Page:The English Reports v1 1900.pdf/306

according to the first intention of the purchase, the particular charities having been constantly performed; and that therefore the appeal should be dismissed with costs.

Die Veneris, 19 Februarii, 1702. After hearing council upon this petition and appeal, it was adjudged by the Lords that the decree of dismission complained of should be reversed; and that the Court of Chancery should proceed to give such relief upon the information as should be just; the House being of opinion, that the increase of the value of the lands in question, ought to be applied in augmentation of the several charities and appointments. Lords Journ. vol. xvii. p. 198.

(See 2. [7] Brown: P. C. 236. where the City of Coventry was utterly removed from the trust.)

The appellant made this case: That Sir John Northcote, upon the marriage of his eldest son Sir Arthur, 24 Char. 1. created a term of ninety-nine years, in the greatest part of his estate, to commence at his death, for raising 4000l. for purposes to be declared by his will; and by his will, in June, 1675, directed the 4000l. to be paid to his executors, John Northcote his grandson, eldest son of the said Arthur and William Northcote, viz. 1500l. at the end of the first year, 1250l. at the end of the second year, and 1250l. at the end of the third year after his decease, to be divided amongst his children and grand-children, as therein is directed, and the residue to his executors, and forgave Sir Arthur several sums of money he had paid for him, and died in 1676; and that Sir Arthur and Sir John's executors, trustees, and legatees, considering the circumstances of the family, by articles, dated 30th September, 1677, agreed that part of the trust estate, to the value of about 180l. per annum, should be exempted from the 4000l. and that Sir Arthur thereupon entered on that part of the trust estate allotted to him by the said articles; and that the said John Northcote, and respondent Alice, had other parts of the trust estate to the value of 250l. per annum allotted them, and enjoyed that part; and that the trustees refusing to act, Sir Arthur also entered on some other part, and paid part of the 4000l. and that before the whole was payable John Northcote died, and William Northcote survived, and married his widow and executrix, the respondent Alice; and that John, to incapacitate Sir Arthur to [288] pay the remainder of the 4000l. had sued him for the debts paid for him by Sir John, his father, and recovered 1600l. though Sir John had by his will released those debts; and that although William and Alice were in possession of great part of the trust estate, liable to the 4000l. yet they in the trustees names endeavoured to evict Sir Arthur out of the estate, agreed by the articles to be enjoyed by him; wherefore Sir Arthur, in Hillary term, 1681, exhibited his bill in Chancery against them and the trustees, and legatees of Sir John, to be repaid the 1600l. with interest; and after that cause had been heard, and twice re-heard, obtained a decree to be repaid the 1600l. with interest, but died before the account settled, and appellant, his widow and executrix, revived the decree, and obtained the master's report, that there was due for principal and interest 2756l. 1s. 4d. which report was on exceptions confirmed: And that the Court of Chancery, 10th November, 1691, enlarged the time for payment of the 2756l. 1s. 4d. with interest, which made 2797l. 8s. 1d. and, instead of paying this, William and Alice appealed from the decree, and that upon full hearing the Lords dismissed the