The Mysteries of the Court of London — page 356: what you’re looking at

Machine-transcribed from the original scan — historical spelling and the odd misread are preserved.

THE LAWSUIT _ 825 Montgomerys, the Master thought that if the conveyance deed were genuine, their claims must be considered as null and void; but he did not believe it to be genuine, — he was of opinion that the proofs of forgery were sufficient, and indeed unanswerable, and he therefore pronounced in favour of the claims of the Montgomery family. Finally, and inasmuch as it appeared that one of the claimants (Lord Raymond Montgomery) was not forthcoming, but was reported to be dead, and inasmuch as it was at all events certain that he had not complied with the conditions laid down in the will of his ancestor, it would result from the various points treated of in the report, that the Right Honourable the Earl Montgomery had established his claims to the priory property altogether; and that the Warwickshire estates must be partitioned between the said Earl Mont- gomery and Lady Holderness, in the proportion of one-third to the former and of the remaining two-thirds to the latter. Such was the report of the Master in Chancery, and although it operated not as a final decision, yet was it re- garded as the basis on which the Lord Chancellor’s judgment would be eventually founded. In a word, then, the triumph of Earl Montgomery and Fernanda over the Marchioness of Bellenden was regarded as complete by the gentlemen of the long robe. Gomicboc <S (EO)