tion respecting the effect of the transfer of such annuities by Daniel Birkett the elder, having been made into the joint names of Daniel Birkett the younger, and the Appellant, Sarah, then his wife; and it was ordered, that it should be referred to the master to enquire under what circumstances, and with what intention Daniel Birkett the elder transferred the 37,000l. bank three per cent. annuities, and 20,000l. navy five per cent. annuities, into such joint names, with respect to the interest which they, or either of them, should take in such funds, and the master was to report to the Court all such evidence and special circumstances which might be laid before him thereon as he might think necessary for the information of the Court; but the same was to be without prejudice to the question of law as to its admissibility and its effect, and any of the parties were to be at liberty to apply to the Court touching such dividends, and the future dividends of such annuities, and the future dividends of the 80001. East India stock and 9007. 13s. 9d. bank stock therein mentioned, to be standing in the name of the accountant-general, in trust, in the cause Wienholt v. Birkett, as they should be advised, and, in the meantime, till further order, such dividends were not, nor was the sum of 2511. 2s. 2d. cash therein mentioned to be in the bank, placed to the credit of the cause, to be paid to any party subject to the direction thereinafter contained. And it was ordered, that the dividends to accrue on the said 37,000l. bank three per cent. annuities, and 10,5007. new four per cent. annuities, should be laid out in the purchase of bank three per cent. annuities in the name and with the privity of the accountant-general, in trust in the said cause; and 1833. LOGAN V. WIENHOLT. he was to declare the trusts thereof accordingly; and it being alleged, on the part of the Respondents, that Daniel Birkett the elder, in his lifetime, upon various occasions, and at various times, laid out considerable sums in the purchase of lands, whereof he took the conveyances and assurances to himself, or to trustees for himself in fee, and afterwards at different times, made conveyances and assurances, whereby he reduced himself to be tenant for life with remainder or remainders to others; several of the conveyances and assurances respectively so reducing his estate, bearing, as it was alleged, the same date, and being executed at the same time; and it being also alleged, that he had laid out considerable sums in the purchase of lands, the conveyances or assurances of which were, in the first instance, taken to or in trust for himself for life, with remainder or remainders over; and it being insisted, on the part of the Respondents, that such real estate, or the monies with which the same were respectively purchased, ought to be considered as property in which they would be in equity entitled to a share or part, under the true meaning of the agreement contained in the condition of the bond, or by reason that such the acts of Daniel Birkett the elder were done under such circumstances, with such undue intent to defeat the effect of the said agreement, that the same ought in equity to be considered as bound and affected by the agreement, although the parties claiming under such voluntary instruments derived their estates, not from his testament, but from conveyances and assurances made in his lifetime, it was ordered, that the master should enquire and state to the Court what purchases were made by Daniel Birkett the elder of real property, after the execution of the bond, of which the conveyances or assurances, and of what dates, were originally taken, either to himself, or in trust for himself in fee, and as to which, by subsequent acts, assurances or conveyances, and of what dates, he afterwards reduced himself to be tenant for life in law or equity, and with remainder or remainders to other person or persons, and to whom, and also what purchases of real property were made by him after the execution of the bond, taking the conveyances or assurances thereof, and of what dates, to or in trust for himself for life, with remainder or remainders over, and to whom; and it was ordered, that all parties should be at liberty to lay before the master such evidence as he might think material, either by affidavit or interrogatories, or both, as he might think fit, for the information of the Court, as to the intent of Daniel Birkett the elder in each and every of the transactions of such purchases, conveyances, and assurances; and especially with reference to their proposed effect, as to the operation of the marriage bond; and the master was to report to the Court, all such evidence, and all circumstances which he might think necessary for the information of the Court; and was to be at liberty to make a separate report as to such matters; and it was declared, that the Respondents would be entitled, according to the true intent and meaning of the agreement contained in the condition of the bond, to be creditors on the estate of Daniel Birkett the elder to the amount of such sum as, under the declarations thereinbefore made, they would be entitled to claim, and such further sum, if any, as the Court might thereafter declare them further 1833. LOGAN v. WIENHOLT. 1833. LOGAN บ. WIENHOLT. entitled to, after the master should have made his report upon the matters above referred to him, and with such interest as the Court might think proper to order. And the consideration of what sum was due, and what interest might be due, and was to be paid to them out of the estate, or estates, of Daniel Birkett the elder; or how the same was ultimately to be borne by the several persons claiming his property, was reserved, until the master should have made his report, and the Court should have given directions thereupon. But it was ordered, that the master should take an account of the personal estate of Daniel Birkett the younger, deceased come to the hands of Alexander Logan and the Appellant, Sarah his wife, and James Quilter, deceased, since the death of Daniel Birkett the younger, or any person or persons by their, or any or either of their order, or for their or any or either of their use, including what might have been received under the voluntary dispositions of personal estate, as to which the Respondents were thereinbefore declared to be entitled to be relieved. And it was ordered, that what, on taking such account, should appear to have come to the hands of Daniel Birkett the younger, should be answered by Alexander Logan, and the Appellant, Sarah his wife, and James Quilter the younger, out of the assets of Daniel Birkett the younger, come to their hands respectively in a course of administration. And in case they should not admit assets for that purpose, it was ordered, that they should come to an account before the master for the personal estate of Daniel Birkett the younger, come to their hands, or to the hands of either of them, or to the hands of any person or persons by their or either of their order, or for their or either of their use. was ordered, that what, on taking such account of the personal estates of Daniel Birkett the elder, and Daniel Birkett the younger, should appear to have come to the hands of Alexander Logan, should be answered by him personally. And it was ordered, that what, on taking such accounts, should appear to have come to the hands of the Appellant, Sarah Logan, alone, should be answered by Albert Goldsmid and the Appellants, John Daniel Birkett, and Charles James Nelson Birkett, out of the separate estate of the Appellant Sarah Logan, come to their hands under the indenture of the 21st day of May, 1821. And in case they should not admit assets for that purpose, then it was ordered, that the Appellants, John Daniel Birkett and Charles James Nelson Birkett, and Albert Goldsmid, should come to an account before the Master for the separate estate of the Appellant, Sarah Logan, come to their or any or either of their hands under or by virtue of such indenture, or to the hands of any person or persons by their or either of their order, or for their or either of their use, but the last-mentioned direction was to be without prejudice to the liability of Alexander Logan, in case the separate estate of the Appellant, Sarah Logan, should be insufficient to answer what should be found due from her. And it was ordered, that what, on taking the accounts, or any or either of them, of the personal estates of Daniel Birkett the elder, and Daniel Birkett the younger, should appear to have come to the hands of James Quilter, deceased, should be answered by James Quilter the younger, his surviving executor, out of the assets of James Quilter, deceased, in a LOGAN บ. WIENHOLT. |