case jeremiah brown appellant thomas Mitton respondent d June Mews dig seven I  S and W his old son join in a mortgage for pound and interest and after  payment it be declare that the premise shall be to the use of I S for life  remainder to W and the heir of his body remainder over b take a assignment of  this mortgage and afterward prevail on I S to sell he part of the premise and  levy a fine this sale be a fraud upon W and be accord set aside decree of the  court of chancery affirm John Mitton be seize in fee of a message tanhouse and  land in Clunton in the county of Salop and by article date the that of April  previous to the marriage of his son William with Alice Bolton in consideration  of the intend marriage and of pound the portion of Alice he covenant to settle  the say premise to the follow use videlicet one moiety to the use of William  and Alice for their life and the life of the survivor brown of they and after  the death of the survivor to the use of the heir of their two body and the  other moiety to the use of the say William for life with remainder to the use  of the heir of the body of William and Alice by indenture of lease and release  date the that and that of the same month John Mitton convey the premise to the  use of the article save only that by some mistake in the word of this  settlement Alice be make only a bare tenant for life in the moiety limit to  her instead of be a joint tenant in tail of such moiety as by the article be  stipulate by other indenture of lease and release date the that and that of  November John Mitton and William his son mortgage the land so settle to one  Jeremiah bright for secure the payment of and interest but after payment  thereof it be declare that the say mortgage premise shall be to the use of the  say William Mitton for his life remainder to John his old son and the heir of  his body remainder to Thomas his second son the respondent and the heir of his  body with other remainder over Alice the wife of William Mitton never join in  this mortgage and in November bright the mortgagee assign all his estate and  interest to one Evans in trust for one Thomas brown which assignment recite  the mortgage and be draw and prepare by the appellant William Mitton become  soon afterward distress in his circumstance be prevail upon by the appellant  in consideration of pound to sell he several parcel of the settle land of  about pound per and which lie contiguous to his own estate and in October the  same be convey to he accord but as these land be part of the premise comprise  in bright mortgage the appellant in order to fortify his title take a  assignment of that mortgage from Evans and brown by indenture of lease and  release date the saint and d of November follow in consideration of pound at  the time of execute the mortgage to bright William Mitton levy a fine of the  premise and he be afterward prevail on to levy another fine thereof to  corroborate the appellant purchase but Alice the wife be no party to either of  these fine in William Mitton die leave Alice his widow with five son and two  daughter and soon afterward the widow together with John her old son exhibit  their bill in chancery against the appellant in order to set aside the say  conveyance of October as have be fraudulent obtain and that they may enjoy the  estate accord to the marriage article the appellant thereupon exhibit his  cross bill to foreclose the equity of redemption of the mortgage premise to  have his purchase of part thereof confirm and to compel the widow to brown  come to a division of the land in respect of the moiety which she be entitle  to for her life brown er p on the that of November these cause be hear at the  roll when his honour declare that the settlement or limitation of the equity  of redemption of the land in bright mortgage be not voluntary but find on the  marriage article and that the plaintiff John ought to be admit to a redemption  of the land contain in that mortgage on payment of what the defendant have  real and good fide pay on take the assignment thereof with interest for the  same after discount the profit of the land and therefore it be decree that the  defendant shall account for what profit he have receive out of the land in the  say mortgage and upon the plaintiff John pay what the master shall state to be  due to the defendant on account of the say mortgage he shall reconvey the  mortgage premise to the plaintiff John and the master be direct to inspect the  defendant purchase deed and to examine and certify what land be comprise  therein and also what money the defendant real pay or advance to or for the  say William Mitton the plaintiff father and upon the master report such  further order shall be make touch the defendant say purchase as shall be just  the defendant be dissatisfy with this decree apply for and obtain a rehear  before the Lord keeper Harcourt on the that of may when it be admit that the  whole estate be comprise in the mortgage make to bright it be order that only  so much as the defendant pay on take the assignment of bright mortgage be to  be repay with interest and that so much of the decree as direct the master to  look into the defendant purchase deed and to certify what land be comprise  therein and whether all or any and what part of the land contain in bright  mortgage be comprise in the defendant purchase deed and also to examine and  certify what money the defendant pay to or advance for the plaintiff father  shall be discharge and that the defendant cross bill touch those matter shall  be dismiss but his lordship do not think fit to give cost to either party in  either of the cause before this decree be draw up the plaintiff John Mitton  die whereupon the present respondent Thomas become entitle to the mortgage  premise and have accord revive the suit be proceed to carry the decree into  execution but the defendant think proper to appeal from both decree insist I  Pratt n Lechmere that the limitation in bright mortgage on which they be find  and to which Alice the wife be no party be voluntary it be entire in the power  of William Mitton to create such limitation or not and no consideration be  mention in that deed to raise such use be limitation that by the decree the  limitation be declare to be find on the brown marriagearticle whereas the  settlement itself be execute before the marriage in pursuance of and by all  the party to the article and the fine afterward levy by William Mitton bar the  entail as well in the settlement as in the article and that the appellant be  in possession by virtue of his purchase the mortgage be only assign to protect  the purchase ought not to have be decree to account for the profit of the  purchase land receive in William Mittons lifetime for he be by the limitation  in bright mortgage tenant for life have power to dispose of the profit as he  please during the continuance of that estate on the other side it be contend I  Jekyll S mead that the limitation of the equity of redemption in bright  mortgage be find upon and consonant to the marriagearticle be not voluntary  and that the appellant have notice of those article by take a assignment of  that mortgage and a full knowledge of the settlement the land therein comprise  ought not to be subject to any other of his claim but the mortgage that his  pretend purchase be find in fraud ought not to subsist and that have get into  possession of the estate in a very unfair manner he ought not to avail himself  thereof to the respondent prejudice who be a purchaser for a valuable  consideration accord after hear counsel on this appeal it be order and adjudge  that the same shall be dismiss and the decree and confirmation thereof therein  complain of affirm jour vol p brown er p