case newland versus shepherd refer to Cropton v Davies l r c p Cuthbert v  Robinson l I Ch comment on in re Hidleys trust W r Lord Macclesfield Mod Eq  can ab pl J S after the devise of several part of his real and personal estate  to several person devise the interest and produce of the surplus of his real  and personal estate to his grandchild until their age of twentyone this will  pass the absolute right and property of the real and personal estate to the  grandchild after that age Mr shepherd a druggist have a daughter a only child  to who he give pound portion and marry to the plaintiff Newland old son of sir  George Newland and Mr Newland have issue by her three child Mr shepherd make  his will by which have dispose of some part of his real estate and of some  legacy he devise the residue of his real and personal estate unto trustee  their heir executor and administrator in trust to pay and apply the produce  and interest thereof for the maintenance and benefit of such of his grandchild  by his say daughter Newland as shall be live at the time of his decease until  his say grandchild shall come to the age of twentyone year or be marry and he  go no further nor make any other disposition of his estate only direct that if  all his trustee shall die in such case his soninlaw Newland shall be a trustee  Obj the surplus of this real and personal estate be undisposed of by the will  ought after the grandchild shall have attain their age of twentyone to go in  the same manner as if there have be no will and consequent the real estate  must descend to the heir at law of the testator and the personal estate be  distribute among the next of kin accord peer William to the statute of  distribution and though the testator intention may have be nay probable be  otherwise yet there must be word as well as a intention to pass away any  estate especial with regard to a real estate Lord chancellor the intention be  most plain that the grandchild shall have the surplus both of the real and  personal estate after their acre of twentyone it be true there be a provision  for the child by the marriage settlement but that be not to take place until  after their father death in this case the testator shepherd do not care to  trust his soninlaw with provide peer William er p for his child out of his own  estate not only during the time when their maintenance will be least expensive  during their tender year and when every parent be bind to provide for his  child but even here he take a care which seem unnecessary and can it be  imagine that the testator will show concern for his grandchild when they do  not want it and leave off that care at the only time when they can be suppose  to stand in need of it videlicet as soon as they shall come of age and be  marriageable beside it be plain the testator give all from the heir at law by  vest the whole estate in fee as well as the legal property of the personal  estate in trustee which will not have be do have any thing be intend to remain  to the daughter and heir not only the interest but produce of the real and  personal estate be to be apply by such trustee and to help this plain  intention of the testator the word produce shall be take in the large sense  and then it will signify whatever the estate will yield by sale or otherwise  peer William and this case be the strong in regard the soninlaw the plaintiff  Newland be to be a trustee in case the other trustee shall all die but it can  be intend that the plaintiff Newland be to be a trustee for himself or for  what himself will be entitle to shall it come to his wife but see Bennet v  Davis post paulet v Delaval ves the case cite in king and mell vent cite in  the case of Hewit versus Ireland vol be applicable to tile present case where  the court construe a will against the express word in order to make it take  effect accord to the intention videlicet a man devise a estate to his old son  and the heir of his body and if he die live his mother remainder to the second  son and because it can not be suppose that the father intend to prefer his  second son before the issue of the old where the old have die in the life of  the mother leave a son the court adjudge the issue of such old son to take and  understand the devise as if it have be if the old son shall die without issue  live the mother remainder to the second son the word produce be not make use  of in the case as state by Reg lib b fol although part of the Lord chancellor  argument appear by this report to have turn particular upon it but though the  whole legal estate in fee be give to trustee yet if any part of the beneficial  interest be undisposed of the heir shall have it by way of result trust  Tregonwell v Sydenham dow and see Nash v smith Ves Kellett v Kellett ba be dow  king v denison V b Maugham v mason ib Southouse v bale V b dunnage v white  James W et vide Kentish v Newman ante vol Targus v puget ves Peat v Powel Amb  S c Eden white v barber Amb S c burr but in Fonereau v Fonereau atk Lord  Hardwicke express his disapprobation of this case of Newland v shepherd and  see Molesworth v Molesworth Cox