case wood versus briant march see Plunkett v Lewis hare SC cite Ves a father  administrator durante those inferior in rank tate of his daughter who be  executrix and residuary legatee of her grandmother estate agree when she marry  with the plaintiff that he shall have which in the settlement be call a  portion Lord Hardwicke refuse to decree a account of the grandmother personal  estate as she have be dead twenty year but direct the father representative  shall account for his personal estate as to the pound only and interest at per  cent from the marriage the plaintiff wife be entitle to the residue of her  grandmother estate under her will and likewise be leave executrix and durante  those inferior in rank tate her father be administrator at the time of her  marriage with the plaintiff he be by agreement to have pound from the father  which in the settlement be mention to be a portion and in consideration of  natural love and affection it be insist for the plaintiff that he be entitle  to a account of the residue of the grandmother estate from the representative  of his wife father and that the pound pay by her father upon her marriage be  not in satisfaction of this residue especial as it be express to be give for  natural love and affection and as the father at the time of the marriage be  worth at least pound and have only this daughter and one son his counsel argue  it be not probable he mean it as a satisfaction that constructive satisfaction  must be draw from circumstance that there be no case to be produce where a  father be indebt to a child on account of a demand under the will of a  collateral relation that before the demand be liquidate his give a sum as a  portion to this child have be hold to be a satisfaction of this demand for  this purpose be cite Prec in Chanc Chidley versus lee and Barnham versus  Phillips hear about a year ago before Lord Hardwicke ante S c the counsel for  the defendant rest chief upon the parole declaration of the plaintiff and his  wife soon after the marriage that the pound be intend both as a portion and a  satisfac atkins cion likewise as to the residue of the grandmother estate and  the deposition of six or seven witness be read which be very full to this  point atkins er p to encounter this on the plaintiff side be read the evidence  of the father declaration before and after the marriage that he say his mother  have leave pound at least to his daughter and that he will give John wood the  plaintiff pound and make a man of he and not above six week before his death  say to the plaintiff thou know be I owe you a great deal of money and thou  shall not be wrong of a farthing Lord chancellor the plaintiff be entitle of  course to what remain due upon the pound the doubt be whether there ought to  be a account take of the grandmother estate I be of opinion there be no ground  to direct such a account if I be to do it after such a length of time as  twenty year for so long the grandmother have be dead it will be lie down a  rule that must create great confusion the first question be whether there be a  presumptive satisfaction of the legacy to the plaintiff wife under the  grandmother will by the pound be advance to her by the father on her marriage  I do not think any certain rule can be lie down but the case must depend upon  their particular circumstance there be very few case where a father will not  be presume to have pay the debt he owe to a daughter when in his lifetime he  give her in marriage a great sum than he owe her for it be very unnatural to  suppose that he will choose to leave himself a debtor to her and subject to a  account the word portion to be sure may imply a fortune out of the father  estate but on the other hand it relate likewise to what the wife bring with  her in marriage and answer to the word do in Latin so that it be as proper and  natural apply to this sense as the other and no argument in favour of the  plaintiff be to be draw mere from the term portion be make use of in the  marriagesettlement atkins as to the case of Chidley versus lee the ground sir  John Trevor go upon be that the husband know nothing of the legacy to the wife  from the collateral ancestor and therefore hold it be not satisfy by the  portion though it be a much large sum than the legacy but I must own I think  that be a extreme hard case and I believe I shall have be incline to determine  it otherwise the other case be Barnham versus Philips hear before I in ante S  c there the father a freeman of London make his will and divide his estate  accord to the custom and the dead man part he devise among his wife and child  afterward in his lifetime he marry one of his daughter and give her pound  which the court declare to be a satisfaction of her orphanage share but not as  to her share in the dead man part because it be uncertain at the time the will  be make to what sum it will amount if the present case therefore rest upon the  presumption only I shall be of opinion that the pound be a satisfaction for  the residue under the grandmother will so Mackdowel v Halfpenny vern seed v  Bradford Ves contra Semb Duffield v smith vern Chidley v lee pre Charles  Crompten v sale p W Barret v Beckford Ves Hanbury v Hanbury bro Charles Rep it  have be say the legacy be unliquidated and no account have be take of the  grandmother estate to this day and if there be any ground to think that the  residue under her will be more than the fortune give to the plaintiff wife in  marriage it may be a reason for direct a account of this estate but pound be  admit to be the utmost amount the evidence on the defendant side with regard  to the declaration of the plaintiff and his wife be very strong and apply  direct to the point of satisfaction and on the other side there be only lose  and general declaration of the father that he be indebt to the plaintiff Lord  chancellor decree a account of the father personal estate as to the pound only  and interest at pound per cent from the marriage against his representative  the plaintiff counsel press very much for per cent but from the time Lord  chancellor king have the seal the court have never direct pound per cent vide  guillam v holland ante atkins er p