atkins case graham versus Londonderry November diamond give to the wife by the  husband father on her marriage with his son be consider as a gift to the  separate use of the wife and she be entitle to they in her own right there be  a question in the cause between Mr Graham and Lord Londonderry whether lady  Londonderry now the wife of the plaintiff but original the wife of the late  Lord Londonderry be entitle in her own right or as paraphernalia to particular  jewel hereafter mention first as to diamond give her by governor Pitt her  husband father and which be a present to her on the marriage with his son Lord  chancellor this court of latter year have consider such a present as a gift to  the separate use of the wife and I be of opinion she be entitle in her own  right the next question be as to four diamond set about the picture of the  late regent of France Lord Londonderry return from France and deliver this  picture to lady Londonderry and say at the same time it be a present send her  by the regent of France if this be consider as a present from the regent of  France it fall under the same rule for be a present by a stranger during the  coverture must be construe as a gift to her separate use though I do not think  it so clear a case as the other there have be several case mrs hungerfords  case which be money appropriate for her separate use and decree to her another  case of the late countess Cowper before sir Joseph Jekyll several trinket be  give her by Lord Cowper in his lifetime and determine to be her separate  estate say vide Ridout v Plymouth ante atk vol two case in my time the first  be Lucas versus Lucas July t atk there be two question one in respect of pound  Southsea annuity which the husband have transfer in the name of his wife the  other as to jewel g give by the plaintiff wife father to the wife atkins I be  of opinion she be entitle both to the Southsea annuity and the jewel because  consider they as give to her separate use the second case be hear upon the  that of November brinkman versus brinkman certain piece of plate be give to  the wife immediate after the marriage by the husband father I be of opinion  they be to be consider as gift to the wife for her separate use next as to the  diamond necklace that undergo several alteration but must be confine to such  diamond as be in it at the time of Lord Londonderrys death this be not to be  consider as a gift mere to the separate use of the wife atkins er p I have  indeed admit a husband may make such gift but where he express give any thing  to a wife to be wear as ornament of her person only they be to be consider  mere as paraphernalia and it will be of bad consequence to consider they as  otherwise for if they be look upon as a gift to her separate use she may  dispose of they absolute which will be contrary to his intention but this will  be the same thing as to lady Londonderrys interest if it can be prove she wear  they as the ornament of her person it be not necessary to prove she wear they  all time but only upon birth day and other public occasion which it have be  prove she do I be therefore of opinion she be entitle unless the objection  shall prevail of the alienation by the husband in his lifetime for whatever  jewel a wife wear for the ornament of her person the husband may alien in his  lifetime Seymore v Tresilian ante atk but I be of opinion the act Lord  Londonderry do amount not to a alienation the diamond necklace be pledge as a  collateral security for pound borrow by Lord Londonderry of Mr Middleton and a  bind give at the same time which show it be intend as a personal security from  himself a power likewise be give to Mr Middleton while Lord Londonderry be out  of England to sell the necklace for pound atkins this do not amount to a sale  but only a necessary power in order to reimburse Mr Middleton when sell his  principal and interest but it be not sell and therefore at his death stand  only as a pledge I be of opinion if a husband pledge the wife paraphernalia  and die leave a sufficient estate to redeem the pledge and pay all his debt  she shall be entitle to have it redeem out of the husband personal estate the  case of tip versus tip in p wms be a much strong case that the right of the  wife to paraphernalia be to be prefer to that of a legatee a lead case and  have be follow by the court ever since Snelson v Corbet ante atk suppose Lord  Londonderry have give this necklace to a legatee specifical the legatee will  have be entitle to come into this court to have it disencumber and the right  of the wife be superior to that of any legatee and therefore I declare she be  entitle to the necklace and as it have be sell she be entitle to a account  accord to the value at which it have be sell