case neeve and other against keck a man covenant for himself and his heir to  surrender a copyhold estate to such use and die before it be do and a bill be  bring against his heir for a specific execution of this covenant and decree  accord S c Eq ab this be a bill bring by the daughter and heir of Oliver neeve  by a former venture against the defendant who be heir at law to Francis neeve  and it be to have a specific execution of a covenant to surrender copyhold  land make by the say Francis on the marriage of Oliver with his second wife  who be the daughter of one Sheffield the bill set forth that in consideration  of the say marriage the aforesaid Oliver Francis and Sheffield agree to settle  their several estate to the use follow the estate of the say Oliver be to be  settle to the use of himself and his intend wife for life remainder to the  first and every other son and son of the body of the say Oliver on the body of  a b his intend wife to be beget with several remainder over remainder to the  right heir of the say Oliver for ever Mr Sheffield agree to settle his estate  to the use of himself for life and after his decease to the use of the say  Oliver and a b his intend wife for life remainder to the son of that marriage  in tail male c Francis neeve agree to settle his estate to the use of himself  and his wife for life with like remainder to the son of Oliver in tail male  modern report and pursuant to this agreement the estate of the say Oliver and  Sheffield be settle to the use aforesaid and the say Francis neeve in order to  keep his estate in his name and blood and in consideration of the say marriage  and of the natural love and affection which he do bear to his cousin Oliver  neeve and in consideration of five shilling to he pay by the say Oliver  covenant for himself and his heir to stand seize of the land c to the use of  himself for life remainder to his wife for life remainder to Oliver and his  wife for life remainder to the fitSt and every other son and son of the say  Oliver in tail male remainder to the right heir of Oliver for ever and for the  consideration aforesaid he covenant for himself and his heir to surrender his  copyhold land to the same use before Michaelmas follow Francis neeve the  covenantor and his wife be both since dead and now this bill be bring against  his heir at law to have a specific performance of the aforesaid covenant have  bind himself and his heir to perform the same the attorneygeneral who be of  counsel for the defendant confess the agreement and the settlement make as set  out in the bill but insist that the defendant be not oblige to carry this  covenant into execution it be true the settlement make by Francis be in  consideration of this marriage and to keep the estate in his name and blood  and so far Francis will have be oblige to perform this covenant a Peyton v  Bladwill vern a and so will his heir at law b wright v wright vezey b but  since the plaintiff in this suit be the daughter of Oliver by a former venture  they be not likely to continue the estate of Francis in modern report er p his  name for when they marry they must change their name neither be they within  any of the consideration of this settlement therefore in respect to they this  covenant stand mere on the foot of a voluntary conveyance and such a covenant  be deny to be carry into execution against a heir in favour of a brother c  case in chancery c for no other reason but because it be voluntary it be argue  for the plaintiff that this be a good and formal covenant to bind Francis  neeve and his heir and that there be a very good and sufficient consideration  for the same for the marriage of Oliver be a consideration which go through  all the use of this conveyance but if that alone do not go through all the use  yet Oliver and Sheffield have settle their respective estate on this marriage  those settlement modern report together with the marriage be consideration  sufficient to raise all the use thereinmentioned now Francis have covenant for  himself and his heir to surrender his copyhold land before Michaelmas follow  to the same use he have convey his freehold estate he be a trustee in this  court for the covenantee until that be do and though he do surrender within  the time videlicet before Michaelmas accord to the covenant yet that be not  material in a court of equity where there be no regard have to such  circumstance of time or place when the estate be once bind by the covenant and  as to the length of time before this bill be bring to have a specific  performance of this covenant it can with any colour of reason be object to the  plaintiff because they commence this suit within a year after the remainder  limit to they vest in possession it have be object that in respect to the  plaintiff this covenant be voluntary and stand mere on the foot of a voluntary  conveyance but certain there be a wide difference between a voluntary  conveyance and a voluntary covenant for if a voluntary conveyance shall be  defective this court will not enforce the execution thereof because it be  defective it do not bind in law but as by a voluntary covenant a man be bind  in law so he be also bind in conscience in a court of equity and the only  reason why this court will enforce a specific execution of such a covenant be  because it be a more adequate remedy than the damage which may be give by a  jury on a action at law for breach of the covenant a Furnival v crew atk a  therefore since Francis neeve have bind himself and his heir by this covenant  and since Oliver be a purchaser under it the plaintiff who be his heir be  likewise purchaser and ought to have a specific execution of this covenant and  the rather because the widow of Francis enjoy this copyhold estate during her  life by virtue of this covenant so that the defendant have thereby admit a  execution thereof in part of the use limit thereby the court be of opinion  that there be several consideration in these settlement sufficient to raise  and support the use and first it be probable that Oliver will not have settle  his own estate in that manner which he have do but in prospect of the estate  now question for by that settlement there be no provision make for young child  so that if there shall happen to be a son of this marriage the rest of the  child will have nothing modern report out of their father estate but what he  can provide for they in his lifetime and sometime it be very prejudicial to a  family where the father have a great estate and no power to charge it with  portion for young child as for instance this case happen the testator devise a  estate of four thousand pound ayear to the devisee for life remainder over but  without any power of make a jointure to a wife afterward the devisee settle  all his own estate in jointure on the woman he intend to marry and with who he  do marry and then he die without issue so that the estate which he take by the  will go over to he in remainder and the paternal estate be all in jointure to  his widow and his next relation have nothing to support they but in the  principal case Oliver neeve who marry the daughter of Sheffield be make rich  and that may be a consideration for settle his estate as he do and the widow  of Francis enjoy this copyhold during her life by virtue of this covenant by  which her husband have bind his estate therefore it be decree that the  defendant shall surrender this copyhold to the use of the plaintiff and their  heir and at their expense a see take v Hastings vern Hobson v Trevor Peer wms  Randal v Randal Peer Wms a modern report er p