and mortgages had been satisfied. Clifford v. Arundell, 27 Beav. 209.

not subject to the condition of widowhood. May v. May, 19 W. R. 432.

Annuity to Son till Death of Mother.]-A testator bequeathed to his son an annuity of 407. from the period of his majority to the death or second marriage of the testator's wife. The son attained twenty-one, and died before the widow:

the son was entitled to the annuity until the death or second marriage of the widow. Ord, In re, Dickinson v. Dickinson, 12 Ch. D. 22; 41 L. T. 13.

Annuitant a Lunatic-"Divide."]-A testator bequeathed his real and personal estate in trust to pay, for the benefit of his son (a lunatic), an annuity until he should be able to manage his affairs, and if he ever returned to a sound mind, then he directed he should "divide" his residuary-Held, that the legal personal representative of estate with his sister. The testator then gave the whole residue to his daughter :-Held, that the daughter took the whole, subject to the annuity and to the contingency; but that if the son recovered he would be entitled to one-half of the capital, and to one-half of the income from To Son's Wife till Second Marriage-Divorce.] the testator's death. Hole v. Davies, 34 Beav.-A testator, by will, made before the Divorce 345. Act, 1857, vested property in trustees, to pay an annuity to his son G. and E., his (the son's) wife, jointly, and also to pay to the wife, if she survived, 50l. annually, so long as she continued unmarried; but if G. survived, to pay him 1007. annually. G. was divorced from E. on account of her adultery :-Held, that G. was entitled to the whole annuity. Knox v. Wells, 34 L. J., Ch. 150; 11 L. T. 666.

Direction to trustees to apply such annual sum at their discretion for the maintenance and support of his wife during her life, as, together with the income to which she was entitled in her own right, should not exceed 500l. per annum. The wife was of unsound mind, but afterwards recovered :-Held, that the discretion referred to the application, and not to the amount; and that the widow was entitled to have her income made up to 500l. a year out of the testator's estate. Bullock v. Bullock, 34 Beav. 85; 11 Jur. (N.S.) 29; 11 L. T. 561; 13 W. R. 212.

To Wife if Separated from Husband.]-A bequest of an annuity to a married woman, in the event of the death of, or her separation from, her present husband. She was separated from him by reason of his infirmity :-Held, that she was entitled to the annuity. Bedborough v. Bedborough, 34 Beav. 286.

Annuity while Persons Live Together-Death.] -A husband bequeathed the income of 8,000l. to his wife during widowhood. By a codicil he gave her an annuity of 1001. during her life, so long as she and his son should live together; but if they should cease to reside together the annuity was To Woman while Unmarried.]-Testator to cease. The son died in the widow's lifetime, directed that if K. should be living and unhaving lived with her till his death :-Held, that married at the decease of B., his executors should the annuity did not cease upon his death. Sut-pay to her, during her natural life, if she should cliffe v. Richardson, 41 L. J., Ch. 552; L. R. 13 Eq. 606; 26 L. T. 495; 20 W. R. 505.

so long remain sole and unmarried, an annuity of 301. K. survived B., and afterwards married: -Held, that the annuity ceased upon her marriage. Heath v. Lewis, 22 L. J., Ch. 721; 17

Jur. 443.

Cesser-Assignment or Bankruptcy.]-A testator directed his executors, after the death of his wife, to invest one-sixth of his residuary estate in the purchase of an annuity during the Determination on Marriage - Consent.]-A life of P., for his support and maintenance; and testator bequeathed an annuity of 1007. a year to in case P. should anticipate, assign, charge, or his daughter A., and to four other daughters, incumber the annuity, or become a bankrupt or annuities of 501. each, after their mother's deinsolvent, the testator directed that the annuity cease; when, if A. was unmarried, he left her, should go to his other residuary legatees. after her mother's death, an annuity of 500l. died in the lifetime of the testator's widow, with-in addition to the 100l. per annum; and if A. out having forfeited the annuity :-Held, that there was an intestacy as to the one-sixth of the residuary estate after the death of the widow. Power v. Hayne, L. R. 8 Eq. 262; 17 W. R. 782.

P.

Second Marriage.]-A bequest of annuity for life, or until bankruptcy or insolvency, and after his decease, bankruptcy, or insolvency, to be paid to his wife during his life and his wife's, and the survivor of them; and in case either of them should attempt to alienate the annuity, the trustees to apply it towards the support of the children. The first wife, to whom he was married before the date of the will, survived the testator, and the gift of the annuity was held not to extend to the widow who was his second wife. Boreham v. Bignall, 8 Hare, 131; 19 L. J., Ch. 461; 14 Jur. 265.

annum.

married, she was not to have more than 1007. per And if his other daughters were unmarried at their mother's decease, and his daughter A. was married, each was to have 1007. a year in addition to the 50l. per annum ; and should any of the daughters marry without their mother's consent, or their brothers after her decease, any so doing should have but an annuity of 50%. during her life. The testator's wife died before him.

At his death, A. and another daughter, E., were unmarried :-Held, that after the determination of the annuity of 5007. by the marriage of A., E. was entitled to the annuity of 100l., and that it did not determine on her marriage with the consent of her brother. Newcomen, In re, 16 Ir. Ch. R. 315.

Annuitants. - Reversion

to

of Failure A testator gave his wife an annuity during her widowhood. Afterwards, by a codicil, he Grantor.]-A., possessed of an annuity, by gave her, in addition to all other provisions, marriage articles covenants to pay it to the an annuity of 8001. for her life, for her sole and wife for her separate use, and then to the separate use. After his death, the widow married survivor of husband and wife for life, and after .again-Held, that the gift in the codicil was to the children of the marriage, and if no child.

immediate annuity of 307. left by my will to" on the 1,000l. in substitution. Adnam v. Cole, 6 A., "to an annuity of 50%." -Held, that he took Beav. 353. an annuity of 501. in addition to the 40l. Ives v. Dodgson, 39 L. J., Ch. 693; L. R. 9 Eq. 401; 23

Equal Amounts.]-Two annuities of equal amount in the same will to the same person, held not to be cumulative. Holford v. Wood, 4 Ves. 76.

During Life or till Marriage.]-Testator, after devising his real estate to T., bequeathed to E., to be paid out of the rents and profits of the said real estate, 2501. per annum, and to live free from rent in his house in H., with the use of household furniture, plate, &c., farming utensils, and stock, for her sole use during her natural life, or so long as she shall remain unmarried; in either event, then to go to T., but should she marry, the executors should pay her 1007. per annum for her own use during her natural life, out of the said rents and profits. E. married in the testator's lifetime:-Held, that the annuities of 2501. per annum and 1007, were not cumulative. Andrew v. Andrew, 1 Coll. 690.

Grant in Lifetime.]-Annuities of 9007. and 5007. respectively by a testator not a satisfaction of annuities of 3001, each granted in his lifetime for valuable consideration. Hales v. Darell, 3 Beav. 324; 10 L. J., Ch. 10.

Annuity during Widowhood.]-A testator, on the marriage of his son, covenanted to pay an annuity to his daughter-in-law, if she survived his son, durante viduitate. By his will he bequeathed to her an annuity of the same amount, but which differed in several respects :-Held, not a satisfaction. Charlton v. West, 30 Beav. 124.

Restraint on Anticipation.]-A father on his daughter's marriage covenanted to pay, during her life, an annuity of 3001. for her separate use, with a clause against anticipation; and by will gave to her a rent-charge of 400l. a year for her separate use, without restraint on anticipation:Held, upon the general tone of the will, that the annuity given by the will was in addition to the annuities given by the settlement. Paget v. Grenfell, L. R. 6 Eq. 7; 16 W. R. 820.

Annuity Payable Half-Yearly.]-A testator who had for valuable consideration covenanted by bond to pay an annuity of 10l. to H. "so long as she should continue the widow of D.," by equal Settlement-Annuity to Bar Dower.]-Settle-half-yearly payments, by his will bequeathed to ment of annuities issuing out of lands upon trust her "an annuity of 30%. if she should so long for the husband for life, and after his decease for continue a widow"-Held, that as the annuity the children as the husband or wife should bequeathed by the will would not become payappoint; and, in default of appointment, equally; able until a year after the testator's death, while and in case the wife should survive the husband, that secured by the bond was payable half-yearly, and there should not be any issue then living, to the one was not in satisfaction of the other. permit her, during her life, to receive the said Dowse, In re, Dowse v. Glass, 50 L. J., Ch. 285; annuities, with power to distrain for same: pro- 29 W. R. 563. vided, that if the wife should survive, and there should be children living at his death, then that the trustees should pay her during her life, out of all the lands, an annuity of 150l. in bar of dower; with power to distrain for same-Held, that the annuity of 150l. was in addition to the annuities granted to the trustees, and was not payable out of those annuities. Blair v. Nugent,

3 Jo. & Lat. 668.

Increase on Determination of Life Interest.]Annuity of 8007. to the testator's wife, followed by an annuity of 2007. to the testator's daughter, and subsequent direction in the same instrument, that, at the death of the testator's wife, the daughter was to have 4007. a year:-Held, that the annuity of 4007., given to the daughter, was in substitution for the 2001. Yockney v. Hansard, 3 Hare, 620; 8 Jur. 822.

Gift of Dividends.] - Gift of residue to pay income to widow for life, subject to the payment thereout of an annuity of 10l. to A. for his life. After the decease of his widow, a gift of the dividends of 1,000l. stock to A. for life :-Held, that the annuity to A. ceased upon the death of the widow, and that A. then took the dividends

VOL. T.

Covenant in

Different Dates of Payment.] separation deed to pay wife an annuity of 521. per annum, on the 1st May, the 1st August, the 1st November, and the 1st February. He afterwards devised specific real estate, upon trust, out of the rents, to pay his wife 521. per annum, on the 1st February, the 1st May, the 1st August, and the 1st November in each year :-Held, that the annuity given by the will was a satisfaction of the debt created by the deed of separation. Atkinson v. Littlewood, L. R. 18 Eq. 595; 31

L. T. 225.

A testatrix devises leaseholds to A., subject to the yearly sum of 127. for B., to be paid halfyearly, on the 27th January and 27th July; afterwards A. devises to R. all his lands, paying B. 12. by half-yearly payments, on the 27th January and the 27th July: B. is entitled to a second annuity in addition to the annuity given her by the will of the testatrix. Bartlett v. Gillard, 3 Russ. 149; 6 L. J., Ch. 19.

Two Deeds.]-By a deed life annuities were granted to seven persons, from the death of the grantor, and secured on land, the annuities to

8

that the court would act upon the estates, and not merely against A. personally. Wellesley v. Wellesley, 10 Sim. 256; 4 Myl. & C. 561; 9 Ľ. J., Ch. 21; 7 Jur. 2.

married women being limited to their separate become entitled to real estates, and to money use. By a deed more than twelve years after-charged on real estate, and had also a power of wards the grantor gave to five of the annuitants jointuring; and that the trustees were raising life annuities of smaller amount, to commence money upon it for A.; and charging that the from the same period, but not secured on land, property was acquired to enable A. to perform nor given to the separate use of the grantees, and his agreement, and that A. had no other property determinable on a contingency. The grantor on which he could charge the annuity-Held, stood in loco parentis to four of the five grantees in the second deed. The first deed was subject to a power of revocation; the second deed did not refer to the first deed, nor profess to exercise this power-Held, that the fact that the second deed did not exercise the power of revocation, and the differences between the two instruments, shewed an intention not to make the provisions of the second deed substitutionary for those of the former. Palmer v. Newell, 20 Beav. 32; 8 De G. M. & G. 74; 25 L. J., Ch. 461; 2 Jur. (N.S.) 268.

To Debtor.]-An annuity given by testator to lus debtor shall not be withheld to discharge the debt, for it is extinguished by the devise. Gould v. Adams, Vern. & S. 258.

4. ON WHAT PROPERTY CHARGEABLE.

Lien.] Grant of a rent-charge or annuity not naming any lands, but covenanting that the arrear shall be recoverable from the estate real and personal of grantor, with a letter written pending the treaty by grantor to grantee, specifying certain lands, constitutes a specific lien on the lands so named, and if by any undisclosed incumbrance the annuitant was shut out of those lands, the court would lay its hands on any other lands of the grantor. Watson v. Sadleir, 1 Moll. 585.

An annuity granted by a feme covert, having a power to dispose of her separate estates to A., is a specific lien on the grantor's estates. Power v. Bailey, 1 Ball & B. 49.

Notice.]-Covenant to set apart and pay annual profits of land is, in equity, a lien on the land against the covenantor, and claimant under him with notice. Legard v. Hodges, 1 Ves. J. 477; 4 Bro. C. C. 421.

Deficiency of Estate Charged.]-Real and personal estate, whereon annuity was chargeable, which husband had covenanted to convey, not being sufficient, his personal estate to make up deficiency. Matthews v. Matthews,

Dick, 470.

An annuity provided by marriage articles to be paid to the wife, if she survived, out of the husband's real estate; if that fund fail, decreed a charge upon his personal property. Griffith v. Anvil, Colles P. C. 52.

Payment out of Rents.]-Bequest of an annuity, to be paid out of rents of realty devised by the will-Held, not charged exclusively on the realty, but that the rents being insufficient, it was payable out of the personalty. Paget v. Hurst, 9 Jur. (N.S.) 906; 8 L. T. 445.

Separation Deed-Covenant to Charge Lands.] -By articles of separation, A. covenanted to secure, by a fixed day, either by a charge on real estate, or by the investment of an adequate sum in the funds, the payment of an annuity for his wife. To a bill by his wife stating that A. had

Annuity Void-Arrears.]-Where an annuity secured by a rent-charge was void, the arrears of the rent-charge in court were paid to the original grantee; and the annuitant was held not that fund, there being only a general debt at law, entitled to have the consideration repaid out of and no lien. Bolton (Duke) v. Williams, 2 Ves. J. 138; 4 Bro. C. C. 297; 7 R. R. 285, 286.

Devise of Lands Charged.]-Devise of lands charged with an annuity, and afterwards by codicil devise of part of these lands to other party confirming the annuity to the wife :Held, that she ought not to be restrained from resorting to this part of the lands for her annuity. Reeves v. Newenham, 2 Ridgw. 11; Vern. & S. 482.

How Charged on Land.]-S. being seised of lands for lives, subject to rent, devised the lands to his wife for life, "my said wife permitting R. to receive 301. a year thereout, during her natural life, she paying the rent reserved while she shall possess the same":-Held, that R. took the annuity for the term of her own life, and that same was charged upon the lands for that period. Benwell v. Clancy, 2 Jones, 338.

Debt.]-Upon the construction of will: -Held that an annuity was charged as a "debt" upon real estate in exoneration of personalty. Moneypenny v. Mascall, 2 Colly. 213.

Leaseholds-New Lease.]-Freeholds and leaseholds for years determinable on lives charged by will with an annuity, and in case the leasehold expired before the annuity, the proportion of the annuity charged on the leasehold should thenceforth issue out of a designated freehold estate. The legatee of the leasehold surrendered the lease, and took a new one determinable on different lives-Held, that on the death of the last cestui que vie in the surrendered lease the leasehold ceased to be charged with the annuity, and the part apportioned to the leasehold became charged on the freehold. Kempe v. Kempe, 5

De G. M. & G. 346.

obtained by the executors. Stubbs v. Roth, 2 mencing" I give and bequeath the several legaBall & B. 548.

cies and annual sums following," a testatrix bequeathed pecuniary legacies and an annuity, and directed two sums to be set apart to produce two specified annual sums, which the testator bequeathed to persons for their lives. She gave the residue of her personal estate, sub

Mistake by Testator.]—A testator gave his real estate upon trust to pay A. 128. per week. The testator had no freehold estate, but he had leaseholds for a long term, which he always believed to be of freehold tenure :- Held, that the lease-ject to the payment of her debts, funeral and holds were charged with the weekly payment. Gully v. Davis, 39 L. J., Ch. 684; L. R. 10 Eq. 562; 19 W. R. 265.

A testator charged all the moneys standing in his name in the public funds with the pay ment of an annuity. Though he had no money standing in his own name :-Held, that funds standing in the names of trustees in which he was interested were charged with the annuity. Quennell v. Turner, 13 Beav. 240; 20 L. J., Ch.

237; 15 Jur. 547.

Whether "Legacy" Includes Annuity.]-A testator bequeathed an annuity to B., charged on his lands of P.; he then bequeathed pecuniary legacies, and directed his legacies to be paid out of his personal estate; and if it should be inadequate, then out of the profits of his lands :Held, that, according to the context, the word "legacies" did not include the word "annuity." Weldon v. Bradshaw, Ir. R. 7 Eq. 168.

Testator bequeathed several annuities and pecuniary legacies, directing the legacies to be paid within twelve calendar months after his death. He then declared that the several annuities therein before bequeathed should be charged upon his real estates. He then charged his real estate with the payment of debts, funeral and testamentary expenses, and legacies, or of such part thereof as his personal estate not specifically bequeathed should be insufficient to pay-Held, that the annuities were primarily, if not solely, charged upon the testator's real estate; and that the term "legacies" did not comprise annuities. Shipperdson v. Tower, 1 Y. & C. C. C. 441; 6 Jur. 658.

Annuitant falls under general character of legatee, unless distinguished by testator; entitled, therefore, under a residuary bequest, in favour of legatees. Sibley v. Perry, 7 Ves. 522;

testamentary expenses, and the legacies and
annuities which she had bequeathed. And she
devised her real estates for a term, upon trust
to pay her debts, legacies, and funeral and
testamentary expenses-Held, that the sepa-
rate specification of "annuities" did not prevent
annuities from being comprehended under the
Heath v. Weston, 3
expression "legacies."
De G. M. & G. 601.

The word legacies, upon the whole construction-Held, not to include annuities. Cornfield v. Wyndham, 2 Colly. 184; 14 L. J., Ch. 375;

9 Jur. 651.

On the construction of a charge of legacies in a will annuities held not to be included. Shipperdson v. Tower, 1 Y. & C. C. C. 441; 6 Jur. 658.

A testator bequeathed life annuities and legacies of money and stock to persons, and legacies of stock to charities, and directed his residue, after payment of debts, life annuities, and the pecuniary legacies therein before given, to be accumulated during a term of two years or two lives in being, whichever should be the larger term, and then to be divided amongst the persons taking pecuniary legacies (under which denomination legacies of stock were intended to be included), under his will or any codicil thereto, rateably and in proportion to the amount in value of their respective original legacies, the legacies of stock being for that purpose estimated at par. By the original will annuitants were excluded from participation, and also representatives of legatees who might die before the period of distribution. By a codicil in the margin of the will this passage was struck through with a pen and the cancellation attested, one of the witnesses being a legatee who died before the period of distribution :-Held, that while the established rule of law declares that in the absence of evidence to the contrary "legacies" includes annuities, there was sufficient evidence of the testator's intention to exclude annuitants, and that the cancellation of the explanatory clause did not point to any Gaskin v. Rogers, L. R.

alteration of intention.

2 Eq. 284; 14 W. R. 707.

Real and personal estate given upon trust to pay the income to the wife for life, and within ten years from the death of the wife to sell and convert, and out of the income to pay annuities to several persons and classes of persons for the said term of ten years, with pecuniary legacies to the same persons and classes, and also to other persons, at the expiration of that time; and annuities to other persons for the lives of the annuitants, and specific legacies. The residue was then given to all and every the several legatees before named (with exceptions), in proportion to their respective legacies:-Held, that the "legatees before named" were the legatees taking benefits out of the fund which fell in at the wife's death, and the "legacies," such legacies as remained to be satisfied at the expiration of the ten years; that annuitants for life, not having other legacies, were legatees of shares in the residue; that the Decisions on Context.]-By a will com-specific legatees were entitled to share in the

6 R. R. 183.

Generally speaking, annuities are legacies, although a distinction is made between them in many cases, arising from the peculiar terms of the will. Ward v. Grey, 26 Beav. 485.

An annuity is included under the term legacy. Mullins v. Smith, 1 Dr. & Sm. 204.

8-2