Page:The English Reports v1 1900.pdf/1395

within the reason of those cases, in which portions or fortunes provided by settlements have been [375] held to be vested and transmissible interests, before the time of raising them.

After hearing counsel on this appeal, it was ordered and adjudged, that the same should be dismissed, and the decree therein complained of, affirmed. (M. S. Jour. sub anno 1774–5, p. 232.)

Dame Mary Broughton Delves, the widow of Sir Brian Broughton Delves, Bart. being seised of the advowson of the church of Mottisfont, otherwise Mottson, East Dean, and Lockerley, in the county of Southampton, on the 2d of December 1766, granted and conveyed the same, for a good and valuable consideration, to the defendant St. John and his heirs.

In October 1772, the advowson became void by the death of the last incumbent, whereupon the defendant tendered his presentation, and the plaintiff Mr. Hill also offered himself to be presented, and thereupon Mr. St. John issued his quare impedit against Mr Hill, and the Bishop of Winchester, in whose diocese the advowson lies; and the declaration stated, that Thomas Fuller, John Fuller, Frances Fuller, and Rose Fuller, were seised as in gross by itself as of fee and right, and being so seised, presented Edward Jones their clerk to the same church, being vacant, who was thereupon admitted, instituted, and inducted; and being so seised, and the said Edward Jones being the parson as aforesaid, they, on the 10th of February 1764, at Mottisfont aforesaid, by their deed duly inrolled, granted the advowson aforesaid to Sir Brian Broughton Delves, Bart. and his heirs; whereby the said Sir Brian became seised of the said advowson, and being so seised, on the 21st of May 1764, duly made his will, and thereby devised the said advowson to Dame Mary his wife, and her heirs; and afterwards on the 1st of February 1766, the said Sir Brian died so seised, and thereupon the said Dame Mary became seised of the said advowson; and being so seised, and the church being full of the said Edward Jones, the said Dame Mary, on the 2d of December 1766, by her deed in writing, granted the said advowson to the said Goodyer and his heirs, whereby he became seised, and being so seised the said church became vacant, by the death of the said Edward Jones, and by reason thereof it belonged [376] to the said Goodyer to present, but the defendants hindered him, whereby, etc.

To this declaration the said Robert Hill pleaded, that true it is, that the said Fullers were seised of the said advowson as aforesaid, and being so seised, presented Edward Jones, who was admitted, instituted, and inducted, and that the said Edward Jones being the parson, they granted the advowson to the said Sir Brian and his heirs, and that the said Sir Brian was thereby seised of the said advowson as of fee, and died so seised, as set forth in the declaration; but the said Robert says, that upon the death of Sir Brian, the advowson descended to his brother, (then Thomas Delves, Esq.) now Sir Thomas Broughton, Bart. as heir of Sir Brian, who thereby became seised, and being so seised, and the church being full of the said Edward Jones, Sir Thomas on the 6th of June 1772, by his deed duly inrolled, granted the said advowson to the said Robert and his heirs; by virtue whereof the said Robert became seised, and being so seised, the church became vacant by the death of the said Edward Jones, whereupon the said Robert petitioned the Bishop to admit and institute him, (he the said Robert being patron of the said advowson, and a clerk in holy orders,) and the said Robert claimed to be admitted. And he traversed, that the said Sir Brian devised the said advowson to the said Dame Mary, upon which fact issue was taken.