case PARTERICHE versus powlet August see Hudson v Carmichael key SC ante vol  SC ante a charge by answer must be discharge by proof a tenant for life though  without impeachment of waste shall be oblige to keep tenant house in repair  not only contrary to the statute of fraud but to the commonlaw before the  statute to add any thing to a agreement in write by parole evidence see lake v  Philips Charles Rep Irnham v child bro Charles Rep Lord Portmore v morris bro  Charles Rep hare v Sherwood bro Charles Rep jordan v sawkins bro Charles Rep  Lord chancellor where a plaintiff be charge by a answer he must discharge  himself by proof and can do it by read the whole answer as he may at law a  exception be take to the master report that he have charge the tenant for life  without impeachment of waste with several sum for the repair of tenant house  upon the estate Lord Hardwicke overrule the exception and say notwithstanding  tenant for life be without impeachment of waste he shall be oblige to keep  tenant house in repair unless the charge be excessive and shall not suffer  they to run to ruin a question arise upon the special matter of the master  report whether parole evidence shall be admit to explain a write agreement  Lord chancellor where a marriage agreement be complete and reduce into deed  and write to superadd any thing afterward be a very unfavourable case by the  settlement the portion of the wife appear to be pound and at the same time she  give a bind to the husband father in atkins the penalty of pound for secure  pound and sign by her but at the bottom the husband in his own hand have write  I own this to be my debt parole evidence have be read to explain this affair  but I be of opinion that evidence must be lie out of the case and no advantage  ought to be take of it by either side as I be oblige to confine myself to the  deed it appear to I to b a extortion in the father of the husband after every  thing be agree the wife sign the bind and the husband at the bottom write I  own this to be my debt what be the natural construction why that the wife  become surety for her intend husband to pay the father this sum most probable  for a debt the son owe the father to add any thing to a agreement in write by  admit parole evidence which will affect land be not only contrary to the  statute of fraud and perjury but to the rule of commonlaw before that statute  be in be and therefore I shall direct that the wife real estate shall not be  charge with the payment of this bind note decree that in the say bind for  secure pound Sarah ware ought to be consider as a surety for plaintiff her  husband and in case any part of the money due thereon shall become a charge on  her real and personal estate the same ought to be exonerate by the plaintiff  Reg lib b fol so Tate v Austin p W lacam v Mertins Ves and Clinton v Hooper  bro Charles Rep in which case this point be full discuss vide Galton v Hancock  post the wife too in this case have a separate estate by virtue of the  marriage settlement atkins er p the husband have a encumbrance upon his estate  the wife advance money to pay it off and the receipt from the mortgagee be  deliver to her the question be whether this be a bounty or a loan only from  the wife for the receipt be not produce if it be by way of loan she have a  separate estate must be consider as a distinct person and be equal entitle to  stand in the place of the mortgagee as a stranger and it be like this case  suppose a husband have a mortgage upon his estate and a wife join with he in  charge her own if she survive he though her estate be liable to the mortgagee  yet in this court her estate shall be look upon only as a pledge and she be  entitle to stand in the place of the mortgagee and to be satisfy out of her  husband estate it be refer back to the master to review his report and to  inquire into the nature of the receipt and to examine the banker who answer  the wife draft for this sum of money