case chancy case see S c wh t l c that Edward Lord Chichester v Coventry l r h  l chancy v Wootton et e contra Reg lib a fol at the roll Mod Eq can ab pl one  be indebt to his servant for wage in pound give her a bind for this pound as  due for wage and afterward by will give her pound for her long and faithful  service this be not a satisfaction for the bind one be indebt for wage to a  maidservant who have live with he for a considerable time give her a bind for  pound and in the condition of the bind it appear to be for wage afterward the  testator by his will among other thing give a legacy of pound to this  maidservant and it be mention in the will to be give to her for her long and  faithful service the maidservant have on her master death possess herself of  diverse good that be his the plaintiff chancy who be the executor peer William  er p bring his bill against her for a account but pay to her the and interest  secure to her by the bind peer William for the defendant it be object that she  shall have both the money due on the bind and also the legacy for the legacy  be a further reward for her service and intend to be a gift in toto whereas if  the bind be to be take out of it it will be only a gift of pound and as to the  old notion that the testator must be just before he be bountiful that be  nothing where the testator have wherewithal to be both just and bountiful salk  beside that this be not insist upon by the bill so that the defendant have no  notice or warning to prove that the testator intend to give her the full  legacy of pound over and above the bind which proof though by parole only have  yet be frequent admit Wallace v pomfret a Ves petit v smith ante also for that  it appear the executor himself have pay the bind and take a receipt for it  master of the roll it be sufficient that it appear the creditor have a great  legacy give her and the plaintiff the executor pray relief which be as much as  if he have pray that he may not be compel to pay both the debt and legacy this  be strong than the usual case for the bind be for service and the pound legacy  be also for service so that it be a great reward and satisfaction for the same  thing neither be it material that the executor have pay it for he be bind to  pay the bind at law and his only method be to stop it out of the legacy but  clear such a legacy be not a satisfaction for service do to the testator after  the make of the will vide salk post Vol Vol III this decree be afterward  reverse by Lord chancellor king Trinity upon which occasion his lordship say  he be not peer William break in upon any general rule though he do not see any  great reason why if one owe pound to a by bind and shall afterward give he a  legacy of pound this legacy must go in satisfaction of the debt for if so the  whole pound will not be give in regard pound of it will be pay towards a just  debt which the testator can not help pay and therefore the whole pound will  not be give against the express declaration of the testator who say he give  the same and though it seem to have obtain as a rule that a man shall be just  before he be bountiful yet when a man leave such a estate and fund for his  debt and legacy as that he may thereout be both just and bountiful and  especial when there seem to be not only a intention but also express word to  that purpose in such case his lordship do not see but it will be as reasonable  that the whole legacy shall take effect as a legacy and that the debt shall be  pay beside and it be say at the bar by Mr Talbot to have be a strange  resolution that if I owe a man pound and give he pound legacy then I give he  nothing but only pay he what I be bind to do but if the legacy be twenty  shilling less videlicet here it be a good gift and legacy exclusive of the  debt however the court say they be not by this resolution overturn the general  rule but that this case be attend with particular circumstance vary it from  the common case videlicet that the testator by the express word of his will  have devise that all his debt and legacy shall be pay peer William and this  pound bind be then a debt and the pound be a legacy it be as strong as if he  have direct that both the bind and legacy shall be pay that when the testator  give a bind for the pound arrear of wage it be the same thing as pay it and as  if he have actual pay it and have afterward give the legacy of pound the  executor can not have fetch back the pound and make the defendant refund so  neither shall the bind in this case be satisfy by the bequest of the legacy  his lordship also observe that the executor the plaintiff Mr chancy do not  himself take this pound legacy to be a satisfaction for the bind as appear by  his have voluntary pay the pound to the defendant and that his lordship be of  the same opinion so the decree at the roll be reverse and the defendant the  maidservant have both her debt and legacy the strict rule be establish that a  legacy give by a debtor to his creditor which be equal or great than the debt  shall be presume to be intend in satisfaction of the debt Talbot v duke of  Shrewsbury pre Charles Jeffs v wood post Vol two peer William er p foul v foul  post Vol III reech v Kennegal ves though if small it shall not be take as a  satisfaction pro tanto Cranmer be case salk Atkinson v web vern Eastwood v  Vincke post Vol two minuet v Sarazine mos but the latter case although they  acknowledge the general rule to be full establish yet express a  dissatisfaction with the principle upon which it proceed and be anxious to  collect from the will circumstance to rebut such presumption so where the  payment of debt be particular mention as in the present case of chancy and  Richardson v grief atk but in Gaynon v wood at the roll July where the  testator by will gaze to Sarah Gaynon a legacy of and thereby declare that in  case his personal estate shall not be sufficient for payment of all his debt  legacy and funeral charge he thereby subject all his realestates to the  payment thereof and afterward by a codicil give a further legacy of to the say  Sarah Gaynon and die indebt to Sarah Gaynon in pound on bind which debt be  contract after make the will but before the codicil his honour declare that  the pound give by by the codicil be to be consider and deem a satisfaction of  the say pound give by the testator to the plaintiff Sarah Reg lib a fol or  where the legacy be not equal beneficial with the debt in some one particular  although it may be more so in another as in time of payment Nicholls v Judson  atk clarke v jewel atk matthews v matthews ves Haynes v micoe bro c c or in  point of certainty Crompton v sale post Vol ill Barret v Beckford ves as to  satisfaction of actual contract to provide for wife child c vide Blandy v  Widmore auto Eastwood v Vincke post Vol two and see Richardson v Elphinstone  Ves jun Barclay v wainwright Ves Hinchcliffe v Hinchcliffe ib Tolson v Collins  Ves plume v plume Ves Wallace v pomfret Ves chave v Farrant Ves