case hunt versus matthews novembris master of the roll in court Eq can ab pl S  c refer to down v Jennings Bea v a widow before her marriage with her second  husband assign over the great part of her estate to trustee in trust for her  child by her former husband though this be without the consent of her second  husband yet it be to provide for her child by former husband it be good and  husband suppress the deed decree to pay pound be the sum prove to be mention  in the deed to be the value of the good the case be a widow before she marry  the defendant her second husband assign over the great part of her estate to  the value of pound to trustee as a provision for her child by her first  husband the defendant after his marriage have get this deed into his  possession suppress it upon the hear it be insist for the defendant that this  deed make by the widow a little before her marriage with the defendant be  fraudulent and do with a design to cheat her husband and ought not therefore  to be countenance in equity and cite the case of sir Philip Howard and baker  where a assignment make by the widow before her marry a second husband be by a  decree set aside but the court think that a widow may with a good conscience  before she put herself under the power of a second husband provide for the  child she have by the first and the deed be suppress by the defendant by which  the particular and value of the estate may appear decree he to pay the pound  without direct any account this decree stand enter that November and interest  be decree from the time of the marriage of defendant with the plaintiff mother  to be compute by the master it full appear that there be a deed make and  execute by the say Sarah hunt the widow before her marriage with the defendant  for settle the value of pound on or in trust for her daughter the plaintiff  and hunt but that the defendant confess that he be consent thereto and that  after his marriage he get the same deed into he custody and burn or destroy it  so that it shall never rise against he nor ever do the plaintiff and hunt any  good and the defendant be to be allow for the maintenance of plaintiff for  such time as she live with he and his wife the plaintiff mother and the decree  on a rehear be confirm Reg lib a fol vide king v cotton p wms where however  the settlement against which relief as seek by the husband appear to have be  make by the wife before any treaty for the second marriage be enter into et  vide bow v lady Vernon chancery case er p Strathmore Ves Jun bro Ch Rep SC  Pitt v hunt ante Carleton v earl of Dorset all post vol so where a debt be  contract for valuable consideration though conceal from the husband it be no  fraud on the marriage Blanchet v foster ves