case Scroggs against Scroggs estate settle on marriage upon the husband and  wife for their life remainder to such child or child as the husband with the  consent of the trustee shall appoint and in default of appointment to the  first and other son in tail the father with the consent of the survive trustee  appoint to his young son bill by the old son to set aside the appointment for  misrepresentation and imposition on the trustee the trustee evidence be read  to prove the imposition but the father evidence to prove no misrepresentation  or imposition be reject see a full note of this case post appendix g lib Reg b  foe S c Sugd power p hark ms append Friday that may a settlement be make  pursuant to article before marriage by which William Scroggs and his wife be  tenant for life of ChuteLodge estate with remainder to such child or child of  the marriage in tail male as William Scroggs with the consent of trustee  therein name for which the present duke of Somerset be the survivor shall  appoint so as the old son shall have pound ayear for life charge upon the  estate and for want of such issue or in default of appointment to the first c  son in tail male c William Scroggs have two son the plaintiff William and  Edward and have by represent the plaintiff as undutiful and extravagant  prevail on the duke to join in appoint by deed the estate to Edward the young  son bill by plaintiff to set aside the deed of appointment for  misrepresentation and imposition on the duke by William Scroggs the father and  inter alian the duke be examine and read in evidence to prove the  misrepresentation and other person to prove the plaintiff be dutiful and not  extravagant and to prove that the defendant William Scroggs the father act  from partiality to the young son and anger and resentment against plaintiff on  the other side the evidence of thefather himself be offer to be read to prove  the plaintiff undutifulness and extravagance but be object to Lord Hardwicke  ambler chancellor express himself clear of opinion that his evidence ought not  to be read for the power be to be consider as a trust to be execute with  discretion that the father be charge with breach of the trust by have impose  on the duke by misrepresentation which depend on the truth or untruth of his  suggestion of undutifulness and extravagancy in plaintiff and therefore he be  improper to be read in evidence to prove they himself that if the plaintiff  shall prevail and set aside the deed of appointment the plaintiff will be  entitle to cost and he can not have they against the duke or against Edward  the young brother but against his father only note the appointment be set  aside gallant v Parker sir George Downing v Bagnal post nom Downing v townsend  see Sugden on power note l that and that July be cite on the part of the  plaintiff