case yate versus FETTYPLACE refer to henty v wrey Ch d vern S c Eq Abr c c S c  ante post a portion of pound devise out of land to a daughter if she marry  with the consent of a and b to be pay at her age of or day of marriage which  shall first happen but if she marry without such consent then she be to have  pound only the daughter die about six year of age decree her portion shall  sink for the benefit of the heir and not be subject to distribution though  strong insist it be a legacy and as such recoverable in the spiritual court  sir Roland Lacy seize of the manor of Pudlicot make a mortgage for year to  Henry heyling for secure pound and interest and afterward by deed and fine  settle the same to the use of himself for life remainder to the defendant  Roland Lacy precedent in chancery er p his son in tail with other remainder  over remainder to himself in fee and be seize of several other estate most of  which be reversion expectant on estate for life and be great indebt to other  person and have one daughter name Arabella make his will in write and thereby  devise the say land and all his land not before settle in jointure to dame  Arabella his wife and to sir Edmund Fettyplace and Charles Fettyplace and  their heir upon trust that they shall by sale thereof raise money to pay his  debt provide that upon payment of Mr heylin mortgage the say mortgage shall be  keep on foot for secure the portion therein after mention to Arabella his  daughter and his other legacy and debt if the land devise be not sufficient to  pay the same and thereby devise to his say daughter pound for her portion if  she marry with the consent of his wife and trustee to be pay at her age of or  day of marriage which shall first happen but if she marry without such consent  then he give her pound only for a portion and no more and make his wife  executrix and die Arabella the daughter die soon after be about six year of  age precedent in chancery afterward dame Arabella the widow marry the  plaintiff Yates and take out letter of administration to Arabella her daughter  and make her will and her husband Mr Yates executor and devisee of all who by  virtue thereof pretend to be entitle to a moiety of the pound devise by sir  Roland to Arabella the daughter and also to so much of the personal estate of  sir Roland as be not specifical devise away for that he have make provision  for payment of his debt by his land and have as be pretend direct the person  who draw his will to give his personal estate to his wife but that he have  omit to do because he think that the make of her soleexecutrix be a gift of it  in law and have examine one brook a attorney who draw the will to that purpose  Mr Yates bring his bill to have a account of sir Roland personal estate and  that he may have the surplus of it and for a moiety of arabella pound Roland  Lacy the infant heir bring a cross bill against he for a account of the real  and personal estate of his father dame Arabella have in her lifetime be the  only act trustee the creditor bring their bill to have the trust perform and  their debt pay a account be direct to be take and the master have make his  report on hear these cause before my Lord summer assist by the master of the  roll as to the first demand of Mr yates touch the surplus of sir Roland  personal estate Mr brook deposition which be admit to be read be insist on and  lady gainsborough case ante rely on as a case in point but as to that the bill  be dismiss and the court take far time to consider of his demand of the moiety  of arabella portion but before any judgement be give therein the seal be give  to sir Nathan wright and then Mr Yates petition to have his cause reheard  precedent in chancery the cause come now to be hear before my Lord keep or  assist by the master of the roll as to the demand of the personal estate the  former order be confirm and the bill dismiss as to the other demand of the  moiety of arabella portion it be insist that it be a legacy to her and may  have be sue for in the spiritual court though it be charge on land and no  court will have prohibit they and by their law it will have be recover though  she die before the time of payment and where this court hold plea of matter of  ecclesiastical conusance they ought to judge accord to the civil law that this  case differ from all the case cite on the other side touch the sink of portion  in land they be all in case of mere trust wherein the chancery alone have the  entire jurisdiction and where no suit lie in the ecclesiastical court for it  and may have give sentence for the appellant accord to the civil law on the  other side it be say that the precedent be the same in effect with this and  particular the case of paulet and paulet vern and no real difference between  they and of that opinion be my Lord keeper and the master of the roll and  therefore dismiss the bill as to this demand likewise and this dismission be  affirm in the house of lord precedent in chancery er p