brown case robert stain appellant edward maddock and other respondent that  April Mews dig xv devise of a personal estate to a for life and afterward for  her child and the yearly interest and produce to be for their maintenance till  the son attain and the daughter at which age their respective portion to be  pay and for want of such issue then to b a die without issue and the devise  over to b be hold to be good the word for want of such issue be the same as  for want of such child sub nom Maddox v Stains wms viner vol p note to can Eq  ab can Fearne Thomas Lord be possess of a considerable personal estate to the  amount of pound duly make his will date the d of November and thereby give to  his brother William Lord pound per and for life to be pay by his executrix by  four equal payment and give to his niece Alicia Stains the wife of the  appellant all the estate which he shall die possess of or a way interest in  either in possession reversion or remainder but declare his mind and will to  be that the interest or other produce thereof shall be for the sole use and  benefit of his say niece Alicia separate and apart from the appellant her  husband or any other husband and that her receipt notwithstanding her  coverture shall be a sufficient discharge for any sum of money to her pay and  after the decease of his say niece Alicia he give I and bequeathe all his say  estate unto his executrix in trust that she shall pay the yearly interest and  produce thereof for the maintenance and education of such child or child as  shall be lawful beget by the appellant on the body of the say Alicia Stains  until they shall attain their respective age follow videlicet if son the age  of and if daughter and when they shall attain such respective age that then  his executrix shall pay they their several proportion thereof share and share  alike and for want of such issue he give and bequeathe all his estate unto the  respondent the child of Sarah Maddock wife of Edmund Maddock lawful beget by  the say Edmund on the body of the say Sarah share and share alike and direct  his executrix within one year after his decease to pay to William Elliot and  Joseph hay pound to be by they distribute to the poor of the congregation  belong to the dissent protestant meeting in Hanover square whereof the  reverend Mr Jabez earl be then pastor and constitute the say Alicia Stains  residuary legatee and sole executrix on the that of September the testator die  and on the that of the same month the say Alicia Stains prove his will in the  prerogative court and she and the appellant her husband possess themselves of  the testator personal estate and the deed write and security relate thereto in  Michaelmas term the respondent be the only child of Sarah Maddock by Edmund  Maddock and be all infant exhibit their bill in chancery against the appellant  and brown Alicia his wife set forth the will of the testator and that the say  Alicia have no child nor be in likelihood of have any and therefore pray a  discovery and account of the testator personal estate and that the same may be  secure for the respondent benefit to this bill the appellant and his wife put  in their answer admit the fact of the bill and set out a particular account of  the testator personal estate but submit to the judgement of the court whether  such personal estate ought to be subject to the contingency in the testator  will on the that of may the cause be hear before the master of the roll when  his honour do not think fit to direct any account to be take of the testator  personal estate but order that the appellant and his wife shall not transfer  the testator stock or assign his lease or receive in any of his debt without  application to the court for leave so to do and thereupon such further order  shall be make as shall be just on the that of January Alicia the appellant  wife die without issue whereby the suit and proceed abate and therefore in  Hilary term follow the brown er p respondent exhibit their bill of revivor and  supplemental bill against the appellant charge that the whole personal estate  of the testator Thomas Lord after payment of his debt legacy and funeral  expense ought to have come to the respondent and that they be well entitle  thereto under the testator will upon the death of Alicia Stains without issue  of her body by the appellant as the same be give they by the will upon that  contingency share and share alike but that the appellant set up a title  thereto under some will pretend to be make by his wife though she have no  power to dispose of the residuum of such personal estate to any person after  her death and therefore pray that the appellant may show cause why the  original suit shall not stand revive and why he shall not account for the  residuum of the testator personal estate and pay and deliver over the same to  the respondent and release all pretence of title thereto the appellant put in  his answer to this bill and thereby state that Alicia his wife have before her  death by his permission make her will date the that of October and after  recite the will of the testator Thomas Lord and take notice that the estate he  die possess of be altogether personal and as she apprehend vest in her by the  say will but that the respondent in case she shall die without issue pretend a  right thereto she devise to Thomas parson pound south sea stock and pound  south sea annuity then stand in the testator name in trust to permit the  appellant to receive the dividend and interest thereof for his life and after  his death in trust for the equal benefit of the respondent and she thereby  give the respondent a annuity of pound issue out of several message in spital  field for the remainder of the term that shall be to come therein at her  decease equal between they and constitute and appoint the appellant sole  executor and residuary legatee of her say will and therefore brown he submit  to the court whether the respondent under the will of Thomas Lord be entitle  to his personal estate upon the death of his the appellant wife without issue  or whether she have not a power to dispose thereof by her will and how far he  shall be Accountable to the respondent for the personal estate of the testator  come to his wife hand she have manage and dispose thereof without his control  the cause be duly revive come again to be hear before his honour the master of  the roll on the that of may who decree the appellant to come to a account  before the master for the testator Thomas lord personal estate come to his  hand or to the hand of Alicia his late wife or any other person for their use  and to produce upon oath all book of account and paper relate thereto and to  be examine on interrogatory as the master shall direct in take of which  account the master be to make the appellant all just allowance and the master  be to examine whether any of the security for any part of the testator  personal estate be fit to be put in suit and if so then the master be to  direct the same accord and what of the testator personal estate shall upon the  say account appear to be in the appellant hand after all just allowance deduct  it be decree that the appellant shall pay and deliver over the security for  the same into the bank of England to be place to the account of the accountant  general and to be put out at interest for the benefit of the respondent the  infant until their age of and then to be pay transfer or assign to they  respective and the master be to examine what be fit to be allow for the  maintenance of the respondent the infant for the time pass and to come and to  state the same to the court and the consideration of cost be reserve till  after the report make and it be order that the appellant shall not in the mean  time alien any part of the testator estate from this decree the appellant  prefer his petition of appeal to the Lord chancellor king and the cause come  to be reheard before his lordship on the that of October his lordship dismiss  the petition and order that the decree shall be confirm the appellant  therefore bring the present appeal and on his behalf it be argue p York h  henchman that by the testator will his estate subject to the payment of his  debt and legacy be give to Alicia the appellant late wife not for her life  only but absolute that the subsequent restriction be mere for her benefit in  order to appropriate the interest for her separate use and exclude her husband  from intermeddle with such interest and that this estate consist whole in  personal chattel the remainder over limit to the child of Sarah Maddock can  not be brown er p effectual that this be the case of a legacy the same may  have be sue for in the ecclesiastical court and by the rule of the civil law  such a legacy will have vest absolute in the first legatee and the bequest  over will have be void and though by the law of England court of equity  exercise a concurrent jurisdiction brown with the ecclesiastical court in suit  for legacy yet the rule of determination ought to be the same that to allow  the bequest over of chattel personal to the respondent by virtue of this will  to be good be go further than have hitherto be admit in case of the like kind  the contingency on which this limitation over be to take place be for want of  issue of Alicia Stains which if it have be make with respect to a freehold  estate will have comprehend all issue of her body by the appellant even to  grandchild great grandchild etcetera and in case of limitation of estate the  same word ought to receive the same construction otherwise great uncertainty  and confusion will be introduce but the failure of issue of any person general  be too remote a contingency for the devise over of a personal thing to depend  upon beside this case must be consider accord to the word of the limitation  and not accord to any accident which have happen subsequent to it and  therefore it be apprehend that if Alicia have leave child by her husband and  such child have afterward die without issue this devise over can not have take  effect that by the decree the appellant be direct to account for what have be  receive by his wife in her lifetime although the interest and produce of the  testator whole estate be give to her sole use separate and apart from the  appellant and her receipt be to be sufficient for all such part thereof as she  shall receive and therefore Thomas parson the trustee name in her will ought  to have be make a party to the suit it be therefore hope that the decree will  be reverse and the respondent bill dismiss with cost on the other side it be  say t Lutwyche W strahan to be a know and settle point in equity that a  personal estate may be settle or bequeathe to one for life with remainder over  to another and it be manifest so bequeathe in this case for by the word of the  will the testator personal estate be not vest in Alicia Stains she be only  entitle to the interest and produce of it for her life and therefore the  limitation over to the respondent on her death she have no child be a good  limitation that though the word of the will whereby the testator leave his  estate after the death of Alicia to his executrix who be Alicia herself seem  not to have be well consider yet there be word sufficient to show though  testator intention that she shall have only the yearly produce and interest  during her life and that afterward the appellant child by her if there shall  be any be to have the estate and if there be no such child that then the  respondent the child of Sarah Maddock shall have it and therefore Alicia be  entitle only to the interest and produce of this estate for her life have no  power to dispose thereof by will or otherwise after death that the last clause  in the will appoint Alicia executrix and residuary legatee do in no sort  revoke or vary the former clause nor be they in any way inconsistent with each  other the executrix be only a trustee for the benefit of the legatee and to  take such residue only as be lapse or undisposed brown of that though the  clause which devise the estate after the death of Alicia to his executrix who  be herself seem inconsistent yet the limitation over by the subsequent clause  for want of child of Alicia will be good she by the first clause be only  entitle to the interest and produce for her life and after her death the  estate be to go accord to the plain intention and word of the testator after  hear counsel on this appeal it be order and adjudge that the decree and the  affirmance thereof shall be affirm with a variation as to the appellant  account which variation be to be by leave out of the decree these word  videlicet be come to his hand or to the hand of his late wife Alicia Stains  decease or to the hand of any other person for his their or either of their  use for the better discovery whereof and instead thereof insert these word  come at any time to his hand or to the hand of any other person for his use  and also for what of the testator estate come to or be in the hand of his late  wife Alicia Stains or to the hand of any other person for her use since the  that of may or at any time thereafter and that a account be likewise take of  what of the say testator personal estate come to the hand of the say Alicia  after the death of the say testator to the say that of may which be not pay or  deliver over by her to her brown er p husband and that what shall be find so  due from her shall be pay by the defendant her executor out of asset and be  apply in the same manner as be in the say decree after direct concern the say  testator personal estate that shall appear to be in the say defendant hand and  if he do not admit asset then a account be to be take of asset come to his  hand and as far as it shall appear that he have asset he be to satisfy the say  demand in a course of administration and for the better discovery and take the  say account which decree as thus vary be declare to be the judgement of the  house and to be observe and put in execution accord jour vol p