case Chichester Bart versus Bickerstaff Mil all Julii Vol case money by  marriage article be agree to be lie out in land and settle on the husband and  wife and their issue remainder to the right heir of the husband though the  money at first be bind by the article yet when husband and wife be dead  without issue the money be consider as in the disposal of the husband and will  be asset and go to his executor or administrator and a strong to his residuary  legatee the plaintiff be brother and heir to sir John Chichester decease who  marry sir Charles bickerstaff daughter and by article on the marriage sir  Charles be to pay one thousand five hundred pound in part of the portion which  together with one thousand five hundred pound more to be advance by sir John  within three year after the marriage be to be invest in land and settle on sir  John for life his intend wife for life to first and other son in tail  remainder to daughter remainder to sir John right heir sir John and his lady  within a year after the marriage fall sick of the small pox the wife die first  and sir John in three day after without issue sir John have make a will and  the defendant sir Charles executor and devise the residue of his personal  estate after debt c pay to the defendant Frances Chichester his sister Vernon  chancery case the plaintiff bill be to compel the defendant sir Charles to pay  he the one thousand five hundred pound insist that by virtue of the  marriagearticle the money ought to be look on and consider in equity as land  and therefore belong to he as heir to his brother per cur this money though  once bind by the article yet when the wife die without issue become free again  and be under the power and dispose of sir John as the land will likewise have  be in case a purchase have be make pursuant to the article and therefore will  have be asset to a creditor and must have go to the executor or administrator  of sir John and this case be much strong where there be a residuary legatee  and therefore dismiss the bill money shall in many case be consider as land  when bind by article in order to a purchase but while it remain still money  and no purchase make the same shall be deem as part of the personal estate of  such person who may have alien the land in case a purchase have be make vide  simons v butter ante p and Kettleby v Attwood ante Vol and case there cite in  Lechmere v earl of Carlisle p wms the authority of this case be somewhat  question by sir Joseph Jekyl the master of the roll and on the same ground by  Talbot Lord chancellor Lechmere v Lechmere Forr say vide dictum in favour of  it per Thurlow Lord chancellor Pultney v Lord Darlington bro Ch Rep