case lady Lanesborough versus fox April cite ante a have the reversion in fee  of land settle upon the marriage of b his son in the usual manner devise all  the land in that settlement on failure of issue of the body of b and for want  of heir male of his own body to his daughter f and the heir of her body this  will do not give a estate tail by implication to b the devise to f be  executory and be void as be on too remote a contingency mark Anthony Morgan  Esq lessee of George fox Esq bring a ejectment in the court of exchequer in  Ireland against the lady dowager Lanesborough for several castle and land in  the county of Longford in Ireland to which the lady Lanesborough plead not  guilty the cause come to be try by a special jury at the tar of the say court  who find a special verdict in Michaelmas term videlicet that sir George lane  Knt and Bart afterward Lord viscount Lanesborough be seize in fee of the say  castle and land and teing so seize do in consideration of a marriage then to  he have between his son James and mary Compton now the say lady Lanesborough  and of pound marriageportion by indenture of lease and release date the d and  that of may convey the say castle and land to Thomas earl of Ossory Richard  earl of Arran Henry Lord bishop of London and sir Hugh Cholmondeley Bart and  their heir upon the trust and to the use follow videlicet that the say James  lane shall have thereout during the joint life of he and sir George lane one  annuity of pound and in case the say intend marriage shall take effect then  after the death of the say James lane that the say mary Compton shall have and  receive one annuity or yearly rend of pound for her jointure and subject  thereto to the use of the say sir George lane for his life without impeachment  of waste and then to the use of the say James lane for ninetynine year to  commence from the decease of his father sir George lane if the say James lane  shall so long live without impeachment of waste and then to the use of the say  case tempt Talbot earl of Ossory earl of Arran bishop of London and sir Hugh  Cholmondeley and their heir during the life of the say James lane upon trust  to support the contingent remainder and then to the first son of the body of  the say James lane on the body of the say mary Compton to be beget and the  heir male of the body of such first son with like remainder to all other the  son of the say marriage successive in tail male and for default of such issue  then to the use of the heir male of the body of the say James lane and then to  the right heir of the say sir George lane that the say marriage be have and  solemnized may and the say pound pay to the say sir George lane that sir  George lane then viscount Lanesborough be seize in fee of the reversion of the  say premise do the that day of July make his last will and testament in write  and do thereby among other thing devise in the word follow item I will and  devise the manor and town of Lanesborough and all other the land tenement and  hereditament mention or contain in the settlement make by I on the marriage of  my say son James lane with the daughter of sir Charles Compton second brother  to the late earl of Northampton on failure of issue of the body of the say  James lane and for want of the heir male of my body to my say daughter Frances  jane and the heir of her body lawful to be get and for want of such issue to  my say daughter the lady beaufoy and mary Bingham several and the heir of  their body lawful beget or to be beget several and respective and for want of  such issue that all and every of the premise shall be and remain to his grace  James duke of Ormond and the heir male of his body lawful beget or to be beget  and in a subsequent part of his say will he do will and devise that if his say  son James lane shall die without issue male his the say testator wife survive  he his say wife shall hold and enjoy his house and park in Rathline and all  the house land tenement case tempt Talbot and hereditament in the county of  Longford wherein he have any estate of inheritance in possession case tempt  Talbot er p reversion or remainder for and during her natural life and after  her decease to the several use to which the same be limit as aforesaid and  make his say wife executrix of his say last will and testament that the say  George Lord viscount Lanesborough die the saint of December so as aforesaid  seize of the same reversion of the manor town and land in the declaration  mention and have issue at the time of his death the say James his only son and  heir and two daughter to wit mary and Charlotte by his first wife and the say  Frances by his second wife and no other issue male and that Thomas earl of  Ossory die the d of June and that Frances viscountess Lanesborough the widow  of George Lord Lanesborough die the saint of may in the lifetime of the say  James viscount Lanesborough that James then viscount Lanesborough December  after the death of his father enter upon the premise and be thereof possess  and the say survive trustee become seize of the say manor town and land in the  declaration mention by virtue of the say deed of lease and release bear date  respective the d and that of may in such manner as the law allow that the say  James viscount Lanesborough and the say earl of Arran Lord bishop of London  and sir Hugh Cholmondeley the then survive trustee by indenture of lease and  release the that and that of October for the bar all estate tail reversion and  remainder and to the end to settle and assure the same as therein after  mention do convey to Edward brabazon Esq and William smyth gentleman and their  heir among other the manor castle and land in question to the intent case  tempt Talbot and purpose that one or more common recovery or recovery may be  thereof have and suffer which say recovery or recovery shall be and enure to  the use of the say James viscount Lanesborough for his life without  impeachment of waste and after his decease then to the use of the lady mary  viscountess Lanesborough wife of the say James viscount Lanesborough for her  life as and for a increase or augmentation of her jointure and in bar of her  dower and three at commonlaw and after her decease then to the use of the say  James viscount Lanesborough and his heir that the say recovery be accord  suffer hill car of the say manor town and land in question which Fergus  Farrell Esq and Edward nangle gentleman be demandant and the say brabazon and  smyth be tenant who vouch the say James viscount Lanesborough who vouch the  common vouchee that the say James viscount Lanesborough be so possess of the  manor town and land in question October do make his last will and testament  and do thereby devise to George Hooper Lord bishop of bath and well and Hatton  Compton lieutenant general and Robert dorm Esq a judge of the common plea and  James Middleton Esq and their heir all his manor land tenement and  hereditament whatsoever in the kingdom of Ireland in which he or any person in  trust for he have any estate of inheritance or other interest in possession  reversion remainder or expectance in trust nevertheless and to and for the  several use therein after express that be to say that from and after his  decease his say trustee shall stand and be seize of all the say premise in the  say county of Longford in trust for the heir of his body and for want of such  issue he do will and devise that the say trustee shall permit and suffer his  sister Charlotte lady beaufoy for and during her life to have and receive for  her own use and behoof the rend issue and profit of the farm and land of case  tempt Talbot Coolcroy barony of Rathline in the say county of Longford and  after her decease his say trustee shall permit and suffer his say wife to have  and receive to her own use the rend issue and profit of the say premise last  mention and his will be that his say trustee shall suffer his say wife from  and immediate after her decease to have and receive to her own use all the  rend issue and profit of all the rest and residue of his say manor land and  real estate in the kingdom of Ireland for her life and after her decease  direct his trustee shall convey the say premise to the several use in the say  will mention videlicet to the use of John bell lane the old and only grandson  of his sister mary Bingham afterward call mary Middleton decease for his life  and after his decease to the use of his first and other son in tail male with  several remainder over and he do appoint his say wife sole executrix of his  say will that the say James viscount Lanesborough August die possess of the  say manor town and land in question and without issue case tempt Talbot er p  that the say Frances lane daughter of the say George Lord viscount  Lanesborough and devisee in his say last will marry Henry fox and by he have  issue George fox the lessor of the plaintiff her old son and heir and the say  Henry die the that day of October and the say Frances die the that day of  December leave the say George the lessor of the plaintiff her old son and heir  of her body who on the saint of September enter upon the say premise and be  thereof seize as the law direct and make the lease to the say mark Anthony  Morgan as in the declaration abovementioned who enter upon the premise and be  possess thereof until the say mary viscountess Lanesborough enter upon the  premise and eject he but whether upon the whole matter find by the say jury  the say lady viscountess Lanesborough be guilty of the say trespass or not the  jury be altogether case tempt Talbot ignorant and if the court judge her  guilty then they find her guilty and assess damage and cost but if the court  do not think her guilty then they say she be not guilty the jury find the  several settlement recovery and will herein beforementioned in hoc verb hill  the court of exchequer in Ireland give judgement for Mr Morgan the lessee of  George fox Esq and pound S for damage and cost the same term the say lady  viscountess dowager Lanesborough bring her writ of error in the exchequer  chamber in Ireland returnable in easter term upon which writ of error the say  judgement be affirm in easter term upon which affirmance of the say judgement  the say lady viscountess dowager Lanesborough bring a writ of error before the  house of lord of great Britain which come on to be hear on the that and that  of April and Mr Talbot solicitor general and Mr rider have argue for the  plaintiff in error and sir Philip York attorneygeneral and Mr Lutwyche for the  defendant in error the judge have be order to attend be ask their opinion  whether Lord James take any other or great estate by the will than by the  settlement and it be agree they shall deliver their opinion seriatim Mr  justice reeve deliver his opinion with his reason that the Lord James can not  take a estate tail no alteration be make by the will and that no estate be  raise to Lord James by implication then Mr justice lee sir William Thompson Mr  justice fortescue Mr baron comens Mr justice probin Mr justice page and the  Lord chief baron several deliver their reason and all be of the same opinion  case tempt Talbot after which this question be put to the judge videlicet  whether any or what estate Frances take by the will of Lord George and  thereupon Mr justice reeve deliver his opinion with his reason for it that  Frances take no estate whatsoever but that the devise to her be absolute void  in its creation as be in too remote a contingency also all the other judge  declare themselves of the same opinion and several deliver their reason the  judgement of the exchequer Chamber in Ireland affirm the judgement of the  court of exchequer there be reverse bro Charles Rep S c the principle which  govern the opinion of the judge upon the question put to they in this case  seem to have be that the limitation to the daughter Frances lane be future be  to arise after the failure of issue of the body of James lane and of the heir  male of the body of the father sir George lane now there be no subsist estate  extend to the issue of the body of James lane general the settlement be  confine to his first and other son and their issue male nor indeed be there  any estate tail in sir George lane himself to extend to the heir male of his  own body and therefore the estate devise by sir George lane can not be  consider as the devise of a reversion depend or expectant on such precede  estate and though as sir George lane have but one son and there be a  limitation by the settlement to the first and other son of such son in tail  male the devise for want of heir male of his sir George own body may have be  construe as a devise of the reversion expectant on the failure of son of his  say son and the heir male of their body yet as there be no preexist estate  extend to issue female of the body of James lane it be impossible to consider  the devise on failure of issue general of the body of James as the devise of a  reversion expectant on failure of such issue there be no precede estate extend  to that period consequent unless such a precede estate be raise by implication  which be not admit by the judge the devise to the daughter Frances jane be not  the devise of a reversion but be a executory limitation unsupported by any  precede estate and be not to take effect till after a general failure of issue  be therefore too remote the decision in lady Lanesborough v fox be afterward  very ample discuss in the case of Morgan v Jones b b hill and by the whole  court allow to be law vide fearne count Rem Edward bro part Cas and Edward bro  PC S c where the above case of Morgan v Jones be full state more v Lord Parker  Lord raym Mod S C badger v Lloyd salk Lord raym goodman v Goodright burr case  tempt Talbot er p de term S michaelis geo two in curian porter