case marshal versus frank ux Eq Abr c c S c pale yellow Rep S c where a  settlement shall be good and take effect though not accord to the intent of  the party one have issue a daughter by his first wife who be dead and be  possess of several message for a term of year make a mortgage of they for  secure the sum of pound and after on his marriage give bind to trustee to  leave pound to his intend wife at his death then the marriage take effect and  the wife be possess of a leasehold estate the husband in consideration of his  wife have join with he in the sale and disposition of her leasehold estate and  also in consideration of the delivery up of the bind by indenture of lease and  release grant bargain sell and demise his own leasehold estate to trustee and  their heir to the use of himself and his wife for their life and the life of  the survivor of they remainder to the heir of the wife and covenant that he be  seize in fee then the wife die without issue but before her death she make a  write in nature of a will and thereby devise the premise so settle on her to  the plaintiff and his heir and the plaintiff after get a release from the heir  at law of the precedent in chancery wife the husband afterward on the marriage  of his daughter with the defendant frank enter into article whereby he agree  to settle and convey the premise on the defendant and his wife and their issue  and the defendant afterward have notice of the first settlement pay off the  mortgage and take a assignment of the mortgage term and this bill be bring by  the plaintiff as devisee of the defendant mother to have a redemption of the  precedent in chancery er p term and the benefit of the devise the defendant  plead the article make on his marriage and that he be a purchaser for valuable  consideration and have no notice of the first settlement but will not swear  this plea so the plea be overrule and his title set forth by way of answer as  before it be now insist for the defendant that admit any thing pass by the  lease and release to the mother under who the plaintiff claim yet that it be  only a voluntary settlement and therefore ought not to take place against the  defendant who be purchaser for valuable consideration and as they pretend  without notice though this be not swear that the settlement be voluntary  appear from its be make after marriage and the consideration of the wife have  join with her husband in the sale of her estate be nothing that be only  leasehold the husband have absolute power to dispose of it without her and  therefore her consent or concurrence no consideration and as to the delivery  up of the bind that be now out of the case she die before her husband but dly  it be insist that nothing at all pass by the settlement for it be only a term  in gross no use pass to the trustee by the statute of h which only raise a use  where the person be seize that by the lease for a year which be only a bargain  and sale no use pass and there be no attornment to vest it as a reversion and  the release be to inure precedent in chancery upon it by way of enlargement of  estate if nothing pass by the lease or if no possession be transfer by that  then there be no estate whereon the release can operate and whatever  consideration it may have in equity to create a trust can not affect the  defendant who have both law and equity on their side law by a assignment of  the legal interest from the mortgagee and equity as purchaser for a valuable  consideration that beside the estate settle on the mother be only a term for  year the limitationto her heir be void and admit it have be good yet she be  under coverture and have no power whatsoever to make a will and consequent the  devise thereof to the plaintiff be void and then the release of his heir at  law can have no operation nor have he any interest in he to release and then  the term go to the husband he survive his wife and consequent this settlement  on the defendant must take place that the husband be also the person entitle  to take out administration to the wife and therefore admit this settlement  shall pass the whole interest in the term yet the husband may at any time take  out administration to his wife and thereby entitle himself to it on the other  side it be insist that the husband have actual take out letter of  administration to the wife and though he have not the letter of administration  in court yet it be send to the master to inquire whether the land comprise in  the article make on the daughter marriage be the same which be mention in the  mother settlement there be some reason to doubt of it the court leave the  plaintiff at liberty to produce his letter of administration before the master  and my Lord chancellor be of opinion that either by virtue of such  administration or by the devise of the wife operate as a appointment or by the  release of the heir at law of the mother by some or one of precedent in  chancery all those way the plaintiff ought to be let into a redemption of the  term for though the settlement can not operate as a lease and release yet the  husband be in possession and not the mortgagee and there be the word grant in  the release it take effect as a grant or a assignment of his whole interest at  commonlaw and though it can not go to the heir of the wife yet his intention  be plain to exclude himself from the whole interest of his estate he shall not  after be admit to derogate from it and therefore it shall vest in those in who  by law it may which be the administrator of the wife for as the husband intend  to divest himself of the whole fee if it have be a fee there be no reason when  it appear to be a less interest that this shall not pass and therefore be of  opinion that the defendant ought to assign on payment by the plaintiff of the  principal and interest but send it to a master to inquire as to the value of  the land precedent in chancery er p