Page:The English Reports v1 1900.pdf/1428

consideration of 10s. to Sir Benjamin Rawling also paid by Henry Hudson, Sir Benjamin, with the consent of the respondent, did bargain, sell, release, and confirm unto the said Henry Hudson, his heirs and assigns, the mortgaged premises, to hold the same unto and to the use of the said Henry Hudson, his heirs and assigns, upon the trusts, and under such limitations over as were in the will of Hylton Lawson given, devised, and declared, of and concerning the same. And the respondent also apprehending that the legacy of £100 given by [427] the will of Hylton Lawson, to Winefred Collingwood, was to be paid out of the personal estate of Hylton Lawson, and having assets in her hands, likewise paid that legacy thereout.

The appellant, together with William Nicholson, as the next of kin of Hylton Lawson, in 1770, filed their bill in the Court of Chancery against the respondent, claiming certain shares of the residuum of Hylton Lawson's personal estate, under the statute of distributions, insisting that such residuum was undisposed of by his will. To which bill the respondent appeared, and put in her answer; and thereby admitted, by mistake, that the appellant and William Nicholson were intitled to certain shares of such residuum. But the cause was finally heard on the 27th of April 1777, at the bar of the House of Lords; and their Lordships were then pleased to declare and determine, that the respondent was intitled to the residuum of the personal estate of Hylton Lawson to her own use.

The respondent, after she had paid such mortgage debt and legacy, and after her right to the testator's personal estate had been so declared and determined, was advised that it was not incumbent on her to have paid the same, or either of them, out of the personal estate of Hylton Lawson; such mortgage debt being the debt of Robert Lawson the elder, and of his estate, and not of Hylton Lawson; and the legacy being, by the express words of the testator's will, and the true intent thereof, payable solely out of his freehold and copyhold estate; and therefore, by indenture, dated the 10th of October 1777, the said Winefred Collingwood, (by her then name and addition of Winefred Pulleine, widow,) in consideration of £100 theretofore paid to her by the respondent, (being the sum so paid to her by mistake in discharge of the said legacy of £100) and other considerations, did bargain, sell, and assign unto the respondent, the said legacy of £100 so given to her by the will of Hylton Lawson, and all interest then due and to grow due for the same, and all her right and interest therein, to hold the same unto and to the use of the respondent, her executors, administrators, and assigns for ever; and the said Winefred Pulleine did thereby authorize and impower the respondent to demand, sue for, recover, and receive the said legacy, and all interest due and to grow due for the same, and to give sufficient discharges for the same in her name.

Wilfred Lawson, the third tenant for life named in Hylton Lawson's will, died in November 1777, a bachelor, and without issue; and John Lawson, the second tenant for life, hath no issue now living.

The respondent, soon after such determination was made in the House of Lords, that is to say, in Michaelmas terna 1777, filed her bill in the Court of Chancery against the appellant, and also against Henry Hudson, the trustee in Hylton Lawson's will, and Mansfield Cardonnell, the devisee of the remainder in fee of the premises at Cramlington, under the will of Hylton Lawson, stating the several facts aforesaid, and that she had in her own wrong, [428] paid the said sums of £1500 and £100; and therefore praying that an account might be taken of the money due to the respondent, in respect of the said sums of £1500 and £100, and the interest thereof respectively; and that the same might be raised by sale or mortgage of the real estate of Hylton Lawson, or of a sufficient part thereof; that all proper parties might join therein, and that such money might be paid to the respondent; and that until such sale or mortgage, the said Henry Hudson, and his heirs, might be decreed to stand as a trustee in the conveyances from the said Sir Benjamin Rawling, for the sole use and benefit of the respondent, subject to redemption by such person or persons as for the time being should appear to be intitled thereto, on payment to the respondent, her executors, administrators, or assigns, of the said sums of £1500 and £100, and interest for the game respectively, and to transfer the mortgaged premises accordingly, as the respondent should direct.

The appellant, by his answer, filed May 4, 1778, admitted that Robert Lawson the elder was seised in fee of the estate at Cramlington, and devised the same in such