John Wright Henniker Wilson v William Carr Foster, Nathan Wetherell and Mary Wright Henniker Wilson
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 11 February 1845 |
| Date | 11 February 1845 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 60 E.R. 415
HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
S. C. 15 Sim. 487; affirmed, 1 H. L. C. 538; 9 E. R. 870 (with note). In addition to cases cited in the note (9 E. R. 870), see Hart v. Hart, 1881, 18 Ch. D. 1881; Clark v. Clark, 1885, 10 P. D. 193; M'Gregor v. M'Gregor, 1888, 20 Q. B. D. 529; 21 Q. B. D. 430.
Articles of Separation. Husband and Wife. Specific Performance. Public Policy.
[405] mary wright henniker wilson, the Wife of John Wright Henniker Wilson, by sir charles wetherell, her next Friend, and william carr foster and nathan wetherell v. john wright henniker wilson ; and john wright henniker wilson v. william carr foster, nathan wetherell and mary wright henniker wilson. Jan. 20, 29, Feb. 1, 11, 1845. [S. C. 15 Sim. 487 ; affirmed, 1 H. L. C. 538; 9 E. R. 870 (with note). In addition to cases cited in the note (9 E. R. 870), see Hart v. Hart, 1881, 18 Ch. D. 1881 ; Clark v. Clark, 1885, 10 P. D. 193; McGregor v. M'Gregor, 1888, 20 Q. B. D. 529; 21 Q. B. D. 430.] Articles of Separation. Husband and Wi/e. Specific Performance. Public Policy. Articles of separation decreed to be specifically performed. A covenant to indemnify the husband against his wife's debts is not the only consideration that will support such articles ; a covenant to put an end to a suit against the husband in the Ecclesiastical Court, or to pay him an annuity, or to pay his existing debts, ia sufficient. An agreement to put an end to a suit for nullity of marriage on the ground of impoteney is not contrary to public policy. In April 1839 Mary Wright Henniker Wilson, one of the Plaintiffs in the original cause, married the Defendant in that cause. At the time of her marriage she was entitled, under the will of her aunt, Lady Frances Wright Wilson, to a freehold estate in Hampshire called Dray ton Lodge, of the value of £2000 a year, and which, by her aunt's will, was limited to her separate use, and she was also entitled, under the will of her uncle, Sir Henry Wright Wilson, for her life, with remainder to her children and other issue, to certain freehold estates in Yorkshire and Essex, producing together about JE3000 a year; arid she was also entitled to a leasehold [406] estate in Mfddlesex called Chelsea Park, and to the sum of .£4, 12s. 6d. land tax charged thereon; and to a leasehold house in Grosvenor Place which had been specifically bequeathed to her by Sir Henry Wright Wilson, and to stock in the funds, ready money, furniture and other effects in her houses at Chelsea Park and Drayton Lodge, 416 WILSON V. WILSON 14 SIM. 407. and to other personal estate; all which particulars had come to her either from Sir Henry Wright Wilson or Lady Frances Wright Wilson. By the settlement on her marriage with Mr. Wilson, after reciting that all her property, except the Drayton Lodge estate and the Chelsea Park estate and the land òtax thereon and £3000 consols, should, after the solemnization of the marriage, belong to Mr. Wilson in his marital right, the Drayton Lodge estate was continued to the separate use of Mrs. Wilson, and the Chelsea Park estate and the £4, 12s. 6d. land tax charged thereon were assigned to trustees, in trust for Mr. Wilson for his life, -and, after his decease, in trust for Mrs. Wilson for her life, and, after her decease, in trust for Mr. Wilson absolutely; and, by a separate deed, Mr. Wilson covenanted to raise certain sums for the portions of the younger children of the marriage out of òcertain estates belonging to him in Somersetshire. After the marriage unhappy differences arose between Mr. and Mrs. Wilson, which òcontinued until May 1843, when Mrs. Wilson instituted a suit against her husband in the Consistory Court of London for nullity of marriage on the ground of impotency; and, on tha 8th of that month, Mr. Wilson was served with a citation in that suit. On the following day he called on his wife's solicitors, and expressed his anxiety that no further proceedings should be taken in the suit, and that an amicable arrangement should be come to. [407] After some negotiation had taken place between him and his wife's solicitors, articles of separation, dated the 1st June 1843, were prepared between him of the first part, his wife of the second part, and Nathan Wetherell and William Carr Foster of the third part, whereby he, on the one part, and Wetherell and Foster on the other part, covenanted, first, that he should permit hia wife to live separate from him : secondly, that the Chelsea Park estate and the £4, 12s. 6d. land tax should be held by and vested in the trustees of the marriage settlement, in trust for Mrs. Wilson, for her separate use during the joint lives of herself and Mr. Wilson: thirdly, -that the estate in Hampshire and the £3000 consols should remain subject to the òtrusts of the marriage settlement: fourthly, that all other freehold, copyhold and leasehold estates to which Mrs. Wilson was entitled at the time of her marriage (but subject, as to such of those estates as were situate in Yorkshire, to the atmuity of £1000 thereinafter secured for Mr. Wilson) should be conveyed by him to the trustees òof the marriage settlement, in trust for Mrs. Wilson's separate use during the joint lives of herself and Mr. Wilson : fifthly, that the furniture in the house at Chelsea Park should be held by Mrs. Wilson for her separate use, and, after her decease, òshould belong to Mr. Wilson absolutely; and that all other goods, chattels and effects in or about the same house, and also in or about the house in Hampshire, and all real ^.nd personal estates to be thereafter acquired by her, should belong to and be settled absolutely on her for her separate use : sixthly, that all rents, taxes and other òoutgoings in respect to the Chelsea Park estate and the other freehold, copyhold and leasehold estates, and all expenses of repairs and insurances upon the same, and all the [408] lessees' covenants in respect of the leasehold estates, should be performed -and satisfied by Mr. Wilson, up to the 24th June then instant: seventhly, that, so long as Mr. Wilson should observe and perform the covenants and agreements contained in the articles, all the rents, taxes and other outgoings in respect of the same -estates, and all expenses of repairs and insurance of or upon the same, and all the lessees' covenants in respect of the leasehold estates, should, after the 24th June then instant, be paid, performed and satisfied by Mrs. Wilson during her life, and that Mr. Wilson, his heirs, executors and administrators, should be indemnified therefrom, and from all the present debts and liabilities of the said John Jfright Henniker Wilson by the joint and several covenant of Wetherell and Foster: eighthly, that, so long as Mr. Wilson should observe and perform the covenants and agreements contained in the article*, an annuity of £1000, commencing from the same 24th of June, should be paid to him, during the joint lives of himself and Mrs. Wilson, and should be charged upon the estates in Yorkshire, which belonged to Mrs. Wilson at the time of her marriage : ninthly, that a proper deed or proper deeds for effectuating the objects of the articles, òand containing all such covenants, agreements, clauses and provisions as should be deemed òexpedient for that purpose, should, with all convenient speed, be executed by all the parties to the articles: and, lastly, that upon the execution of the articles by Mr. .14 SIB. 9. WILSON V. WILSON 417 Wilson the proceedings against him in the Ecclesiastical Court should be suspended and that, upon...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
MacLeod v MacLeod
... ... Eldon "doubted but enforced them: cf St John v St John (1803) 11 Ves 525 , 529 and Bateman v ... ) 9 Clark & F 101 ; 4 Man & G 1104 and in Wilson v Wilson (1848) 1 H of L Cas 538 ... There Lord ... ...
-
NG v KR (Pre-nuptial Contract)
...a present separation is, and always has been, in principle perfectly lawful and enforceable: see, for example, Wilson v Wilson (1845) 14 Sim 405, (1848) 1 HLC 538, and Hyman v Hyman [1929] AC 601. Thus, as Mr Pointer observes, as early as 1864 it had been held in Rowley v Rowley (1864) 3 Sw......
- X v X (Y and Z Intervening)
-
X v X (Y and Z Intervening)
...a present separation is, and always has been, in principle perfectly lawful and enforceable: see, for example, Wilson v Wilson (1845) 14 Sim 405, (1848) 1 HLC 538, and Hyman v Hyman [1929] AC 601. Thus, as Mr Pointer observes, as early as 1864 it had been held in Rowley v Rowley (1864) 3 Sw......