Lawlor  T.  lawlor.— X,  194.
7.    By  railway  company  of  road.
See  RAILWAYS  AND  RAILWAY  COMPANIES  L

O.  statute  of  frauds—Bill  for  redemption— Absolute  deed— Parol  evidence  to
sbow  tbat  It  was  to  take  effect  as  a  mortgage  beld  admissible -Evidence
of  plaintiff  uncorroborated  Insufficient- 36  Vic.  cb.  10  Out.
The  bill,  which  was  filed  in  1876  by  the  children  andheirs-at  law  of  Jesse
W.  Rose,  alleged  that  the  deceased  had,  in  1861,  conveyed  certain  real  estate
to  his  brother,  Isaac  Newton  Rose,  upon  the  expressed  trust  that  he  would
advance  him  $1,000,  and  hold  the  property  as  security  for  the  repayment  of
that  sum  with  interest;  that  he  never  did  advance  that  sum  ;  that  Jesse  W.
Rose  died  in  1872 ;  that  Isaac  Newton  Rose  died  in  1874,  having  devised  this
property  to  his  son ;  that  the  trusts  upon  "which  it  had  been  conveyed  had
been  fulfilled ;  and  sought  an  account  of  Isaac  Newton  Rose's  dealings  there-
with. The  defendant,  the  executor  and  executrix  of  Isaac  Newton  Rose,  set
up  an  absolute  sale,  and  relied  on  the  Statute  of  Frauds  and  the  Statute  of
Limitations.
The  evidence  will  be  found  set  out  fully  in  the  report  of  the  case  in  the
court  below  (See  3  Ont.  App.  R.  309) ;  part  of  such  evidence  consisted  of  the
testimony  of  Colin  Henderson  Rose,  one  of  the  plaintiffs,  a  son  of  JesSe  W.
Rose,  to  the  efiect  that  his  father  being  in  difSculties  in  1861,  Isaac  Newton
Rose  told  him  (C.  H.  R.)  that  he  would  take  an  assignment  of  the  property,
pay  off  certain  mortgages  thereon,  advance  Jesse  W.  Rose  $1,000  andreoon-
vey  it  at  any  time.
