case Nichols versus hooper Lord keeper Harcourt vern Eq can ab pl Eq can ab pl  legacy give upon a man die without issue the man die leave issue which issue  within six month after die without issue the legacy not due it not be intend  to rise upon any remote contingency than the man die without issue live at his  death John Jackson seize in fee devise land to his wife mary for life  remainder to his son Thomas Jackson and his heir provide I that if the say  Thomas Jackson shall die without issue of his body then he give apiece to his  two niece a and b to be pay within six month after the death of the survivor  of the say mother and son by the person who shall inherit the premise and in  default of payment as aforesaid then the testator devise the land to the  legatee for payment and die Thomas Jackson die leave a daughter the testator  wife mary die aad the son peer William er p which daughter within the say six  month after the death of her father Thomas Jackson die also without issue the  bill be to have the pound and for the plaintiff it be urge that though Thomas  Jackson leave issue live at the time of his death yet when the issue die  without issue peer William then do Thomas Jackson die without issue that if a  man shall devise land to a in tail and if a die without issue then to b if a  shall leave issue and that issue shall afterward die without issue bs estate  will plain commence and it be say to be the strong in regard in this case here  be a death without issue within six month after the death of the survivor sure  the issue of Thomas die without issue within six month after the death of  Thomas her father Vernon et cur content Thomas Jackson be not by this will  make tenant in tail but continue tenant in feesimple so that this be not like  the limitation of a estate for it be agree that in case of limitation of  estate in construction of law whenever there be a failure of issue of J S  though J S die leave issue at his death yet from that time J S be dead without  issue but where a legacy be give by a will to commence upon this contingency  sure if J S shall die without issue this shall be take accord to common  parlance videlicet issue live at his death for in common parlance if J S  leaves issue he do not die without issue and it can be intend that the  testator design whenever there shall be a failure of issue of Thomas which may  be year hence that then these legacy which be mean only as personal provision  shall take effect however in this case with respect to the legatee if the  legacy take any effect the word of the devise pass a legal peer William  interest and the court do not hinder the plaintiff from proceed at law in a  ejectment but dismiss the bill note this differ from the case of Goodwin v  clark lev where a settlement be on husband and wife before their life  remainder to the first c son in tale male and if the husband shall die without  issue male remainder to the daughter for a term of year for the raise of pound  for their portion and the husband die leave issue a son and a daughter after  which the son die without issue whereupon it be adjudge that the daughter  shall have the pound for that whenever the issue male of the husband fail he  may proper be say to be dead without issue male   Buckmeres case and this very  expectation remote and precarious as it be for there be a estatetai a recovery  suffer by the tenant in tail will have bar the portion expectant thereupon be  notwithstanding of advantage to the daughter with respect to their advancement  in marriage whereas in the principal case the estate be a fee no recovery can  be suffer thereof and consequent there be a danger of a perpetuity vide post  target v gaunt Pinbury v Elkin yet the more modern case do not admit this to  be construction arise ex way termini but intend a indefinite failure of issue  unless the contrary appear from other circumstance beauclerck v dorm atk  saltern v saltern atk earl of Stafford v Buckley ves big v bensley bro c c  glover v Strothoff bro C C grey v Shawne Eden Jeffere v spring Cox boehm v  clarke Ves Barlow v salt Ves do v penny mere lion v Mitchell mad and see  Hodgson v Hussey atk note William sand king Rackstraw v vile si stuff so  Nicholls v Skinner pre Charles Hugh v sayer post Keily v foul bro PC do v lie  t r but where a legacy be give to a man and his representative this exclude  the idea of its be intend as a personal provision Massey v Hudson mere  Nicholls v Skinner ub sup which seem a authority against this position be  incorrect report see mere in vin pl where this case be report from a ms note  it be say the decree be reverse in the house of lord peer William er p peer  William de term S the number three