case lady Bodmin versus VANDEBENDY January in court Lord chancellor Eq can ab  pl pre Ch Ch can show p c S c a term keep on foot to protect a purchase if  equity will remove it in favour of a dowress who have recover at law ante case  the defendant for pound purchase of the Lord Bodmin the reversion after the  death of the Lord Warwick of land of near S per and and for protection of the  estate and to prevent the plaintiff dower the defendant upon his purchase take  a assignment of a term for year which be vest in trustee to secure the payment  of certain annuity and afterward in trust to attend the inheritance and  likewise take a assignment of a ancient statute that have be keep on foot for  the protection of the estate the plaintiff have recover dower at law but be  prevent from take out execution by reason of this term and statute to be  relieve against which and to be let into possession of her three be the end of  the plaintiff bill the defendant insist he be a purchaser and that he ought to  have the benefit of this term and statute for the protection of his purchase  for the plaintiff it be insist that be able sequitur law and that dower in the  eye of the law be as much favour as a purchaser and therefore where a tenant  in tail Vernon chancery case die without issue whereby the estate which be in  the husband be determine yet the dower continue and that a woman for her dower  come not in the post as have be object but it be a continuance of the husband  estate vide   Litt a and though a difference have obtain and be allow betwixt  a jointress that come in by the act of the party and a woman that by operation  of law become entitle to dower and that the former shall have the benefit of a  term limit to attend the inheritance and not the latter yet in truth there be  no ground in reason for such a difference for though a jointure may be make in  respect of a portion yet marriage itself be a sufficient consideration and so  esteem in law et strong quior be disposition law how man ndly the original  intent in create this term be only to secure the payment of annuity and that  particular intent be satisfy this term ought not to be long keep on foot and  this reason be enforce from the judgement give in the cause between hall and  Dench ante p where a man have by his will devise his land in fee to I S and  afterward have occasion for money mortgage the same land in fee to I n it be  decree that this mortgage be not a absolute revocation but that the devisee  shall have the benefit of redemption the mortgage be only for that particular  purpose to supply the mortgagors present occasion with money vide Baden v Lord  Pembroke post vol and so in this case the particular end in raise this term be  answer it ought not to be make use of to keep Vernon chancery case er p the  plaintiff out of her dower and they cite the case of the attorneygeneral and  Thruxton ante p where it be adjudge that the inheritance escheat though the  king by escheat come in the post yet he shall have the benefit of a term limit  to attend the inheritance it be there say the king be not in bare in the post  but in the per also by reason that the term go with the inheritance by the  express limitation of the party so where a term be attendant on the  inheritance if the king extend the inheritance he shall have a right to the  term Nicholls v how all post vol burgess v wheat Bl not hold to be law such  dict arg walker v den Ves jun and urge that in case there be a term raise of  land in gavelkind to attend the inheritance that equity will distribute this  term among all the heir in gavelkind pro rata and it be further urge that the  circumstance of this case be of great weight in equity the defendant be a  purchaser Vernon chancery case with notice of the plaintiff title to dower and  that he take advantage of the Lord Bodmins extravagance and that the value in  respect of the consideration pay be in itself very exorbitant videlicet the  reversion of pound per and after the death of the Lord Warwick who die within  a year after the purchase for pound so that it may be reasonable presume that  the defendant have a allowance make he in his purchase in respect of the  plaintiff title to dower and it be a common case in equity that where a  purchaser have a allowance in respect of a encumbrance this shall make the  encumbrance good though it be before defective and the lady Bodmin here bring  a great portion at least pound and these circumstance make this case much  different from that of pheasant and pheasant vent S c for there the plaintiff  have by the decree of this court her whole portion restore to her it have be  lodge in the Chamber of London and the property not alter by her husband and  there be therefore the less reason to incline a court of equity to relieve her  against the term that prevent her dower and in that case she have not actual  recover dower as the plaintiff here have do for the defendant it be insist  that this be a case that must frequent happen and yet there be no precedent  where a plaintiff have be relieve in such a case but on the contrary the case  of pheasant and pheasant be express in point and adjudge that the plaintiff  shall not be relieve and as to the circumstance of a great portion bring by  the plaintiff and that the defendant have purchase at a undervalue by which  they will difference this case from that it be answer that those be bare  suggestion and not a word prove of it in the cause and therefore not to be  regard but what be chief rely on by the defendant counsel be the inconvenience  that may ensue shall relief be give in this case that it will alter the course  of conveyance and overthrow many Vernon chancery case purchase it have always  be look upon as a good security to a purchaser and a sufficient protection to  his estate where there be a ancient term keep on foot and frequent in such  case to avoid charge they never insist on a fine or common recovery and if  such a term shall be set aside for a dowress why not for any other encumbrance  the court incline to relieve the plaintiff and therefore in regard the  equitable circumstance of a great portion and the purchase at a undervalue be  not in proof the Lord chancellor refer it to a master to examine and to state  the case to the court vide Swannock v lifford Amb and atk SC under the name of  hill v Adam and Mr butler note   Litt a note for a very full note of Lord  hardwicke judgement in that case and it be now clear that a purchaser or a  mortgagee who be a purchaser pro tanto though he know of the right of dower  may advance his money and take in a outstanding term may avail himself of it  though the consequence will be utter defeat the right of dower such dict per  master of the roll Wynn v William Ves see also maundrell v maundrell Ves Ves  mole v smith Jacob note the plaintiff bill be afterward dismiss and upon a  appeal to the house of lord the decree of dismission be affirm vide shower  case in parliament foe Vernon chancery case er p