case base versus grey Bart Lord chancellor July Eq can ab pl pale yellow Eq  Rep S c a possess of a exchequer annuity for ninetysix year by marriagearticle  covenant to pay it to the wife for her separate use and then to the survivor  of husband and wife for life and after to the child of the marriage and if no  child then to be for the benefit of a husband and wife die leave a child who  soon after die a shall keep the annuity and it shall not go to the  administrator of the child the defendant sir James grey on the marriage of  Elizabeth Jennings suppose to be his natural daughter give her pound portion  and have purchase a annuity in the exchequer of pound per and for a term of  ninetysix year he by the marriagearticle covenant to pay the pound per and to  the intend wife during the coverture for her separate maintenance and that the  survivor of they shall have the pound per and for life if the term shall not  soon determine Vernon chancery case and if the survivor die before the  determination thereof then the residue thereof to the child or child beget  between they and in case there shall be no such child or child then the pound  per and to be for the benefit of sir James grey the marriage take effect base  and his wife die leave a son who survive they for the space of four year and  then die and the plaintiff take administration to he the question be to who  the residue of the term belong whether to the plaintiff as administrator to  base the son or to sir James grey for the plaintiff it be insist that the  limitation to the wife during the coverture and then to the survivor of  husband and wife for life and if a child to such child or child beget between  they be a disposition of the whole term and will not admit of any further  remainder over be limit unto two person for their life and the life of the  survivor and then to the child or child afterward to be beget and especial  since there be a child there have be a child in the principal case must make a  material difference vide Higgens v Dowler ante p which seem to Vernon chancery  case er p contain a principle contrary to that on which this case be decide  who survive father and mother and the word seem to import that if there be a  child or child they be to have the residue of the term but if no child to take  that be a child live at the decease of the survivor of father or mother then  the defendant sir James grey to have the residue of the term and if not so  understand and limit the remainder be void per cur the defendant have not  assign the order nor transfer the property only covenant to pay and a court  Vernon chancery case of equity must not carry the covenant be a free gift  beyond the letter the word of the decree be whereupon c his lordship be of  opinion that by the deed meaning the marriagearticle the property in the  annuity be vest in the defendant sir James grey for it be the intention of the  party to that deed that it shall be so there be no notice take of the tally  and order but only a covenant for the annual payment of the annuity which be  commence in order to prevent the dispose of it so as the defendant sir James  grey may have a hand over it if there shall be a failure of issue of that  marriage and the word in the deed will not have carry it to the defendant have  not the property be still in he but he have the legal property in he it ought  not to be take from he by a court of equity bill dismiss except as to arrear  during the life of the son which defendant be to pay No cost Reg lib a fol nor  will equity in any case decree a specific execution of a voluntary agreement  Brownsmith v gilborne stram vide Ayliffe v Mr just Tracy p wms Metcalfe v  Pulvertoft Ves Qure yet if that distinction be allow and think at the bar to  be a over nice distinction Eq can ab ub sup settlement of term hereafter will  be do by way of covenant with such remainder over as can be do by way of  limitation of a estate or of a trust vide the same mode of reason urge in  regard to perpetuity duke of Norfolk v Howard ante Vol