case Mitford and other against lord herbert Pritchard croom and other where a  person insist on a absolute gift by the intestate in his lifetime when it  appear to be only a trust S c Eq ab John Bromley be possess of a considerable  personal estate marry the daughter of the defendant Pritchard from who he  afterward depart and thereupon she obtain a sentence for alimony which he the  say Bromley disobey he be excommunicate then he go to parish and place two  thousand pound in the townhouse there in the Lord Herbert name and have a  mortgage on the duke of powis estate for secure the repayment of a thousand  pound and interest and have two hundred and forty pound in ready money and  jewel in his trunk and some wearingapparel and die intestate after his death  the aforesaid Croom one of the defendant possess himself of this two hundred  and forty pound and of all modern report the jewel and wear apparel pretend  the same be give to he by the intestate in his lifetime and the widow of the  say Bromley have by her last will devise some legacy make the defendant  Pritchard executor and die afterward Pritchard by virtue of the say will  possess himself to the value of seven hundred pound of the say intestate  estate thereupon the plaintiff as nephew and nextofkin to the say John Bromley  exhibit this bill to have a distribution make to they of a moiety of the say  intestate estate and that though Pritchard be entitle to the other moiety by  virtue of the will of his widow yet he ought to take a moiety of the have debt  a well as of the good and that the defendant Croom may be Accountable to the  plaintiff for a moiety of the say bromley estate in his Crooms hand  notwithstanding the pretence of a free gift make thereof to he by the say  Bromley in his lifetime the counsel for the defendant Pritchard submit to  account for a moiety of the say bromley estate in his the say pritchard hand  but insist that he be entitle to have a allowance of such debt which be owe to  he by the intestate who have leave his wife the daughter of the say Pritchard  without any support and be go into place remote she be maintain by the  defendant Pritchard several year so that he be entitle to retain so much of  her husband estate as shall be account a reasonable satisfaction for such  maintenance and as a debt due to he from the husband modern report er p and as  for the pretend gift to the other defendant Croom it will be the interest of  the defendant Pritchard to have it set aside for then be as executor to the  widow of the intestate will be entitle to a moiety of his estate in his hand  for in truth it be not a gift but a trust in he contrive between the intestate  and the say Croom for that the intestate be excommunicate can not make a will  and if he have make one it can not have be prove so to avoid this disability  this method be contrive between they to dispose the personal estate in the  lifetime of the intestate as for Adderley another of the defendant there be no  proof that be intermeddle with any of the intestate good the bill as against  he ought to be dismiss with cost modern report so that the chief contest in  this cause be concern the two hundred and forty pound receive by the say  defendant Croom which as his counsel insist be a absolute gift to he a few day  before the intestate death subject to pay two legacy of ten pound apiece and  to pay his apothecary bill and the expense of his funeral and since be  excommunicate be can make no will it be the more reasonable he shall dispose  his estate in his lifetime in this manner and it be in proof that be often  declare that his own hand shall be his executor and that he will give all away  while he be live and this be a very natural disposition to the defendant Croom  who be his near relation and godson and the person who he most trust during  the time he abscond on the account of the excommunication and the prosecution  by his wife and her friend so that it be a donation death causan and that be  where anything be give for fear of death on some think of a present or future  danger which donation be gratuitous and a absolute gift and the defendant be  proper entitle to the benefit thereof and therefore not to account to the  plaintiff or any other for this gift the counsel for the plaintiff aver that  the defendant Pritchard have admit a great part of what they have pray in the  bill but that he insist on the allowance of some debt due to he from his  daughter the intestate wife and which he ought not to retain out of the money  in his hand but out of all the moiety of the intestate estate to which he be  entitle by virtue of her will and as for what be insist on by the defendant  Croom that the intestate in his lifetime give he the two hundred and forty  pound now in his hand there be no colour that he shall not account for it for  admit it be a donation death causan such a gift be good by the civil law as a  will but by that law a excommunicate person can make a will for if be can then  such person may dispose of their estate by will in this manner neither be this  a absolute gift to the defendant Croom for it be in proof that it be a bare  trust and this appear by the best proof that can be make and that be  testimonium rei for after the delivery of the good and the receipt of this  money the intestate appoint Croom to pay such debt and legacy to his nephew  beside there be a very strong presumption that the testator be not of a  dispose memory at the time of make this pretend gift for he say it be all  which he have in the world so modern report be forget a great sum which he  have in the townhouse at parish which can never be intend if he have be in his  sense the court be of opinion that this be a odd claim by the defendant Croom  as a absolute gift of this two hundred and forty pound when it plain appear to  be a trust it be true be swear in his answer that the intestate give he all  his personal estate and direct he to pay the apothecary bill and ten pound  apiece to his two nephew but this direction be subsequent in time to this  pretend gift and that prove it to be a trust for the intestate therefore it be  decree that the defendant Croom shall account and that the bill shall be  dismiss with cost as to adderley and as for the other defendant Pritchard that  he shall be allow what be due to he for the maintenance of the intestate wife  while he be live but not for her maintenance since her husband death but he be  not entitle to cost of this suit unless they have be tax and ascertain in the  lifetime of her husband modern report er p