case Northey versus strange sir John Trevor master of the roll pre Charles Eq  can ab pl pl a freeman of London have no wife and have issue a a son and b and  c daughter c marry against her father consent by which mean she never have any  portion afterward she die in her father lifetime leave a son d peer William  the freeman make his will wherein take notice that he have give to his son a  pound and to his daughter b pound in full of their orphanage part by the  custom he devise pound to his grandson d and after some other legacy give one  peer William er p moiety of the surplus of his personal estate to his son a  the other moiety to his child and grandchild afterward the freeman in his  lifetime give several further sum at several time to his son amount to pound  more the certainty whereof do not appear under the freeman hand but do appear  by the son answer in the cause and then the freeman die leave his daughter b  ensient with a child which be afterward bear saint it be admit by the counsel  on both side and decree by the court that there be the wife of the freeman the  child be entitle to one moiety salk vern the other moiety be the dead man part  dly it be admit by counsel and say to have be so determine and settle that a  freeman grandchild where the grandchilds father be never advance in the  freeman lifetime and die before the freeman leave a child be not within the  custom salk vern and that only the freeman child be within the custom to come  in for a orphanage part peer William dly it be decree that whereas the freeman  son a be by the freeman will mention to have have pound and consequent the  quantum of a s advancement appear under the freeman hand yet this very  declaration by the custom let the son in for his orphanage part vern and  though the son a afterward receive far sum amount to pound from his father the  freeman and the certainty thereof appear by his own answer yet these sum which  be additional gift to his advancement be with the other pound bring into  hotchpot will not be a bar to his orphanage part vide blunden v Barker post  thly that the child of b the freeman daughter who be in ventre sa mere at the  freeman death shall not take in regard a devise to one child and grandchild  shall prima fancy refer only to such child and grandchild as be live at the  time of the make of the will but if a devise be to my child and grandchild  live at my death a child in ventre sa mere may in such case be so far regard  as to be look upon as live thly that the son a shall not come in for a share  of the remain surplus he be by the word of the will separate from the other  child videlicet the devise be of one moiety of the surplus to the testator son  a and the other moiety to his child and grandchild so that the son a be intend  to have only a moiety peer William thly that the child and grandchild must  take per capital and not per stirpes they all take in their own right and not  by way of representation vide Blackler v web post Vol two thly that a legacy  of pound be give to a and if a die before twentyone then to b upon a s die  before twentyone in the life of the testator this be not a lapse legacy but  shall go over to b vern ante Lord bindon v earl of Suffolk vide heath v heath  atk Haughton v Harrison ib Madison v Andrew ves ellison v airy ib Horsley v  Chaloner ves Bartlet v Hollister Amb Isaac v Isaac ib Baldwin v Karver Cowp  attorneygeneral v Crispin bro c Robert v Higman ib note Congreve v Congreve ib  devisme v Mello ib Singleton v Gilbert ib note Gilmore v Severn ib Ayton v  Ayton ib note Cox viner v Francis bro c c Hugh v Hugh bro c c Middleton v  messenger Ves Barrington v Tristan Ves Paul v Compton Ves Hugh v Hugh Ves  Campbell v Prescott Ves wield v Bradbury vern note leak v Robinson mere laffer  v Edward mad Slade v milner mad Legard v Haworth I east vide beal v beal ante  millar v turner ves Bennet v honeywood Amb Cooper v Forbes bro c c clarke v  black ib peer William er p