case thomas bar ux versus keney bar ux maii Eq can ab g pl Freem S c on  marriage land be settle on a for life remainder to the first c son of the  marriage in tail male remainder to trustee for year to raise pound portion for  daughter Payable at eighteen or marriage remainder to a in fee after the  marriage a settle other land and a term be create for raise the like sum of  pound for daughter on failure of issue male Payable at sixteen or marriage a  die leave a daughter his heir at law who attain eighteen and die unmarried the  trust of the term be not merge in the fee but the portion shall go to the  daughter executor and be disposable by her will but there shall be but one  pound raise on marriage of sir Thomas with the Lord wharton daughter there be  by the marriagesettlement a term lodge in trustee for the raise of pound for  daughter on failure of issue male and a maintenance until the portion be  Payable which be to be at eighteen or marriage and subject to that term the  estate be entail on the issue male with a remainder to the right heir of sir  Thomas Vernon chancery case after the marriage have sir Thomas make a  settlement of other land and thereby likewise lodge a term in trustee for  raise the like sum of pound for daughter on failure of issue male Payable at  sixteen or marriage and a maintenance in the meantime for remainder over prout  there be issue a son and daughter of that marriage the son die in his minority  unmarried and the estate descend upon his sister and heir who have attain the  age of nineteen and upward in her last sickness make a will nuncupative and  thereby mention to devise all that be in her power to devise to her mother  then the wife of sir Charles keney by who he have several child and die her  mother prove the will in the prerogative court and the real estate descend to  the plaintiff wife her heir at law the plaintiff bill be as be heir at law to  be relieve against a judgement in ejectment obtain by the trustee on the term  for year lodger in they for raise portion for daughter as aforesaid the  question be what pass to the lady keney by the will of her daughter whether  both or either of the sum of pound charge on the land in manner aforesaid as  portion for daughter in failure of issue male and whether in the consideration  of a court of equity the sum intend for the portion of mrs Thomas be not merge  or extinguish and the trust determine either by her die unmarried before the  portion be raise or by the inheritance of the whole estate descend upon her as  be the heir at law to her brother father and grandfather for the plaintiff it  be insist that the trust be determine Vernons chancery case and the proceed in  the trustee name ought to be stay by the injunction of this court Vernon  chancery case er p first because the several sum of pound and pound be intend  as a portion for mrs Thomas and she die in her minority and unmarried the  intention of the trust be answer and there be no occasion for the raise of a  portion and therefore the proceed upon the ejectment in the trustee name ought  to be stay by the injunction of this court and the term ought to be assign to  the plaintiff the heir at law and insist this be the reason of the decree in  the case of paulet and paulet vol case where it be hold that the daughter die  a infant and unmarried the portion shall not be raise for the benefit of her  administrator but shall sink into the inheritance for the benefit of the heir  although there be no provision or clause in the settlement that the portion  shall in such case cease second that the inheritance descend upon her the  whole estate be consolidate and the term be no long a trust for the raise of a  portion for her but the whole entire term become a trust for her and she may  have compel the trustee to have assign the term to her or to who she shall  appoint and to take her portion to be a subsist charge on the estate be in  effect to say she be debtor to herself three that where matter come to be  controvert between the heir and administrator the heir be general favour so in  Scudamour v Scudamour pre Ch Hayter v rod p wms chaplin v Horner ibidem b  Edward v countess of Warwick p wms Lutkins v leigh Forr and ought to be so in  this case the rather because here be no debt to pay and the nuncupative will  be make when she be almost in limit and do not Vernon chancery case contain  any particular devise of the portion but be in general of all she have power  to dispose of and cite the case of narbonne and narbonne where by article of  marriage pound be to be lie out in land and settle to the husband for life  remainder as to part to the wife for her jointure remainder to the first and  other son in tail and in failure of issue male a term to trustee for raise  portion for daughter remainder to the right heir of the husband the husband  die leave issue only a daughter on a bill bring to have the money invest in  land and settle accord to the article the court in that case decree a  performance of the article but with this that there shall not be any term in  trustee for the raisin a of a portion for the daughter but that the estate  subject to the mother jointure shall go to the daughter and her heir and the  reason give by the court be that it be in vain to direct any such term since  the daughter be the heir at law unless it be for the benefit of a  administrator to the prejudice of the heir as that case may happen which the  court think not reasonable fourthly it be insist if the portion provide by the  marriage settlement be still a subsist charge upon the estate yet there ought  to be but one sum of pound raise and the latter provision shall be take to be  in lieu and satisfaction of the former as have be adjudge in the case of Blois  and Blois Ch Rep vent Jesson and Jesson and in many other like case ant can  for the defendant it be answer first that this case be not within the reason  of the judgement give in the case of paulet and paulet for there the portion  which be to be out of land be make Payable at eighteen or marriage and the  young lady happen to die Vernon chancery case unmarried and before the age of  eighteen of which age she want a year at her death but in the principal case  the portion be not only debt is owed but be also become Payable in her  lifetime and therefore may be more proper resemble to the case of the earl of  river and earl of Derby ant can but be in truth a much strong case for there  be no time appoint for the payment of the daughter portion but the term for  raise it be to commence upon the decease of her father who she survive there  although she die in her infancy and unmarried it be look upon as a interest  vest and go to her administrator and be so decree in this court and affirm  upon a appeal to the lord in parliament and much more may the portion in this  case be deem a interest vest since it be make Payable at a certain time and  she survive the time appoint for payment thereof second although the  inheritance descend and vest in her as heir at law yet there can be no merger  of the term for that be lodge in trustee and where a infant have two right in  her this court which be to take care of infant will always preserve that right  which be most beneficial to the infant and in this case it be for the interest  and advantage of the infant that the portion shall be look upon as a continue  and subsist charge and not sink into the inheritance because it may have be a  mean to have prefer her in marriage during her infancy and before she be  capable of make a settlement of her real estate and likewise wheat Vernon  chancery case er p of the age of seventeen at twelve bishop v sharp post she  be capable of dispose by will of her personal estate either for payment of  debt or in legacy among her relation and in the case of narbonne and narbonne  that be cite if the infant have desire her portion may have be raise in order  to prefer her in marriage or the like no doubt but the court will have decree  it to be raise out of the land and in case there have be a bill bring as on  the behalf of mrs Thomas Vernon chancery case to have the term assign so as it  may have merge in the inheritance the court will not have so decree because it  will have be to the prejudice of the infant and for that reason in the case of  Audley and Audley ant can where the committee of a lunatic have invest part of  the lunatic personal estate in a purchase of land when that matter come to be  controvert between the heir at law and the next of kin the court there decree  that it shall still be account as personal estate and the next of kin consent  to accept the land at the value they be purchase at the land be decree to be  sell accord or otherwise the committee must have be charge with the money and  have dispose of the land as he can and so it be likewise adjudge in the case  of one Dennis where the guardian of a infant take upon he to invest part of a  infant personal estate in the purchase of land three ft be insist by the  defendant counsel that both the pound ought to be raise for that the latter  provision be not say to be in lieu or satisfaction of the former and they be  make Payable at different time the pound by the marriagesettlement at eighteen  or marriage that of the provision of the father at sixteen or marriage if I  the father have marry a second wife and have issue male yet the pound by the  marriagesettlement must have be raise but the latter pound be not to arise but  in failure of issue male of the body of the father as well of the first as of  any other after take wife and as the daughter by the first wife be to have  pound although the father shall have have one or more son by a second wife so  in case he shall have no son at all but only daughter by a second wife or  shall think fit to give the estate to any collateral heir it may be reasonable  to augment and double the daughter portion and that may Vernon chancery case  be a sufficient reason to induce the father to make this further provision for  his daughter and as it be not declare that the latter provision be intend to  be in lieu and satisfaction of the former there be nothing in the deed that  lead to such construction nor that necessary imply any such matter but rather  the contrary be not only make Payable at several time as aforesaid but also  different sum appoint for maintenance until the portion be Payable and the  case of Duffield and smith ant can be cite where the daughter have portion  charge upon land and their brother afterward by will give they his personal  estate and devise the land to a kinsman of his name although the personal  estate so devise be of better value than their portion yet upon a appeal to  the lord in parliament it be adjudge they shall have both the one and the  other contrary to the decree of the lord commissioner the Lord chancellor be  of opinion that as the term in law be not merge so neither be the trust  determine or extinguish in equity but remain still a subsist charge upon the  estate and ought to be raise and pay to the lady keney who have administration  with the will annex and likewise hold that only one pound with the maintenance  ought to be raise and the defendant to take by which of the two settlement she  think most to her advantage but to discount what profit be receive from the  death of Mr Thomas the brother the pound to carry interest from the time it be  Payable there be a entry of a order d may which state that the cause have be  hear on the that march wm Reg lib b fol but the editor have not be able to  find any entry of the decree so a strong where fee vest in trustee duke of  chandos v Talbot p wms note this decree be afterward affirm upon a appeal to  the lord in parliament that April journ Ho lord vol p Colles p c vide Powell v  Morgan ante p Chester v will Amb Lord Compton v Oxenden bro Ch Rep Ves jun  Forbes v Moffat Ves Vernon chancery case er p price v Gibson Eden Donisthorpe  v porter ibidem Amb Bodicoate v Moreton that march at the roll