Blount v Burrow

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Judgment Date18 July 1792
Date18 July 1792
CourtHigh Court of Chancery

English Reports Citation: 30 E.R. 481

HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY

Blount
and
Burrow

blount v. burrow. July 18th, 1792. 4 Bro. 0, G. 71.-Issue directed to try, whether there was donatio mortis causa ; as it did not appear to have been in the last illness. Party discharged, as well as charged, by his own examination. (Lord Commissioner Wilson absent.) Walter, a Defendant, being examined before the Master in order to charge him with the receipt of four India bonds, the property of the testator, swore as to that, that he had received them from the testator twelve days before his death with directions to keep them in case of his death. The Master refused to allow him these bonds ; upon which he accepted. Mr. Lloyd and Mr. nail, for the exceptions. This is a good donatio mortis causa ', Snellgrove v. Baily, 3 Atk. 214, Hill v. Chapman, 2 Bro. C. G. 612. The examination of the party is good evidence in his discharge. Where you examine a party to charge him, and there is also matter of discharge, you cannot read one without reading both : Kirkpatrick v. Love, Amb. 589. (Note : If in the same sentence and as one transaction ; otherwise not. See Bidgeway v. Darwin, Thompson v. Lambe, 7 Ves. 404, 587. Robinson v. Scotney, 19 Ves. 582.) The answer of a Defendant may be read against him : but then he may read the whole : 2 Com. Dig. 98. Darston v. Lord Oxford, 1 Eq. Ca. Ab. 10, as to books and writings. Mr. Selwyn and Mr. Ainge, for the report. This is not good as donatio mortis causa ; because it is not stated in the examination, that it was in the last illness, which [547] is absolutely necessary. Besides on all the suspicious circumstances of the case the Court will not receive the examination of the Defendant as evidence to entitle himself to these bonds. He never stated his claim by answer ; nor till examined upon interrogatories. To allow this would be to allow him to make evidence for himself. If he takes these bonds, there will not be enough for debts. I admit the case from Eq. Ca. Ab. which is a book of good authority, though that point is not mentioned in the report of that case, Pre. Ch. 188. But that only goes to the case of books and writings; which I admit, because there is not the danger; and the parties in that case lived at Barbadoes ', and many of them were...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT