case Hanbury versus Lord Bateman October the custom of London will operate on  the orphanage part of a freeman estate and he can leave it to go in such  proportion as he please sir James Bateman a freeman of London on the marriage  of his daughter whether with Mr western give her a portion of pound which be  convey to trustee for the benefit of young child if any if none to Mr western  his executor administrator or assign and a jointure be settle in lieu of the  portion and in the deed be this covenant that if the say sir James shall by  any way or mean give or leave to any of his daughter other than the say  whether Bateman any sum or sum of money or other thing for her portion which  shall be deliver or convey and which shall exceed the value of pound that then  he will pay or give to Mr western his executor c so much money or other estate  as shall make his say daughter whether portion equal to that of any other  sister atkins in sir James Bateman die and his daughter whether orphanage  share come to pound S d over and above the pound in Mr western die leave only  two daughter the wife of the plaintiff Mr Hanbury and the wife of the  defendant Dominick the S d be in the hand of the defendant Lord Bateman  executor of sir James and this bill be bring to have it in money or to be lie  out in land pursuant to the covenant atkins er p sir James bateman will  whereas I be a freeman of the city of London my desire be that my estate may  go as to one moiety accord to the custom and whereas I have already advance my  daughter whether with pound my will be if there shall be a deficiency in one  moiety of my estate to make up my other five daughter portion pound that then  as much as be want to make up that sum to each of they shall be supply out of  the other moiety the statute of the Phil and man ch which be entitle a act for  the punishment of such as shall take away maiden that be inheritor be within  the age of sixteen year or that shall marry they without consent of their  parent be read to show that the sister of mrs Hanbury have forfeit her fortune  by marry under the age of year Dominick a footman in Lord bateman family  against the will of her relation Lord chancellor at the time of make this  statute the jurisdiction in these case vest in the court of star Chamber but  when that court be abolish the power as far as it be legal exercise be take up  by the court of king bench who have assume this authority ever since though a  husband be convict of a offence of a criminal kind yet it do not follow in all  case that it shall be give against he in evidence in a civil suit but in this  case I be of opinion that the conviction of the husband under this statute may  be read in evidence against he because it be use for no other purpose but to  convict he alone within the penalty of the statute otherwise if offer as to  the wife as it will tend to make her incur a forfeiture of her portion for her  life under the statute especial as she be a infant and be no party to the  conviction atkins I think it may be compare to the case of disability under  the statute of of William and mary cap against papist in which the court will  never suffer a conviction of recusancy to be give in evidence against a three  person but you must prove the fact as there be no proper evidence in this case  of the marriage he reserve the consideration of it to another time Lord  chancellor the great question be whether the contingency have happen on which  the augmentation of whether portion be to arise I be incline to think the  contingency have not happen at the time of enter into this covenant sir James  have several child the plain meaning of this covenant be to prevent sir James  Bateman from give a great portion out of his estate to one daughter than  another what be the meaning of these word other than that the say whether  Bateman do it mean that sir James Bateman shall leave his personal estate to  go equal among his daughter I think it mean if he shall give more to any one  daughter in preference or in exclusion of any other daughter then that he  shall be a debtor for so much to Mr western c but he have not do this for he  have leave the custom of the city of London to operate upon his personal  estate the covenant be plain not apply to his personal estate for the word be  if he shall deliver or convey which more proper and in legal understanding  belong to real estate so that he may have make that equivalent or satisfaction  for the inequality out of his land if sir James Bateman have give pound to any  other daughter in his lifetime he will have be liable to have be sue by Mr  western his executor c upon the covenant the consequence of the covenant be  that it create a debt upon his estate and not a charge upon the orphanage part  it have be object that if he shall by any way or mean give or leave will  extend to the orphanage share in favour of the plaintiff the present case  differ great from both the case cite Wilcox and Wilcox vern Blandy and Widmore  vern atkins it be not in the power of a freeman of London to leave his  orphanage share to go in such proportion as he please but the custom will  operate upon that part of a freeman estate bill dismiss Reg lib a fol atkins  er p