case butler whether ux versus Duncomb Lord chancellor Parker vern Mod Eq can  ab pl term create for daughter portion commence after the death of the father  and mother upon trust to raise the portion from and after the commencement of  the term father die leave a daughter decree the portion be vest but not  raiseable during the life of the mother upon the marriage of George Duncomb  with mary one of the daughter of the late Lord g I pollexfen the defendant  George Duncomb the father covenant to settle landsin the article mention be  pound a year on George Duncomb the son for life remainder to mary his intend  wife for life remainder to the first and every other son of the marriage in  tail male remainder to trustee for five hundred year upon the trust therein  mention remainder to the use of the defendant George Duncomb in fee the trust  of the five hundred year term be declare to be that the trustee shall from and  after the commencement of the term raise portion for the young child of the  marriage peer William videlicet if but one young child then pound if more to  be raise by the rend and profit or by sale demise or mortgage and Payable at  twentyone or marriage the marriage take effect and there be issue a daughter  only the plaintiff whether and George the husband die afterward pursuant to  the article mid a decree in this court the defendant George Duncomb settle the  same premise be pound per annum on his daughterinlaw mary for life remainder  to trustee for year the reversion to the defendant George Duncomb himself in  fee the trust of the five hundred year term be as before that the trustee  shall from and after the commencement of the term by rend or profit sale  demise or mortgage raise pound to be pay to the plaintiff whether at her age  of twentyone or marriage but there be no provision for maintenance the  plaintiff John butler who be but a mercer in Guildford and of mean  circumstance by stealth and bribery prevail with the plaintiff whether when  but fifteen and without the consent of any of her relation to marry he and  with her bring this bill for the portion it be urge for the plaintiff that  though the man have be in fault yet this be now as the wife suit for her  portion in which the husband join but for conformity peer William er p and  therefore his indirect practice in procure the marriage be out of the case  quod cur to go away next it be insist that the year term be vest in peer  William the trustee present on seal the deed and be assignable and saleable  and that a provision for a portion be to be favour so that if it can be any  way consistent with the deed it shall be pay at such time as there be occasion  for it and not wait until the death of the parent the mother who be now but  fortythree year of age the daughter may at that rate be sixty year of age  before her portion will be Payable that though the word be that the trustee  from and after the commencement of the term shall raise the portion yet it be  say there be a legal and a equitable commencement of the term it be plain  there be a estate of the term subsist by which the portion can be raise and  equity will call for it when there be most occasion which be upon the daughter  marriage and when the payment by express word be appoint to be at the daughter  age of twentyone or marriage the other word inconsistent with these shall be  reject as repugnant that whenever it shall be raise it must carry interest  from the marriage it be appoint to be then pay and therefore to raise it now  will be most beneficial to the daughter and not prejudicial to the reversioner  who in all event be to pay interest either to the daughter or to the mortgagee  and it can not be material to which that it must the rather have this  construction in regard in this case there be no maintenance provide for the  daughter until her portion become Payable beside the person here contend with  be only the father who have the reversion in fee and have receive the pound  which be the mother portion and yet now make a difficulty of part with pound  peer William that though the settlement in this case be after the marriage yet  the plaintiff ground their pretention upon the article make before marriage  and notwithstanding it may be object that the plaintiff the daughter whether  be not a young child within the trust of that term yet as a daughter though  first bear when there be a son bear after be in equity deem to be a young  child ante beal v beal so here she shall be consider in the same light for  that otherwise she can be entitle to nothing within those article quod curian  to go away as to authority Mr Vernon cite the case of hellier and Jones I Eq  can ab pl determine in the time of the lord commissioner decree by the lord  commissioner the that November I W m and afterward affirm by their lordship on  a rehear and again affirm upon a appeal to the house of lord and where it be  decree that a reversionary term for year expectant upon the death of the  mother shall be sell for the payment of a portion at the marriage of the  daughter so likewise be it resolve in the case of Stainiforth v Stainiforth  vern and in a much strong case than the principal one that of Gerrard v  Gerrard vern and cite post in pierpoint v Lord Cheyney where a estate be  settle upon sir Charles Gerrard for life remainder to lady Gerrard for life  remainder to trustee to raise portion for a daughter by the marriage if but  one to be pay within six month after the death of the father and mother on the  father sir Charles die leave a daughter and no son the daughter have a decree  for raise the portion in the life of the mother the lady Gerrard who be yet  live and in the case of Corbet and Maidwell salk this case of Gerrard and  Gerrard be peer William allow by Lord Cowper though it be admit he say if it  have be res integran he will not have go so far also Jones though greaves and  Maddison be cite where a journeyman mercer marry the daughter and the portion  be to be raise by a term for year if the father die without issue male by the  marriage and shall leave a daughter and the mother on her death leave a  daughter the judge to who the case be refer for their opinion determine the  portion to be due in the life of the father this seem contrary to Wingrave v  Palgrave ante Lord chancellor though Gerrard and Gerrard and greaves and  Maddison be strong case yet this case seem to go yet far and as Lord  chancellor Cowper who his lordship be please to say he unequal succeed declare  have those I case come before he he will not have go so far I for my part  declare I will not go a jot far but where thing be settle and render certain  it will not be so material how as long as they be so and that all people know  how to act peer William er p the word from the commencement of the term must  be intend commencement in possession and in this case if the trust of the term  have be that the trustee after the commencement of the term and not before  shall raise the portion there can then have be no doubt but the term must have  commence before the portion can be raise now here those negative word be plain  imply for when the deed say after the commencement of the term it plain show  the intention of the party to be that it shall not be before and can have no  other meaning peer William and the pen of it in such manner may be owe to a  reasonable and prudent care in the parent to prevent this estate from be eat  up and devour with interest for if the reversion may be mortgage it may have  be by the same reason mortgage immediate on the marriage and the mother be but  a little above forty may be suppose to live to double that number of year  videlicet to eighty or upward within which time the pound mortgagemoney will  be more than Triple and the mortgagee may foreclose and by get report of the  money due may make his interest principal as it must be after the report  confirm vide post Bacon v clerk and brown v Barkham by which mean the whole  reversion of pound per annum will be inevitable swallow up therefore to  prevent this hardship on the family the word seem to have be insert and can  have no other meaning than that the portion shall be raise after the  commencement of the term in possession whereby the party have fix a time for  the raise it which word though so prudent insert for the preservation of the  estate from a probability of be lose the other side will nevertheless have  reject also his lordship do not seem to take it that the portion shall carry  interest from the marriage though I do not observe that the court give any  opinion as to that matter but say that if it be to yield interest yet decree a  mortgage to be make will carry it further by put it in the power of the  mortgagee by a bill of foreclosure to make even the interest principal upon  every report and that if this portion be due the trustee if they think fit may  make the peer William mortgage without come to the court at least it seem so  hard a case upon the reversioner that equity shall not decree it as to the  objection that the settlement do not provide a maintenance until the portion  be Payable there be no reason that equity shall supply it any more than that  it shall supply the want of a portion if none have be provide but this may be  industrious omit by the settlement as intend to leave the child to depend upon  the mother who by the law of the land and of nature be bind to provide for it  moreover the court observe that here in the trust declare by the marriage  article of the year term it be not say as usual that if there shall be issue  male and such issue shall die before twentyone without issue male then the  term shall cease so that if there have be issue male of the marriage and that  issue have survive twentyone and have at any time afterward die without issue  male the daughter will have be entitle to her portion of three thousand pound  and as the other side contend to the interest from her marriage but qure for  this seem otherwise as to the interest in regard if there have be issue male  that attain twentyone such issue male may by a recovery have bar the  subsequent term of year and during the life of such issue male the principal  of the portion will be entire precarious and therefore not due and for the  same reason can not carry interest that it be no objection to the grandfather  that he have receive pound portion upon the son marriage with the plaintiff  mother and therefore ought not to scruple part with pound to the plaintiff his  granddaughter since for that peer William pound the grandfather settle a  jointure of pound a year upon the son wife which may be so long enjoy by her  as to make it a dear bargain upon the common method of purchase however the  case be of consequence Lord chancellor adjourn it and direct in the mean time  precedent shall be lie before he afterward upon the last day of cause in  easter term man Lord chancellor have take time to consider of the case do  solemnly deliver his opinion he say the question be when this portion of pound  shall be raise he shall answer prout the deed that it shall be raise after the  commencement of the term in possession peer William er p that the declare by  the trust of the term the portion shall be raise after the commencement of the  term imply a negative that it shall not be raise before and if those negative  word have be insert there can have be no question at all that a declaration of  a trust be like the prescribe a law to a trustee which be to be observe by he  and contain in it a prohibition to act to the contrary it be such a  affirmative as imply a negative in the same manner as the declare in the trust  of the term that pound be raise imply that no more than pound shall be raise  or as that part of the declaration of trust which say the pound shall be pay  to the daughter at her age of twentyone imply it shall not be pay before  twentyone peer William that it have be object a term especial for the raise of  portion may in some case begin early in equity than it will at law as in the  case of Savile and Savile which be argue this term where upon the marriage of  the Lord eland son to the marquis of Halifax with the daughter of the earl of  Nottingham a rentcharge of pound per annum be settle upon her for her jointure  and a term of ninetynine year be limit to commence after the death of the Lord  eland the husband determinable on the death of his then intend wife in trust  the better to secure to her this rentcharge with remainder of the land thus  charge to the first c son of the marriage with remainder to trustee for year  to raise portion for daughter if no issue male the portion to be pay at the  age of sixteen or marriage which shall first happen and afterward the marquis  of Halifax settle the reversion by way of voluntary settlement on sir George  Savile subject to the limitation and charge in his son settlement and to take  effect on failure of issue male of his own body in which case his lordship  allow that this year term for portion take place in equity from the death of  the Lord eland the ninetynine year term be raise for a particular purpose only  sure for secure the rentcharge and subject to that trust which extender only  to part of the profit whereas in the principal case the whole profit of the  premise be dispose of until the commencement of the term videlicet to the  mother for her life which distinguish it from the case of Savile and Savile  peer William again it have be object the portion be to be pay at the age of  twentyone or marriage and since it be express direct any clause to the  contrary may be reject as well as this but sure it be a rule both in law and  equity so to construe the whole deed or will as that every clause shall have  its effect he agree the intention be to provide for a daughter but still not  so as to raise the portion until the term shall commence and yet the word  which order the payment of the portion to the daughter at her age of twentyone  or marriage shall have their effect videlicet they shall vest a right in the  daughter to this portion when she have attain twentyone as she then have and  have attain that age her portion in case of her death shall go to her executor  or administrator as a vest interest that in the order and nature of this deed  the portion be first to be raise and then to be pay but still the same be not  to be raise until after the commencement of the term and to take itin any  other sense be rather expung than construe I that there be no precedent  against this Corbet and Maidwell be a different case and yet there Lord Cowper  declare that he think precedent have go further than he shall have carry they  that the common method of settlement now a day direct that no sale or mortgage  shall be make for raise of portion until the premise shall come in possession  vide post Vol two in the case of reresby v Newland which though not conclusive  in this case yet be they as peer William so many protestation against the  unreasonableness and inconvenience of such sale of reversion that it will  plain ruin this estate and the reversionary interest therein if the daughter  and her husband have a power to raise the portion in this manner for it must  carry interest and that interest may afterward be make principal which with  the charge of the suit will be so heavy that in all probability the estate  charge will be foreclose before it can come into possession and it will upon  every removal of the security be still hard for the reversioner to procure  money so that the portion in this case though vest be not to carry interest  until the term shall commence for all interest be in default of payment  however his lordship say he will not dismiss the bill for the party may still  apply for a sale under this decree whenever the term can come into possession  but it appear from the register book that afterward on the wife and trustee  peer William er p consent in court Mr butler the husband be allow to raise  pound a moiety of the portion by mortgage the reversionary term to supply his  occasion in trade although Gerrard v Gerrard greaves v Maddison c have be  constant receive as the law of the court yet judge in late time have express  their opinion of the inconvenience attend those determination and have anxious  seek for circumstance to distinguish the modern case from they Sandys v Sandys  post reresby v Newland post Vol two ravenhill v Dalnsey ib broom v Berkley ib  Hebblethwaite v Cartwright can tempt Talb Stanley v Stanley l atk hall v  carter atk Stevens v dethick atk goodal v river mos lion v duke of chandos atk  churchman v Harvey Amb smith v Evans ib Conway v Conway bro c c see Lord  eldoms observation on Conway v Conway in Codrington v Foley Ves and see  Albemarle v Roger Ves jun Clinton v Seymour Ves Lyddon v Lyddon Ves