Doe, on the Demise of Charles White against Simpson and Another
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 09 May 1804 |
| Date | 09 May 1804 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 102 E.R. 1031
IN THE COURT OF KING'S BENCH.
Referred to, Fenwick v. Potts, 1856, 8 De G. M. & G. 521.
dob, on the demise of charles white, against simpson and another. Wednesday, May 9th, 1804. Under a-devise of lands, arrears of rent and a bond and judgment to trustees and the survivor and the executors, &e. of such survivor, in trust, out of the rents and profits of the said estates and arrears, &c. to pay certain annuities for lives, and a sum in gross; and from and after payment of the said annuities and money, the testator devised successive estates for lives, remainder to C. W. in tail, remainder to his own right heirs; and he also gave a general power of leasing to the trustees for the best rent, with an allowance of 101. a year to each for their trouble: Held that the purposes of the trust being 1032 DOE V. SIMPSON 5BAST,163. all answered, by the death of the annuitants, and the raising of the money for legacies, the remainder man in tail (the life estate being spent) took the legal estate in the premises;, For where the purposes of a trust may be answered by giving the trustees a less estate than-a fee, no greater estate shall pass to them by implication; but the uses in remainder limited on such lesser estate so given to them shall be executed by the statute. And in this ease it is sufficient to answer the purposes of the trust to give the trustees by implication an estate for the lives of the annuitants, with a term of years in remainder sufficient for the purpose of raising the gross sum charged out of the rents and profits. And this construction is further confirmed in this particular ease by the bequest to the trustees of the arrears and the bond and judgment, as well as of the rents and profits; for otherwise the interest in the bond, &e. would go to different representatives than the estate if the trustees took a fee : and the leasing power was only to be executed as the occasions of the trust required. And there was also a personal remuneration to the trustees of 101. a-year for their trouble, which was not extended to their heirs. [Referred to, FenmcJc v. Potts, 1856, 8 De G. M. & G. 521.] This was an ejectment for certain premises in the parish of St. Matthew, Bethnal òGreen, in Middlesex, brought by the first remainder-man in tail under the will [163] of one Charles White, against the defendant, who claimed as assignee of one Hopkins, under a lease granted in August 1786 by the executrixes of Henry Hyatt, the surviving trustee under the will of Charles White, dated July 1754, and properly òexecuted and attested; whereby tbe said devisor having first devised unto the said Henry Hyatt all his messuages, lands, &c. whatsoever in the parish of Willsdon for life, with divers remainders over for life, remainder to Charles White in tail; and having given directions for the renewal of a certain church lease, &c.; proceeds as follows : - ' ò ' "I give and devise unto the said Mr. H. Hyatt, my cousin Fitz Ferrand, and Mr. Syddall, and the survivor of them, and the executors and administrators of such survivor, all those my messuages, lands, &c. whatsoever, in London, Kensington, and in the parish of St. Matthew Bethnal Green, Middlesex, together with all arrears of rent due from the tenants of the said estates, and the bond and judgment I have from my tenant John Sugar for arrears due; in trust, that they, out of the rents and profits of the said estates and arrears due,, shall pay one annuity of 501. to my sister Mrs. Holme for her life, by half yearly payments from the time of my decease; and also to pay one other annuity of 501. to my sister Mrs. Dickinson for her life by half yearly payments, for her sole and separate use, &c. And from and after payment of the said annuities, then in trust out of the said rest and residue of the said rents-and profits to pay to my brother Thomas White, and my nephew, his son, Charles White, and Peter Holme, and the survivor of them, and the executors, &c. of such survivor, the sum'of 8001. to be by them paid and applied to the sole use and benefit of the said children of my said brother William, in such manner and proportion, and to and for [164] such uses, &c. as they shall think best. And from and after payment of the said annuities and the said sum of 8001. I give and devise my said estates in London and Middlesex last mentioned to my brother'William for life, remainder to his eldest son William for life, remainder to his second son Samuel for life, remainder to his third son Charles for life, remainder to his youngest son John for life, remainder to my brother Thomas White for -life, and after his decease to his son, my nephew, Charles White (the lessor of the plaintiff,) and his heirs male ; and for want of such issue to my right heirs for ever. And I do hereby give and grant unto the said Mr. Hyatt, Mr. Ferrand, and Mr. Syddall, and the survivor of them, and the executors and administrators of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lot B Ltd v Warry
...Lord Denman CJ referring to the general rule as stated by Smith J and based upon cases such as Doe d White v. Simpson (1804) 5 East 162, 102 ER 1031 (a case that was among those mentioned by the judge in the present matter) went on to say (4 Ad & El 582 at 590, 111 ER 906 at 909): ‘But thes......
-
Fenwick v Potts
...his solicitors, who acted both for the father and the son on the occasion of the mortgage to the latter. They referred to Doe v. Simpson (5 East, 162) ; Robinson v. Grey (9 East, 1); Cooke v. Blake (1 Exch. 220); Ware v. Lord Egmont (4 De G. M. & G. 460); Finch v. Shaw (19 Beav. 500; 5 H. o......
-
Poad against John Watson the Elder and John Watson the Younger
...that they take no larger estate; Ward v. Burbury (18 Beav. 190), Aekland v. Pring (2 M. & G. 937), [619] Doe dem. White v. Simpson (5 East, 162), Hawker v. Hawker (3 B. & Aid. 537). [Jervia C.J. Those last two cases, I think, are no longer considered as law.] Doe dem. White v. Simpson (5 Ea......
-
Doe D. Muller and Others v Claridge
...the -trustees, they will not take any greater estate than is requisite to the performance of their functions.] In Doe d. White v. Simpson (5 East, 162), under a devise of lands, arrears of rent, and a bond and judgment, to trustees and the survivor, and the executors, &c., of such survivor,......