240 WILLIAMS' CASE.—3 BLAND.

In 1687, on a bill to be relieved against a conveyance, it appeared,
that the plaintiff being entitled to an estate tail, after the death
of his father, in lands which, if in possession, were worth, to be
sold, about £800, did in 1071, for £30 paid and £20 per annum,
secured to be paid to him during the lives of him and his father,
absolutely convey his remainder in tail to the defendant's father
and his heirs. The convej auce was set aside as being an unright-
eous bargain in the beginning. Nott v. Johnson, 2 Vern. 27. In
the year 1716, on a bill brought to set aside a sale of a remainder,
the case appeared to be, that the plaintiff's father was a tenant for
life, remainder to the plaintiff' in tail, remainder over to a third
person; that the plaintiff had married, and had a son. After
which the plaintiff being about thirty years of age, and his son
ten years old; and when the plaintiff's father was ancient and
sickly and in declining life, the plaintiff sold his estate in remain-
der, which was worth £150, to the defendant for £1,050. The
Chancellor decreed relief on the payment of principal, interest
and full costs: upon the ground, that the amount paid for the
estate in remainder dependent upon so frail a * life was so
226 entirely too low as to be evidence of an unconscionable
bargain which was altogether unfit to be sustained. Twisleton v.
Griffith, 1 P. Will. 310. In 1734, on a bill to be relieved from an
assignment of a legacy, it appeared, that Andrew Mackean had,
by his will, given a legacy of £500 to his nephew Martin, if he
should survive the testator's wife Catharine, who, by the will, was
to have the interest of the £500 for her life, as also the principal in
case she should survive Martin. The nephew Martin was about
twenty-four years of age; had led an extravagant life, and had
been some time 111 Newgate. The widow Catharine was about
sixty-four years old; but as to her health there was a variety of
evidence. Martin sold his interest on this legacy of £500 to Cole;
for which Cole stipulated to give £100 to be paid in £5 per annum,
with a proviso, that if Martin survived the widow, then what
should remain due of the £100, should be paid to him within a
year after her death; but if he died in her life-time, then the £5
per annum to continue payable until the £100 should be fully paid.
The price thus stipulated to be paid for the legacy, was held to be
so much below its real value that the assignment of it would have
been set aside as unreasonable, had it not been solemnly and re-
peatedly confirmed by Martin. Cole v. Gibbons, 3 P. Will. 290.

It is not unlawful for a remainderman or a reversioner to sell his
estate. Such sales are only set aside because of some fraudulent
conduct in the purchaser, or because of his having taken some
undue advantage of the seller of such an interest. Among other
circumstances, inadequacy of price, may, in all such cases, be
taken into the consideration as evidence of fraud. But inade-
quacy of price can only be shewn by making an estimate of the