case lingen versus SOWRAY Lord keeper Harcourt pre Charles pale yellow Chanc  pale yellow Eq Rep Eq can ab pl Mod money article to be lie out in land be to  be take as land even as to collateral heir by article before marriage the  husband agree to add to the wife portion of pound and the security for these  money be assign to trustee and agree to be invest in land to be settle on the  husband for life remainder to the wife for life remainder to the first c son  in tail male remainder to the daughter in tail remainder to the right heir of  the husband the marriage afterward take effect and there be no issue thereby  the husband by will devise some land to the wife the rest of his real estate  in the county and city of York and elsewhere in great Britain lie devise to I  S also he peer William er p give his personal estate and all his security for  money to his wife who he make executrix and die leave many of the security  remain unaltered but some of the money have be put out upon other security and  be mention to be in trust for the husband his executor and administrator peer  William and the question be whether these security or any of they pass as  personal estate to the wife it be object that though equity will in force a  execution of agreement yet the end and scope of these article be determine  save only as to the wife life videlicet the husband be dad and there be no  issue of the marriage and the consideration or inducement to this settlement  look no further nor have any more extensive view that it can not be the design  of the settlement to take care of or provide for distant or remote heir and  that if this money have be lie out in a settlement yet still it have be in the  power of the husband to devise the land purchase therewith for it will have be  a vest remainder in fee in himself and consequent absolute at his disposal the  only question then be whether he intend to devise it now it be more probable  that he intend to pass it under the denomination of personal than real estate  for that in fact those security be personal estate and must continue so till  actual invest in land and by the devise of all his real estate in the city or  county of York or elsewhere in this kingdom he must have allude to land and  something local that it be not to be presume the testator who be a layman take  it that the covenant alter the nature of the estate and make that real which  before be and in fact afterward continue to be personal estate and in case of  will the intent of the testator be the chief thing peer William to be regard  and inquire after and surety when the testator bequeathe all his personal  estate nay when he express devise all his security these security in question  must be intend to pass or if this shall not be admit in the latitude that be  contend for at least it will hold as to such of the security as have be alter  and take though in the name of the same trustee yet upon different trust Mr  Vernon contra insist that equity which enforce the execution of agreement look  upon money agree to be invest in land as land and on the other hand consider  land agree to be sell as money and therefore if a man shall article f or the  purchase of the manor of d which be a estate in fee for pound and die though  the pound till invest will go to the executor yet equity will enforce a  execution of the article and then it shall go to the heir so if one seize of  land in fee shall agree to sell it and shall die before sale till sell it will  be in fact a real estate and as such descend to the heir but equity will  enforce a sale accord to the agreement by which it will become money and go to  the executor but there be still more reason why money agree to be invest in  land shall be take as a real estate in regard this be for the benefit of the  heir who be vide post Hayter v rod favour in equity beyond a executor or  administrator to which purpose he cite the case of Whitwick v Jermyn vern at  which Lord c I hale assist and the case of Kettleby v atwood vern where upon  article to lie out money in a purchase and the party die before the execution  of such article the dispute be betwixt the heir and executor and peer William  decree for the heir he also cite sir Jonathan atkins case vern as a strong  case in equity in Lord chancellor jeffrey time where upon marriagearticle it  be agree that pound of the husband money and pound of the wife money shall be  lie out in a purchase of land and settle upon the husband for life remainder  to the wife for life remainder to the issue of the marriage but be silent  where it shall go afterward in default of issue and the husband and wife die  without issue the question be whether the executor of the husband or the  executor of the wife or the heir of the husband or the heir of the wife shall  have the benefit of these article and decree that the article make this money  as land it shall be take to be real estate and shall go to the heir of the  husband and not to the heir of the wife in regard that in the common way and  usage of conveyance and settlement the remainder in fee be in such case limit  to the heir of the husband say qure if the money be tobe take as land it have  not be reasonable in this last case to let one half videlicet the wife pound  or the land therewith to be purchase go to the heir of the wife and the other  pound or the land therewith to be purchase go to the heir of the husband peer  William er p that this case of atkins be much strong that the principal case  for in that the use in the article be all determine by the death of the  husband and wife without issue and yet when all the end of the marriage  article be answer and at a end it be decree to be as land and as real estate  whereas in the principal case the wife be live peer William all the use in the  marriage article be not determine for the wife by the article be to have the  benefit of they for her life videlicet to have the profit of the land to be  purchase for her life and it be say equity have go further by direct where  money have be decree to be lie out in the purchase of land in fee that the  wife shall have dower Lord keeper the article have in equity change the nature  of this money and turn it as it be into land and therefore as to so much of  the pound as be subsist upon the security on which it be original place or on  any other security where no new trust have be declare it ought to be consider  as real estate but as to the pound of it which be call in by the testator and  afterward place out on security on a different trust that shall be take to be  personal estate forasmuch as there be no issue of the marriage it be in the  power of the husband to alter and dispose of it as against the heir at law  though not against his wife and this place it out upon different trust I take  to be a alteration of the nature of it since the testator declare the trust to  his executor seem tantamount with his have declare that it shall not go to his  heir on a appeal before Lord Cowper term pasch this decree be affirm this  state of the case agree with the register book vide post Vol note walker v den  Ves jun city v Parker Collins v Wakeman ib kennel v Abbott Ves Wheldale v  partridge Ves Ves Thornton v Hawley Ves Biddulph v Biddulph Ves kirkman v mile  Ves Ashby v palmer mere and see cruse v barley post Vol III holiday v Hudson  Ves Ripley v Waterworth Ves brown v Higg bell v phyn ib William v coade Ves  berry v usher Ves Hooper v Goodwin Ves hill v cock I v b see vern Sweetapple v  bindon where the husband under such circumstance be allow to be tenant by the  courtesy and ante so Cunningham v moody Ves vide Edward v countess of Warwick  post Vol two Guidot v Guidot atk Pulteney v earl of Darlington I bro c c  Rashleigh v master bro c c