Page:The English Reports v1 1900.pdf/589

a new life, within the time for that purpose limited; but Sir Thomas Worsop and his heirs, though liable to the payment of the £100 upon the death of a cestui que vie, were not obliged to add any farther life, or accept of a renewal; and if the appellant was not to take a legal advantage of the proviso, he would be without remedy in this respect. That this was not a case which lay in compensation, for the damage which might be sustained by dispensing with a lapse of time, being merely eventual, and depending upon contingencies incapable of being estimated with any certainty, no proper equivalent or compensation could be given in lieu of it. And that the supposed promise or declaration of the late Lord Ross, dispensing with the time limited for the nomination of a new life in the room of Ann Bush, was supported by the evidence of one single witness, father of one of the respondents, and examined to a supposed conversation upon an accidental meeting in the street, above thirty-five years before the examination; whereas it was expressly denied by Lord Ross's answer, and attended with great [288] improbabilities; and it was apprehended, that such parol evidence would be productive of all the mischiefs intended to be avoided by the statute of frauds and perjuries.

On the other side it was insisted (J. Strange, W. Murray), that the respondents came properly into a Court of Equity, for a specific performance of Lord Ross's covenant to renew, according to the true intent and meaning of the parties; and that many decrees had been made for the specific performance of such covenants, and especially in Ireland, where these perpetual leases are frequent. That upon the death of Ann Bush, (the only life upon the failure of which a formal tender and nomination in time was not made) the condition on which the lessees became entitled to have another life added, was substantially and in equity performed, application having been made to Lord Ross for that purpose, within about a month after her death; but the actual renewal was deferred till his return to Ireland, at his own desire, and upon his express promise to take no advantage of the six months expiring in the mean time; for otherwise the nomination of the life, and the proper instruments would have been procured from Ireland, before the six months could have expired; and it would be contrary to justice, to suffer a man to take advantage of his own wrong. That the bills drawn upon Mr. Bush by Lord Ross's agent, and accepted, and his Lordship's promises to renew, made to Mr. Bush, in Dublin, in the year 1697, when the Notary was sent for; were not only a confirmation of the original agreement to renew, notwithstanding the expiration of the six months; but ought to be considered as an election made within the terms of the proviso, rather to take the £100 fine, than to vacate the lease; and amounted to a waiver of any legal advantage arising from the lapse of time, if any such advantage had been gained before. And therefore it was hoped, that the decree would be affirmed, and the appeal dismissed with costs.

Accordingly, after hearing counsel on this appeal, it was ordered and adjudged, that the same should be dismissed, and the decree therein complained of, affirmed; and it was further ordered, that the appellant should pay to the respondents £100 for their costs, in respect of the said appeal. (Jour. vol. 25. p. 629.)

Arthur, the first Earl of Anglesey, had issue James, afterwards Earl of Anglesey, Altham, afterwards Lord Altham, Richard, who likewise was afterwards Lord Altham, Charles and Arthur.—James, the eldest son, had issue James, John, and Arthur, who were successively Earls of Anglesey, and who all died without issue male.—Altham died without issue.—Richard had issue Arthur, who died without