case spencer against chase if a buy from b a minor under circumstance of  distress the reversion of a house worth forty pound ayear for a hundred pound  and sell it again in a few day for two hundred pound equity will compel a to  account with b for the difference this be a bill exhibit by the plaintiff  against the defendant to have a account of what be real due to he and foe have  a reconveyance of the estate upon payment of the money e the bill set forth  that the defendant have impose on the plaintiff when under age and have get  several bargain make between they which he compel the plaintiff to execute  modern report since he come of age and particular a mortgage of a house in  russelstreet in Bloomsbury which the defendant now claim as a absolute sale  and that be persuade the plaintiff to mortgage other land to he the defendant  to secure the repayment of six hundred and forty pound when in truth be the  plaintiff never receive above three hundred and twenty pound of he upon any  account whatsoever the defendant by his answer deny any trust of the house in  russelstreet but insist that it be a absolute sale thereof to he and as to the  mortgagemoney be can not remember the several sum he have pay to the plaintiff  but affirm that he have pay several sum to he and discharge several of his  note to other person but can tell when or to who such note be Payable or who  be witness to they have cancel they at the time he take this mortgage for his  security but that he have actual pay to the plaintiff one hundred and one  pound ten shilling and sixty pound more and deliver a chaise to he in all to  the value of two hundred pound and upward but deny any imposition on the  plaintiff and insist that he may be allow two hundred and ten pound the  plaintiff have of he over and above the six hundred and forty pound secure by  the mortgage beside his charge and bill of fee and expense as a attorney for  the plaintiff which be not yet make up but insist that they shall be allow on  the account it be argue for the plaintiff that from the nature of this  transaction he have a very hard case for it appear in the cause that he be a  attorney clerk and be very extravagant be encourage support and supply by the  defendant in that way of live be be another attorney in the neighbourhood and  who know the plaintiff be entitle to the say house and land while under age  and modern report er p have be support in his extravagancy with several small  sum of money at several time by the defendant he threaten this young man as  soon as he come of age to send he to gaol if he do not repay the money and  thereupon he extort from he both this conveyance of the house in russelstreet  and the mortgage of his other land a see Stapleton v Stapleton atk crow v  Ballard brown c c delorain v brown brown c c fox v Macreth brown c c Dungey v  angove vezey jun a now this house be very well tenant be a good house and let  for forty pound per annum and the plaintiff who be entitle to the reversion  after the death of a old life then in be sell it to the defendant for a  hundred pound who within a few day afterward sell it to one Hucksley for two  hundred pound modern report and as to the mortgagemoney even the defendant can  show any particular of money pay by he more than the plaintiff have set forth  in his bill so that be must come to a account for that money and ought  likewise to account for the profit of the house in russelstreet  notwithstanding the pretend conveyance thereof be make by he after he come of  age because it be extort from he in the manner as already mention but as to  that matter it be answer by the defendant counsel that there be no colour to  make he account for the profit of the house in russelstreet for though  Hucksley give he two hundred pound for it in a little time after he the  defendant buy it of the plaintiff yet that be a great deal more than the real  value it be buy for the conveniency of the purchaser who house be contiguous  and that there be no colour to avoid the sale thereof because there be no  manner of proof that the plaintiff be impose on or circumvent and as to the  mortgagemoney there be a crossbill exhibit against the plaintiff be own in his  answer that he have receive several considerable sum of the defendant  therefore if he the defendant shall be make subject to account and it be very  hard to prove every particular disbursement make by he in behalf and for the  use of the plaintiff it may be reasonable that he shall be examine upon  interrogatory and that the defendant bill of cost and all other his demand may  be bring into the account and allow but upon read the will of the plaintiff  father which be his title to the mortgage land it appear to be a devise of the  say land to trustee and their heir until the plaintiff come of the age of  twentyfive year and then in trust for he and the heir of his body remainder to  the right heir of the father and it appear that the plaintiff be not of the  age of twentyfive year when be execute this mortgage but of the age of twenty  one year and no more so that express by his father will he be not to take  until four year after the mortgage be make the court be of opinion that it be  void in law for if it be a contingent and executory devise to the plaintiff it  be plain he have no title until the contingency shall happen but if the  estatetail be execute in he then be may make a title by suffer a common  recovery but let it be either way he be now of age and ought to pay or secure  what be just due to the defendant modern report but as to the sale of the  house in russelstreet it be a imposition on the plaintiff for the defendant  buy it for less than three year purchase therefore he ought to make a  allowance for what he sell it more than he pay for it to the plaintiff a Herne  v to make water vern Chesterfield v Jansen vezey S c atk James v Morgan lev  Buxton v Lister atk Willis v Jernegan atk Stanhope v cope atk Baldwin v  Rochfort will barny v beal Ch case Twisselton v Griffith Peer wms Clarkson v  Hanway Peer wms Osmond v Fitzroy Peer wms Astley v Reynolds stram Barker v  vansomer brown c c Heathcote v Paignon brown c c a and the mortgage be decree  to stand as a security for what shall appear to be just due to the defendant  of which the master be to take a account and that the modern report er p  plaintiff shall have his cost to this time to be deduct out of what shall  appear to be due to the defendant and that upon payment therefore the  defendant shall reconvey but upon nonpayment the plaintiff shall suffer a  common recovery for the defendant security and be foreclose accord to his  prayer in the cross bill and if the defendant be Willing to be at the charge  the plaintiff shall suffer a recovery immediate lest the defendant shall die  before what be due to he shall be pay