Delivery when presumed made, and for whose Behoof.
Hamilton v. Hamilton
Date: 9 January 1741 Case No. No 239.
Right taken in name of children from a third party, if alterable by the father.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Where a father had disponed his estate to his son, and taken from the son an obligation to pay certain sums to his several chidren in full contentation of all former provision or portion natural, without reserving to himself any power to alter or vary the proportions settled by that obligation, it was found that the father could not alter nor vary the said proportions.
For though bonds of provision granted by the father, and still retained by him, may be cancelled, or varied at pleasure, yet, where a father takes a bond from a third party in his child's name, the delivery of that bond to the father is a delivery for the behoof of the creditor, upon the common principle, that a bond out of the hand of the granter is presumed a delivered evident, and may be recovered by the creditor out of the hands of any third party.
Fol. Dic. v. 4. p. 125. Kilkerran, (Presumption.) No 3. p. 426.
*** C. Home's report of this case is No 25. p. 4137., voce Faculty.
