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/ssactsengr0788 and id is 1 raw text is: VERNON V. VERNON
George Hyde, by his will, after making certain dispositions therein mentioned,
said, I also bequeath to the poor distressed people, of Quorndon, in Leicestershire,
the interest of £1000, to be paid half-yearly, every year, but not later.
Mr. Knight appeared for the personal representatives, and Mr. Bethell for other
parties, but the case was not argued; His Honour's opinion being merely asked,
whether it was a good charitable bequest?
THE VICE-CHANCELLOR [Sir Lancelot Shadwell] was of opinion that it was, and
directed a scheme to be laid before the Master.
Mr. Knight observed, that there was a suit already instituted, called Hyde v.
Cullow, to administer George Hyde's estate, but that the Attorney-General had
thought fit to institute this suit, for the sole purpose of ascertaining whether this
bequest was good or not; Mr. Knight's clients ought, therefore, to be allowed their
costs.
Mr. Spence observed, that the object of filing this separate bill was in fact to save
expense, because there were many parties interested in the suit of Hyde v. Cullow,
who would all have claimed their costs of appearing.
THE VICE-CHANCELLOR, however, thought there was no necessity for a separate
suit, and decreed that the costs should be paid out of the charity fund.
LORD CHANCELLOR'S COURT.
[184] VERNON V. VERNON. Feb. 3, 4, 1837.
[S. C. 2 My. & Cr. 145; 40 E. R. 596.]
Where a Plaintiff inserts two Averments in his Bill, one favourable to himself, and
another against himself ; the Defendant, for the purpose of Demurrer, has a right
to take that Averment which operates against the Plaintiff.
This was an appeal from a decision of the Master of the Rolls, who had allowed a
demurrer to the Plaintiff's bill, for want of equity, and for want of parties.
[185] It will be unnecessary to go into a detail of the facts of this case, as it was
disposed of by a point of pleading.
The short case, however, was this :--J. W. Vernon was entitled, under the will of
John Vernon, made in 1765, to an estate for life, and John Vernon, his son, to an
estate in tail on the Vernon plantation in Antigua; and in Sept. 1794 a recovery
was suffered by J. W. Vernon and J. Vernon, and the plantation resettled; by which
J. W. Vernon took an estate for life, and John Vernon, the son, an estate for life,
with remainder to his first and other sons in tail. He had a son, who was the present
Plaintiff, also named John Vernon.
In 1785, J. W. Vernon demised the plantation, with the slaves, to Justinian Cass-
major, for fourteen years, at the rent of £1500 a year.
In 1794, Cassmajor removed forty-nine slaves from the plantation to a neighbouring
plantation, called Hawk's-bill; and in 1813 he sold the slaves on that estate to a Mr.
Punnett, who removed them to his estate of Mustrique, in the island of St. Vincents ;
in 1798, the lease was renewed, and in 1808, it was again renewed; and John Vernon
was made a party. Cassmajor continued tenant of the plantation till his death, in
June 1820 ; and Newman and J. Vernon were his personal representatives.
In October 1821, which was soon after the death of Cassmajor, Newman, his
personal representative, obtained a release to be executed by J. Vernon, the father to
Punnett, in respect of the slaves having been removed.
The bill stated, that the Plaintiff had only lately discovered that the slaves had
been removed.
J. W. Vernon lived till lately. The other Defendant was John Vernon, the
Plaintiff's father, who was out of the jurisdiction of the Court. The other Defen-
dants (who put in the demurrer) were Messrs. Fraser, Alexander, Neilson, and
Alexander, mortgagees of Punnett. Messrs. Fraser & Co. had put in a claim for the
compensation money, awarded by the Commissioners for the slaves on the estate mort-
309
DONNELLY 184.](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.slavery/ssactsengr0788&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)