Historical gleanings; a series of sketches: Montagu. Walpole. Adam Smith. Cobbett.

Mode of access: Internet.

The works of the english poets /

Mode of access: Internet.

A memoir of Charles Mordaunt, Earl of Peterborough and Monmouth : with selections from his correspondence /

Mode of access: Internet.

The Earl of Peterborough and Mommouth : Charles Mordaunt :

Includes index.

A Catalogue of the pictures at Weston, belonging to the Earl of Bradford.

Includes index.

Biographical catalogue of the portraits at Weston, the seat of the Earl of Bradford.

Includes index.

The quarrel between the Earl of Manchester and Oliver Cromwell: an episode of the English Civil War.

Mode of access: Internet.

Diary and correspondence of John Evelyn, F. R. S. To which is subjoined the private correspondence between King Charles I. and Sir Edward Nicholas, and between Sir Edward Hyde, afterwards earl of Clarendon, and Sir Richard Browne.

Mode of access: Internet.

Memoirs of John Evelyn ... comprising his diary, from 1641-1705-6, and a selection of his familiar letters, to which is subjoined, the private correspondence between King Charles I. and Sir Edward Nicholas; also between Sir Edward Hyde, afterwards Earl of Clarendon, and Sir Richard Browne, ambassador to the Court of France, in the time of King Charles I. and the usurpation.

Mode of access: Internet.

Several orations of Demosthenes, exciting the Athenians to oppose the exorbitant power of Philip King of Macedon.

Bound in old sprinkled calf.

Diary and correspondence of John Evelyn, F.R.S., to which is subjoined the private correspondence between King Charles I and Sir Edward Nicholas, and between Sir Edward Hyde, afterwards Earl of Clarendon, and Sir Richard Browne.

Half-title of v. 4: Bohn's historical library.

Earl of Aylesford v Morris (1873)

A Characteristic of a landmark case is that it stands for a proposition of law. In Earl of Aylesford v Morris,1 Lord Selborne held that where there existed an inequality between contracting parties, with weakness on one side and an extortionate advantage taken of that weakness on the other, the contract could not stand unless the party claiming the benefit of the contract could rebut the presumption by establishing that the transaction was ‘fair, just and reasonable’. This chapter examines the historical circumstances behind the formulation of this proposition.