Page:The English Reports v1 1900.pdf/1442

said annuities, might be paid to the respondent, upon his giving proper security for the payment of the two annuities to Elizabeth Wicker and John Jones during their lives. But in case the court should be of opinion, that the respondent was intitled only to one moiety of the £5402 7s. 4d. and the interest thereof accrued due since he attained his age, then he prayed, that such moiety might be paid to him, on his giving security for a moiety of the two annuities; and he prayed, that the appellant Charlotte Wicker might account for the testator John Wicker's personal estate, not specifically bequeathed; and that all proper parties might join in a proper sale or mortgage, which might be necessary, of any part of his real estates.

The appellants, and the other defendants to this bill, having appeared, and put in their answers thereto, the cause came on to be heard before the Lord Chancellor Thurlow, on the 10th of March 1780; and his Lordship, upon hearing the will of the testator, William Wicker, the decree dated the 21st of February 1754, and the Master's report, dated the 17th of February 1756, read, was pleased to declare, that the respondent was intitled to the whole sum of £5402 7s. 4¾d. mentioned in the pleadings, and interest. And the appellant, Sir Thomas Broughton, submitting to answer what should be due from the estate of John Wicker, in respect of the said sum of £5402 7s. 4¾d. and interest, it was referred to Mr. [449] Graves, to compute interest on that sum from the time the respondent attained his age of 21, after the rate of £4 per cent. per annum; and the Master was to inquire how much had been paid out of such interest, and was then due on account of the annuity of £100 payable to the defendant Elizabeth Wicker, and of the annuity of £10 payable to the defendant John Jones. And it was further ordered, that the same should be deducted out of such interest; and that what should appear to be due for the remainder of such interest, should be paid by the appellant Sir Thomas Broughton to the respondent. And it was further ordered, that the Master should appropriate and set apart a sufficient part of the said sum £5402 7s. 4¾d. to answer the growing payments of the said annuities; and that what should be appropriated for that purpose should be paid by the appellant Sir Thomas Broughton into the Bank, with the privity of the Accountant General, to be placed to the credit of the cause. And it was ordered, that the same, when so paid, should be laid out in the purchase of Bank annuities, in the name and with the privity of the Accountant General, in trust, in the cause; and he was to declare the trust thereof accordingly, subject to the further order of the court and out of the interest to grow due on the Bank annuities, it was ordered, that the annuity of £100 should be paid to the defendant Elizabeth Wicker, during her life; and the annuity of £10 should be paid to the defendant John Jones, during his life; and on the death of the said annuitants, or either of them, it was ordered, that the respondent, or any other persons standing in his place, should be at liberty to apply to the court for a transfer of the said Bank annuities, as they should be advised. And it was further ordered, that the remainder of the said sum of £5402 7s. 4¾d, after a deduction of what should be taxed for the parties costs of the suit, should be paid by the appellant Sir Thomas Broughton to the respondent. And it was further ordered, that the Master should tax all parties their costs of the suit, and that the same should be paid by the appellant Sir Thomas Broughton, out of the remainder of said sum of £5402 7s. 4¾d.; and in default of the appellant Sir Thomas Broughton's payment of the said sum of £5402 7s. 4¾d. it was ordered, that the respondent should be at liberty to apply to the court, to have the same raised and paid out of the estate of the testator John Wicker.

The appellants, pretending to be dissatisfied with this decree, because it declared the whole of the said sum of £5402 7s. 4¾d. and not a moiety only, to be the property of the respondent, on the 9th of April 1781, preferred their petition to the Lord Chancellor, to have the cause reheard on that point; and it accordingly came on to be reheard on the 21st of May 1781, when his Lordship was pleased to order that the decree should be affirmed, and that the sum of £10 deposited with the register, should be paid to the respondent.

The appellants, being still dissatisfied, brought the present appeal; and on their behalf it was contended (J. Mansfield, F. Hargrave), that all the devises in the will of William Wicker, subsequent to those in favour of his own children, [450] except the residuary devise, were on the contingency of his dying without issue; and those words import a failure of issue indefinitely. If this should be the construction, the contingency was too remote for an executory devise, and consequently the devise to the second or younger sons of the testator's brother John Wicker, and his sister Sarah Mitford, under