c anonymous Lord keeper trust and not a condition land be devise to the heir  at law pay a sum of money to b it be hold in this case that pay do not make a  condition because no one can enter for the condition break but the devisee  himself see ante c p note c p and to the authority there cite add mary  Portingtons case Rep but this will be a trust upon the land for raise the  money and if a purchaser have notice of the will he shall be affect with it  Adair v shaw Sch and Lef but as this case be if the heir shall sell to a  purchaser without notice of the will as he may make a title without the will  be heir at law lady Shaftesbury v Arrowsmith Ves the title of the heir be a  plain one and it be a legal title all the family deed together will not make  his title better or worse the money may be lose and therefore the money be not  Payable until some year hence the heir be decree to give security upon the  same principle by which a executor be bind to give security for a legacy  Payable at a future time green v Pigot Br Carey v askew Cox can by mortgage  the estate and in this case it be say that where there be a agreement between  party upon a security that this court will never cause the party to give  further security but where there be a trust for raise money and the estate be  like to be waste this court will enforce the give of security so that the  trust may not be defeat and the Lord keeper say he have know the spiritual  court refuse administration to the next of kin it must be presume that this  refusal be in favour of the widow between who and the next of kin the ordinary  have a power of election by stat h c but where the decease leaves no widow the  administration devolve on the next of kin as a claim of right which if refuse  the court of king bench will enforce by mandamus and no risk can be incur as  every administrator be compellable by the beforecited statute to enter into a  bind with sufficient surety condition for a due performance of the trust where  it appear to they that he be a spendthrift and like to waste the estate and in  this case it be say that in case the devise be to a stranger pay pound to a  that this make a condition and that the heir may enter for the breach of it  but when he have enter he shall be a trustee upon similar reason Lord coke in  his comment upon Littleton fol b observe that if a man seize ex part of a  mother make a feoff in fee upon condition and die the heir of the part of the  father which be the heir at commonlaw shall enter for the condition break but  the heir of the part of the mother shall enter upon he and enjoy the land but  the correctness of one part of this doctrine have be question by Mr Robinson  in his treat on gavelkind p and subsequent by Mr Preston in his treat on  abstract vol p who think that the heir ex part of a mother may enter in the  first instance so far as to secure the pound c anonymous master of the roll  injunction to stay waste ante case and note a woman tenant in tail after  possibility of issue extinct be restrain from commit waste in pull down house  or in cut down tree which stand in defence freeman er p of the house and fruit  tree in the garden but for some turret of tree which stand a land length or  two from the court will freeman grant no injunction because she have by law  power to commit waste and yet notwithstanding she be restrain in the  particular aforesaid because that seem to be malicious Cook v Whalley Eq can  ab bishop of London v web p wms