case Stephens versus Stephens Lord chancellor king Eq can ab pl a devise that  if beneficiary and vie of a churchlease which the testator have shall die the  testator executor shall purchase the premise for the life of I S the testator  kinsman but if such purchase can not be make then the surplus of his personal  estate to go to another whether I S take any interest by the will one seize of  a leasehold estate for the life of a hold of the church make his will and  after several legacy devise a annuity out of the leasehold premise to b for  his life and direct that if b survive a the beneficiary and vie in the lease  then the testator executor shall purchase the leasehold premise for the life  of c the testator kinsman and then devise that his executor out of the surplus  of the leasehold and personal estate shall keep the premise in repair but if  the leasehold premise can not be so purchase then be devise the surplus of the  estate to the plaintiff and make I S his executor in trust only give he a  small legacy the executor purchase the leasehold premise for the life of c and  the question be whether the plaintiff or the defendant c be entitle to the  surplus of the profit thereof for the plaintiff it be urge by the solicitor  general that as if the lease can not be purchase for c s life the plaintiff be  then to have that money with which the purchase be to peer William have be  make so now the lease be purchase with the testator money the plaintiff ought  to have this lease aad that the testator must intend so otherwise he will have  even the money if not lie out in the purchase to the defendant c which the  will have not do that it be a very idle pretence for c to claim the lease for  no other reason but because he be one of the life for which the lease be take  which can relate only to the duration of the lease and do not import any  benefit to the defendant also if there be no disposition of the lease by the  will then the testator will have die intestate as to this lease and consequent  it must have go to his next of kin accord to the statue of distribution of  intestates estate Lord chancellor the plaintiff can have this lease the devise  to he be upon a contingency which never happen videlicet if the leasehold  premise can not be purchase for the life of the defendant whereas such  purchase have be make by the executor dly the executor can claim the lease he  be only executor in trust and have a express legacy neither do he in fact lie  claim to the same dly the next of kin will not be entitle thereto it appear  that the testator do not intend to die intestate as to any part of his estate  but thly the defendant c be the person entitle to the leasehold premise this  be the case of a western manor where it be the usual way to put in a son a  daughter or peer William er p a wife life by which it be mean to give the  estate to such a son or daughter c and this the rather appear to have be a  beneficial peer William devise because in the devise clause the testator call  the defendant his kinsman and here slight word will serve to give the  leasehold premise to the defendant forasmuch as no other person can take they  and it be a dark will but afterward upon a rehear for the reason give by the  solicitor general the chancellor reverse his former decree and hold that by  his will the plaintiff be entitle to the lease Reg lib b fol