part of the estate in fee, and limits the equity of redemption to the prior uses. He then joins in a transfer of the mortgage, and reserves the equity of redemption to himself in fee: Held, that the equity of redemption did not revert to the old uses. (Innes v. Jackson, 1 Ves. 356.) Anson v. Lee,

S. 364.

PLEADING.

1. (Demurrer.) On a bill by a residuary legatee against executors; a demurrer for want of equity, on the ground that the bill did not allege that the testator died without revoking his will, or that the executors had proved the will, was overruled, with liberty for the defendants to plead and the plaintiff to amend. Blewitt v. Blewitt, Y. 541.

2: (Injunction.) An annuity was granted to A, in consideration of certain services performed by him. A assigned the annuity for a valuable consideration to B; the deed of assignment contained the usual power of attorney to sue and give discharges, and which power was declared to be irrevocable. A shortly after the assignment quitted England. B having brought an action in the name of A for arrears of the annuity, the grantors filed their bill against A and B to restrain the proceeding at law, alleging that the annuity had been obtained through fraud and misrepresentation; and that it had been assigned to B colorably, and without any consideration. B. by his answer denied all knowledge of the alleged fraud or misrepresentation, and claimed to be a purchaser for a full consideration. No answer was put in by A. An injunction obtained by the plaintiff's against A and B'was dissolved as to B, he being substantially the plaintiff and having put in a full answer. B proceeded to trial in an action at law commenced by him in the name of A (the plaintifs in equity appearing on trial) and recovered a verdict. The plaintiffs subsequently moved for an attachment against the solicitor of B for a breach of the injunction by which the defendant C was retained from proceeding at law, but the court refused the motion. Imperial Gass Light Company v. Clarke, Y.

580.

PRACTICE.

1. (Production of papers, &c.) Defendants in a suit are privileged from producing letters which have passed between them and their solicitors subsequently to the in-titution of the suit and in relation thereto, (Bolton e. Corporation of Liverpool,

Younge, 377:) but the rule does not apply to letters between the parties themselves. Whitbread v. Young, Y. 541. 2. (Injunction.) Where an injunction obtained for want of answer is dissolved on the merits, and the bill is afterwards amended, a motion for an injunction for want of an answer to the amended bill is a special application requiring notice, notwithstanding the defendant being in contempt. Chinelli v. Chanvet, Y. 560..

3. (Supplemental answer.) Leave was given to file a supplemental answer for the purpose of stating facts which the defendant had wished to state in his original answer, but had been prevailed upon to omit, by the mistaken advice of his solicitor. Nail v. Punter,. S. 474. REVERSIONARY INTEREST. (Inadequacy of price.) A bill was filed to compel the transfer of a sum of stock, the reversionary interest in which had formerly been purchased by the plaintiff. The transfer was resisted, on the ground of fraud and inadequacy of price. The former failed in evidence: as to the latter, it appeared that the price was sufficient according to the evidence of witnesses and other competent judges, but about a third less than the value, as calculated by actuaries: Held, that this was not such a case of inadequacy as would justify the court in declaring the contract invalid. (Gouland v. De Faria, 17 Ves. 20; Headon v. Rocher, 1 M'Clel. & Y. 89.) Ports v. Curtis Y. 543.

WILL.

1. (Construction.) A testatrix bequeathed the sum of £100 to be put out on good security by her executors thereinafter to be nominated, and the interest to be paid by her executors to A B of W. and his successors, so long as he the said A B and his successors should teach in the said town of W. the Gospel of Christ, under the name of orthodoxy. The evidence showed that A B in the lifetime of the testatrix preached to a congregation in W. of Calvinists, or, as they called themselves, Orthodox Independents: Held, that the minister for the time being of the congregation at which A B preached in the lifetime of the testatrix, was entitled, so long as he preached the doctrines preached by A B in the lifetime of the testatrix, to the interest of the legacy. AttorneyGeneral v. Molland, Y. 562.

2. (Specific bequest.). A testatrix, by her will, bequeathed funded property sufficient to pay an annuity of £50 to A for

1

life, and, after A's death, she bequeathed the fund to other persons. And, after giving various pecuniary legacies, she bequeathed to B the whole of the remainder of her (the testatrix's) dividends during her life; and, after B's decease, she bequeathed £1000 stock to C, and other sums of stock to other persons. The testatrix died shortly after the date of her will, entitled to £606 Long Annuities, but to no other stock: Held, that the bequest to B during her life, of the whole of the remainder of the dividends of the testatrix, was specific, and that C and the other legatees in remainder after B's death, were not entitled to have the Long Annui-` ties converted into Bank annuities; though being a decreasing fund, the legacies might altogether fail. Vincent v. Newcombe, Y. 599.

3. (Remoteness.) A testator bequeathed his residuary estates to trustees, in trust, as to one third, for his daughter for life, and after her decease, in trust for her children, and to be paid to them on attaining 25; but if his daughter should leave but one child her surviving, then the whole third to go to and become the property of such only child upon its attaining 25, and be transmissible to its executors; but, in case his daughter should leave no child her surviving, or in case she should leave a child who should not attain 25, then over: Held, that the children did not take vested interests until 25, and the limitations in their favor were void for remoteness. Hunter v. Judd, S. 455.

4. (Shifting clause.) W. G., by his will dated in 1775, devised his estates to his nephew for, life, with remainder.to his first and other sons in tail male. T. G., the nephew's eldest son, after his father's death, suffered a recovery, and limited the estates to himself for life; remainder subject to a term for securing a jointure, and raising portions for his younger children, to his first and other sons in tail male. S. F., by his will dated in 1804, devised his estates to frustees, in trust for the second and subsequently born sons of T. G. in tail male: provided, that if the lands devised by W. G. to T. G. should descend to or devolve upon any son of T. G., or any heirs male of such son, and the person on whom those lands should descend or devolve, should, under the trusts of his, S. F.'s will, be tenant in tail male of his estates so as to be then actually in the possession or receipt of the rents and profits thereof, then his estates should be in trust for the person who would be entitled to his estates

under his will, if the person on whom W. G.'s estates had so descended or devolved, were dead without issue. T. G. had three sons, the eldest died in his life-time; then T. G. died: Held, that as W. G.'s estates came to T. G.'s second son incumbered with the term, S. F.'s estates did not go over under the shifting clause. (Driver v. Frank, 3 M. & S. 25; Doe v. Perratt, 5 B & C. 48.) Fazakerly v. Ford, S. 390.

17*

LEGISLATION.

MASSACHUSETTS.

Acts passed by the legislature of Massachusetts, at the session which commenced on January 1, 1834.

Academies. The Fuller Academy in Newton was incorporated. An act was passed to incorporate the 'Society of the Sons of Dummer Academy,' in Newbury, with power to hold property to an amount not exceeding $5000; which is to be appropriated exclusively to the promotion of education and moral improvement in Dummer Academy.'

Ch. 157.-Accounts, Merchants'. All actions on accounts which concern the trade of merchandise, between merchant and merchant, their factors or servants, shall be commenced and sued within six years next after the cause of such actions, any thing in the st. 1786, c. 52, § 1, to the contrary notwithstanding. This act is to take effect on April 1, 1835.

Ch. 2.-Actions. All actions of trespass, and of trespass on the case, which are now pending, or which may hereafter be commenced, for injury to personal property, whether such injury be caused by misfeasance or non-feasance, shall survive to and against the executors and administrators of the parties, and may be proceeded in, in the same manner as is provided by st. 1822, c. 110, 1, in relation to actions of replevin and trover.

Ch. 86. Whenever either of the parties to an action which survives to or against his executors or administrators, shall die before the day on which the writ is returnable, or shall die after an appeal therein taken and before the first day of the term of the court to which such appeal was taken, such action and appeal may be entered and proceeded in, in the same manner as if the deceased party had died after the entry of such action or appeal.

Ch. 189. If in any action founded on debt or contract, now pending, or which may hereafter be brought against two or more