case hill versus Adam on appeal from the roll July SC Amb under the name of  Swannock v lifford mistake report here as hill v Adam see Reg lib b fol the  defendant purchase a real estate of the plaintiff husband and the estate be in  mortgage for a term he agree to pay it off out of the purchase money and to  assign the term to a trusteefor the purchaser to attend the inheritance which  be accord do the husband die in and in the plaintiff bring her bill against  the defendant for a account of profit and to be pay her dower sir Thomas Abney  sit for the master of the roll decree dower for the plaintiff but Lord  chancellor reverse the decree and dismiss the bill without cost in the  defendant purchase a real estate of the plaintiff husband and the estate be in  mortgage for a term it be agree that the mortgage shall be pay off out of the  purchase money and the term assign to a trustee for the purchaser to attend  the inheritance which be do accord the husband die in and in the plaintiff  bring her bill against the defendant for a account of profit and to be pay her  dower it be admit by the defendant counsel that the wife may be I et into  dower against a mortgage and may be let in to redeem for that purpose against  a purchaser but if a purchaser take in a term prior to the wife right of dower  whether it be a satisfy term or money pay for it it be a bar to the wife have  dower and if any thing the payment of money atkins for the assignment of the  term make it rather strong so if a purchaser take in a mortgage the feme can  redeem a trust term attendant on the inheritance be the inheritance itself  notice to the purchaser of the marriage and right of dower make no difference  a woman can be endow of a trust estate though the husband may be tenant by the  courtesy of it it be insist for the plaintiff that in the present case the  husband do not join with the mortgagee in assign the term but it be answer  that the assignment of the term and the purchase be all one transaction and do  at the same time and that the wife can be in a better condition against the  purchaser than the husband will have be case cite Radnor and Vandebendy shower  parliament Cas bank v Sutton W Wray v William p W brown v Gibbs prece in Eq  sir Thomas Abney in the absence of the master of the roll decree dower for the  plaintiff but on a appeal to my Lord chancellor he reverse the decree and  dismiss the bill without cost and say since the case of Radnor v Vandebendy it  be a settle rule of the court that if a purchaser take in a term precedent to  the right of dower whether it be a satisfy term or money pay for it it be a  bar to the wife dower but if the mortgage have subsist at the husband death  the wife may have redeem and be entitle to her dower or if the husband have  pay off the mortgage and take a assignment of the term to attend the  inheritance and die seize the wife will atkins er p have be endow but if a  purchaser come in after the mortgage be pay off and the death of the husband  and take a assignment of the term that will prevent dower he say the term in  Radnor v Vandebendy be not a satisfy term but he think there be no difference  whether the term be satisfy or not or whether the purchaser pay for it but of  the two the latter be most favourable Radnor v Vandebendy be the rule to go by  and it have be general say in court upon these occasion they will not go a jot  further than that case nor will I but I think the present rather strong  against dower it may have be as well at first if case of dower and courtesy  have be leave to commonlaw but commiseration to dowresses have arise from  indulgence to tenant by the courtesy but all the case be settle and reconcile  in Radnor and Vandebendy and therefore the term here must be prior to the wife  right of dower the reader be refer to the follow case on the subject William v  Wray p W brown v Gibbs Prec Charles Dudley v Dudley Prec Charles Radnor v  Vandebendy show p c William v lamb bro Charles Rep hark   Litt a note vide  Godwin v Winsmore post