The money was accordingly paid, and the conveyances executed in pursuance of this decree; but afterwards the defendants, Fletcher and his wife, thought proper to appeal from it, insisting (W. Dobyns), that the testator intended the lands to be purchased, should go to the children of William Goodman; that by the limitation to him for life, nothing more was meant, than to prevent him from selling the lands; and, that the money not being wholly laid out in the purchase of lands, the nnapplied residue ought to be taken as part of the testator's personal estate.
But to this it was answered (J. G. Snow), that by the rules of law, nothing could be intended, contrary to the words and declaration of the will, which plainly showed the testator's intention to be, that William Goodman should have no estate or interest longer than for his own life only; and, that the money being expressly directed to be laid out in land, ought to go as the land would have gone if it had been purchased. 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 that the said William Fletcher should pay, or cause to be paid, unto the respondents Thomas Chapman: and Roger Chapman, the sum of £10 for their costs. (Jour. vol. 17. p. 346.)
Case 2.—Bryan Ferrand, and Others,—Appellants; Richard Jackson,—Respondent [2d February 1703].
[Mew's Dig. x. 1251.]
Proced. in Chan. 109. 2 Vern. 424. 1 Eq. Ca. Ab. 268. ca. 8. Viner, vol. 8. p. 402. ca. 24. 461. ca. 16. vol. 16, p. 448. ca. 5.
Thomas Ferrand being seised in fee of the manor and lands of Flasby, in the county of York, of the yearly value of £80, and possessed of a personal estate amounting to £280 and upwards, and having only two children, namely, the appellant Bryan, and Barbara the late wife of the respondent, made his will, dated the 25th of February 1682, and thereby directed, that his children should be maintained out of his goods, and the rents and profits of his lands, till 21; and the overplus was to be, for raising a portion of £500 for his said daughter, to be paid to her at the age of 21; and in case it was not then raised, that his executors should stand seised of all his lands, till the same was fully raised and paid. And he appointed the appellant William Watkinson, executor of his will.
[3] The respondent married Barbara, the testator's daughter, at the age of 18, who brought him one child, named Barbara, and soon afterwards died, before she had attained 21.
The respondent having taken out administration to his late wife, filed his bill in Chancery against the appellants, for a satisfaction of the £500 portion, with interest and maintenance; and praying an account of the testator's personal estate, and of the rents and profits of his real estate; and that the premises, charged with the payment of this portion and maintenance, might be sold for raising the same.
On the 29th of January 1699, the cause was heard, when an account was directed to be taken of the personal estate of the testator, and of the rents and profits of his real estate; and the Master was to enquire what incumbrances there were on the premises; and all further directions were reserved until after the report.
The Master having made his report, and thereby, inter alia, certified, that there were two mortgages upon the testator's real estate, one for £200 due to one Lupton, and another for £500 which was then vested in the appellant William Watkinson; and that the premises were also charged with an annuity of £25 per annum, payable to the testator's widow for life: the cause came on to be heard for further directions on the 17th of May 1701, when it appearing that, by reason of these incumbrances, the £500 portion could not be raised out of the rents and profits in any reasonable time, it was decreed, that the real estate should be forth with sold for raising this portion; that the
1138
