case townsend against hunt Hilary term car roll a assumpsit will lie although  the consideration be execute in part as if the defendant promise to pay the  residue of a legacy in consideration of the plaintiff have at the defendant  request execute a general release to his wife executrix ante SC Jones roll ab  dyer Leon assumpsit the plaintiff declare whereas Francis townsend make his  will and thereby devise to the plaintiff threescore pound to be pay at his age  of oneandtwenty year and make whether his wife his executrix and leave asset  to pay his debt and legacy and that the say whether take the defendant to  husband and afterward the plaintiff come to full age and the defendant and his  wife pay to the plaintiff in part of payment of the say legacy upon the d of  April threeandflfty pound who give to the defendant and his wife a general  release that the defendant September car in consideration that the plaintiff  at the defendant request have make a general release to the defendant and his  wife assume to the plaintiff that if his wife do not pay croak car the seven  pound residue of the say legacy in her lifetime that he will pay it after his  the say defendant wife death and allege in fact that the defendant wife do not  pay the say seven pound in her life and that he have require it of the  defendant and he have not pay it per quod action to grow progressively upon  this declaration the defendant demurrer and it be argue at the bar by Farrer  for the plaintiff and by calthrop for the defendant and be show for cause of  his demurrer that this promise be for a consideration pass be a void promise  and here be not a continue consideration but naked bargain unde non be born  action a and compare it to the case in Elizabeth dyer a where one promise to  one who be bail for his servant to save he harmless it be adjudge a void  promise Berkley justice for this reason be of that opinion but if it have be a  consideration continue as in consideration of marry his daughter or cousin  which be as a gift in frankmarriage it have be good but not here no more than  if in consideration you give he a horse a year since he have promise to pay  you ten pound which be void because pass but justice Jones and myself upon the  first motion conceive it good for if this promise have be make at the time of  the release make it have be clear a good promise and a good consideration then  be make after the release forasmuch as the release be make at the defendant  request b and the defendant have the continuance of the benefit thereof the  promise upon this consideration be good enough for so the case import in dyer  if the bail have be enter into at the master request and afterward he have  make the promise it have be well enough and for this purpose they vouch the  case of marsh v Rainsford c and another case here of rigges v Bullingham d  where in consideration that the plaintiff at the defendant a roll ab more cro  Elizabeth lev stram b roll ab p lie stram in point Com dig c Danv p Leon d cro  Elizabeth croak car er p request have grant the next avoidance of such a  church the defendant at a day after promise to pay to the plaintiff one  hundred pound after verdict upon non assumpsit it be move in arrest of  judgement first because there be no time or place mention when that grant be  make say non allocatur because it be but a inducement to the action a second  exception because it be a consideration pass and it may be twenty year before  say non allocatur because it be make at the defendant request afterward in  Michaelmas term car the principal case be move again all the justice seriatim  deliver their opinion that it be good and it be adjudge for the plaintiff