Page:The English Reports v1 1900.pdf/1433

will of Hylton Lawson consistently, or so as to give effect to every part of it, unless it was admitted, that though he intended that all the other legacies given by his will were to be paid out of his personal estate in the first place, he meant to make his freehold and copyhold estates the only fund for payment of this legacy. When he speaks, in a former part of the will, of all his legacies, he must be taken to mean all his legacies, except that for the payment of which he had afterwards made a special provision. And it was proved in the cause, that the respondent had actually paid this mortgage debt, and the legacy. It could not be contended, that, because she actually paid them, she was for that reason not intitled to the relief given her by this decree. The powers of courts of equity are daily exercised in protecting parties against the consequences of their own errors. In the suit which the appellant instituted against the respondent for a distribution of the residuum of the personal estate of the testator Hylton Lawson, the respondent, by her answer, through mistake of the law, admitted herself to be a trustee of a great part [435] of it. The final decree, notwithstanding that admission, declared her to be beneficially intitled to the whole residue. The same equity would certainly have obliged the appellant to refund, in case, through the same mistake which caused her to make that admission, the respondent had actually paid him any part of the surplus.

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 1781, p. 245.)

In Michaelmas term 1779, the plaintiff in error brought his ejectment in the court of King's Bench in Ireland, against the defendant in error, and declared therein, that on the 28th of September 1776, the lessor, Richard White, a minor, by Frances White, his mother and guardian, had demised to him the towns and lands of West Ruskagh, East Ruskagh, and several other denominations; and also the houses, lands, and premises, in and about the town of Bantry, in the declaration particularly described; and also Whiddy Island, with its sub-denominations; all situate in the manor of Bantry, in the barony of Beer and Bantry, and county of Cork; to hold to him the said Robert Warner, his executors, administrators, and assigns, from the said 28th of September, for twenty-one years then next ensuing, at the yearly rent of £5. Then stating in the usual manner his entry and possession under the demise, until he was ejected by the said Hamilton White; and concluding in the common form.

The defendant pleaded the general issue, not guilty; and thereupon issue was joined, and the cause came on to be tried in the county of Cork, at the spring assizes 1780, when the jury found a special verdict to the following effect: That Richard White, Esq. being seised in fee of the manor of Bantry, and of the lands of Blackrock, Ardgrown, and Reen, and other lands therein mentioned, situate in the barony of Beer and Bantry, [436] and within, and parcel of the manor of Bantry, by indentures of lease and release, bearing date respectively the 24th and 25th of September 1766, the release being of five parts, and made by the said Richard White, of the first part; Simon White, Esq. eldest son and heir apparent of the said Richard White, of the