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/ssactsengr0654 and id is 1 raw text is: 21.8 WATSON V. LINCOLN (EARL OF) AMD. 325.
the life to be a good one '1 2dly, Whether he knew it to be a bad life 7 and, 3dly,
Whether it was a bad life, though not known to Sir Crisp Gascoigne to be so 7
With great respect to the knowledge of the Judge, I think the last part was going
too far ; for though where a man affirms a thing to be so, which is otherwise, it is a
falsity and fraud in him, whether he knew it or not ; yet that must be understood
with a distinction : Where the affirmation is of a fact which is in itself certain, as of the
loss or missing of a ship, or that such a farm is let at so much, it is so ; but where it is
a matter of opinion, as of the state of health of any person, or of the value of a farm
that is unlet, it is not so. And it is impossible to say upon what the Jury founded their
verdict in this case. But I go still further: This Court has frequently granted new
trials, merely because the inheritance was to be bound by it (V. Harder v. Sise, cited
2 Vern. 285, in which there were five trials. Stace v. Mabbot, 2 Ves. 553). It is true,
that so much regard is not paid to personal property. But in this case, a gentleman's
character is at stake.
Therefore let there be a new trial, on the defendant's paying the costs.
(Note: The motion was on the ground that though the verdict was found for Sir
B. Cleve, yet that the weight of evidence was on the side of Sir Crisp Gascoigne, and that
G. L. a very material witness, could not attend the trial, by reason of illness, but was
now recovered, and able to give evidence, at any future trial. Lib. Reg.)
[325] Case 170.-WASON and his WIFE and Others against Earl LINCOLN
and Others. 9th and 13th August 1756.
Advancement of portion on marriage of a daughter, and said to be in full of her portion
or fortune, what provisions it extends to. [A provision by will by a father to a child
is adeemed by a subsequent portion given by the father in his life-time.(]) The Court
leans against double portions. (See Bellasis v. Uthwatt, 1 Atk. 427. Clark v.
Sewell, 3 Atk. 98. Warren v. Warren, 1 Bro. C. C. 308.) (This case is frequently
cited under the title of Pelham v. Lord Lincoln.)-Lib. Reg. 1755, B. fo. 512.
In the marriage settlement of Henry Pelham, deceased, in 1726, a term was created,
to raise £10,000 for portions for daughters of the marriage, in case of failure of issue-
male; provided, if he should in his life-time give any of the portions thereby appointed
to be raised, for or towards the preferment of any of his daughters in marriage or
otherwise; or if there should on his death come or descend on them any lands or
tenements from him ; then such sums, and the value of such lands, should be deemed
as part of the portions, unless Pelham should declare the contrary.
By a settlement made by the Duke of Newcastle in 1741, inter alia, a term was
created on the Nottinghamshire estate, to raise £10,000 to such younger children as
Pelham should appoint.
On 7th September 1748, Pelham having issue four daughters only, viz, the Countess
of Lincoln, Prances, Grace, and Mary, made his will, and appointed the £10,000 under
the first term to be raised for the benefit of all his daughters, except the Countess of
Lincoln, at eighteen or marriage. He then directed the Nottinghamshire estate to
be sold, after the death of the Duke of Newcastle, and the money to be divided among
all his daughters, except the Countess of Lincoln, whom he had provided for with a
portion. He gave his estate at Esher to his daughter Frances, and her issue, in strict
settlement, with remainder over to his other daughters in like manner. He gave his
personal estate to his daughters, except the Countess of Lincoln ; and gave the residue
of his real estate to all his daughters in tail, as tenants in common ; and in case any of
them should become entitled to the Duke of Newcastle's estate, her interest in the above
devises was to cease and go over.
[326] By a codicil, 9th September 1751, he charged his estate at Esher with £5000
to each of his youngest daughters, as should not be entitled to the possession and en-
joyment of the house and park at Esher; and adds a proviso, that if any of his un-
married daughters should marry without his wife's consent, her interest in the estate
under the will and codicil should go over to the other daughters.
On 28th August 1752, on the marriage of his daughter Grace with plaintiff Watson,
he gave her a portion of £20,000, by appointing £9950 of the £10,000 to be raised by
the term of years in the deed of 1.741, and by mortgaging his reversionary interest](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.slavery/ssactsengr0654&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)