Page:The English Reports v1 1900.pdf/1463

time that the debts and legacies were, or might be satisfied. That the decree was well founded, in holding the respondent to be bound by the appellant's marriage-articles; inasmuch as she had released her right of dower, and the arrears thereof, and submitted to take the lands of Frenchbrooke in lieu of it; and it would be very hard and unreasonable, that she should be turned out of the possession of Frenchbrooke, which was not a full equivalent for her dower or thirds of the testator's estate, and be stripped of her maintenance, and left destitute of any provision, until she should be established in the possession of what was devised to her by the testator's will; and which possession the court could not decree to her, until it should appear by the Master's report, that the debts and legacies charged on the estate, were or might be paid. And that there were several precedents in Ireland, where the widows of transplanters, who, in satisfaction of their old estates, had lands given them under the government of Oliver Cromwell by transplantation, and consequently had but equitable estates, had obtained decrees in the Court of Chancery in that kingdom, for the third part of such equitable estates and transplanted interests.

But after hearing counsel on the appeal, it was ordered and adjudged, that the decree therein complained of, should be reversed: and it was declared, that the respondent was entitled to her dower, notwithstanding the articles pretended to be made on her marriage; and that the articles or agreement of 1701, and the indorsement thereon, were void as against the appellants, they being then minors, and no parties; and that the respondent ought to elect, whether she would insist on her right of dower, or waive her dower, and claim a moiety of the testator's estate, after payment of debts, legacies, and portions, according to his will. (Jour. vol. 20. p. 169.)

The counsel for the respondent were then called in and asked, "Which of the two they did elect for their client?" But the respondent herself not being present, her counsel declined making any election for her, and desired a few days for that purpose; whereupon the house allowed the respondent time till Saturday then next, (the 20th of August,) to return an answer to the question put to her counsel, as aforesaid; at which time, their Lordships would further decree, as should be just.

[482] This time was afterwards enlarged; but the respondent, or any on her behalf, not having appeared to make such election; it was therefore, on the 19th of September 1715, ordered and adjudged, that the said Mary Lynch should account, according to the course of the Court of Chancery in Ireland, for all the personal estate, and profits of the real estate, of George French, her first husband, which at any time came to her hands, or to the hands of any other person to her use; and in taking such account, she should have all just allowances; and that when such account was taken, as to what should appear to be remaining of the estate of the said George French, either real or personal, after what was sufficient to pay and discharge all debts, legacies, and portions, owing from, or given by the said George French, the said Mary Lynch was well entitled to one full moiety of the rents and profits of such residue of the estates real and personal, during the term of her natural life, by the will of her said husband. George French; the said moiety of the rents and profits to be computed and allowed to her, from the end of one year next ensuing his decease: but if the said Mary Lynch should, at any time pending the account so directed, or before the confirmation of the report thereof, elect to waive the said profits of the moiety, which she might claim by the will of her said husband; and insist, in the Court of Chancery in Ireland, on her right of dower; then the said Mary Lynch was decreed to pay the costs of the said account, so far as the same had proceeded before she should so make her election; and that she should be allowed one full third of the clear profits of the real estate of her said husband, whereof she was dowable either by law or equity, (without prejudice to the point, whether the said Mary Lynch was dowable of the estate whereof her said husband was only seised as cestui que trust, by the usage of Ireland, or the course of equity in that kingdom in such cases, which the Court of Chancery in Ireland was to determine, subject to any future appeal;) and if on the account to be taken as above mentioned, the said Mary Lynch should not have received sufficient to satisfy what was now decreed to her, then the residue of the estate, real and personal, of her said husband George French, was and should remain liable to satisfy and make good to her what should so remain due: but if it should appear on such account, that the said Mary Lynch was over paid what should be found due to her according to this present decree, then the said Mary Lynch was decreed to pay such surplus so found due from