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/ssactsengr0752 and id is 1 raw text is: DUFFIELD V. ELWES [[827] I BLIGE N.S.
[497] ENGLAND.
(COURT OF CHANCERY.)
THOMAS DUFFIELD, Esquire, and EMILY FRANCES his wife,-Appellants;
AMELIA MARIA ELWES, Widow, and ABRAHAM HENRY CHAMBERS,
Esquire, WILLIAM HICKS, Clerk, and GEORGE THOMAS WARREN
HASTINGS DUFFIELD, CAROLINE DUFFIELD, MARIA DUFFIELD,
ANNA DUFFIELD, and SUSAN ELIZA DUFFIELD, Infants, by Original and
Amended Bill,-Respondents.
And between the sane Plaintiffs,-Appellats; ROBERT GREENHILL RUSSELL,
Esquire, GEORGE SPENCER SMITH, the said WILLIAM HICKS, Clerk,
and AMELIA MARIA his Wife, late AMELIA MARIA ELWES, Widow,-
Respondents.
[Mews? Dig. xv. 326 (Duofield v. Ilick..), S. C. 1 Dow and Cl. 1 (Dufi'eld v. flicks), 1
Sie. and St. 239. Applied in Porter v. Walsh (1895), 11. R. 284; affd. (1896),
11. R. 148. Ado-pte:d in Casiidy v. Belfas't Ban ,'ing Co. 1887, 22 L. I., Ir. 68,
at p. 76. Considered in In ir Dillon, Dij/fin, v. Di/ffia, 1890, 44 CI. D. 76, at pp.
82, 83.]
E. having by his will made a certain provision for his daughter, an only child--
with whom he had been offended on account of a clandestine ma.rriage-(but
was reconciled to her and her husband), declares to, a common friend his
purpose to make a farther provision for his daughter. Being on, his death
bed, and unable to write, he is urged by that friend to( make a, gift 'to, his
daughter of certain monies secured by mortgage and bond, and expressly
assents to that proposal. Ii the evening of the same day, being then unable
to, speak, he is reninded by the same friend of the transaction of the morn-
ing, and the deeds of mortgage and bond securing the monies, being pro-
duced, he is informed that it is necessary to confirm the gift by a delivery
of the deeds; and the friend proposed with the father's permission, to hand
over the deeds [498] to his.daughter. Upon this proposal, the father made
an inclination of his head, and the friend then handed the deeds across the
bed where the father was lying, to the daughter on the opposite side; where-
upon the father placed the hand of the daughter upon the deeds, and pressed
it with his own hand for some minutes, and appeared satisfied with what
he had done. The deeds in question 'consisted of, 1. A conveyamce in fee
of lands to secure £2927, with the usual covenant for payment of the money
lent, and bond by way of collateral security. 2. An assignment of a, mort-
gage debt of £30,000, and of a judgment for that sum recovered on a bond
with a conveyance of the land, and the usual covenant for payment of the
money.
Held that this was a valid donatio- mortis cazsme; that the property in the deeds
and the right to reco-ver the money secured by tlem, passed by the delivery
followed by the death of the donor, and that the real and personal representa
tives of the donor, were trustees for the donee, to make the gift effectual.
The original suit in this case was instituted in the Court of Chancery, by the
Appellants Thomas Duffield, Esquire, and Emily Frances his wife, as Plaintiffs, with
a view of obtaining the judgment of that Court upon several questions arising out
of the various dispositions made by George Elwes, deceased, of different parts of
his property, by way of settlement, gift and testamentary arrangement; and also
for the purpose of placing the infant Defendants, the children of the Plaintiffs,
under the protection of the Court.
The, Appellant Emily Frances Duffield, was the only child and heir at law, and
sole next of kin of George Elwes; she intermarried with the Appellant, Thomas
Duffield, Esquire, in the year 1810. The children of that marriage were five;
namely, the Respondent George Thomas Warren Hastings Duffield, the only son
959](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.slavery/ssactsengr0752&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)