case in chancery the duke OF Norfolk case or the doctrine OF perpetuity see  judgement correct from Lord nottingham ms swan of Mars a bargain and sell to l  the barony of Gr and Br for ten month of Mars a grant the reversion of those  barony to r and d and their heir to the use of a for life remainder to e the  wife of a for life remainder to r and d c for year upon trust to be declare by  another deed of the same date remainder to h h his second son and the heir  male of his body remainder to c h his three son and the heir male of his body  remainder to e h his five son and the heir male of his body remainder to a h  his six son and the heir male of his body remainder to b h and the heir male  of his body remainder to the right heir of a l attorns tenant to r and d c of  Mars a make another deed declare the trust of the term for year recite it and  the use in the last mention settlement say in the recite part that it be  intend that the term shall attend the inheritance the profit be receive by h h  and the heir male of his body and for default of such issue such other person  who accord to the limitation of use shall have have they if no such term have  be so long as t h old son of a or any issue male of his body shall live but in  case t h die without issue of his body in the life of h h not leave his wife  ensient with a son or that after the death of e h by failure of issue male of  t h the honour of a shall descend on h h then h h and his heir to be exclude  of the trust then the indenture witness that the term shall be upon the trust  case in chancery and under the restrain limitation and proviso aftermentioned  videlicet if t h or any issue male of his body be live in trust for h h and  the heir male of his body until by the death of t h without issue male and not  leave his wife ensient with a son or after his death by failure of issue male  the honour of a descend to h h and in case the honour shall not descend to h h  that after the death of h h the trust shall be for the heir male of h h and  for default of such issue in trust to permit such other person and their issue  male respective to who the freehold or inheritance be limit by the former deed  to take the profit as if no such lease be and in case the honour of a descend  upon h h then the trust for h h and his issue male to cease and then as to the  barony of Gr in trust for c h and the heir male of his body remainder to c h  and the heir male of his body remainder to f h and the heir male of his body  remainder to b h and the heir male of his body remainder to h h and the heir  male of his body remainder to the right heir of a the father and as to the  barony of Br as to one three part of it in trust for e h and the heir male of  his body remainder to f h and the heir male of his body re case in chancery er  p remainder to b h and the heir male of his body remainder to t h and the heir  male of his body remainder to h h and the heir male of his body remainder to  the right heir of a and as to another three part of the barony in trust for f  h and the heir male of his body with like remainder to other brother ut above  remainder to the right heir of a and as to the other three part in trust for b  h and the heir male of his body with the like remainder to the rest of the  brother ut above a die in e the wife of a die in and then the term of year  commence novemb d the survive trustee at theRequest of h h assign the term to  one Marriot Dec Marriot assign the term to h h october h h by bargain and sale  enrol sell to m to make he tenant to the praecipe for suffer a recovery  october the use of the recovery declare to be to h h and his heir Nov t h the  old son of a die without issue or have ever be marry if the trust to h h be  good and the other trust limit to the other brother on the contingent in case  t h die whereby the honour of a shall descend to r h be good or void  relievable or not relievable in a court of equity the term be surrender serj p  ton opinion Dec I be of opinion that the trust to all the brother of h h in  his term be void and no way relievable in equity for if case in chancery these  limitation be make after t h shall die without issue male of his body be good  in their original creation to the brother of h h it must be by the Attendency  of the term upon the reversion of the estate which be so entail and then when  their estate in remainder be dock by the recovery which h h suffer and the  trust that attend on they we be likewise destroy and can never survive the  remainder on which they depend no more then they can have stand alone in their  original creation serj Mds opinion Dec I conceive that the trust for the term  be appoint to wait upon the inheritance in the forepart of the deed though  seek contrary to the latter part be not so but both may be reconcile that be  to say shall wait upon the inheritance upon such contingency as hereafter be  express be the trust be limit and in the same order only the contingency of  the death of t h without issue c prout the trust of the term limit to h h and  the heir male of his body with remainder over as the case be I think be a good  trust and will go accord so long as there be no charge make though regular a  term for year can be entail yet it may be make to wait upon the inheritance  that be entail but when it be so limit it be not proper a entail within the  statute de gift but governable partly in equity and partly in law h h to who  it be so entail may dispose of it and thereby bind his issue without fine and  recovery as I conceive and the term so limit in tail shall be subject to his  debt against the issue in tail as I also conceive by the recovery suffer by h  h all the intails be bar and consequent the wait of the term upon the  inheritance destroy because the inheritance it S elf be change but the bare  surrender of the trustee can not have that operation if nothing else have be  in the case but the great question in this case I conceive will arise upon the  death of h without issue and the other contingency because the trust of the  term be not limit to h h absolute but to cease upon those contingency and then  to be alter yet see the main intention of the settlement be to make the term  wait upon the inheritance as by the recital of the deed and when it change be  limit by way of inheritance therefore I conceive that h h while he be owner of  the inheritance and trust of the term suffer a recovery the contingent trust  of the term to the other be destroy in law they have no relief because the  estate for year be surrender and I conceive the chancery will not support such  leap limitation of a term for year case in chancery er p especial when it can  take effect in toto as the contingent limitation be and the remainder in that  case will be void md case in chancery sir William Jones opinion Jan I be of  opinion that the term be limit to h h and the heir of his body under other  limitation than the inheritance be the whole term vest in h h and the  limitation thereof to the other brother be void for a trust of a term can be  entail unless it be to attend a inheritance and the limitation of the trust  differ from the limitation of the inheritance it be all one as if the trust of  the term be limit without respect to any inheritance in which case the  limitation of the term to the other brother will be clear void next I take it  to be clear that take the trust of the term to be attendant to the inheritance  of the recovery have bar the remainder of the other brother as to the  inheritance the trust of the term must needs be whole in h h and that the  other brother can never claim the same in equity for since the inheritance as  intendant to which they can only be entitle to any part of the trust of the  term be vest whole in h h and no remainder leave in the brother there can be  no remainder in any of they of the trust of the term but as the whole  inheritance be now in h h so do the whole trust attend that inheritance W jons  sir William Jones opinion Oct I be of opinion that the now duke of Norfolk and  earl of Arundel have a good Title to the S aid barony first in law it be clear  that the term be surrender and so if any Title remain to the young brother it  can only be in equity and second I think there be no Title in equity as to  which it may be insist upon that if the limitation of the trust of the term be  at first good yet see they be chief to attend the inheritance and that  inheritance by the recovery be change and make a feesimple and this before the  contingency in the limitation of the trust of the term happen whereby the  limitation of the trust be change and the young brother can have the term in  the same plight nor during the same estate as be at first design I say from  these consideration it may be conclude that the limitation of the trust of the  term be destroy but that which I do most rely upon be that the first  limitation of the trust of this term under this contingency be altogether void  as to which the case be no more than that a term of year be grant in trust  that h h and the heir of his body shall receive the profit until by the death  of t h and the failure of issue male of his body the honour of a shall come to  h h and in case the honour of a shall descend to h h then the trust for he and  the issue male of his body to cease and then it be limit respective to the  young brother and the heir male of their respective body I conceive these  limitation to the young brother be void first it will be agree that the  limitation of the trust of a term to one and the heir male of his body and for  want of such issue to another be void as to the second I think it as case in  chancery clear that if a trust of a term be limit to one as long as John a  style have issue of his body and that John a style die without issue of his  body then to another that remainder be void likewise that which seem to make  the doubt in this present case be that the contingency must happen within a  life videlicet the honour of a descend to h h which must be to he in his  lifetime or not at all to which I answer that though a contingency be remote  in it self and not likely to happen within a life the time within which it  ought to happen or not at all do not alter the case and therefore in child and  Baylys case report in d croak and by Jones and palmer the failure of issue be  limit to be within a life videlicet a term be devise to one and his assign and  if he die without issue of his body live at the time of his death then to  another this be adjudge no remainder unto that other and though it be object  that the contingency must happen within the compass of life or not at all yet  no regard be give to that this case seem to I in reason to be the same with we  I do observe that no case can befound where limitation either by way of trust  or devise of a term have be allow to take effect upon a failure of issue or  after death of the party to who the first estate be limit without issue and as  in child and bailiff case the judge say as I have often hear they say in other  case that if Matthew man case be now to be adjudge it will not be so adjudge  and that case be a term be demise to one for life and after his death to  another which be allow case in chancery er p good and that they will not go a  step far so I say in this case it must go further than man case or any other  case that be adjudge to make it void William jons serj Mds opinion Nov the  case be new and without any express precedent and therefore not capable of so  certain a determination as will be expect in case advice be to be give whether  a purchaser shall deal in the buy of a lease or not yet though there be no  precedent in print Vet such like case have be determine as guide my judgement  and opinion to be scilicet that as this case be circumstantiate Charles have  not nor can have a right to the trust of the term the reason and ground of my  opinion be as follow first the trust of the term for year in gross and  separate from a inheritance can be entail in possession or remainder but yet  where there be a term for year in be if the inheritance of the land be entail  with remainder over there the term may be limit to wait upon the inheritance  accord to the several intails and such limitation be good so long as nothing  intervene to interrupt or disturb it but I conceive it be not capable of such  privilege of entail as inheritance be for the entail be confirm by the stat of  Westminster de gift but the attendance of the term upon the inheritance entail  be not within the statute de gift c be but a creature of the case in chancery  chancery and in several case may be destroy and bar though no fine and  recovery or other bar be make of the inheritance I conceive in such case if  the tenant in tail alien without fine or recovery for valuable consideration  the issue in tail shall avoid the inheritance the chancery shall never help he  to avoid the lease in this particular case it be clear that neither Charles  not any in remainder can recover this term at law but only by suit in chancery  and in chancery shall never recover where the limitation of such a term in be  be not supportable in commonlaw which in this case it be not as I conceive for  take the case without the contingency that Henry be tenant in tail remainder  to Charles in tail c the recovery suffer by h will have bar Charles of the  rest of the term as well as of the inheritance but the sole objection here be  that the trust of the term to Henry be express that it shall determine quoad  Henry and his issue in case though duke of Norfolk die without issue live  Charles as in this case he do the strength of this objection lie in this first  that the cessor of the trust be to be upon the death of a stranger without  issue sure on though duke of Norfolk on who the land be not entail and second  the term be not to cease but upon the death of though duke of Norfolk without  issue in the life of Henry as to the first it will make no difference in  reason and in the polity of the law where the cessor be limit on the death of  a stranger without issue or of the tenant in tail without heir of his body for  first in both case the possibility be remote and not regard in law where a  term be so limit and so be their solution in child and Baylys case and diverse  other this will be a way to set up a perpetuity as strong as that it be limit  upon the death of the tenant in tail without issue put the case there be a  father and several son a b c and the father be seize in fee of the reversion  of land after a lease of year be settle the inheritance upon his old son in  tail with remainder in tail to his other son and this lease be in trustee for  he at the same time cause the lease to be settle in trustee in trust for the  son to wait on the inheritance in trust accord provide that the second son die  without issue in the life of the father or son the trust of the old son to  cease I conceive this will not be maintain in equity if the second son shall  not alien by fine and recovery as to the second objection that the cessor be  on the death of though without issue in the life of Henry whereby the  contingency be reduce to happen in the life of one person videlicet Henry and  not at large videlicet of the death of though without issue I conceive no  difference make thereby a d it be in effect the point adjudge in child and  Baylys case mic James d r cro James which be thus French a termor for year  demise to his wife for life remainder of the case in chancery term to W case  in chancery er p his son and his assign proviso that if the son W die without  issue of his body then live that t his son shall have the term or interest  adjudge then in b b which be three year after mic throw affirm in the  exchequerchamber by Hobart winch Denham Hutton and Jones that the demise to  though be void in that case the contingency do expect during the life of W  only as here it be on the life of h and the reason of their judgement both in  the king bench and exchequerchamber in effect of all the judge of England at  that time be because it may tend to make a perpetuity and that this new invent  way of entail of term be in no sort to be favour in law in child case it be  limit if William have no issue at the time of his decease in this case if  though have no issue at the time of Henry death put case it have be limit that  though have die without issue in thirty or forty or any number of year or if  it have be limit that though have die without issue in the life of Henry and  five or six more person it may have be so limit as well as to one life and the  law be the same it be more contingent when the cessor be limit to be upon the  death of though without issue in the life of Henry than it have be if though  have die without issue general for he may die without issue though he die not  without issue in the life of Henry first the sum of this be if such limitation  of a term as this be be not good at law the trust of a term can be good in  chancery second the general scope of the settlement of the term be that the  term shall wait on the inheritance in tail which now can be because it be  alter again if the law shall be otherwise that Charles have the whole term  then those in remainder shall be utter defeat of it and shall not go to  Charles his son and heir but to the executor which never be intend by the deed  opinion and consideration for the young brother sir I c I conceive that  notwithstanding the late judgement in chancery have be that if a term of year  be limit by way of trust or otherwise to any person and his heir male with  remainder over or other limitation to any other person those remainder and  limitation be void and the whole term shall be to that person and his executor  and administrator to who it be first limit in tail yet this case be different  from all those case by reason this be only a temporary provision as to Mr  Henry Howard until that contingent of the death of the duke of Norfolk shall  happen and then absolute to cease as to Mr Henry Howard and then the trust of  the term be declare to be for the preferment of the young son as be above  express and albeit that Marriot have in plain breach of trust by his  assignment enable the now duke to destroy the term in point of law yet the  chancery may subject the land during case in chancery the remainder of the  term to the trustee for the young child as agreeable to the intention of the  deed of trust and to all honesty and equity and that equity I take it be in no  sort bar by the fine if a bill be exhibit I c Jan sir r S I concur with this  opinion because it be no absolute trust not so much as for the life of Henry  but a limit trust upon a contingent which as in its creation it may so in fact  it do happen in the lifetime of Henry and consequent there be no room for any  construction to be make that the trust of the whole term vest in Henry against  the express limitation thereof r S Mr Osbey I conceive first that if by Act  execute my Lord of Arundel have create this term to my Lord Dorchester and the  rest of the trustee in trust for Henry Howard in tail and after his death to  the brother in tail that have be a perpetuity and not good for a term though  as to that there be a difference take in Tatten and Mollenexs case more in  chancery by the Lord chancellor and the judge assistant which seem to be  reasonable that the first party that be the beneficiary and trust against his  issue may dispose of it but not against he in remainder for equity preserve it  as to the remainder so then if it have be to Henry Howard and the issue of his  body the remainder to the brother though Henry Howard can as to his issue  dispose case in chancery er p of it yet as to his brother it stand good if  that resolution hold good and the book say it be ground upon precedent in that  court too but this case differ where the course of equity be against it  therefore first there be only by this conveyance a reception of the profit in  Henry Howard and the issue male of his body until the dignity of Arundel come  to he and it be not in trust for he and his issue male so I as he have not the  entire trust in he as the other son have by the pen of the deed second it be  not absolute in trust in he and his issue male but temporary in they upon the  fail of the dignity of Arundel soon or late and he be not a beneficiary and  trust within any of the statute precede the statute of use but have but a  limit pursuance of the profit but the trust vest complete in the brother after  three then the marquis of Dorchester assign the term to Marriot and he assign  it to h h whereby he have in strictness of law extinguish it whereby there be  a wrong and deceit do to the brother he S bind equity and good conscience to  make they recompense and satisfaction for this wrong and it appear that h h be  privy to this with a design to extinguish it and that extinguishment turn to  his advantage he be likewise compellable in equity to answer it out of mrs  estate either by create a new term in this land or by some other way accord to  the resolution of the judge in my Lord of ormond case Hubbard sir W Ellis case  in chancery I have see the opinion of Mr attorneygeneral serj Maynard and serj  Pemberton who opinion I do much value and have great esteem for Mr attorney  with that the term to h h and the heir of his body under other limitation than  the inheritance be the whole term vest in h h and the limitation thereof to  the other brother be void I conceive the whole trust of the term be not limit  to h h but part of the trust so long as Thomas the decease duke shall have  heir male of his body and until the earldom come unto he so as the trust be  but a qualify and limit trust in h h so as this trust to h be now end by way  of limitation to h h and then there be a new trust spring and arise to the  young brother not by way of remainder of a term but the trust to h be end and  determine I conceive a new one may well arise and spring up to the young child  admit it be a trust of a term in gross it be not a remainder but a future  contingent grant and a limitation to they as it be in pell and brown case  second if it be to attend the inheritance then he conceive clear the recovery  have bar all remainder the term and the trust of the term be also bar if this  trust have be to wait upon all the estate as they come in possession it have  be the strong but as this case be I conceive the trust will wait upon the  estate of h h for so long as though life and have heir male of his body and  until the earldom come unto he and the trust of Henry determine and then a new  trust spring up to the young child which be a future contingent trust so as a  common recovery can bar this trust so long only as they do wait upon the  estate of h h which be now determine by a collateral limitation and the  recovery can enlarge the trust to h h and make that to continue which in its  creation be to end when such a contingent happen which have now happen if h h  have not suffer a common recovery he have have a estatetail yet no trust this  be a future contingent trust to the young child which can be bar by a common  recovery W else of Mars serj Md for the brother the surrender or grant of the  lease for year to Henry nor the extinguishment of the legal interest of the  term do not prejudice the equitable trust of the term so long as the land come  not into other hand videlicet of a purchaser without notice of the trust which  be not in this case a entail can be make of a term in gross as if a lease for  year be make in trust for I S and the heir of his body with remainder over I S  may dispose of the whole term and such disposal be good against his issue and  those in remainder and if he die without such disposition make by he his  executor shall have the benefit of the trust and not hisIssue or the remainder  case in chancery but a term may be limit to attend and wait on the inheritance  by way of a trust as if a long term of year be the reversion in fee if the  reversion be case in chancery er p purchase in fee or settle in tail the term  may be settle to the use of the fee or tenant in tail and in that case if the  tenant in tail die or the tenant in fee die the heir or issue shall have the  benefit of the trust and not the executor c but in that case if the tenant in  fee die in debt and no other sufficient asset to pay the debt in that case the  executor shall be prefer before the heir although the debt be such as the heir  be not bind or liable unto and I conceive that in that case if the tenant in  tail that have the equity of a term wait on it do purchase the term and alien  or obtain the trustee of the term to make a alienation of a term it shall bind  the issue in tail and he in remainder though the alienation be by deed without  fine or recovery because the term in law be well alien without fine c and the  statute of Westminster de gift extend not to a case of a term yet it be true  this do not absolute determine the case in question upon three account first  it be a new case not yet bring in question second because here be a spring and  a new trust by accident subsequent and alter the trust and change the entail  of the term to other person from Henry to the young child and on such accident  take away the trust whole from Henry the first tenant in tail and three the  change seem to be ground on great reason for the Lord Maltravers be in such  condition as he be in there be great reason to disable he and provide for the  young child as be do by this case and if Henry shall come to be earl and have  addition of estate that the other young child shall also have accession of  estate to they and so it be by this deed of trust provide but notwithstanding  these reason and this difference of the case in these circumstance from other  case already resolve and the contrary opinion that I have see I be rather of  the opinion that in this case the young brother be bind by the recovery suffer  by Henry than convince that they be not bind for I find that the reason give  the touch not my doubt full the reason of my opinion be videlicet for the  recovery suffer and the time when it be suffer to wit before the Lord  Maltravers die for till he die Henry be tenant in tail and have power by a  recovery to bar and dispose of the whole inheritance as well of his own  estatetail as of those in remainder the term of year be but accessary to serve  and attend the inheritance which be principal and the only reason that make  such entail or limitation of case in chancery the term good be because it be  to wait on the inheritance first to Henry in tail and so successive to the  other brother or else as it be abovesaid the limitation have not be good and  when that reason fail and the Cause why it be a good limitation cease and be  take away the effect of it do likewise cease the change of the term into three  do not change the Estatestail of the young brother and can stand with the  intention of the deed of trust for I think it clear if Charles admit he come  to the inheritance as owner or if in the life of Henry he can get a tenant of  the freehold of all or any part of the land to join with he shall then suffer  a recovery it will bar Edward Francis and Bernard of so much of the three part  whereof such recovery shall be suffer videlicet of the whole inheritance and a  three of the term and the residue to wit the other two part will respective  cease and be entail as to the term and be whole in the respective disposition  of Edward and the rest and go to their executor not to their issue or the  remainder and yet upon long consideration of the case there be another and a  further ground of my doubt of what have be say videlicet not only because it  be a new case and concern a great and noble family but on another and further  ground observe and insist upon by such great opinion contrary to what I have  above observe videlicet that it be not only a spring and contingent use to the  young brother respect they but because the original trust to Henry videlicet  that the trust to he and his issue be as to he and they under a limitation and  that not so long as he the tenant in tail shall have issue but so long as the  Lord Maltravers shall have issue male and on that reason the case be more  doubtful MD case in chancery er p sir W Ellis I agree that if a man have a  term for year and he grant and demise this to one and the heir male of his  body the remainder to another and his heir that this term can be entail nor a  remainder limit upon it and that upon the death of the party to who the term  be so give it shall go to his executor as a chattel and not to his heir male  do conceive it will not be deny by any that if there be a long term for year  for year more or less in trust and a man purchase or settle the inheritance to  the use of himself for life the remainder in tail the remainder in fee and  declare that the trust of the term shall wait upon those estate and fall in  with they but that this trust of the term shall go along with all the estate  and shall not be merge in any of they and this trust shall not go to a  executor but shall go along with the estate and if the tenant in tail die  without issue it shall go along with the next remainderman in tail and after  his death without issue it shall go to he in feesimple and attend all the  estate in remainder be they never so many and this I conceive be the common  course in chancery to incorporate case in chancery such trust to go with all  the estate this be not a absolute trust for Henry and the heir male of his  body but a limit and qualify trust as long as duke Thomas elder brother live  and have heir male of his body and until the earldom of a do come unto he so  as by the death of duke Thomas without issue the trust to Henry which be but a  limit trust be now determine and vanquish as to Henry as this be a contingent  trust in Henry but in case Thomas be alive and have issue when the term be to  begin so the continuance and duration of the trust of the term be but to last  until the earldom come unto he and it be the strong for that this trust end in  Henry by way of limitation how long shall Henry and his issue have this trust  until Thomas die without issue male and the earldom of a come unto he both  which have happen so as the trust for Henry and his issue be end by way of  limitation and be now dispose over to other as it may well be so as this be a  new trust that by a contingent subsequent declaration take away the trust from  Henry and settle a new trust in the young child and it be to be consider that  Henry be to have the true of this term not so long as he shall have issue but  so long as the Lord Maltravers shall have heir male so as that make it a  collateral limitation or determination of the say estate the equity and  justice of this trust carry much weight with I and that condition the Lord  Maltravers be in it be fit to settle the trust in Henry so long as the Lord  Maltravers have heir male of his body and if they fail and that the earldom of  a and great accession of estate to come to Henry it be a great reason that the  young child shall be provide for and take notice of and it will not be easy to  blow off and overthrow a trust in a court of equity contrary to the express  mind and intention of he that make it for the provision of the young child  especial it be make with so much justice and reason wherein he have both a  respect for his honour family and young child there be one objection against  all I have say which seem prima fancy to carry weight with it and that be when  the legal interest be come to Henry and he be tenant in tail in possession and  suffer a common recovery and bar all the remainder in tail how can this trust  which be a accessary follow estate to which I answer first if the trust have  be to follow and wait upon the estate this objection have be the strong but  this trust be not absolute to wait upon Henry estate but so long as duke  Thomas have heir male of his body and until the earldom of a come to he both  which be happen he continue still tenant in tail and yet this interest be  determine in the trust second this be a future contingent interest that now be  happen to the young brother which can be bar and it may be resemble to pell  and brown case cro case in chancery a man devise his land to his second son  Thomas and his heir and if he die without issue leave William his elder  brother then William shall have it in fee it be adjudge that this be a  feesimple in Thomas the second and though regular one fee can descend on  another yet this be a future contingent interest that the devise of the  feesimple to William his old son be good case in chancery er p another great  question be Thomas the second son suffer a common recovery whether this do not  bar the future contingent possibility of William and it be adjudge it do not  now here be as much a future contingent possibility of a trust as there be of  a estate or more and therefore there be much reason that the future contingent  possibility of a trust shall not be bar by a common recovery as in this case  and as to that which be say that a accessary can be without a substance and  the estate of the young child be to succeed and yet they have no proper estate  for Henry be now tenant so as this be a personal trust for the young child  independent of their estate and if so then clear this recovery can bar their  estate another reason why a court of equity shall help and interpose in this  case may be because the estate for year be convey by Marriot in breach of the  trust which a court of equity ought to maintain and support as much as they  can first because Marriot and the now duke be not purchaser for a valuable  consideration second they come in with privity and have notice of the trust  and I conceive may and will notwithstanding these act make good these trust  for the young child and if this be a new doubtful case certain I conceive it  be the sure and safe way for a court of equity to make good the intention of  he that make it and to preserve the trust for the young child William else Feb  case in chancery de term S hill year king car two king XXXIII XXXIV and dom  March die Jan in curian cancellar