case carter versus carter at the roll pound be provide by settlement for the  issue of the marriage in such proportion as the husband shall appoint he die  leave a daughter and make no appointment the pound be decree to her John  carter devise pound to his nephew George carter to be invest in a purchase of  land in trust to the use of George for life remainder to trustee to preserve  the contingent remainder remainder to his first and every other son in tale  male remainder to trustee their executor administrator and assign for fifteen  year without impeachment of waste with several remainder over and a power to  George to make a jointure and the trust of the term be declare to be in case  there shall be no issue male for the raisin portion for the daughter and  daughter of the say George to be pay at such time and in such manner and  proportion and with and under such proviso and limitation as the say George by  any write or write under his hand and seal attest by two witness shall appoint  mosely report a bill be bring by those in remainder against George to have  this money lie out in land George by his answer say that he do appoint and  intend by a write in due form to appoint that all the rend and profit shall be  collect and apply for raise a portion for his daughter Elizabeth in case he  shall have no other daughter but if he shall have more the rend and profit be  to be divide equal between they Payable at eighteen year of age or marriage  George make a appointment of the whole profit for the jointure of his wife and  die without issue male leave Elizabeth his only daughter have never make any  appointment of the portion and on this bill which be bring to have the money  lie out in a purchase of land and the jointure establish two question be make  as to the portion of Elizabeth whether it will arise if the father make no  appointment and second if a appointment be necessary whether the answer of  George be a sufficient appointment Mr rider for the defendant the daughter by  the intention of the testator the profit of the whole term be to go to her if  George have but one daughter if a long term be carve out of the inheritance to  raise portion it can be suppose that the testator intend all the profit shall  be apply but this be a very short term and mosely report er p only sufficient  for that purpose if the word have go no further than for the raise portion for  the daughter and daughter of the say George the whole term will have be in  trust for the daughter and the word follow do not alter the sense of the forgo  for they give the father no power to appoint the sum but only the time manner  and proportion in which it shall be pay in the case of Davy and Hooper vern  pound provide by settlement for the issue of the marriage in such proportion  as the husband shall appoint he die leave a daughter and make no appointment  the pound be decree to the daughter to be raise out of the term and the  judgement be affirm in the house of lord and the trust of this term be to be  execute in favour of a daughter and the portion can be raise without the  assistance of this court as to the second question nothing of substance that  be require in the appointment be omit in the answer and the circumstance be  prescribe only to ascertain the fact and to guard more effectual against fraud  and imposition but here the father do appoint upon oath and on record which be  strong than by any matter in S or by deed so that there mosely report can be  no doubt whether he intend to appoint if a bill be bring to carry a parole  contract into execution and the defendant admit the contract that admission  shall bind he and the court will decree a performance because then there can  be no doubt of the reality of the contract the end of the statute be answer  there be no danger of perjury in the evidence and then why shall not the court  allow this answer to be a good appointment and dispense with the circumstance  which be tack to it only to manifest that it be real execute as it do in many  case in favour of a wife a child or a creditor Mr attorney general contra the  court in the construction of a term in trust never make any distinction  whether it be long or short there be no direction in the will to apply the  whole profit in the case of Davy and Hooper a particular sum be mention  nothing be leave for the husband but to appoint the time and manner of payment  of it but here the father have a power to proportion which be to be understand  not only in relation to the number of daughter but likewise to the profit of  the whole term in case he have but one daughter and he may appoint her a  portion less than the profit and she can not insist that she be entitle to the  whole as to the second question I admit that this court do sometime make good  a defective execution of a power in favour of daughter but never a  nonexecution the power be by any write or write under his hand and seal attest  by two witness and by a answer to a bill in this court he say he do appoint  and intend to appoint c which show he do not think his answer a sufficient  appointment this be not a appointment by he in write the answer be not writ or  sign by himself and be no more than a parole declaration though it be more  solemn and bind than a deed as to the court and party to the cause and this be  not like the case of a parole contract where if the defendant do not plead the  statute but admit the contract he shall be bind to perform it for there the  agreement be on a valuable consideration which bind the conscience of the  party and see the contract be admit the end of the statute be answer for there  be no fear of perjury in examine to it here the appointment be defective in  all its circumstance which be prescribe not only for the sake of the party to  who the power be give but also for the sake of the remainderman and though  this court will make good a defective appointment in favour of a daughter who  have no provision it never will if she be provide for because then she can be  consider as a creditor of mosely report the parent in this case the father  have devise to the daughter land of the value of pound and so it be like the  case where a copyhold be devise to a wife or child if they be provide for  equity will not supply the want of a surrender Mr mead this power be give by a  stranger to the father of the defendant and be not a power reserve by the  owner over his own estate which be to be construe liberal if the father have  appoint a small sum than the profit the trustee can have raise no more and no  case can be mention where the construction of the defendant have be put even  on term create by settlement on marriage for raise portion though the daughter  in such a case be purchaser if a power be give by deed and it be execute by  will it be not a good execution here the power must be mean to be execute by  deed and the answer be not a execution of it and the case of the parole  contract be no way applicable to this yet I remember in one instance where the  mortgagor confess by his answer a parole agreement that the interest shall  mosely report er p be raise from pound to pound per cent that Mr justice Tracy  will not decree it contrary to the statute of fraud and perjury and in a late  case your honour will not supply the want of a surrender of a copyhold devise  to the wife because she have pound ayear give her by the same will master of  the roll this term of fifteen year be not create for the raise any particular  sum or for the raise portion not exceed such a sum but in a very unusual  manner for the raise portion it have be object that no distinction ought to be  make whether the term be long or short yes I think they may have different  consideration as they manifest different intention in the testator in one case  it be not reasonable to suppose he design the whole profit shall be apply as  it may be in the other where they will only be sufficient to form competent  portion this term be not to commence till after the death of the wife for the  father have a power give he to limit a jointure and he have execute that power  let we lose this estate for life precedent to the estate to his first and ever  other son and this term be subsequent to those limitation must be postpone to  the jointure mosely report I be of opinion that this whole term be allot for  the raise the portion and that it be the intention of the testator to  appropriate the whole profit and it be no objection to say he may as well have  devise a term to the daughter for fifteen year because then he can not have  leave the father this power to adjust the proportion the profit shall be pay  to they in in case he have more daughter than one the term be upon trust for  raise portion c if no more have be say there can be no doubt but that the  whole profit belong to the daughter the term be but fifteen year and proper  for that purpose but he go on to be pay c proportion can relate to the profit  in case there shall be but one daughter but must have a reference to the  portion if there be more than one and it be put in not with a intention to  empower the father to lessen her portion if he have but one daughter but if he  have several to proportion it among they as he shall think they deserve the  term be in trust for raise portion which give a present interest and the civil  law and we allow a distinction when the time be annex to the legacy and when  to the payment only suppose he have say the portion shall be raise by the  profit to be pay c this can be only directory as to the time of payment and  the proportion in case he have several daughter and if the estate have be  purchase as the term be without impeachment of waste the daughter may cut down  the timber and this be in the view of the testator he be make a provision for  his nephew and his child and if he have son he give they a absolute power over  the estate and to bar all the remainder the second question be if a  appointment be necessary to the raise and charge this portion if the answer be  a good appointment it must be admit that this be not such a appointment as the  will direct though a write may be under hand and seal and not a deed for want  of delivery but the question be whether the defendant be a daughter be not  entitle to have this defective execution make good by this court but it be say  here be no execution and equity will not supply the want of it either in  favour of a child or a creditor but I think there be a defective execution and  that the circumstance be not add in favour of the remainderman for the power  do not charge his estate more or less but only ascertain the time and  proportion in which what be before charge be to be pay the answer say he do  appoint so be a present appointment and the word and intend c do not derogate  from that actual appointment or show that he think it will not avail but only  that he will mosely report afterward execute it in the precise form if such a  power be give to raise portion a parole appointment will not be good in equity  even before the statute of fraud and perjury but the question be Whetfier this  answer be not such a manifestation of the execution of his power as this court  will make it good as well as decree a parole contract admit by the answer for  the statute be make to prevent perjury in the evidence but there be no  occasion to examine where the contract be admit and I think this case be the  same for he can have do nothing that will have make his intention to appoint  more manifest than this answer where a young child come into equity to have  the want of a surrender of a copyhold supply he must be whole unprovide for or  have but a very slight provision though there have be great variety of opinion  upon this point and where all the child have be well provide for the court  have supply the want of a surrender against the heir because the father be the  best judge in what manner to provide for his child and I believe mosely report  er p Lord Cowper be the first who refuse it because the young child be great  provide for and the heir have little or nothing but I have never know this  distinction make or that the court will enter into the consideration of it  where a young child have apply to have a defective execution of a power make  good so I be of opinion that the whole profit of the term belong to the  daughter after the death of the mother Ant Cas vern vern Chan Cas Chan Cas  Nels Fol Rep in can Wednesday June the that