With regard to leaseholds, however, it was held (i), that the liability to pay rent and perform covenants undertaken by the assignee was sufficient consideration to prevent the settlor from availing himself of the provisions of 27 Eliz. c. 4, although it is insufficient to support a settlement in case of bankruptcy. Moreover, it was held (k), that if the trustees of a voluntary settlement sold the property to a purchaser for value, the settlement was confirmed, and could not subsequently be overridden by the settlor. Nor could a settlement be defeated under the Act after the death of the settlor.

By the Voluntary Conveyances Act, 1893 (1), it is enacted that no voluntary conveyance, if in fact made bonâ fide, shall hereafter be deemed fraudulent within the meaning of 27 Eliz. c. 4, by reason of any subsequent purchase for value. By s. 3 an exception is made with regard to sales by voluntary settlors before June 29th, 1893. If, however, the title deeds are in the hands of the voluntary donee, and he is in possession of the property, it may now be fairly assumed that there is no purchaser who claims under an assurance by the settlor made before the Voluntary Conveyances Act; although the right of such purchaser being legal and not equitable, it is assumed that laches would be no defence to an action by him (m).

(i) Price v. Jenkins (1877), 5 Ch. D. 619.
(k) Prodgers v. Langham (1662), 1 Sid. 133.

(7) 56 & 57 Vict. c. 21, s. 2.

(m) Noyes v. Paterson, [1894] 3 Ch. 270; Re Maddever (1884), 27 Ch. D. 523.

INVALIDITY OF VOLUNTARY COVENANT TO MAKE A
SETTLEMENT.

Voluntary Covenants.-A voluntary settlement, to be effectual, must be complete, and not rest in contract, for a mere agreement to do an act not supported by valuable consideration, cannot be specifically enforced (n), even though it be under seal (o). At law a contract under seal requires no consideration, but in equity a voluntary covenant, e.g., a covenant in a voluntary settlement to settle after-acquired property (p), will not be enforced, and does not create any equitable estate. A voluntary settlement is effectual if the settlor has done everything in his power to make a legal transfer of the property, or if he has declared himself to be a trustee of the property for the cestuis que trust. It was, however, held in one case, which has since been doubted (q), that a covenant by a widow on her second marriage to settle property for the benefit of her children by a former marriage, if made pursuant to an agreement between her and her intended husband, will be enforced at the suit of the children (r).

It is now well settled that a voluntary deed, purporting to be a complete transfer of property, but not effectual as such, will not be construed as a declaration

(n) Pownall v. Anderson (1856), 2 Jur. (N.s.) 857; Antrobus v. Smith (1806), 12 Ves. 39.

(0) Re Earl of Lucan (1890), 45 Ch. D. 470.

(p) Wilkinson v. Wilkinson (1858), 4 Jur. (N.s.) 47.
(q) See Att.-Gen. v. Jacobs Smith, [1895] 2 Q. B. 349.
(r) Gale v. Gale (1877), 6 Ch. D. 144.

of trust so as to be binding in equity (s). On the other hand, a voluntary settlement effected by a complete conveyance of land to trustees is not rendered inoperative by the disclaimer of the trustees and consequent revesting of the estate in the settlor (t); although a settlor or his representatives cannot be compelled under the voluntary settlement to do any further act to render it binding (u). It has, however, been held, in a case in which a voluntary deed contained a covenant for further assurance, and the estate of the settlor was administered in the Court of Chancery after his death, that the volunteer was entitled to damages out of the estate for breach of the covenant (x).

SECTION 9.

RENT-CHARGES AND LAND TAX.

Rent Charges created by Deed.-A rent-charge arises on a grant by one person to another of an annual sum of money payable out of certain lands in which the grantor may have any estate (y). A rentcharge issuing out of a term of years is a chattel interest (z). Section 44 of the Conveyancing Act, 1881, confers certain remedies on the owner of a

(s) Richards v. Delbridge (1874), L. R. 18 Eq. 11; Lewin Trusts, 73.

(t) Mallott v. Wilson, [1903] 2 Ch. 494.

(u) Dening v. Ware (1856), 22 Beav. 184; Heartley v. Nicholson (1875), L. R. 19 Eq. 233.

(x) Cox v. Barnard (1850), 8 Hare, 310.

(y) Williams, Real Property, 20th ed., 418.

(z) Re Fraser, [1904] 1 Ch. 726.

rent-charge, whether charged on land or the income thereof, viz.:

(1) A power of distress when the rent is in arrear for twenty-one days.

(2) A right of entry when the rent is in arrear for forty days.

(3) Power in a like case to demise the land for a

term of years to a trustee upon trust to raise

the arrears by mortgage, sale or demise (a). In addition to these statutory remedies the owner of a rent-charge may sue the terre-tenant for debt (b), even in the absence of an express contract to pay the rent (c), and notwithstanding that the profits of the land fall short of the amount of the annual charge (d). The expression terre-tenant means the person in possession of the land subject to the charge as tenant in fee, and does not include a tenant for years (e). When a rent-charge, charged on the fee simple of real estate, is in arrear, the court has power to order the arrears to be raised by sale or mortgage of the estate (ƒ) ; but if the rent-charge is secured by a term of years, the owner of the rent-charge is not entitled to an order for the sale of the fee simple ().

(a) These provisions now apply to improvement rent-charges (see Improvement of Land Act, 1899, s. 3), and rent-charges created on enfranchisement of Copyholds (Copyhold Act, 1894, s. 27).

(b) Thomas v. Sylvester (1873), L. R. 8 Q. B. 368.

(c) Ex parte Graham (1889), 42 Ch. D. 343; Searle v. Cooke (1890), 43 Ch. D. 532.

(d) Pertwee v. Townsend, [1896] 2 Q. B. 129.

(e) Re Herbage Rents, [1896] 2 Ch. 811.

(f) Re Tucker, [1893] 2 Ch. 323.

(g) Blackburne v. Hope-Edwards, [1901] 1 Ch. 419.

Tithe Rent-charge. By the Tithe Commutation Act, 1836 (h), the payment of tithe was abolished, and the payment of a sum in the nature of a rentcharge substituted, varying with the price of wheat, barley and oats, and calculated on on a septennial average. Tithe rent-charge is now payable by the owner, and not by the occupier of the land charged (i), and the only means of recovering it is to apply to the county court, when the rent is three months in arrear, and obtain an order for a receiver, or in case the land. is in hand, for a distress by an officer of the court (k).

Redemption of Rent-charges.-Rent-charges may be redeemed by application to the Board of Agriculture under s. 45 of the Conveyancing Act, 1881, but this section does not apply to tithe-rent charge or to a rent-charge reserved on a sale or lease. A tithe rent-charge may be redeemed in certain cases. at twenty-five years' purchase by application to the Board of Agriculture under the Tithe Commutation Act, 1878 (1).

Land Tax.-Land tax was originally an annual impost only. In the year 1798 an apportionment of land tax was made by the commissioners under the Land Tax Act of 1797 (m), and the amount then

(h) 6 & 7 Will. 4, c. 71.

(i) See Tithe Act, 1891 (54 Vict. c. 8), s. 1. An agreement by the tenant to pay tithe rent-charge is void (Ludlow v. Pike, [1904] 1 K. B. 531).

(k) Ibid., s. 2.

(7) 41 & 42 Vict. c. 42, ss. 1-5; see also ss. 20, 31-39 of the Act of 1860 (23 & 24 Vict. c. 93).

(m) 38 Geo. 3, c. 5.