case Beeton versus darkin e contra die Julii in court lord commissioner one  die intestate leave a uncle and a decease uncle son whether the decease uncle  son shall come in for a share on the statute of distribution post case the  question arise upon the statute for distribution intestate estate in this case  there be Vernon chancery case four brother and a sister be uncle and aunt to  the intestate one of they be dead leave child the question be whether these  child shall come in for a share Mr finch argue that before the make of this  statute if there be a brother live and a nephew the brother shall have have  the administration and the nephew shall have have nothing but now by this act  of parliament the nephew come in for a share but the act go only to brother  and sister child and their representative which will not reach this case for  the word of the act be there shall be no distribution further than brother and  sister child and their representative and that must be intend of collateral to  the intestate object per Lord Hutchins if there be two uncle both dead leave  issue the child of one of they get administration by Mr Finchs rule the  administrator be not bind to distribute Mr pinch that be not my argument I do  not say that even in that case there shall not be distribution among those who  be in equal degree but what I say be that there Vernon chancery case er p  shall not be any representation among collateral to the intestate beyond  brother and sister child Mr solicitorgeneral and Mr sergeant levinz argue e  contra that the proviso in the act of parliament that there shall be no  representation beyond brother and sister child must be take with relation not  to the intestate but to the person among who the distribution be to be make  Vernon chancery case there be no such word in the act of parliament as that  there shall be no representation among the collateral to the intestate beyond  brother and sister child to the intestate there want the word intestate in  that place to support Mr Finchs argument per Lord Hutchins the ecclesiastical  court very ancient make distribution of intestates estate long before the act  of parliament many precedent whereof be late produce at the bar of the house  of lord in the case crook and Watts ant case between the half blood and the  whole blood that the spiritual court be not prohibit from make distribution  until the reign of king James the first and the prohibition be then ground on  the statute of Henry VIII which direct the ordinary to grant administration to  the next of kin and when that be do they have execute their authority and he  take it that the word in the act of parliament to distribute accord to the law  for that purpose and rule in the act aforementioned the word law must relate  and be intend of ecclesiastical law and the usage in the spiritual court  before that time practice the court incline that the nephew be well entitle to  a share with the uncle and aunt but take time further to consider of the case  Reg lib a fol but it be now settle that in such a case the uncle and aunt  shall take the whole pet case p wms bower v Littlewood ibidem maw v Harding  post pre Ch S c