case Osgood against stroud refer to Stephens v trueman Ves sen Ithell v bean  Ves sen apply hale v lamb Eden refer to price v Jenkins Ch d if a father in  consideration of marriage settle a estate upon his first son for life  remainder to his wife for life remainder to the issue in tail with remainder  to his modern report er p four son in fee the four son on the death of the  husband and wife without issue may compel a specific performance of this  settlement ante S c Eq Abr S c Peer wms by marriagearticle it be covenant that  land shall be settle upon husband for life wife for life then to the issue of  that marriage in tail remainder to the four son of the husband father this  four son die leave behind he a daughter marry to the plaintiff who bring this  bill the estatetail be spend and no settlement make to have the article  perform specifical by settle c in opposition to the defendant to who as heir  at law it will descend in case of no settlement it be argue for the defendant  that though these article be find upon the consideration of marriage yet they  must be esteem voluntary for so much of they as that consideration will not  each or cover and a court of equity will not in favour of volunteer aid a  defective settlement much less decree one where there be none modern report  the plaintiff who be a remainderman after the limitation to the issue of the  marriage be certain a volunteer and then the question be single whether the  court will interpose so far in favour of a volunteer as to carry a covenant to  settle into execution to the prejudice of the heir at law upon who it will  otherwise descend that the court will not the follow case be cite the case of  Robinson v Kirsaire a Prec Chan a the case of Thompson v Lord Haversham before  Lord Cowper the case of Bellingham v Louther c Chan case c this last case be  much rely upon for the plaintiff it be say that trust though voluntary must be  perform that they may be create as well by article as otherwise and as well by  marriagearticle as any other way that here there be a covenant to settle c the  question be whether this not be perform by the ancestor a imply trust to do  this be not devolve upon the heir in the case of Jenkins v keymis report both  in Hardres a hard a and the chancery case b Chan case b it be express affirm  by Lord chief baron hale that the consideration of a marriageportion will  extend and run through all the use in that settlement and what consideration  will be good by way of settlement will be so by way of article Macclesfield  Lord chancellor it seem clear to I that where there be a marriageportion and  settlement that part of the settlement only which belong to the wife and child  by that wife can be esteem to be find upon the consideration of that marriage  for it be absurd to imagine that the friend of the wife shall be suppose as at  all concern about the remote use of the settlement upon person to who they be  entire stranger and as for the case of Jenkins v keymis it ought modern report  not to be understand in so absurd a sense as that come to the meaning of the  case be no more than this that a father when he make a marriagesettlement upon  one son have such a proper fair and justifiable opportunity offer he of  provide for his other child as that if he think fit to lie hold upon and  embrace it by insert in the settlement provision for they such provision shall  never be esteem as fraudulent and as such set aside in favour of creditor  therefore it be very plain to I that the plaintiff must be consider as a  volunteer if there be nothing more in the case than the consideration of the  marriage and the marriageportion but upon supposition that the estate be  neither all in the father nor all in the son so that neither can without the  assistance and help of the other have make this settlement then it may be very  natural to suppose that this part of the settlement under which the plaintiff  claim may be find upon a agreement between father and son for it be very  natural for the father to tell the son I must provide for my other child as  well as you and therefore unless you will consent to this I will not join with  you in make this settlement and then this remainderman the plaintiff must not  be consider as a volunteer but as one claim under the consideration of the  father do that to enable the son to make the settlement which he be not bind  to this I take to be the state of the present case for by the evidence it seem  to I that the father have a power of charge the estate with modern report er p  the payment of thirteen hundred pound which probable be may depart from upon  the consent of his son to that part of the settlement under which the  plaintiff claim upon this reason without determine the point that relate to  volunteer he decree a settlement to be make upon the plaintiff pursuant to the  article c Edward v Warwick Peer wms neave v Keck Mod Vernon v Vernon brown p c  gore v Nash atk Stephens v trueman vezey roe v Mitton will c modern report  trinity term the eleven of George the first in the court of chancery king Lord  chancellor master of the roll