Payment of the 40l. per Annum to those of the half Blood; but it was adjudged and decreed, that they are equally intitled to the 40l. per Annum apiece, and enjoyed accordingly. Farmer versus Lane and Nash in Chancery, 26 Octob. 1677. declared and adjudged by the Lord Chancellor Nottingham, That the half Blood are in equal Degree of Kindred with the whole Blood, and ought to have an equal Share of the Personal Estate. The like was in the Case of Stapleton and the Lord Merion against the Lord Sherrard and his Lady, in Chancery by Judge Windham, 13 June 1683. the Case was thus: Robert Stapleton had a Sister of the whole Blood, and a Brother and Sister of the half Blood, and died Intestate: Administration was granted to his Wife the Lady Sherrard, who claimed a Moiety of the personal Estate by the Custom of the Province of York, and a Quarter of the other Moiety by Force of the Act for Distribution of Intestates Estates; and adjudged that the Wife should have only one Moiety, and the other Moiety to be divided equally between the Brothers and Sisters both of the whole and half Blood. This Cause was Reheard the seventh of May 1685. by the Lord Guilford, upon the Certificate of his Grace the Lord Archbishop, to whom it was referred to certify the Custom of the Province of York; who certified that the Wife shall have only a Moiety, and the other Moiety shall be divided amongst the next of Kindred, and adjudged that the half Blood shall have an equal Share with the whole, and so the former Decree was confirmed.
—2 CHAN. REP. 300.-The same was adjudged by Mr. Justice Charlton, June 30. 1685. in the Case of Pullen and his wife against Serjeant, in the Court of Chancery.
The like was, amongst other Things, declared and decreed by the Lord Jeffryes, Febr. 19. 1686. in the Case of the late Lord Winchelsea against Norcliff and Wentworth; upon which Hearing were present and assisting the then Lord Chief Baron Atkyns, and Mr. Justice Lutwich; and so was it Nov. 20. 1689. between Stephens and Throgmorton in Chancery.
It hath likewise been held so in the Ecclesiastical Court; and accordingly adjudged by Sir Richard Raynes upon solemn Argument, by the most eminent Counsel, both of the Civil and Common Law, in the Case of James Storey, Febr. 26. 1685. and in the Case of George Hawles, by the same Judge, upon Jan. 1. 1687.
Decree affirmed.—Then it was urged, That the Statute of Jac. 2. for Reviving and Continuance of several Acts of Parliament therein mentioned, proves this: For 'tis enacted, That if after the Death of the Father, any of his Children shall die intestate without Wife or Chil-[110]-dren in the Life-time of the Mother, every Brother and Sister, and the Representatives of them, shall have an equal Share; and that a Brother of the half Blood is a Brother to the Intestate as well as a Brother of the whole Blood, and therefore ought to have Share, and an equal Share with the Rest. And upon Consideration of all those Precedents, and there being no Practise against it, except that of Sir Richard Lloyd's, it was prayed that the Decree might be confirmed; and it was confirmed.
Lee Warner v. William North [1695].
[15 Lds. Jo. 691.]
Charitable Uses. Delegates. 2. Vern. 118.—Appeal from a Decree of the Lord Chancellor, which over-ruled the Exceptions taken by the Appellant, to a Decree made by Commissioners for Charitable Uses, concerning a Gift by Bishop Warner's Will; and the same was received, and the Parties ordered to answer. And each Side being heard by their Counsel, the Decree was affirmed. Vide the Statutes concerning Charitable Uses and the Delegates; and Quære how they differ; and whether an Appeal doth not lie upon a Sentence by Delegates, as well as on a Decree of Chancery upon a Decree of Commissioners for Charitable Uses?
75
