case bird versus hooper pale yellow Chan Eq Abr c S c ante a by his will give  his child several legacy and give his old son pound afterward give he pound to  go to Italy and be a merchant enter his son debtor pound afterward upon a  calculation of his estate and find it not sufficient to pay the whole he by a  codicil retrench pound out of the young child legacy without take notice of  this pound the pound shall not be deduct out of the pound to the old son a man  have several child make his will and thereby devise to they several legacy and  among the rest give his old son pound afterward the father send his old son to  Italy and give he pound and be a merchant make a entry in his book on the  debtor side my son b debtor pound then by a codicil have a account of his  estate and find it will not answer all the legacy he retrench pound out of  each of the young child legacy without take any notice of the old son and by  his say codicil he mention several debt that be owe to he and give they  towards pay the legacy but take no notice of the pound so advance to his old  son and soon after die the question be whether this pound shall be deduct out  of the old son legacy of pound he have bring his bill for the whole legacy for  the plaintiff it be argue that no deduction ought to be make for saint it be  plain that if such entry have be before the make of the will and then he have  by his will give pound to the plaintiff he shall have have it all without any  regard to such entry that though here it be make after the will yet precedent  in chancery the testator be a merchant and keep book regular for the entry of  all money issue out or receive by way of creditor and debtor this entry be  only for a memorandum to show when and to who this pound be pay that it be  usual among such person to set down all the money they pay and if to the cook  or housekeeper for the necessary of the family yet they usual enter they  debtor so much and therefore this entry be not to be regard dly when he  afterward make his codicil he thereby retrench pound out of all his other  child legacy and yet take no notice of this pound advance to his old son which  if he have intend shall be deduct he will have mention it beside he therein  reckon up several sum of money that be due to he from several person and  thereby make a estimate of his estate and if he have intend to include this  pound he will likewise have take notice of that as a debt due to he it be also  further urge that this pound be advance all at once as a sum in gross for the  set out his old son in the world that he have be no other charge to his father  whereas the other child be a constant charge to he that he have a particular  kindness for this son and if the pound shall be deduct out of this legacy he  will have less share of his father kindness than the other child the defendant  the executor confess asset and submit to do as the court shall direct the  master of the roll be only in court decree the whole pound to the plaintiff  and mention a case of my Lord Guernsey who marry a daughter of sir John bank  with who he have a considerable fortune in land afterward sir John build a  house upon the land and be a merchant make a entry Lord Guernsey debtor so  much for building the house and then make his will and devise the residue of  his estate precedent in chancery to his two daughter and yet it be hold this  house shall fall into the lump of the fortune give the lady Guernsey note for  the plaintiff be cite Chan Cas S precedent in chancery er p Jones v Selby  precedent in chancery er case jones versus selby follow mustapha v Wedlake W n  Eq Abr c pale yellow Chan S c ante wms wms vezey S c cite and state by Lord h  atk the nature of a donation causan death in what it differ from a will the  evidence to prove it must be very strong this be a appeal from a decree of the  master of the roll upon one single point which be this the plaintiff be a  relation of and housekeeper to Charles amhurst decease and have live with he  upward of twenty year Charles amhurst in march make his will and thereby give  the plaintiff who name be then Wetherley pound about two or three month after  be mind to augment her fortune and have a hair trunk wherein be several thing  of value he send for her and call up two of his servant and in their presence  say thus I give to my cousin mrs Wetherley this hair trunk and all that be  contain in it and deliver her the key thereof and bid the servant take notice  and remember it if they shall be at any time call upon for that purpose and  several time after as it be prove in the cause ask they if they remember the  hair trunk and once take a candle and show it they that they may remember it  about three year after Charles amhurst make another will wherein he first  revoke all other will by he at any time make and by that will give the  plaintiff pound but take no notice of the gift of the hair trunk or any thing  in it and die four day after his death upon open of the trunk in the presence  of several relation and other there be find in it several ring piece of gold  and among other thing a tally upon the government for pound precedent in  chancery the now plaintiff mrs Jones bring her bill for the pound and for this  pound tally and have a decree for the pound but by reason of the parliament  sit the other point as to the tally be hear before the master of the roll and  he likewise decree that to her whereupon this appeal be bring it be prove for  the appellant that the trunk be never remove from the place where it stand at  first that Mr amhurst give out the order from time to time for renew of the  interest upon the tally and receive it himself it be now insist upon for the  appellant that the testator have give her pound by his first will though he  afterward declare his intention to make it up pound and accord give her the  trunk and all that be in it yet there be but a donation causan death that it  be in the nature of a legacy wait for the death of the testator and be  ambulatory and open till that time that by his revoke all former will this  donation which be but in nature of a will and not to receive its completion  till his death be revoke likewise that however if it be not yet his intention  appear by the first will and the subsequent donation to give her but pound  that the pound give by the will shall be take in recompense and satisfaction  thereof that if a man give bind for the payment of a sum of money to another  and after by his will give the same person a legacy of as great or more value  that shall be take to be in satisfaction of the debt a strong in this case  where it be only a gift that be voluntary and not to take effect till his  death beside it be urge that the plaintiff ought to have prove that this tally  be in the trunk at the time of the gift that it be probable that if the  testator have intend to give her that over and above the pound he precedent in  chancery will have ratify it by his will or at least have take some notice of  it and that be in the nature of a legacy it ought not to stand against  creditor the creditor likewise have bring a cross bill for satisfaction of  their debt and therefore it be pray that the decree may be reverse on the  other side it be argue much from the proof of the testator kindness to the  plaintiff that the reason he give no more than pound by his will be because he  have give his own sister no more that he intend to leave the plaintiff in such  a condition as to be able to keep a servant after his death c that they have  prove the gift of this hair trunk by two servant and his delivery of the key  that he after precedent in chancery er p ware refuse to take the key tell her  it be her own that if this tally do not belong to the plaintiff the gift will  be of little value that he never will have use so much solemnity in the give  of it to her if there have be nothing in it that it be strange he shall call  up two of his servant and so often ask they if they remember it if he have  give her nothing but a old hair trunk then as to the donation causan death  they agree it be not to take effect till his death but when that happen it  take effect ab beginning from the donation make that the revocation of all  former will can not revoke that and cite Bracton and justinian institute of  the several sort of donation causan death that by they it appear such donation  have no dependence on the will that if the donor die first it be a absolute  gift but if the donor die first then indeed it be to return back to the donor  and not to go to the executor or representative of the donor that this tally  shall be presume to be in the trunk at that time and to presume the plaintiff  put it in after will be to presume her guilty of a fraud precedent in chancery  which be a presumption against law and equity and therefore it lie on the  other side to prove it be put in after that the take no notice of this tally  in his will be a argument that he do not look upon it as any part of his  estate but give away before that upon open of the trunk this tally be find in  it and the several relation and other present be then satisfy of the plaintiff  right thereto however they have be advice since and therefore it be pray the  decree may be affirm Lord chancellor say you agree that a donation causan  death be a gift in present time to take effect in going to be after the party  death as a will and that it be revocable during his life as a will be and so  it differ in nothing from a will for it be not a present substantive gift and  therefore he think that this case consist but of two point saint whether there  be sufficient evidence to prove that the tally be in the trunk at the time of  the gift dly whether this will be not a revocation of it as to the saint he  premise that these sort of donation especial where they be of the same kind  with what be give by the will ought to be full prove in all their circumstance  otherwise they be not to be countenance because it will open a way to perjury  and fraud great than the statute already in force have provide against that  here the plaintiff have not prove by any one witness that this tally be in the  trunk at the time of the gift that if it have be so sure the testator will  then or when he have occasion so often after have tell the witness of it that  it be strange he shall bid they take notice of the trunk and not mention the  tally which be the principal thing in it that all the plaintiff prove upon  this score be its be there when the trunk be open which be three year after  the gift and four day precedent in chancery after the testator death that he  set there to condemn fraud and therefore may presume they unless they prove  the contrary as to the and point whether the will be not a revocation he say  it can not be proper call a revocation but the pound therein give shall be  look upon as a satisfaction of the pound gift en her by the first will and the  pound tally after that one can be say to revoke a debt by his will but yet he  may satisfy it by give a legacy of equal value and since he have revoke all  former will this pound be a satisfaction equivalent to a revocation and must  go in recompense of the pound he have before intend her since she can not  prove he intend it otherwise for if she have then the donation causan death  must have stand and therefore the decree be reverse in the case of ware v  turner vezey dick the doctrine respect a donation causan death be full explain  and many authority cite and ample comment upon by Lord Hardwick it be there  determine that the gift of receipt for S S annuity be not a delivery to pass  the annuity as a donation causan death precedent in chancery er p precedent in  chancery de boundary S mich in curian porter