case Ellinor against garton and other the court of chancery will not order a  devisee of land to make satisfaction to the heir for money lie out by the  testator on a notion that he be possess of a estate in fee John Ellinor on his  marriage settle the land in question on himself and his wife for their life  remainder to the heir of their two body remainder to the right heir of John  Ellinor in this deed Ellinor covenantee with the trustee in the usual manner  that he have a good title and that the estate be free from encumbrance there  be no issue of the marriage the wife die modern report John Ellinor devise the  premise to one of the defendant and die his heir at law the plaintiff derive  his title under the marriagesettlement enter then it appear that John ellinor  father make a will and devise the premise to his son John in tail remainder so  that upon his death without issue the remainder take effect in a b a defendant  who bring his ejectment and obtain a verdict at York assize the bill be file  first to dispute the verdict at law second to demand a satisfaction out of the  personal asset of John Ellinor on the foundation of the covenant in the  marriagesettlement that Ellinor have a good title c three that a satisfaction  may also be make by the defendant who claim under the will for the money which  Ellinor have lie out in building upon the premise under the notion of his  leave a estate in fee the attorneygeneral and Mr Noel give up the first and  three point and insist only on the satisfaction out of the personal asset on  account of the breach of the covenant and say this case be like those of  Kettleby v atwood a Eq Abr Chan Rep Vernon a and Lechmere v Lechmere b Eq Abr  case t t Peer wms b Hardwicke Lord chancellor the first and second point be  very proper relinquish if there be anything wrong in law or in fact at the  trial the party may have have his remedy by a bill of exception or by move for  a new trial so as to the other point if tenant in tail will be weak enough to  lie out money on the land entail there can be no pretence that any allowance  shall be make for this second in this consideration of the case it be wide  different from those to which it be compare for in the case of Lechmere v  Lechmere c there be a express covenant to settle land and there be no doubt  that where a person for a valuable consideration covenant to make a settlement  upon the issue of the marriage and to limit a remainder to his own right heir  if all the issue of the marriage die the court will decree a satisfaction to  the heir at law notwithstanding be be a volunteer for what be regard in equity  in case of this nature be the intention of the person make the covenant which  appear to be that so much of his personal estate shall be apply in the  purchase of land for the use in the covenant so that the question be between  the heir at law who claim under the covenant and the personal representative  the court be certain right in decree that they both shall have just as much as  be intend for they the one not take so large a share of the personal estate as  he must take if the covenant be not perform the other have no great benefit by  a satisfaction out of the personal estate than the covenantor intend he shall  have if a proportionate part of it have be apply towards the purchase of land  and so far be the intention of the party regard in these case that if it  appear that a covenantor mean to prefer his personal modern report  representative to his heir at law the latter shall have no satisfaction out of  the personal asset nay the court go so far as to admit parole evidence to show  the intention but this cause come before the court in a strange perplex manner  the devisee and the heir at law be both party to the suit now if a man who  have no title shall devise his estate be the devisee entitle sure not be then  the heir at law capable of have satisfaction make to he in this case contrary  to the testator intent shall satisfaction be decree to he and he be make a  trustee for the devisee this will be the wile notion in the world modern  report er p let the bill therefore be dismiss without cost but if the  plaintiff give the defendant any further trouble concern the premise the  defendant have leave to apply to the court for cost