case Lord lempster against Lord pomfret a son be not entitle to show a reason  for it capper p against his father of course but must Reg S c dick hark ms on  exception to the master report of defendant answer be insufficient Lord  chancellor this court will give so much relief against a father tenant for  life in favour of his son tenant in tail as in case of a stranger they will  not order the deed to be deliver up or take out of his hand but though this be  a case between father and son yet the court must go by some rule one be if a  bill be bring by a son against his father for discovery of deed as auxiliary  to a action to be bring at ambler law or relief seek in this court he be  entitle to it so if for a discovery in order to mortgage for proper purpose I  will not determine whether in case the son be about marry and the father will  not discover his settlement and what right the son be entitle to in that case  he ought not to have such discovery but this court will not give way to new  invention in order to promote suit and uneasiness in family the present case  be not within any of those rule the bill do not suggest that the settlement be  destroy or intend to be so see Pyncent v Pyncent atk but it suggest waste at  commonlaw and that Lord pomfret be only tenant for life and not dispunishable  of waste and that plaintiff be tenant in tail in remainder defendant in his  answer deny he have commit waste and insist he be dispunishable of waste that  be a full answer and bar to plaintiff bill it may not have be so if waste have  be of tree grow for ornament or shelter or pull down the family house as in  the case of baby castle vane v Lord Barnard vern S c salk pre Ch Eq can Abr  and Packington v Packington atk but then a special case shall have be make by  the bill if Lord pomfret be dispunishable of waste whatever title plaintiff  have he can have no relief against defendant on this bill therefore disallow  the report and let the answer be take to be sufficient Reg Min book that Nov  cur allow the exception to the master report and let the defendant have back  the deposit there be many case in which the court have secure the title deed  for the benefit of remainderman expectant on a estate for life see ivy v ivy  atk smith v cook atk joy v joy Eq can Abr ford v peer Ves Papillon v voice p W  Southlei v Stonehouse Ves beef v beef mad but a bill will not lie by a  purchaser from a contingent remainderman for inspection of deed in the hand of  the tenant for life Noel v ware mad