2. Trustees who were directed to sell an estate as soon as conveniently might be after their testator's death, refused, by the desire of one of the parties interested, an offer of 6,600 7. for the estate, but they afterwards sold it for 3,600 7. The Court charged them with the loss, but gave them their costs as their conduct had not been wilful or perverse. [Taylor v. Tabrum] 281 3. Personal service of an order for payment of costs, by a plaintiff to a person not a party to the suit, will be dispensed with, where the plaintiff cannot be found. [Hunter v. -] 429 4. In a foreclosure suit, against an insolvent mortgagor and the provisional assignee of the Insolvent Court, who claims no interest, the plaintiff must pay the costs of the assignee and add them to his debt. [Weaving v. Count] 5. By the decree on further directions in a creditor's suit, the costs of all parties were directed to be taxed as between solicitor and client and paid out of a fund in Court. The fund proving insufficient to pay the 439 A vicar, whilst the 13 Elizabeth, e. 20, against charging benefices, was repealed, charged his living with an annuity, and covenanted if he should exchange his living, to secure the annuity by charging and demising the new living, and that, in the meantime, it should be charged with the annuity. He afterwards exchanged his living, but did not execute any deed until after the revival of the 13 Elizabeth. Held that the covenant was a subsisting charge on the new living, and a receiver was appointed to provide for the annuity. [Metcalfe v. The Archbishop of York] 2. 224 By the decree on further directions, in a creditor's suit, the costs of all A. being in possession of an estate under a decree in 1783, B. filed a bill against him to recover the estate, and brought a writ of right for the same purpose; A. then filed a cross bill against B., seeking for a discovery of matters relating to B.'s pedigree, and praying that B. might elect whether he would proceed at law or in equity, and that, if he elected the latter, that he might be perpetually restrained from proceeding at law to recover the estate. B. demurred, because the bill sought a discovery of matters constituting his case at law, and because the order for putting him to his election ought to be obtained on motion, and not at the hearing. Demurrer over-ruled. [Lowndes v. Davies] See CAUSE AND CROSS CAUSE. 468 CROSS-REMAINDERS. Testator devised an estate to A. for life, remainder to trustees to preserve, &c., remainder to all the children of A., as tenants in com mon, and not as joint tenants, and, for want of such issue, to B. for life, remainder to trustees to preserve, &c., remainder to all the children of B. as tenants in common, and not as joint tenants, and for want of such issue, to C. in Fee. Held that the children of A. took estates for life, with cross-remainders between them, for life, with remainder to B. for life, with remainder to her children, as tenants in common, with cross remainders between them for life, with remainder to C. in fee. [Ashley v. Ashley] 358 CUMULATIVE LEGACIES. Testator, by a will duly attested, gave legacies to various persons, charged upon his real and personal estates, and payable at the end of two years after his death, and he directed that, if his property should be more than sufficient to pay the legacies, they should be increased proportionably. By an unattested paper, purporting to be instructions for a will, but admitted to probate, the testator gave legacies to many of the legatees in the will, either individually or as members of a family; but the direc tions as to the time of payment and the increase of the legacies were omitted. Held that the legacies in the unattested paper were not substitutional for the legacies in the will, but cumulative. [Strong v. Ingram See CONSTRUCTION, 23–25. DEBTOR AND CREDITOR. 197 1. C. brought an action against F. in the Lord Mayor's Court, for the recovery of a debt and issued an attachment against B., who had in his hands funds belonging to F. W. filed a bill against C. B. and F., claiming a lien on the funds, and obtained an injunction ex parte, to restrain proceedings in the action. Whilst the injunction was in force, F. became bankrupt. Held that though C. might, but for the injunction, have sued out execution long before F. became bankrupt, yet that he was not entitled to be paid otherwise than rateably with the other creditors. [Ullock v. Barber.] 300 2. A debtor conveyed certain of his estates to trustees, in trust to raise a fund for payment of his creditors named in a schedule, and to raise an annual sum for his own benefit. Several of the creditors executed but the trustees the conveyance; did not sell the estates, the creditors having received sums in or towards satisfaction of their debts, out of other estates conveyed by the Α debtor upon the same trusts. judgment creditor, whose name was not mentioned in the schedule, filed his bill against the trustees of the firstmentioned estates and the debtor, stating as above, and that the trustees had entered into the receipt of the rents of those estates, the value of which greatly exceeded the scheduled debts, and praying that his debt might be raised and paid out of such parts of those estates as should not be sold for payment of the scheduled debts, and that an account might be taken of the receipts and payments of the trustees, 4. 3. Injunction granted to restrain the goods of a partnership from being taken in execution for a debt due from one of the partners, who died before the writ was delivered to the sheriff. [Newell v. Townsend] 419 A. made a voluntary assignment of a sum of money, being, at the time, indebted to B. on balance of a running account. A. afterwards made payments to B., exceeding in amount the balance due at the date of the assignment; but the balance continually increased. The assignment was set aside at the suit of B. [Whittington v. Jennings] 493 See CREDITOR'S SUIT.-DEED 3. ESCROW.-INFANT, 2. DEBTS. See WILL, 13. DEBTS AND LEGACIES. DECREE. A testator devised his real estates to trustees, in trust to dispose of the rents for the benefit of the poor of the city of R. and the limits and precincts thereof. The trustees having applied the rents for the benefit of the poor of one only of the parishes in the city, an information was filed, on behalf of two other parishes, claiming to participate in the charity, and a decree was made, in 1680, directing that the rents should, for ever thereafter, be divided amongst the three parishes in certain proportions. In 1808, an information was filed, on behalf of a fourth parish, for a similar purpose; and that parish was decreed to be entitled to a share of the rents, in proportion of its extent and population to the extent and population of the three other parishes; but the proportions, as between those parishes, were not to be altered. An information was afterwards filed on behalf of one of those three parishes, claiming an increased share of the rents, on account of its population having increased more than the population of the other parishes. But the information was dismissed, the decree of 1680 being final. [Attorney General v. The Mayor of Rochester] 273 2. In a suit by a husband against his wife and children (whom he had deserted) respecting the wife's share in an intestate's estate, the decree referred it to the Master to approve of a proper settlement on the wife, with liberty to all parties to lay proposals before the Master. Before the report was made the wife died. Held that the children were entitled to the benefit of the decree. [Groves v. Perkins] See DEMURRER OF PAROL.-PLEA AND PLEADING, 5.-PRACTICE, 10, 18. DEED. 584 1. A. having received monies belonging to B. privately, and without any 2. By a marriage settlement estates were limited to the wife and the husband, for their lives, with remainder to the heirs of the body of the husband on the body of the wife, and their heirs, and, if more children than one equally to be divided among them as tenants in common; and, for default of such issue, to the wife and her heirs. Held that the husband did not take an estate in tail special, but for life only, and that the children took, by purchase as tenants in common in fee in remainder. [North v. Martin] 266 3. A. assigned 8007. to trustees in 4. A wife, who had been deserted by or sums before mentioned, by mort- |