case slater versus buck at the roll if grantee of a rentcharge purchase part  of the land the rend shall be apportion in equity especial if he be ignorant  of his title to the rend when he make the purchase the plaintiff father create  a rentcharge out of the premise to himself for life remainder to the plaintiff  in fee with a power of revocation and sell the land to the defendant father  which descend on the defendant from who the plaintiff purchase a acre of the  say land and be after his father death acquaint with his title to the  rentcharge he apply to the defendant who pay it he several year and the  plaintiff for the rentarrear distrain mosely report the defendant replevied  and the plaintiff file a bill for a apportionment and a injunction master of  the roll if one who have a rentcharge issue out of land purchase part of the  land the whole rend be extinguish but if part of the land come to he by  descent the rend shall be apportion because the law work no wrong in the first  case the rend be extinguish because the purchase be the party own account but  since the law call it a wrong I think this court will relieve he but here the  plaintiff be unacquainted with his title when he purchase part of the land he  be not ignorant of the law but of the fact and therefore accord to the many  precedent and the common rule of equity he ought to be relieve if a man have a  personal demand of which he be ignorant and give a general release which in  point of law be a bar to he of all demand yet in this court it shall release  only those demand he be acquaint with and not those he be ignorant of but it  be say that it must be presume the plaintiff know of this rend which be create  in his favour by his own father but it can be presume so for the rentcharge be  pound ayear in fee and the acre of land he purchase be but fifteen shilling  ayear and since I be not to presume the plaintiff ignorant of the law I can  suppose he will have take this small conveyance if he have at that time be  acquaint with this title to the pound ayear and he be no party to the deed  which will have be some presumption he know it though he never execute it and  yet in that case I shall have expect some evidence of it and his father may  not think proper to acquaint he with the deed because it be subject to a  revocation and the defendant pay this rentcharge for many year and though he  say he be not then acquaint with the advantage he have at law shall I suppose  he to be ignorant of the law and not the plaintiff be it therefore decree that  the land shall stand charge against the defendant and all claim under he with  the pound S and that the plaintiff shall have his cost at law and in this  court and a perpetual injunction against the replevin I will not direct a new  conveyance of such a rentcharge for fear of mesne encumbrance Chan Cas mosely  report er p mosely report Wednesday January the that