ambler case Sherrard against Lord harbour that that that may Lord Harborough  devise his manor advowson c to trustee to pay his son pound for life and the  rest of the profit to be lie out in land during his son life and then settle  hold the son have a right to present to the live when vacant not under the  devise but as heir at law it be a fruit undisposed of see hill v bishop of  London atk and note the difference see Kinsey v Langham forest king v Dennison  v b in note Hopkins v Hopkins c I Talb lib Reg b foe a S c hark ms from de  grey No Bennett earl of Harborough by will date that may devise his manor  advowson c to trustee in trust out of the rend and profit of the estate to pay  to the present earl of Harborough a annuity of pound for his life and the rest  of the profit to be lie out in land during the life of the present earl and  settle to use c as his other land be settle after the death of the present  earl and direct that after his death the trustee shall stand seize of his  estate c to first c son of the present earl in tail remainder to plaintiff  Robert for life remainder to plaintiff Philip in tail remainder over he also  find a almshouse for six poor person to be choose by such person as shall  enjoy his estate at Stapleford and give the present earl his option of live at  the mansionhouse at Stapleford with a allowance of pound ayear for repair two  question saint who have the right of presentation to the advowson during the  life of the present earl d who have right of nomination to the almshouse  whether saint the trustee d the present earl of Harborough d the plaintiff  Robert as next remainderman for life in be or plaintiff Philip first  remainderman of the inheritance in be that the heir at law of the testator  Lord chancellor after argument at bar saint the trustee have no pretence of  right for though they have the whole legal estate yet as be only trustee  accord to the rule of this court they take nothing for their own benefit  ambler if any part of the legal estate be undisposed of it go to the heir at  law so it be where any part of the trust be undisposed of see city v Parker  Ves starke v brook p W mallabar v mallabar for Durour v motteux Ves William v  coade Ves Stansfield v Habergham Ves see Amb d the present earl of Harborough  have no right under the will he be entitle to nothing but a rentcharge by way  of declaration of trust out of the profit d on part of plaintiff argue for  Robert and also for Philip but be of opinion they will go to neither but be to  be consider as something indispose of and will go to the heir at law as to  Philip he be the first remainderman in tail the remainder be vest and it be  compare to the case of timber fall by the act of God or by wrong but that be  not applicable for the tree be consider as part of the inheritance but a  advowson be not part of the inheritance but fruit fall which every owner of  the estate for life or for year be entitle to gather it be like cut Underwood  in the course of fail as to Robert he be only remainderman for life after  failure of issue male of the present earl and have nothing to do with the  possession of the estate argue be be next remainderman but it be a remainder  attach but not in possession distinction where remainderman be in possession  by act of law and where by limitation in the first case it will open and shut  to let in other precedent remainder when they come in be in the latter not  duchess of Hamilton v Fleetwood it be a fruit of the estate undisposed of no  other profit be dispose of but what be to be collect and accumulate c argue  why not sell the next presentation this court will not allow it nor will any  body buy it suppose there have be no direction as to surplus profit the heir  at law will have have they and so be the case ambler er p of lady Hertford v  lady Weymouth suppose a right of nomination ambler to a hospital or master of  a college this direction certain will not take in that I be of opinion if  testator have devise all the surplus rend and profit it will have carry the  right of presentation because I shall have take it as the surplus of his  estate this be like the case of the master of a hospital or headship of a  college it be exact the case of Hopkins v Hopkins can tempt Talb atk Ves in  the reason of it upon d question as to almshouse I have more doubt and think  it hard the present earl shall not nominate to it who have the estate at  Stapleford the trustee they can nominate shall it go to the heir at law as  undisposed of I be doubtful as it be de to make new create by the testator  will shall have doubt less if it have be a old foundation or even treat in his  lifetime if Lord Hardborough make his option to reside at Stapleford he have  the possession of the house there and ought to nominate his lordship declare  his intention to reside at Stapleford by his counsel in court and decree  accord the testator direct a annuity of pound per annum to be pay for ever out  of the manor of Stapleford for the use of six poor man of the church of  England such as the person or person who shall enjoy his estate at Stapleford  for the time be shall choose equal to be divide between they and that the say  trustee and their heir shall stand seize of the house and ground then late  erect by he as a dogkennel at Stapleford in trust for such or person for ever  and that the trustee shall lie out in make habitable room in such dogkennel  fit for such poor person to dwell in which shall be support by such person as  shall be entitle to the manor for the time be the parliament Beaumont leave  two sister his heir at law and they be both dead leave each a son who be  therefore his coheir it be declare by the decree that in case the earl of  harbro shall reside in the say capital house at Stapleford that in that case  he be the only person entitle to any beneficial interest in possession in the  say estate will have the right to choose and nominate a poor man or poor man  to fill up any vacancy in say testator nourishing house and a question be make  in this cause concern the nomination of a clerk to be present on the avoidance  of any benefice whereof the advowson be part of the say trust estate which may  happen during the life of the say earl it be declare that such nomination will  from time to time belong to the testator coheir at law as a part of the say  estate not dispose of by his say will during the time aforesaid and the  trustee be to present such clerk as shall be so nominate as aforesaid