Sprange against Barnard and Others
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 04 May 1789 |
| Date | 04 May 1789 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 29 E.R. 320
HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
[585] easter term, 29 gteo. 3, 1789. sprange against barnard and Others. Bolls, [BOth April and] tth May [1789]. Wife, having a power to dispose by will, signed and sealed by her, of 300 in the hands of trustees, having made a will agreeable to the power, afterwards makes a testamentary paper, by which she gives it to her husband; but so much as shall be remaining at his death, &c., to her brother and sisters, s This paper is not sealed [found annexed to the will by a wafer, and is] on a stamp. His Honor held [the annexation by the wafer immaterial, and that] the stamp was equivalent to a seal. (Note: Lord Bedesdale questions this part of the decision, on the reasons given, referring to M'Adam v. Logan, 3 Bro. 0. G. 310 ; Mr. Sugden also thinks the decision wrong. Sugden on Powers, 226, 227.) Secondly, that it vested absolutely in her husband, and it was decreed to be paid to him, the property not being sufficiently certain to raise a trust. (S. P. Wynne v. Hawkins, 1 Bro. C. 0. 179, and the cases in'the Editor's notes, f See also Harland v. Trigg, ibid. 142.) By settlement, dated 29th March 1787, made previous to the marriage of the plaintiff with Susannah Crapps his late wife, reciting that Susannah Crapps was intitled to 300 new South Sea annuities, the same were agreed to be transferred to trustees upon trust, int. al. that they should transfer the said 300 stock, or any part thereof, to such person or persons, and for such uses and purposes as she, the said Susannah Crapps from time to time, notwithstanding her coverture, and whether she should be 2 BRO. C.-C. 586. SPEANGB V. BARNARD " 321 or married, by an}7 writing or writings, under Tier hand and seal, attested by two or more credible witnesses, or, by her last willfand testament, in writing, or any writing purporting her last will and testament, to be by her signed, sealed and-published in the presence of the like number of witnesses, should direct, limit, or appoint; and, in default of such direction, &c., intrust for the said Susannah Crapps, her executors and administrators. The marriage took effect, and Susannah Sprange made a will in writing, dated the 27th of September 1787, which was signed, sealed and published by her, and attested by two witnesses (agreeable to the power reserved by the settlement) and reciting the indenture and. power thereby reserved, directed the trustee to pay the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- MPLM Muthiah Chettiar, Re; ex parte SPN Ramanathan Chettiar
-
Marian Louise Norford (Administratrix of the Estate of Mabel Norford, deceased Claimant v St Christopher-Nevis-Anguilla National Bank Ltd Defendant [ECSC]
...to the account. 24 To support his position that there is no certainty of subject matter, Mr Butler relies on two cases includingSprange v Barnard 1789, in 2 Bro. C.C. 585. In that case, a testatrix by her Will left £350.00 to her husband for his sole use, and at his death, the remaining par......