Atcherley v Vernon
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1795 |
| Date | 01 January 1795 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 88 E.R. 834
IN CHANCERY
834 MICHAELMAS TERM, 10 GEO. 1. IN CHANCERY 10 MOD. 319. case 234. atcherlky against veenon. S. C. 9 Mod. 68. S. C. 2 Eq. Abr. 209. S. C. 1 Peer. Wms. 783. S. C. Corny. 381. S. C. 3 Bro. P. C. 107. Mr. Vernon made his will the seventeenth of January 1711, and by this will he vested the bulk of his estate, real as well as personal, in five trustees, for the use of Bowater Vernon, &c. and also he gave the residue of his personal estate to the same trustees, to be invested in land, and settled to the same uses. He gave his wife five hundred pounds, to be paid her presently by the trustees ; and a thousand pounds a-year free from all taxes but Parliamentary ones, in full satisfaction of dower, jointures, and all demands out of his real estate, to be paid by the trustees. He gave her also all his plate, and his London house, and the goods and furniture; he gave her likewise the use of his house at Hanbury, with all the demesne lands and park that he kept in his own hands, with all the goods and furniture, together with the books, for her life. He gave his sister and heir at law, Mrs. Atcherley, two hundred pounds a-year for her separate use ; and his niece Letitia Atcherley one thousand pounds. After the making of his will, he purchased several estates in land ò some of which purchases were completed, and the conveyances executed in his life-time ; [519] but in some they were only contracted for, part of the purchase-money paid, but no conveyance executed; and in some the time limited by the articles for executing the conveyance was not come. He purchased likewise a copyhold estate; but that purchase was completed, save that he was pleased, that the vendor's name should be made use of in trust for him. Mr. Vernon being seised of the manor of Hanbury in fee, out of which there was payable to the Crown a fee-farm rent of thirty-five pounds a-year, purchased this in, and took a conveyance of this fee-farm rent to himself in fee. Matters standing thus, Mr. Vernon, on the second of February 1720, added a codicil to his will; in which codicil he first takes notice, that he had made his will, bearing date on or about the seventeenth day of January 1711, and ratifies and confirms this his will in every part thereof; save what alteration he should make by that codicil. He further takes notice, that he had by his will given his sister and heir at law two hundred pounds a-year to her separate use, during her life, and a thousand pounds to his niece Letitia Atcherley; and by his codicil makes the two hundred pounds four hundred pounds, in case she survived her husband : and increases the sum of one thousand pounds to six thousand pounds, to be paid his niece upon day of marriage or twenty-one. And then declares, that his will and meaning is, that the respective legacies of two hundred pounds a-year, and the six thousand pounds, be taken and accepted of by his said sister and niece, in full satisfaction of all manner of claims and demands they or either of them had or might have upon any part of his estate, real or personal; and upon condition that they do release unto his executors and trustees all manner of claims and demands upon any part of his estate. [520] Then he goes on and says : " Having thus provided for my sister and niece, I do devise all the lands purchased by me since the making my will, to the trustees in my will named, to and for the same uses and purposes as the manor of Hanbury stands settled by my will. And I do hereby revoke that part of my will wherein I make A. B. and C. three of my trustees; and I do desire J. S. and J. N. to be two of my trustees, and do devise my said real estate to them accordingly." Upon this will and codicil, the first point insisted upon by Mr. Atcherley in right of his wife, sister and heir at law to Mr. Vernon, was founded upon that part of the codicil, " I do thereby revoke, &c." It waa insisted, that he had by these words revoked that integral part of the will that related to the trust, and the uses thereby limited. Had he not intended to have done so, he would not have used those words, "that part of my will," but would have used some other words that would have manifested his intention to have related only to the persons of the trustees. It was said, that if he had intended only this, it was-very strange that he should repose any trust, as to the new-purchased lands, in those 10MOD.421. MICHAELMAS TERM, 10 GEO. 1. IN CHANCERY 835 very trustees thus by him put out; yet that he plainly does, for he devises them to the trustees in the will named, viz. all five. As the former meaning seems to he the more literal one, so it is the more favourable one to the heir at law, who will otherwise be disinherited by the will. And it is likewise an interpretation that makes the codicil uniform and consistent with itself. For immediately after this, there follows a new devise of all hia estate to the two new trustees; which clause, supposing the former not to be a revocation, is plainly inconsistent, and itself a revocation. And as there is no new trust appointed by this new devise, the law implies that, and says, to the use of the heir at law. [521] But admitting, that the devise to these new trustees, by virtue of the word " accordingly," should be taken to be, to and for the same uses and purposes as are mentioned in the will; yet inasmuch as the lands are devised to the trustees, only omitting the words "and their heirs," they can take only an...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Acherley v Vernon
...to them accordingly ò this is only a revocation as to the appointment of the two trustees, and not of any other part of the will.-S. C. 10 Mod. 518. S. C. 2 Eq. Ab. 209. S. C. 1 Peer. Wms. 783. S. C. Corny. 381. S. C. 3 Bro. P. C. 107. This was a bill exhibited by Roger Acherley, Esq. and ......
-
Roe, on the Demise of the Right Hon. Thomas Conolly, against Vernon and Vyse
...deceases of his mother and wife to his on, &c." It appears therefore that he used the term freehold ("all his freehold (a) 9 Mod. 68. - 10 Mod. 518, 529, and Comyn. Eep. 381. (b) 3 P. Wms. 312. (c) 2 Atk. ,85. Vide also Goodwyn v. G-oodwyn, 1 Ves. 226. (d) 6 Term Eep. 612. , (e) Cas. temp. ......