case Frederick against Frederick a levy a fine to the use of b for life and  after to the use of the child of c bring into existence c have two son live at  the time and before the death of b have issue two daughter adjudge that the  postnalce shall not take ante   a Jenk cent more   pop     light a salk I   I  ass Plowd roll roll Rep Owen ante more partition the case be upon special  verdict a levy a fine to I S which b that indenture be declare to he to the  use of b for life and after to the use of the child of c bring into existence  c at the time of the limitation have two son and before the death of b have  issue two daughter the question be if the daughter shall take after a argument  at the bar it be resolve by the court except Owen that the daughter shall not  take Anderson first show his opinion that the Postnalce shall not take but  only the child that be in be at the time of the limitation for they shall not  take as jointtenants nor as tenant in coninion nor by way of remainder and  therefore not at all as jointtenants they can take for they be not in be at  the time of the limitation of the remainder nor as tenant in common or by  remainder no more than they can take by a estate execute by other conveyance  and use be not Allowable but as they be consonant to the rule of law and  reason and it be plain here that no present or future use be limit to those  that shall he afterward bear and no matter can he collect out of the party  intent to help they Walnisley accord this rule be to he observe in use in  every case there be to he donor and donee who shall take as well in limitation  of a use as of a estate execute and although the commonlaw know nothing of use  yet now by the statute a use be a estate and to take such a estate there ought  croak Elizabeth to be a donee as if a gift he make to the father et birthright  son if he have no son then the son bear afterward shall not take and the use  ought to be observe as it be appoint and when it be limit in possession it  must take in ossession and in going to be and in expectance when it be so  limit but there must he a donee to take at such a time as it be limit a and  where it be object that the intent and meaning of the use be to he observe it  be true if they he not fond and idle as in will which be great favour for the  weakness of they that make they and it be against the rule of law and reason  and of use that one who be not in be shall take by a use limit in possession  and therefore the son in be shall only take it in this case and not the  daughter bear after and in the earl of Hedfords case it be rule by the advice  of the justice in the court of ware that where he make a conveyance to the use  of himself for year the remainder to his old son in tail the remainder to the  heir of the earl although his meaning be as it appe reth by the word that his  heir shall take as a purchaser yet it be rule accord to the rule of law and  not accord to his meaning scilicet that he shall take it as a fee execute in  himself and it seem that if a limitation he to the right heir of I S and he  have a vide hark   light a note where from hale ms it be say the father take  the whole feesimple croak Elizabeth er p issue a daughter and die his feme  enseint with a son who be afterward bear yet the daughter shall retain it for  she be in the estate execute Beaumond agree in omnibus Owen contra for the  intent here appear that all the child shall have it for bring into existence  refer to those that be bear as to those that shall he bear and a use be a  matter of conscience but it be adjudge by the other justice against the  daughter