The Earl of Northumberland v The Marquis of Granby
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1766 |
| Date | 01 January 1766 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 28 E.R. 774
HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
See Worthington v. Wiginton, 1855, 20 Beav. 82.
[489] The Earl of northumberland v. The Marquis of granby. [See.Worthingtonv. Wiginton, 1855, 20Beav. 82.] Where testator gave to his son for his life the interest of a mortgage upon an estate, of which he was tenant for life in remainder at testator's death, and also the furniture in, certain houses, upon condition of his executing a release of all claims he might have upon testator's estate, and of his not contesting the will: though the son lived four teen months after the father's death without executing a release, and upon his first hearing the will, had expressed his. dissatisfaction, and an intention of filing a bill; yet the circumstance of his never having paid any interest on the mortgage, of his having entered into possession of the furniture, and exercised acts of ownership, together with certain expressions of assent in his letters, were .held to be evidence of his acceptance.-16th, 17th, 18th, and 20th June 1760.-S-. G-. Amb. 540. '(Note:. The statement of facts is taken from the .entry in the Register's book of this cause on the rehearing, A. 1767, fol. 187.) . - By the marriage settlement of Charles, Duke of Somerset, bearing date the 30th of January 1687, the estates of the Duchess of Somerset were (int. al.) limited to trustees lEDEN, 490, NORTHUMBERLAND (EARL OP) V. GRANBY (MARQUIS of) 775 for a term of 500 years upon trust, if the said Duchess should die before the Duke, leaving issue male by him., to permit the heir male of the marriage to receive, during the Duke's life, from the time of his attaining the age of twenty-one years, the yearly sum of £3000 for maintenance, clear of all deductions. By indenture, bearing date the 4th of June 1707, it was agreed, that if the Duke should die in the lifetime of the Duchess, that then Algernon, Earl of Hertford (the eldest son of the said marriage), should, during the lifetime of the Duchess, receive the yearly sum of £3000, until some estate of the yearly value of £3000 above all reprises (public taxes only excepted), should be settled on him for life in possession. By an indenture, bearing date the 4th of July 1715, made on the marriage of Algernon, Earl of Hertford, [490] part of the Duke's paternal estate in Wiltshire, of the annual value of £1788, was limited to Lord Hertford in possession, and other part of the Duke's estates, subjected with an annuity of £1000 to him for life; with a declaration that the several lands and premises thereby provided for Lord Hertford for life in possession, were intended to be and accepted in discharge of only £2500 per annum, part of the £3000 per annum, provided by the first settlement. Duke Charles had issue by Elizabeth, his first Duchess, only one son, who survived him or had issue, the said Algernon, Earl of Hertford (afterwards Duke of Somerset), and only one daughter, ;who had issue, viz. Catherine, the wife of Sir William Windham, who had issue Charles, late Earl of Egremont. The Duchess died on the 10th of November 1722, from which time this annuity of £3000 per annum commenced. His Grace, by his second wife Charlotte, Duchess of Somerset, had issue two daughters, Frances, afterwards Marchioness of Granby, and Charlotte, afterwards Countess of Aylesford. By his will, bearing date the 5th of July 1748, reciting, that he had by the several indentures therein mentioned, conveyed and settled the manors, &c., therein mentioned, to the use of his said two daughters in manner therein mentioned ; he by his said will confirmed the said indentures, and thereby willed, that the said several estates should be held and enjoyed accordingly, to the purport and intent of the said several deeds. He further devised all other his manors, &c., in the said several counties therein mentioned to trustees and their heirs in trust, for and subject to the same uses, trusts, limitations and conditions as were expressed in a certain indenture of release, bearing date the 21st of February 1732 ; and also reciting, that by virtue of the [491] several powers contained or expressed in the several settlements upon or since the said testator's marriage, several sums therein mentioned, amounting in the whole to the sum of £35,000, had been raised by way of mortgage on part of the manors, &c., which were to remain and come after his death to his son, the said Algernon, Earl of Hertford; all which said sums had been since paid off by him, and the mortgages for the same had been assigned over to trustees for his, the said testator's, own sole use and benefit, and remained as part of his own personal estate ; but that he, being minded that the estates on which the said sums had been charged should remain and come to the said Algernon, Earl of Hertford, discharged from all the said incumbrances, and being also desirous that peace, good harmony, and friendship might be preserved between the said Algernon, Earl of Hertford, and his said two sisters ; and also out of his paternal affection for his said son, and regard for those who should be entitled after him in remainder, the said testator thereby gave, demised, and remitted to him, the said Algernon, Earl of Hertford, all the said several sums...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Dillon v Parker
...171). Earl of Northumberland v. Earl of Aylesford (Amb. 540. G57. S. C. under the title of Earl of Northumberland v. Marquess of Granby, 1 Eden, 489). Stratford v. Powell (1 Ball & Beat. 2,'i, 24). In this instance compensation is impracticable ; the parties cannot be placed in statu, quo ;......
-
Thornton v Thornton
...THORNTON and THORNTON. Messenger v. Andrews 4 Rus. 478. Marquis v. GranbyENR Ambl. 54; S. C., 1 Eden, 489. Usticke v. PetersENR 4 K. & J. 453. Lord Randeliff v. Perkins 6 Dow. P. C. 140. Dillon v. Parker 1 Swanst. 82. Dummer v. PitcherENR 5 Sim. 35. Cosby v. Lord AshtownUNK 10 Ir. Ch. Rep. ......