THE points of the Lady Dacre's Petition of Appeal, are to reverse two points by way of Explanation of the Lord's Order made upon a So­lemn Hearing in the House of Lords, upon Mr. Chute's Appeal in Novem­ber, 1680.

The 1st. Touching the Maintenance of her Younger Grand-Children.

The 2d. Touching a Specifick Legacy of Goods at Sutton Court.

And as a new Appeal for Relief, touching Goods at Dorset House, given her as pretended by Mr. Chute's Grandfather's Will in 1659. of about 900. l value.

And that she is by the Court of Chancery lately ordered to pay 20 l per An­num, as a rent for the Vine-House; and 20 l per Annum for Fewel by her spent there.

As to the First Matter of Reversal,

1st. The Lord's Order was, that a Clause in a Decree in 1668, for allowing the Lady 120. l per Annum, for Maintenance of the said Children should be re­versed, and consequently that the Money paid her for it, should be applyed to­wards her other demands from Mr. Chute.

But now she sayes that she has since discovered Mr. Chute's Father's Will, char­ging his Estate with Maintenance for the Children, which had she had before (she is Confident) the Lords would not have reversed that decree.

But yet it is fully proved she did before know of that Will, and in Truth it is not to the purpose, for it does not charge the Estate at all; nor was the De­cree for the Maintenance grounded on it, nor did it mention it. And therefore could not (were there any thing in it) be used by her.

2d. As to the Specifick Legacy of Goods at Sutton Court; The Lords Or­der is plain and possitive, that she shall have no benefit by that Legacy, till the Debts are paid, and that the value shall be applyed to pay her Debt, when she first had it, which was in 1659. and yet she would, by a Pretence of Explana­tion have that Order set aside, and have it presently allowed her, altho the Debts were not paid in 20 Years after, and note that by his Will, he says he looks up­on those Goods, not to be the further from his Son.

As to the new Matters of Appeal.

Touching the Pretence to the Goods at Dorset House, the Will was plain that he gave her such Goods only as should be at Sutton Court at his Death. And those she had by the said Decree.

And altho by her Bill in Chancery in 1662, she might claim those at Dorset House too; yet Mr. Chute's Father was charged with them in 1666. by the De­cree upon her Bill as assetts to pay debts, and so he applyed them. And she ne­ver excepted to the Masters Report of that Charge, but acquiessed ever since, thereupon without any claim for 20 years.

As to the 20 l per Annum for the House; it is proved (by several Gentlemen living near the said House) to be worth 50 l per Annum.

And as for the 20 l per Annum for Firewood, it is likewise proved that the said Lady Dacres burnt to the value of 70 l per Annum.

These two last are the only Points, wherein the Lady Dacres appeals against the Chance­ry to the Lords.

In all the other Points, she appeals to the present House of Lords against the last.