need help to transcribe this text

[lepicard]

I have received this document from the National Archives.
Usually I can read english but not this kind of old english with some abbreviations!
Could you please help me to understand .
Thanks
Patrick
[/img]

[mckha489]

A start, because it is good practice, and we have to learn -  but there are some words I am unsure of.
Hopefully others will correct my mistakes. It would help I think if you could give the description of the document National Archives gives.
I see there isn't one 
Joshua Soulard living in St Martins Lane in y^e gift of St martins in y^e ffeilds in y^e County of Middx
merchant aged 60 years or thereabouts being a …………………….. sworne & ……….. the
30th day of march in y^e yeare of our Lord god 1715 & in y^e 1st yeare of the reigne of
our sovereigne Lord King George for & on the  ….. & behalfe of the Comp^lt deposeth &
saith as followeth

To the 1^st ……………..  ……….   I saith that he hath knowne the Comp^lt Isabella Soulard
for abt 7 moneths last past and saith that he hath knowne the def^t Daniel Mackadam
for abt 16 yeares last past.

to the 3^d. ……………… I saith that abt 4 of 5 moneths [ ] he did at the request
of the Comp^lt goe with her and one Mr Bandier (?) to y^e ho [ ] ……… y^e Relict of Mr
John {its a name - No—) & from thence the def^t. Daniel Mackad [ ] ….. for to come
thither,

[lepicard]

My direct ancestor was Stephen SOULARD (french huguenot) married to Elizabeth MACKADAM approx 1696.
Another SOULARD (Joshua) his brother was living also in London.
I know Stephen died in France in 1712.
So, recently I have found on the National Archives website a "litigation" Soulard V Mackadam
date 1715:
I have 4 pages of this file . Two pages seems very interesting  for me with many details.
I have only posted once.
I understand Elizabeth is nammed Isabella ? and Daniel Mackadam was the father.
In addition, I have found a will of Daniel Mackadam in 1693.
To sum up , I'm trying to review all details for my understaning.
Every word counts!!!

[horselydown86]

Here are some additions to mckha's transcript.

...Lane in ye p(ar)ish of St Martins...

...being a uitneste p(ro)duced Sworne & exa(m)i(n)ed the...

...for & on the p(ar)te & behalfe...


To the ist Interr(ogato)rie this dep(onen)^t saith...

A similar form is used for the third interrogatory.

Regarding uitneste, it could be witneste but I don't think it is.  The w in knowne in line 6 is quite different.

ADDED:

I now think this last word is:  uitnesse

[lepicard]

Thanks
What about Stephen Soulard?

[horselydown86]

The surname in the section pertaining to the third interrogatory is Nost.

Patrick, I think it's best if I read the whole thing to get a grasp on what it's about and where Stephen Soulard fits in.  I can see his name mentioned a few times.

Then we can decide what to transcribe.

[horselydown86]

As is often the case it's been difficult to isolate a simple statement of the case.  I have therefore transcribed the section following mckha's transcript, which has the bulk of the matter.

Have a read and see what you think.  I can do some more if you think it's worthwhile but it won't be until tomorrow.

...thither, whoe accordingly came to them when in [discourse?] w? him ab^t y^e pl(ain)^t(iff)s demands

of 160^l legacy left her by her fathers will & ^likewise^ of her share of one hundred

pounds ^more^ by y^e same will in case of y^e death of her brother Henry, the

said def(endan)^t being then asked in p(re)sseing termes whether he had not made

use Interest or p(ro)fitt of the said divised Sumes of mony he did confesse

& acknowledge that he could not deny but that he had made use of the mony

& said why should not ^he^ make use of itt rather then a stranger

or words to y^t effect


To the 4^th Interr(ogato)rie this dep(onen)^t saith y^t in y^e moneth of May 1698 this dep^t did receive from

his brother Stephen Soulard (by the ffrench post) a letter of Attorny beareing date y^e   

5th of may 1698 thereby impouring this dep^t to aske & receive of John Nost all sum(m)es

as belonged to his ^wife^ Isabella Mackadam by the death of her father to which L(ette)re of

Attorny this dep^t for more certainty referrs himselfe ^it^ being in his Custody,

And that in p(ur)suance thereof this dep^t applyed himselfe to ye said M^r John Nost 

& likewise to y^e said def^t Daniel Mackadam in y^e said moneth of

may 1698 and he this dep^t demanded of each of them paym(en)^t

[about two lines struck out here]

of all such sums as the said M^r Soulard was

entituled unto in right of his wife Isabella (the [now?] pl^t) by virtue of her fathers

Will, but the said M^r Nost and the said def^t refused to comply with this

dep^ts demands or to pay this dep^t any mony in p(ur)suance of the said Lre of

Attorny unlesse this dep^t would find and give them sufficient security to

^indempnifie^ them from any Comission of Banckrupt that should hereafter issue ag(ains)^t the said Stephen

Soulard for & on acc(oun)^t of his fayleing in y^e world ab(ou)^t 4 or 5 yeares before this

dep^ts makeing of the said demand...

ADDED:

y^t = that

y^e = the

impouring = empowering

[lepicard]

OK . Not so easy !!
Thank you for the answer.
Thanks to this file , I have found another will (on line) about Daniel MACKADAM en 1693.
I 'm sure now to have some English roots!!!

I have another point to clarify . Please refer to the attached copy.
Do you have the same understanding as me?
Daniel MACKADAM had three descendants : Daniel, Henry ans Isabella .
Its seems that Isabella was born october 19th, 1674. She will get the mother wedding ring when she will have 22 years old in 1696 or married!

Patrick

[horselydown86]

I have another point to clarify ....
Daniel MACKADAM had three descendants : Daniel, Henry ans Isabella .
Its seems that Isabella was born october 19th, 1674. She will get the mother wedding ring when she will have 22 years old in 1696 or married!

As I read it, Isabella Mackadam will not receive her legacy of 160 pounds from her father until she reaches the age of 22 years or is married.

She is also to receive her mother's wedding ring but when is not specified.

This section of the will is unusual in that he makes bequests to Daniel and Henry within parentheses (brackets) inside the bequest of 160 pounds to Isabella.

The bequests to the two sons appear to be a silver Inkcase each, marked with their own names.