Page:The English Reports v1 1900.pdf/582

reasonably advise, should be inserted in such conveyance to be made as aforesaid, as are usual in marriage-settlements, and which should be conducing to the settlement of the said estates, according to the true intent and meaning of the said indenture.

This deed was executed by all the parties, and soon afterwards the marriage took effect.

By indentures of lease and release, dated the 16th and 17th of May 1701, the said Robert and Stephen Offley, in consideration of the marriage then had, and expressly declaring it to be in performance of the said marriage agreement, did jointly convey to Manning and one Samuel Crome, and their heirs, all the said Cornelius Clarke's estate, and all the right, title, interest, use, property, claim, and demand of them, or either of them, of, in, or to the same, to the use (as to part) of Stephen for life; then to Urith for life; then to Robert, their new-born son, and the heirs male of his body; with remainder to the second and other sons of the said Stephen and Urith in tail male; as to other part, to the use of Robert, the grandfather, for life; then to Stephen for life; then to Urith for life, in full of her jointure; with the like remainder to Robert, their infant son, in tail male, and to their second and other sons in tail male successively: and as to the residue, to Robert, the grandfather, for life, then to Stephen for life; remainder to Robert, the infant son, in tail male; remainder to the second and other sons of Stephen and Urith, in tail male successively. Provided, that if Urith, when she came of age, should refuse to convey her real estate to Stephen and his heirs, subject to such charges, and upon such conditions as were mentioned in the said marriage-agreement, then the limitations to her for life should be void. And the said Robert and Stephen Offley covenanted, that they, or one of them, had full power to settle the premises as aforesaid, and that the same should remain and continue to and for the uses and trusts aforesaid, freed from all acts, estates, titles, charges, and incumbrances, made, committed, or done, or then after to be made, committed, or done by them, or either of them.

No notice was taken either in the said marriage-agreement, or in the settlement made pursuant to it, of the said Cornelius Clarke's will, or the power therein contained for making a jointure; or that Robert, the grandfather, and Stephen were only tenants for life of the said estate; but they agreed to convey and settle the same, as if they or one of them had been seised thereof in fee-simple, and covenanted for enjoyment accordingly.

By indenture, dated the 4th of May 1704, and by fine, the said Stephen and Urith (she being of age) settled all her real estate to the use of Stephen and his heirs.

[278] Robert, the first son of Stephen and Urith, died before Urith, and in 1711, she died, leaving the respondent, her then eldest son, and Stephen, her only younger child, living.

In 1712, the said Stephen, the respondent's father, married the appellant Ann, whose fortune was about £1200, but of which he had no more than £200 to his own use.

In 1716, Robert Offley, the father of Stephen, died, and by lease and release, dated the 13th and 14th of January 1717, the said Stephen settled an estate of £40 a year of his own purchasing, and also £65 a year, part of the said Urith's estate, and £9 10s. a year leasehold estate for 600 years, and also £1000 of the appellant Ann's fortune, in trust for himself and her for life, then to all her children by him in equal shares: and by another deed, dated the same 14th of January, he limited to the appellant Ann about £300 a year of Cornelius Clarke's estate as a jointure.

By deed, dated the 4th of September 1721, Stephen confirmed the appellant Ann's jointure, and added thereto as much more of the said Clarke's estate, as made the whole about £371 a year, which was not quite a moiety of it.

The respondent came of age in December 1723, and soon after was sent for home from his studies, being then, and at the time of his joining in the deeds and recovery after-mentioned, intirely ignorant of the said Urith his mother's marriage agreement and settlement, and all the other deeds and writings above-stated, and of what provision his father had made, or could make, for the appellant Ann, or her children; and his father having then four daughters by her, he and the appellant Ann solicited and importuned the respondent to charge £3000 on Cornelius