536 HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY.

seem to be any necessity for giving any directions with respect
to this portion of his estate. I will, however, say, that it ap-
pears to me very clear, that the daughter of the testator took
an absolute title in remainder in one-seventh of this rest and
residue, upon the death of the widow, to whom a life-estate
was given; and that, upon the death of the widow, this one-
seventh will descend to the heirs at law of the daughter with-
out being liable to the curtesy of her husband in the realty, she
not having been seized in fact, and in deed, of this estate during
the coverture. 4 Kent's Corn., 29, 30. The outstanding life-
estate in the widow of the testator, during the coverture,
debars the husband of his curtesy.

[No appeal was taken in this case.]

MARCH TBHM, 1850.

THE BANK OF WESTMINSTER
vs.

WILLIAM PINKNEY WHYTE,
PERMANENT TRUSTEE OF
GEORGE SUTER.

WM. P. WHYTE,
PERMANENT TRUSTEE OF
GEORGE SUTER
vs.
JOHN FISHER ET AL.

[ABSOLUTE CONVEYANCE A MOBTGAGE—BIBHT OF INSOLVENT TBUSTEE TO SELL
MORTOAGED PROPERTY.]

No matte? how absolute a conveyance may be on its face, if the intention is to
take a security for a. subsisting debt, or for money lent, the transaction will
be regarded as a mortgage, and -will be treated as auch.

Parol evidence is admissible to show, that an absolute conveyance was intend-
ed as a mortgage, and that the defeasance was omitted or destroyed, by fraud
or mistake.

But, unless accident, fraud, or mistake can be shown, or in cases of trusts,
parol evidence cannot, either at law or in equity, be admitted to contradict,
add to, or vary the terms of a will, deed, or other instrument.

It is the right and duty of the trustee, in insolvency, to sell (he mortgaged
property of his insolvent, and pay off the liens and incumbrances thereon.