case attorneygeneral versus robin at the roll one by will give several legacy  and afterward in the same will apprehend that there will be a surplus  therefore give further legacy the legacy in the former part of the will shall  have preference in case of a deficiency one make a will then a codicil and  give legacy by both on a deficiency they shall all come into average one robin  a clergyman have some personal estate and about pound of it in SouthSea stock  which at the time of the make of his will videlicet in June be value at about  pound per cent make mrs will and thereby give pound apiece to his executor for  their care and pain and pound apiece to the poor of three several parish and  pound apiece to his servant beside several other charity and at the latter end  of his will say that he apprehend there will be a considerable surplus of his  personal estate beyond what he have before give away in legacy for which  reason he give several further legacy after this the testator make a codicil  whereby he give several other legacy amount in all to pound and then provide  in his codicil that in case there shall be any deficiency then pound which the  testator have give by his will for rebuilding a chapel for saint John college  in Cambridge peer William shall not take effect say only that as much as shall  be think necessary for that purpose shall be lie out in beautify the old  chapel there and soon afterward the testator die there happen to be a great  deficiency by reason of the fall of the value of Southsea stock which the  testator have compute at pound per cent upon which it be decree by the master  of the roll that the legacy give at the latter end of the will be upon a  presumption that there will be a surplus and there happen to be no surplus the  former legacy in the will shall have a preference and those legacy give in the  latter end of the will shall be lose however as to the legacy give by the  codicil it be object that a codicil be as a latter will which shall prevail  over a former and therefore the legacy in the codicil ought to be prefer to  the legacy in the will say per cur the codicil must be take as part of the  will so that if there be a deficiency to pay both all the legacy in the will  and likewise those in the codicil constant experience show that there shall be  a abatement in proportion but here when the testator in the latter end of his  will say that in regard he apprehend there be a considerable surplus therefore  he give additional legacy the same apprehension of a surplus must be intend to  continue in the testator at the time of his make his codicil and the legacy in  the codicil shall take place only out of the suppose surplus be it not for the  latter part of the codicil videlicet that the legacy in the codicil shall be  pay out of the pound give for the peer William rebuilding of the chapel and  out of the remainder of what may be think necessary to be lie out in beautify  the old chapel also though it object that the charitylegacies shall be prefer  to the other legacy yet it be decree and say to have be former so rule that  charity legacy be but legacy must on a deficiency abate in proportion  notwithstanding that by the civil law charitylegacies have the preference to  all other ante vol Tate v Austin master v master and attorneygeneral v Hudson  with respect to the pound give to the poor of three several parish these the  court look upon as part of the funeral and as dole at the funeral and  therefore hold that no abatement ought to be make out of they but as to the  pound apiece give to the servant though these have be pay by the executor who  desire a allowance on account thereof yet the master of the roll say he can  not break into the rule for then there will be no know where to stop wherefore  these legacy be to abate in proportion last it be urge that the pound apiece  give to the executor be say to be for their care and pain the same become a  debt and the executor army duty be entitle to a preference may pay such their  own debt first say per cur the executor if they please may renounce and the  legacy to they be but legacy and shall abate in proportion it can be a debt in  regard peer William er p that can never be a debt to the executor that be not  so to the testator so Fretwell v Stacy vern anon atk see Dyose v Dyose ante  vol page v Leapingwell Ves Beeston v booth mad peer William de term S the  number three