case lawson v stitch may the that a devise of a sum of money in a bag c be a  specific legacy and shall not abate with pecuniary legatee where a particular  debt be devise and afterward recover by testator in a adversary way it be a  ademption of the legacy John Lawson by will date the that of July among other  legacy devise to the defendant pound to remain and continue at interest on  such security as he shall leave at the time of his death or to be put out on  government security at the election of his executor it appear in fact that the  testator have a mortgage for the principal sum of pound on the estate of one  Mr pope and that he have no other sum out at interest and it be insist by the  defendant that he have several time declare that he will leave he he say pound  there be a deficiency of asset to answer all the other legacy give by the will  the question be if this be a specific legacy for if it be it will not be  liable to any proportionable abatement with the other pecuniary legatee atkins  it be insist by the attorney general that this be a specific legacy that it  appear the testator have in this mortgage sufficient to answer the charge and  that too appear to be the only security the testator have it must be presume  he intend this legacy shall be satisfy out of this mortgage that wherever any  security itself be devise or any part of the money due on such security such  legacy be always to be take as a specific one and in support of his argument  he cite the case of Philips v Carey at the roll the that of may there the  testator devise a legacy of pound Payable at the age of or marriage to be  retain in the hand of atwell who have money of the testator in his hand as his  banker the master of the roll hold this legacy shall not carry interest only  from the time limit for payment which be the case always of general pecuniary  legacy but that by this manner of devise this pound it be sever from the rest  of testator estate and specifical appropriate for the benefit of this legatee  and that it shall carry interest immediate you Lord Thurlowe in ashburner v  MGwire bro Charles Rep say that this case have often be deny to be law vide  heath v very post vol and note Lord chancellor it be pretty difficult to make  pecuniary legacy specific one but some such there be as in the case of a sum  of money in such a bag the devise of a bind or other security or a devise of  money out of such security and in such case there can be no abatement see  purse v Snaplin ante note but this seem to I by no mean a specific legacy here  be no particular charge of the legacy on this mortgage and the election give  to the executor plain show the testator do not intend to make the mortgage the  particular fund out of which the legacy shall issue but only give the legatee  power of take part of the mortgage money if it shall happen to be a subsist  mortgage at the time of his death or if otherwise that part of the testator  money to the amount of pound shall be lie out in the purchase of some  government security or other to that value that the case at the roll be very  different for that be plain a devise only of part of a debt due from atwell to  the testator nor do this point come in judgement oh be it at all necessary to  be determine there the question only be from what time t e legacy shall carry  interest and though it be hold to carry interest immediate yet it will not  follow from thence it be a specific one but liable to a abatement with the  other legacy if any deficiency have make that necessary N B it be say by the  attorney general in this case that where a particular debt be devise or part  thereof and the same be recover by the testator in his lifetime in a adversary  way that will amount to a ademption of the legacy otherwise if volun tarily  pay off by the debtor to the testator it be admit by the chancellor in this  case that distinction have prevail and that it be the practice of the court so  Orme v smith Eq ab pl crockat v crockat p W rider v wager p W partridge v  partridge can tempt Talb say contra earl of thomond v earl of Sussex p W ford  v Fleming p W Ashton v Ashton p W Drinkwater v falconer Ves attorney general v  parkins Amb ashburner v MGwire bro Charles Rep hambling v Lister Amb Baarick v  Stevens bro Charles Rep atkins er p atkins his lordship declare that the pound  give to the defendant be to be consider as two pecuniary legacy and liable to  abate in proportion with the other legatee Reg lib b fol