The Right Hon. JOHN RICHARDS, one of the Barons of HM Court of Exchequer, CAROLINE RICHARDS, Widow, CAROLINE MARIA RICHARDS, otherwise WOODHOUSE, and another, v CROASDAILE MOLONY, HENRY MOLONY and Others

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 25 June 1850
• Date: 25 June 1850
• Court: High Court of Chancery (Ireland)

Chancery.

The Right Hon. JOHN RICHARDS, one of the Barons of Her Majesty's Court of Exchequer, CAROLINE RICHARDS, Widow, CAROLINE MARIA RICHARDS, otherwise WOODHOUSE, and another,

and

CROASDAILE MOLONY, HENRY MOLONY and others.

Wankford v. WankfordENR 1 Salk. 299, 304, 305, 306.

Bayley v. LloydENR 7 Mod. 250.

Plumer v. MarchantENR 3 Burr. 1380, 1384.

Sowarsby v. LacyENR 4 Madd. 142.

Lavender v. StantonENR 6 Madd. 46.

Breedon v. Breedon 1 R. & M. 413.

Keon v. Magawley 1 Dru. & War. 401.

Balfour v. Welland 16 Ves. 151.

Horsley v. FawcettENR 11 Beav. 565.

Magennis v. FallonUNK 2 Molloy, 561, 565, 566.

Llewellyn v. Mackworth 2 Eq. Cas. Ab. 579.

Hovenden v. Annesley 2 Sch. & Lef. 629.

Pentland v. StokesUNK 2 Ball & B. 75.

Wych v. East India CompanyENR 3 P. Wms. 309.

March v. Russell 3 Myl. & Cr. 31.

Hardwicke v. MyndENR 1 Anstr. 112.

Noel v. RobinsonENR 1 Vern. 94.

AnonymousENR 1 P. Wms. 494.

Mannix v. DrinanUNK 3 Ir. Eq. Rep. 108.

Jennings v. BondUNK 8 Ir. Eq. Rep. 755.

Doe v. Routledge Cowper, 705.

O'Gorman v. Comyn 2 Sch. & Lef. 147.

Prodgers v. LanghamENR 1 Sid. 133.

Spackman v. TimbrellENR 8 Sim. 253.

Salmon v. GreenENR 11 Beav. 453.

Padwick v. PlattENR 11 Beav. 503.

Carey v. GoodingeENR 3 Bro. C. C. 111.

Berry v. Usher 11 Ves. 90; et vide Willock v. Dargan, 1 Ir. Chan. Rep. 39.

Pritchard v. LangherENR 2 Vernon, 197.

Sheridan v. JoyceENR 1 Jo. & Lat. 401.

Crew v. Dicken 4 Ves. 97.

Willmott v. JenkinsENR 1 Beav. 401.

Philippo v. Munnings 2 Myl. & Cr. 309.

Foster v. CookENR 3 Bro. C. C. 347.

Gillespie v. AlexanderENR 3 Russ. 130.

Williams v. Chitty 3 Ves. 545.

Graves v. GravesENR 8 Sim. 43.

Harding v. Grady 1 Dru. & War. 430.

Dormay v. BorrodaileENR 10 Beav. 263.

Ball v. Harris 4 Myl. & Cr. 264.

Ellard v. Cooper 1 Ir. Jur. 27; since reversed on appeal, 1 Ir. Chan. Rep. 376.

Price v. NorthENR 1 Phillips, 85.

Kightly v. Kightly 2 Ves. jun. 328.

Shallcross v. Finden 3 Ves. 739.

Clifford v. LewisENR 6 Madd. 313.

Arnold v. ChapmanENR 1 Ves. sen. 110.

Hazlewood v. PopeENR 3 P. Wms. 323.

Aldrich v. Cooper 8 Ves. 396.

Lord Forrester v. LeighENR Ambler, 173, 174.

Onge v. TruelockUNK 2 Molloy, 48.

Leonard v. LeonardUNK 2 Ball & B. 171.

Logan v. WienholtENR 7 Bligh, 1, 49, 50.

Winch v. KeeleyENR 1 T. R. 621.

Caweth v. PhilipsENR 1 Lord Raymond, 605.

Gage v. ActonENR 1 Salk. 326.

Davis v. Spurling 1 R. & M. 64.

Burgh v. WheelerENR 8 T. R. 483.

Milbourne v. EwartENR 5 T. R. 381.

Ex parte CoysgameENR 1 Atk. 193.

Cannell v. BuckleENR 2 P. Wms. 243.

Bridges v. Bridges 3 Ves. 120.

Lord Compton v. Oxenden 2 Ves. jun. 264.

Fergus v. Gore 1 Sch. & Lef. 107.

Malone v. Geraghty 3 Dru. & War. 239.

Molloy v. FrenchUNK 11 Ir. Eq. Rep. 376.

Burgh v. BruttonENR 2 Hare, 373.

Crallan v. OultonENR 3 Beav. 1.

Dornford v. Dornford 12 Ves. 130.

Coppin v. CoppinENR 2 P. Wms. 295.

Atkins v. TredgoldENR 2 B. & C. 23.

Scholey v. WaltonENR 12 M. & W. 511.

Harrison v. CageENR 2 Vern. 85.

Smith v. ScottENR 1 C. P. Cooper, 490.

Forbes v. Moffett 18 Ves. 384, 390.

Dundas v. BlakeUNK 11 Ir. Eq. Rep. 138.

Smith v. SmithENR 2 Vernon, 178.

Walcott v. HallENRENR 1 P. Wms. 495; S. C. 2 Bro. C. C. 305.

Woodward v. D'Arcy Plowd. 185.

Sheridan v. JoyceENR 1 Jo. & Lat. 401.

David v. Frowd 1 M. & K. 200.

Wankford v. WankfordENR 1 Salk. 299, 304, 305.

Fryer v. GildridgeENR Hobart, 10.

Plumer v. Marchant 3 Bur. 1380.

Philippo v. Munnings 2 Myl. & Craig, 309.

Caton v. RideoutUNK 1 M'N. & G. 599; S. C. 2 H. & T. 33.

CHANCERY REPORTS, BEING A BER/E8 OF CASES ARGUED AND DETERMINED IN TEE HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY AND ROLLS COURT. The Right Hon. JOHN RICHARDS, one of the Barons of Her ,).7 Majesty's Court of Exchequer, CAROLINE RICHARDS, Widow, CAROLINE MARIA RICHARDS, otherwise WOOD-HOUSE, and another, V. CROASDAILE MOLONY, HENRY MOLONY and others. 1850. (Chancery.) June 20, 21, 24, 25. PREVIOUSLY to the marriage of the plaintiff John Richards with The rule at law, that Catherine, daughter of Henry Gonne Molony, her father agreed to where the ob ligee in a bond give her a marriage portion of 4000 Irish, and in pursuance of becomes ex ecutor of the obligor, and receives assets adequate to discharge the debt, it is extinguished, is also the rule at law where one only of two obligees is appointed one of several execuÂÂtors of the obligor. •5C-' The same rules prevail in equity. 1 And this is so, albeit that the obligees are trustees. Accordingly, where a father, on the marriage of one of his daughters, entered into a bond to A and B., conditioned for payment of 4000, and on the marriage of another of his daughters entered into a bond to A and C, conditioned for payment of 4000, and was a party to the marriage settlements of both daughters, whereby the sums secured by the bonds were limited upon certain trusts; and by his will, diÂÂrecting his debts to be paid, and reciting the acknowledgment of the bonds, devised certain lands to A, and other lands to D, and bequeathed legacies to both of his daughÂÂters, to be paid out of his personal estate if sufficient, but if not sufficient, out of the devised lands, and appointed A and two other persons to be his executors, and died ; and more than sufficient assets for payment of all his debts and legacies reached the hands of A;-Held, that whether A had or had not committed a devastavit, the ceux qui trustenthad not any equity to raise the amount of the bond debts out of the lands devised to D, although D bad personally instituted a suit against A for indemnification of the lands devised to D against those bond debts. To that suit the ye= qui trustent were not parties. V oL. 2. 1 exe.rzei_6,1 a .2_, 2 CHANCERY REPORTS. that agreement, on the 25th of March 1813, entered into a bond to Overstreet Grogan Knox and Croasdaile Molony (the obligor's eldest son), with warrant of attorney for confessing judgment thereon, in the penal sum of 8000 Irish, conditioned for payment of 4000 Irish, with interest. By a postnuptial settlement it was witnessed that the said sum of 4000 so secured was granted and assigned to Croasdaile Molony and Overstreet G. Knox, their executors, &c., upon trust (inter alia) to pay to John Richards the interest thereof during his life, and upon trust for the younger children of the marriage as he should appoint, power being given to the trustees to pay the money during his lifetime, with his consent, to those children. Catherine Richards his wife died in 1831, leaving seven children of the marriage. John Richards, having appointed amongst the six younger children the sum of 4000 (and a sum of 2000 also proÂÂvided for them by the settlement), paid to each child the amount of his or her share in the 4000 so appointed, and took assignments from them of those shares. Accordingly the right to the whole of the principal sum secured by the bond became ultimately vested in himself. Henry Gonne Molony, on the marriage of his daughter the plainÂÂtiff Caroline with William Nunn Richards, agreed to give her also a fortune of 4000 Irish, and in order to secure same, he executed on the 2nd of March 1815 his bond and warrant, &c., to the plaintiff John Richards and Croasdaile Molony, conditioned for payment of 4000 Irish, with interest. By marriage articles of contemporaneous date it was witnessed that the last mentioned bond was to be held on certain trusts for the benefit of the husband, the wife, and the younger child or children of the marriage. William Nunn Richards died in 1822, leaving a son and daughter. The latter, Caroline Maria Richards, and her mother Caroline, were both plaintiffs in this suit. By his will of the 17th of November 1817, Henry Gonne Molony, after desiring his just debts and funeral expenses to be in the first place paid and discharged out of his personal estate, and after reÂÂciting the bonds above mentioned, devised the lands of Shallee and CHANCERY REPORTS. 3 other lands to Thomas Walker and Thomas Steele, upon trust (inter alia) for his son Croasdaile Molony for life, and after his decease to provide for his wife a jointure in certain events, which did not arise, and subject thereto to the use of the second son of Croasdaile Molony, and the heirs male of his body. The testator, having in a previous part of his will recited that he was minded to make a provision in land for his second son Henry Molony in lieu and satisfaction of any share be might or would become entitled to, as a younger child, out of a sum of 3000, charged on the lands of Duras, Legane, &c., by the testator's marÂÂriage settlement executed in 1786, for his younger children, thereby also devised to the 'same trustees the lands of Farroure, Cappagh, and certain other lands, upon trust (in case his second son the defendant Henry Molony should assign his share of the charge of 3000 to the testator's executors, which the testator declared should be considered as part of his, the testator's, personal estate), for the use of the defendant Henry Molony for life (with power to charge the same with 3000 for his younger children), with remainder to his first son in tail male, remainder over. To his daughters Catherine and Caroline, in addition to their marriage portions already mentioned, the testator bequeathed legacies of 2000 each ; and in case he should not die possessed of a personal estate sufficient to answer said bequests of 2000 and 2000, the testator charged them upon the lands devised, as above stated, to his sons Croasdaile and Henry ; but in case he (the testator) should die possessed in bank stock and otherwise of a personal estate suffiÂÂcient to pay those legacies, he directed that they should be paid thereout, and that the lands should stand fully exonerated from those legacies. After bequeathing some other legacies, the testator appointed his wife, Thomas Walker and Croasdaile Molony, executors of his will. By a codicil of the 28th of April 1821, the testator (inter alia) revoked a part of his will whereby he had named his...