs as his solicitor and agent for carrying out such investments and a current account was kept between James Gibbs and Joseph Toogood and James Gibbs procured the grant of the indenture of 19 Jan 1836 and that previous to execution James Gibbs had determined that she should execute as surety for her father and charge her estate in remainder under the will of Giles Greenaway as a collateral security for the annuity but no application was made for her to execute and he was ignorant of the arrangement.

19. The indenture of 19 Jan. 1836 was brought over to Ostend and executed by Edward Youde and herself but the consideration money was not in fact retained by handed back for return to James Gibbs.

20. Joseph Toogood did not advance the consideration and at the time of execution James Gibbs did not have sufficient money of Joseph Toogood for the consideration.

21. the consideration of £1,600 was not paid to Edward Youde and the handing it over to Edward Youde was to give colour to the statement contained in the memorial that it was handed over.

22. Copy of the memorial re the deed of 19 Jan. 1836.

23. Plas Madoc estate conveyed by Edward Youde to James Gibbs by indenture of 17 Sept. 1835 was valuable and sufficient to secure the annuities but Edward Youde had no title to the estate. At the date of the indenture of 19 Jan. 1836 James Gibbs and Edward Youde and Joseph Toogood knew that the title of Edward Youde to the estate was in dispute and that the other property assigned by Edward Youde as a security for the annuity of £251 was of little value but the plaintiff did not know either of this.

24. Defendants Henry Woollright and Mary his wife allege that James Gibbs accounted with Edward Youde for the £1,600 consideration but the plaintiff has discovered that James Gibbs retained a considerable portion for costs and commission. During the period 1835 - 1843 when James Gibbs was adjudged bankrupt he was greatly indebted to Edward Youde and at the time of the bankruptcy he was indebted to him in £10,034.18.10d. no part of which has been paid. the £1,600 was an inadequate consideration for the annuity.

25. From the face of the indenture of 19 Jan. 1836 that the plaintiff executed the indenture as surety for her father with her mother d. and it was well known to James Gibbs and through him to Joseph Toogood that the plaintiff was residing alone with her father and under his control and did not get any benefit from the transaction and was not in a position to take professional advice and infact the nature of the transaction was concealed from her and under the circumstances her execution of the indenture was improperly obtained and ought to be declared void against her.

26. If the indenture of 19 Jan. 1836 had any validity against her and if the £1,600 was paid to James Gibbs by Joseph Toogood yet the retaining by James Gibbs, without the knowledge of the plaintiff, of the £1,600 was a fraud against the Plaintiff and would render the indenture void against her, she has discovered that James Gibbs was indebted to Edward Youde in £22,569 which has not been paid.

27. During the lifetime of Charles Greenaway the plaintiff was without funds to take proceedings on the indenture of 19 Jan. 1836 and her interest in the property was contingent on Charles Greenaway dying in her lifetime without issue. Plaintiff has discovered that no payment has been made on the annuity since 4 Sept. 1837 when £125.10s. was paid by James Gibbs to Joseph Toogood for ½ yrly payment of the annuity due 19 Jan. 1837 and no proceedings have been taken to revive the judgment entered up by Joseph Toogood against Edward Youde and the plaintiff on 29 Feb. 1836.

PRAYER - The Plaintiff prays -

1. That the indenture of 19 Jan. 1836 and warrant of attorney are void so far as they operate as a security for payment by the plaintiff of the annuity of £251 or as acharge of such annuity upon property of the plaintiff.

2. that the judgment entered up by Joseph Toogood against Edward Youde and the Plaintiff is not binding on the plaintiff and that the defendants Henry Woollright and Mary his wife and the estate of Joseph Toogood are not entitled to derive any benefit therefrom and that Henry and Mary Woollright be restrained from taking any proceedings at law for the purpose of enforcing the judgment v. the plaintiff.

3. That proper directions be given for effectuating the above purposes.

4. That the plaintiff have relief as the nature of the case may require.