HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.slavery/ssactsengr0793 and id is 1 raw text is: BUNBURY V. BUNBURY
[318] BUNBURY v. BUNBURY. April 25, 26, May 24, 29, 1839.
[S. C.; (affirmed on appeal) 8 L. J. Ch. (N. S.), 297; 3 Jur. 644. See Hope v.
Carnegie, 1866, L. R. 1 Ch. 324. Oakeley v. Ramsay, 1872, 27 L. T. 747. For
subsequent proceedings see S. C. 2 Beav. 173.]
An injunction granted, on terms, to restrain proceedings instituted in Demerara to
recover real estate there, and an order made for a consignee and manager of the
estate and produce; it appearing to the Court that there were many other questions
between the parties connected with the estate, which could be more conveniently
determined together in this country.
This was a motion for an injunction to restrain the Defendants, Hugh Mills
Bunbury, and Alfred Victor Count de Vigny and Lydia Jane his wife, from
prosecuting legal proceedings in the colony of Demerara, to recover possession of
certain estates or plantations there, and for a reference to the Master to appoint a
manager of the estate, and a consignee of the produce.
The case was, that Hugh Mills Bunbury, the testator in the cause, being an
English subject, about the year [319] 1788 went to the island of St. Vincent, an
English colony subject to the laws of England; and that, on the 6th of August 1791,
he there married Lydia Prisca Cox, also an English subject, and who became the
mother of the Defendants Hugh Mills Bunbury and Lydia Jane Countess de Vigny.
At the time of this marriage Demerara was a Dutch colony subject to the laws of
Holland; in the year 1796 it was captured from the Dutch, and soon afterwards
Mr. Bunbury, who obtained the office of ordnance storekeeper, went thither with his
wife and family, and he resided there under circumstances, which, as it was alleged, did
not vary his domicile, but left his character of a domiciled English subject unaltered.
Under these circumstances, and before the year 1799, he purchased a quantity of
bush land, which he brought into cultivation, and which now constituted the estates
or plantations in question in this cause, and were called the Devonshire and the
Devonshire Castle plantations. It was admitted, that in the absence of special
contract or special circumstances, the law of Holland conferred upon the wife a
community in the property of her husband; and that upon the death of the wife,
her share devolved upon her children.
Mrs. Bunbury died in Demerara in the year 1800, and the Defendants, Mr.
Bunbury and the Countess de Vigny as her children, now claimed to be entitled, to
that which they alleged to have been her share of this Demerara property, acquired
by Mr. Buubury during his marriage with her.
At the time of her death the children were infants, and notwithstanding their
alleged rights, Mr. Bunbury the father, as well whilst they were infants as after they
attained their respective majorities, managed and he continued to manage and deal
with the property as his own, till the time of his own death, which took place on
[320] the 2d November 1838. He resided in Demerara till the year 1812, when he
returned to England ; but he went to the colony on subsequent occasions, and resided
there for different periods of time. He died in England, and his domicile appeared
to have been always in England.
On the occasion of his marriage with Lydia Prisca Cox, a settlement was made,
whereby certain slaves were conveyed to trustees on trust for himself for life, with
remainder to his wife for life; with remainder to the children of the marriage, to be
equally divided between them at twenty-one or marriage. At the date of this settle-
ment, he held no land which was subject to the law of Holland, and no provision was
made for the event of his requiring any.
In the month of March 1822, Mr. Bunbury married Alicia Lillie, now his widow,
the Defendant Alicia Bunbury, and pursuant to articles made before the marriage,
he executed a settlement, dated the 29th day of March 1822, whereby he covenanted
to vest the two Demerara plantations in trustees, subject to certain mortgages, on
trust to pay his wife £500 for pin-money, and subject thereto, on trust for himself
for life; and then to raise the sum of £30,090, and secure a jointure of £2000 a year
for his widow, and subject thereto, to the issue of the marriage as therein mentioned.
I BEAV. 318.
963](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.slavery/ssactsengr0793&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)