case edward williams appellant John bell lane esquire and the right honourable  mary viscountess Lanesborough respondent d February a claimant under a  marriage settlement without notice of prior encumbrance shall not be compel to  a discovery sir George lane in the year purchase from Thomas Dutton Esq son  and heir of sir Thomas Dutton Knt the manor and land of Rathcline and other  land in the county of Longford in Ireland and be thereof seize and possess be  in during his attendance upon king Charles two in foreign part oust and  dispossess of the say manor and land by mean of the then rebellion in that  kingdom and continue so dispossess until the year brown on the restoration of  the king and in the that year of his reign a d a act pass in the parliament of  England wherein it be enact that the say sir George lane his heir trustee and  assign shall have hold and enjoy and shall be and be thereby adjudge to be in  such actual seize and possession of the say manor of Rathcline and Lisduffe  with their appurtenance as he be in on the that September and shall and may  enjoy all other the land tenement and hereditament wherein the say sir George  lane have any estate in possession reversion or remainder on the say that day  of September in as large ample and beneficial manner to all intent and purpose  as he the say sir George lane or any other person or person in trust for he or  to his use have hold or enjoy or of right ought to have hold or enjoy the same  and that all act ordinance order attainder record and other matter and thing  whatsoever have make transact or do to the prejudice of he the say sir George  lane since the say that day of September shall be as against the say sir  George lane his heir and assign void and null to all intent and purpose as if  the same have never be make by a act of parliament pass in Ireland in the that  year of king Charles two common call the act of settlement it be enact that it  shall and may be lawful to and for sir George lane Knt his heir and assign to  have hold possess and quiet enjoy to the use of he the say sir George lane his  heir and assign all the land tenement and hereditament wherein the say sir  George lane have any estate in possession reversion or remainder on the that  day of September and also all the castle manor land tenement and hereditament  which he the say sir George lane or any other person in trust for he or to his  use have purchase of or from Thomas Dutton Esq son and heir of sir Thomas  Dutton Knt decease and also of and from sir John Norton of Rotherfield in the  county of Southampton Bart situate lie and be in the county of Longford and  Leitrim contain by estimation acre of profitable land be it more or less save  unto all and every person and person body politic and corporate their heir  executor successor and assign other than to the king majesty his heir and  successor and other than to the say Thomas Dutton and sir John Norton or any  of they or the heir executor administrator or assign of they or any of they  and other than such person and person their heir executor or assign as do or  may claim to the use of or in trust for they or any of they and other than to  such person and person their heir executor and assign who shall not be adjudge  innocent accord to the qualification of that act all such estate right title  and interest either in law or equity as brown they or any of they have before  the make of the say act and in another act of parliament pass in Ireland in  the that year of his say majesty reign common call the act of explanation be  contain a clause enact that sir George lane and several other person therein  name and all other particular provide for in the say former act and not  particular mention in this act and other special provision make for they their  heir executor and assign shall hold and enjoy to they their heir and assign  all and singular the land tenement and hereditament in and by the say former  act settle brown er p grant dispose and confirm or mention mean or intend to  be settle grant dispose and confirm to they their heir and assign and not  already decree away by such decree as be hereby confirm and all other the  benefit and advantage of this act and the benefit and advantage in and by the  say former act mention in any particular clause or other proviso relate to  they or any of they their heir or assign the benefit of reprisal by the say  former act grant only except in pursuance of these several act sir George lane  on the that February car exhibit his claim to the say manor and land before  the commissioner appoint for put the say act in execution and on the that of  march follow that claim be hear before the say commissioner and it then appear  that the say land be seize and sequester in the time of the then late  rebellion in Ireland and thereby forfeit and vest in his say majesty to the  use in the several act mention the commissioner thereupon decree that the say  sir George lane be lawful entitle unto the same to he and his heir for ever in  free common soccage subject to a quit rend of pound S d per annum Payable into  the exchequer in Dublin and on the that of may follow the commissioner certify  this judgement under their hand and seal whereupon the premise be grant and  confirm to the say sir George lane his heir and assign for ever by letter  patent bear date the that July car sir George lane be so seize by indenture of  lease and release date the d and that may in consideration of the marriage of  his son James with mary Compton and of pound to he pay settle the say land and  manor of Rathcline on trustee to the use of himself for life remainder to his  say son James for life remainder to trustee to preserve contingent remainder  remainder to the first and other son of that marriage in tail male with  remainder over on the that December sir George lane have first be create Lord  viscount Lanesborough die upon who death his say son James then Lord viscount  Lanesborough be heir at law of his father and also a purchaser under his brown  own marriage settlement take possession of the say manor and land of Rathcline  which his father have enjoy to the time of his death and receive the rend and  profit thereof without molestation for upward of year but on the d July the  appellant file his bill in the court of chancery in Ireland against Lord James  pretend himself to be heir at law of sir Thomas Dutton and as such entitle to  the manor and land of Rathcline and also to the land in the county of Leitrim  and therefore pray a discovery of the purchase deed and that Lord James may  account for the rend and profit of all the say land and deliver up to he the  possession thereof to this bill Lord James put in a plea and answer and plead  in bar to the appellant claim the say marriage settlement marriage and the  portion pay without notice of any of the matter in the appellant bill that sir  George lane about the that December die seize and possess of the premise and  thereupon Lord James enter into possession and have enjoy the same ever since  that sir George lane be on the that December in possession and then oust and  so continue until he also plead the three several act of parliament decree  certificate and letter patent before state and by his answer say he believe  that the pound marriage portion be pay to his father and that he Lord James  never be in the possession or receive the rend and profit of the land in the  county of Leitrim this plea be argue on November before the then Lord  chancellor of Ireland the same be allow and thereupon the appellant reply and  witness have be examine on both side the cause be hear on that February before  the commissioner for the custody of the great seal of Ireland when the  appellant claim appear vexatious the court order his bill to be dismiss and in  case he give any further trouble to pay the cost of the suit but the appellant  notwithstanding this decree procure the cause to be reheard on the that July  before the then Lord chancellor who be please to order and adjudge that the  say former order shall be affirm the appellant be still dissatisfy apply for  and obtain a further hear brown er p on the that may when offer to read other  evidence and proof than what have be either read or offer to be read on the  former hear and re hear the court declare they can see no reason to permit  such proof to be read on this further hear and therefore refuse the same soon  afterward the say James Lord viscount Lanesborough die but before his death he  make his will date the that of October and thereby devise to the lord bishop  of bath and well Hatton Compton Robert dorm and James Middleton brown esqr  inter alian the say manor of Rathcline in trust to permit the respondent mary  viscountess Lanesborough to receive the rend and profit thereof during her  life and the testator thereby declare his will to be that his trustee shall  with all convenient speed after the decease of the respondent mary viscountess  Lanesborough convey settle and assure the say premise to the use of the  respondent John bell lane for life remainder to his first and other son in  tail male remainder to George fox lane Esq for life with several remainder  over after Lord James death the appellant think proper to appeal from all  these several order and on his behalf it be contend that the marriage  settlement plead by the late Lord Lanesborough ought as to he and the  respondent lane his heir and devisee to be consider as a voluntary settlement  the land in question be no part of the lady jointure and it not appear that  sir George lane from who the estate move receive any part of her portion so  that there be no reason to consider Lord James as a purchaser for a valuable  consideration beside his say that he believe the portion be pay to his father  be not sufficient in this case for he be the husband be entitle to the portion  and whether it be pay to his father or to himself be a matter lie within his  own knowledge the averment of payment ought therefore in a plea of this nature  to have be positive it be very different from the case of a purchase make by a  ancestor where it may be sufficient for the defendant to say he believe and  hope to prove that the consideration money be pay by the ancestor that from  the several act of parliament plead by Lord James it appear that his father  neither have or can have the least right to any of the land in question but  such as he have purchase from Thomas Dutton and sir John Norton which of  itself be sufficient notice and it become incumbent on Lord James and his lady  friend to have inquire what estate or interest sir John lane have purchase  from Dutton and Norton which if they have do it will have appear that he have  only buy a redeemable or defeazable estate since therefore the act so plead  give sir George lane a title only to the land by he purchase from the say  Thomas Dutton and sir John Norton without mention any land in particular and  since Lord James have not prove or even in his plea aver that the land in  question be comprise in such purchase the appellant be well entitle to a  discovery of the purchase deed and of all the land and denominatioins comprise  therein and if so the plea ought not to have be allow nor the appellant bill  dismiss that sir Thomas Dutton and his son and also the appellant and his  mother be protestant and nowise forfeit person consequent not affect by the  vest clause in the act of settlement and explanation and it appear that sir  George lane have only a encumbrance on the land in question and come brown  first into the possession thereof under a lease make by sir Thomas Dutton he  ought not in equity to be allow a great benefit of his grant or patent than to  protect his encumbrance thereby and after satisfaction of such encumbrance and  the expiration of the lease that grant or patent ought to be consider as take  in trust for the heir of sir Thomas Dutton that the length of time be  sufficient account for by continual claim and well excuse by infancy coverture  and such like disability in the interval and for a considerable space be well  answer by the say old lease and last that the court of chancery ought to have  permit the appellant to prove his exhibit viva voice and to enter his proof as  read that he may have be the better able to lie open his case and proof full  upon this appeal it be therefore hope that the say several decree or order  will be reverse and the plea overrule so that the appellant may be at liberty  to seek for a full discovery and relief against the respondent lane the  devisee who be now come into the estate as a mere volunteer on the other side  it be only say that if the appellant be regular in his appeal yet for the  several reason contain in Lord James plea the respondent conceive brown er p  that the several order appeal from be equitable and just and ought therefore  to be affirm accord after hear counsel on this appeal it be order and adjudge  that the same shall be dismiss and the several order or decree therein  complain of affirm jour vol p