Draft marriage settlement

1. Thomas Campbell Eyton of Eyton esq.

2. Thomas Eyton of Eyton esq, his father.

3. Elizabeth Frances Slaney of Walford Manor spinster

4. Thomas Campbell Eyton.

5. John Oliver Hopkins of Fitz clerk, William Ward of the Middle Temple London esq. John Eyton of Sidmouth Street Regent Square, co Midd esq, and Robert Burton the younger of Shelton esq (Francis Nevit Leighton deleted).

6. Thomas Bulkeley Owen of Tedsmore Hall esq and John Somerset Packington of Westwood House co Worcs esq. Recital of settlement of 6 December 1808 - (as recited 665/479). A marriage is intended between Thomas Campbell Eyton first son of Thomas Eyton party by Elizabeth his late wife, and Elizabeth Francis Slaney, and on treaty for the marriage it was agreed that certain stock and leasehold and personal estate belonging to E.F. Slaney should be settled upon Thomas Campbell Eyton and Elizabeth F. Slaney and the issue, which was done by a settlement of even date with these presents.

(i) E.F. Slaney.

(ii) R.A. Slaney her father.

(iii) Thomas Campbell Eyton.

(iv) Thomas Eyton his father.

(v) John Oliver Hopkins, William Ward, R. Burton the younger and John Eyton (F.N. Leighton deleted).

It was also agreed that in consideration of T.C. Eyton receiving £4000, part of E.F. Slaney's fortune, that he should assure her as jointure for her life £400 p.a. and also the principal sum of £10,000 for the child or children of the marriage payable out of the estates which should be demised to Owen and Packington for term of 500 years to secure payment of the £400 p.a. and the principal sum of £10,000; and that Thomas Eyton party should assure to Thomas Campbell Eyton during the joint lives of them both an annual rent charge of £600 and that he should secure to or for the benefit of Elizabeth Frances Slaney in case Thomas Campbell Eyton should die in the lifetime of his father an annual sum of £400 payable during the joint lives of Thomas Eyton and E.F. Slaney. Consideration: the agreement, the intended marriage, and the settlement of even date, and the sum of £4,000 paid to T.C. Eyton by direction of E.F. Slaney, and 10s paid to him by Owen and Packington. Draft conveyance of the manors of Eyton or Eyton on the Wildmoors and Brotton als Bratton als Brocton, the capital messuage called Eyton Hall, in Eyton, and other property (as in 665/479) with the addition of a messuage and garden formerly John Purslow, inserted between tenures of John Steventon and John Roberts weaver in Eyton). to hold (subject to the terms of 600 and 1000 years created 7 Dec 1808) to use that in case E.F. Slaney shall survive T.C. Eyton she may from the decease of the survivor of T.C. Eyton and Thomas Eyton party, receive for life yearly from the premises £400 annuity tax free to be paid at the Common Dining Hall of Lincolns Inn by half yearly payments (in lieu of dower), with right of distraint and entry to secure payment; subject to this £400, Owen and Packington are to hold for a term of 500 years on trust in case payment of the £400 is behind 40 days, to raise the money paying any surplus to the person to whom the next estate shall belong. If there is any issue of the marriage then Owen and Packington shall after the decease of Thomas Eyton party and Thomas Campbell Eyton (but subject to the charge of £400) raise £5000 in trust as in the settlement of even date. (Clauses relating to the raising of £10,000 have been struck through)- various marginal notes by Thomas Eyton objecting to clauses throughout the draft and making comments on the purpose of other clauses) Demise to the trustees of the property for a term of 99 years to secure payment of the £600 and £400 annuities, any surplus being paybale to Thomas Eyton. (A long note by Thomas Eyton "I had made most of the marginal observations upon this most objectionable deed before upon referring to the money settlement I found that it is intended to enroll it under 3 and 4 W.LV and upon that ground as Protector of my marriage settlement I must positively decline being a Party to it. It was expressly understood and I believe Mr. W. H. Slaney was so instructed by his Brother that the jointure after my decease was to be secured by a separate deed to be executed by my Son alone; or if I should testify my consent to the present deed by being made a party to it and executing it, it would interfere most materially both with my life estate and the limitations over, as it contains an immediate grant of the Manors etc, to trustees and their Heirs by my Son to secure the jointure etc unconditionally which he has no power of doing without my consent which therefore was clearly intended be included; and as an additional proof of it he is made to covenant that he has the power to grant it unconditionally, which he clearly has not"Eyton, March 7, 1835. Further comments in pencil in another hand.