case smith versus Newport and the earl of bradford before the master of the  roll July the earl of Bradford by his will give all his estate to trustee in  trust for the defendant Mr Newport and the heir of his body and to pay such  sum out of the rend and profit for his maintenance as Lord Bradford shall by  any write appoint b a codicil be direct the trustee during Mr Newports  minority to pay the rend to the plaintiff so much as she please to be apply  for his maintenance and the residue to her own use by another codicil direct  the trustee shall not settle the estate on Mr Newport and the heir of his body  till and till then such maintenance as the trustee and the plaintiff shall  think fit mrs smith insist she be entitle to receive the rend and profit till  Mr Newport attain the age of but the master of the roll be of opinion they  vest in Mr Newport at and the time of receive prolong only till and decree the  trustee shall account for the rend from his age of to to the committee of his  estate Mr Newport be find a lunatic the only material question in this cause  be to who the rend and profit of the late earl of Bradfordsestate shall go  from the defendant Newports age of till his age of the plaintiff mrs smith and  the defendant Mr Newport find their claim upon the will and codicil of the  earl of Bradford the earl of Bradford upon neither but mere as heir at law to  his brother the late earl the late earl by his will date the that of may give  all his estate to trustee and their heir in trust by sale or mortgage to pay  all his debt and legacy and Chargeable as aforesaid devise that the say  trustee shall stand seize of the real estate in trust for the only use of the  defendant Mr atkins Newport and the heir of his body and for default of such  issue in trust for such person and person and for such estate and estate as  the testator shall by any deed or write direct and appoint and for want of  such direction then to testator own right atkins er p heir and that the  trustee shall out of the rend and profit of his real estate pay such sum of  money for the education of the defendant Mr Newport during his minority as the  testator shall by any deed or write direct and appoint by his second codicil  the testator direct that the trustee shall during the minority of Mr Newport  till the time of his death in case he shall die before twenty one pay the rend  of all his estate to the plaintiff mrs smith so much thereof as she shall  think proper to be apply for his maintenance and the residue to her own  separate use by his three codicil recite the will and former codicil he  express direct that the trustee shall not settle the estate on the defendant  Mr Newport and the heir of his body until he shall attain year and until that  age he shall have such handsome allowance for his maintenance as the plaintiff  smith and the trustee shall think fit the testator die the that of December  the plaintiff bring her bill in for several purpose and among the rest to be  let into possession of the several estate till the defendant Mr Newport shall  be entitle it be decree in that the plaintiff shall be pay the surplus rend  and profit till the defendant Mr Newport shall attain his age of and upon his  attain that age all party be to be at liberty to apply for further direction  touch the say trustestate and on this day it come on before his honour for  further direction master of the roll William fortescue Esq I shall first  consider the question as it stand between the plaintiff and Mr Newport it be  insist by mrs smith that she be intitled to the rend and profit of all the  real estate devise under the will of the late earl of Bradford till Mr  Newports age of and that the testator have by his three codicil prolong the  time till his age of it will follow as a natural consequence that the testator  intend she shall receive the rend and profit till that time I may here observe  first that the plaintiff be not entitle mere as the defendant Mr Newport be a  minor nor be the direction that the rend and profit shall be pay to her during  his minority sufficient to entitle her but the word till he arrive at his age  of the testator intention in extend it to Mr Newports age of seem to I to be  to prevent he from alienate at atkins and therefore it do not necessary follow  that by prolong the time he have give the rend and profit to the plaintiff  till the defendant Mr Newport attain his age of for it may be intend too to  prevent any extravagance he shall be guilty of at so young a age as and it may  be do too in order to lie money from his age of to to pay off the encumbrance  upon the estate necessary conclusion therefore can be draw from it one way or  another it be certain the intention of the testator be that the plaintiff  shall enjoy the rend and profit of all the estate till Mr Newport attain his  age of but if lie intend that she shall likewise have the rend till he arrive  at he will have direct it over again in the same manner as he have do with  regard to his age of and the three codicil shall not be extend to make any  alteration in the will further than the express word will warrant upon the  whole of this point I be of opinion the plaintiff be not entitle to the rend  from the defendant Mr Newports age of to his age of the second question be  between the defendant Mr Newport and the earl of Bradford whether the rend and  profit be dispose of by the testator at all between Mr Newports age of and his  age of it be say very true a heir at law shall not be disinherit by  implication only and for this purpose be cite the case of Stephens versus  Stephens case in the time of Lord Talbot and Hopkins versus Hopkins d vide  Hawyard v Stilling fleet ante vol note with regard to this question it must be  consider that the heir at law be disinherit by the express word of the will  for the whole estate be give to trustee and their heir in trust for the  defendant Mr Newport in tail and the plaintiff smith in fee so that the whole  be dispose of the legal estate vest in trustee for the use of the defendant Mr  Newport and in default of issue of he to the plaintiff and her heir therefore  the heir at law can have nothing unless there be a revocation of what be  before dispose of atkins er p now the three codicil do not revoke the  estatetail give to the defendant Mr Newport but only that prolong the time of  his come into possession can this then amount to a revocation of the will as  to the intermediate time or do a direction that the rend and profit be do pay  to Mr new port till his age of prevent their go to the defendant Mr Newport I  apprehend not at all for though he be not to have the rend and profit till his  age of yet his interest in they be not take away and though they be not  immediate to be pay yet they vest notwithstanding atkins therefore I be of  opinion that here be nothing undisposed of under this will but that the rend  and profit vest in the defendant Mr Newport at and the time of receive only be  prolong till his age of year for these reason must decree the trustee to  account for the rend and profit during this intermediate time from his age of  to his age of to the committee of the defendant Newports estate he be find a  lunatic his honour do declare that the surplus rend and profit of the say  trust estate from the time of the defendant Newports attain his age of year  until he shall attain his age of year over and above what shall be allow for  his maintenance and the other outgo of the say estate do belong to the say  defendant Newport and such surplus rend and profit of the say estate over and  above c are from time to time when the same shall amount to a competent sum to  be place out at interest for his benefit Reg lib b fol