case DRAKEFORD versus wilks and other July if a legatee promise a testator  that in consideration of a disposition in favour of her she will do a act in  favour of a three person she who undertake to do the act must perform so thynn  v thynn vern reech v Kennegal Ves Amb SC say vide Whitton v Russell atk mrs  Drakeford a intimate friend of the plaintiff have make a will and thereby  devise a bind of pound and upward to the plaintiff the testatrix be afterward  induce to make a new will and give this bind to mrs and Wilks and make her  executrix but oblige her to promise that she will after her own death give it  to the plaintiff the testatrix die and and Wilks prove her will and about two  month after the death of the testatrix make a deed of gift of the bind to the  plaintiff to take place after her death and frequent declare that she will not  cheat the plaintiff and that she do it in regard to the promise she make the  testatrix upon the death of mrs and Wilks the bind come into the hand of the  obligor who be her brother and representative and upon his refuse to pay it  the plaintiff bring her bill to compel the payment of the bind and offer to  read evidence to establish the fact but it be insist by the defendant counsel  this be to give parole proof to overturn a write will and that the bind by the  will of mrs Drakeford have be give absolute to and Wilks who be make executrix  also and that it be within the mischief the statute of fraud and perjury  intend to prevent the court overrule the objection and the fact with all its  circumstance be very full prove Lord chancellor the first question be whether  there be any foundation to relieve the plaintiff on the trust and confidence  set up by the bill the second question be whether the court will assist in the  case of a voluntary deed I will consider the last question first in order to  remove it out of the way the defendant counsel have make two objection first  suppose it stand abstract from weakness and insanity in and Wilks it be a mere  voluntary deed and the court will not assist the plaintiff to carry it into  execution atkins this be of no weight because against any person who stand  before the court mere as the representative of mrs Wilks it be a good  disposition for a person may as well make a disposition by deed to take place  after her death so Ramsden v Jackson atk as by will this court have in several  instance decree such a deed to be good as against person stand only in  representation to the donor as be volunteer also but will not be good against  creditor the second objection be insanity in mrs and Wilks No evidence have be  lie before I of actual imposition circumvention or fraud and the deed of gift  appear to be a act consistent with every other act she have do it be insist  the prepare the draft of the deed to give it in the lifetime of mrs Wilks  instead of after death be a evidence of imposition but it appear clear to be  the mistake and ignorance of the drawer for it be alter immediate and submit  to but though there shall be no fraud yet if mrs and Wilks be incapable of  make any disposition at all it be void if it have rest here and this have be  the whole of the case I shall have send it to be try on the insanity  notwithstanding she do not appear on the evidence to be insane without lucid  interval but I will not send it to trial because the first point be with the  plaintiff which put a end to the second question it have be true say by Mr  Wilbraham it be dangerous to set up parole trust of personal estate as well as  real estate since the statute and that the court will not suffer parole  declaration to be set up in opposition to the will but if there be a  declaration and undertake by a legatee to do a act in consideration of the  testator devise to that legatee I know no case where the court have not decree  it whether such a undertake be before the will have be make or after the case  of thynn versus thynn in vern and Jones versus nabbs pasch Eq Cas Abr and  kinsman versus kinsman Q and mention in atkins er p Jones and nabbs depend  upon the undertake and promise of the person who be to receive benefit by the  will this be not set up any thing in opposition to the will but take care that  what have be undertake shall have its effect a will be ambulatory if the  testatrix have a conversation with a legatee and the legatee promise that in  consideration of the testator disposition in favour of her she atkins will do  a act in favour of a three person and the testator let we the will stand it be  very proper the person who undertake to do the act shall perform because I  must take it if mrs and Wilks have not so promise the testatrix will have  alter her mill therefore I be of opinion that such a undertake by a executor  or residuary legatee either before or after the will be make ought to have its  effect the next question be whether this have be sufficient prove I think it  have very clear for even some time after the will have be make mrs and Wilks  declare she will not defraud the plaintiff and there be a full evidence  likewise of the undertake by which she bind her own conscience a account must  be take of the principal and interest due on the bind and with cost because  the defendant be the debtor on the bind there be no occasion for a circuity to  decree the bind to be deliver up in order to have a suit at law for it because  as the defendant Wilks be the debtor I can decree a payment of the debt and  his lordship do decree accord Reg lib a fol