case brown versus gibbs ante and the authority there refer to a court of  equity will not assist a dowress who have have judgement at law with a be  remiss execution in remove a trust term I Harris seize in fee of certain land  make a settlement of they to the use of himself for life then to trustee for a  term for year then as to one moiety to his son m and the heir of his body with  other remainder over and the trust of the term be declare to be for raise  pound apiece for the two daughter of m and a proviso that if m or the heir of  his body shall pay c to the daughter at or marriage the term to cease m die  without issue male leave only his say two daughter plaintiff who be his widow  recover dower at law with a be remiss execution during the term and now bring  this bill against the defendant who be precedent in chancery the daughter to  set aside the term that she may have the benefit of her recovery at law it be  insist upon for the plaintiff that this term ought to be absolute set aside  for that the intention of the settlement can only be to raise portion for  daughter in case m have issue male for if he shall leave none as he do not the  daughter be to have the land itself by virtue of the limitation of the  settlement and they can raise themselves a portion out of their own estate and  therefore the purpose for which the term be intend fail the term in equity  have no subsistence and though where there be a term general to attend the  inheritance that may perhaps prevent a dowress because it can be intend to be  keep on foot for no other purpose but to prevent encumbrance yet it will be  otherwise in this case where the term be declare to be for a particular  purpose which be otherwise provide for and though in the case of lady Radnor  versus Rotheram ante this court will not set aside the term yet that be  because it be against a purchaser but there be no purchaser in this case but  we come against the heir and therefore the term in this case ought to be whole  set aside and in the case of clay versus Snell tenant by the courtesy be let  in against such a term dly admit that the term shall not be whole set aside  yet the plaintiff be entitle to have a account of the profit and to be let  into the benefit of her dower pay what be unraised of the portion if it be a  common mortgage it can be deny but she shall redeem and in this case the term  be only a security for raise these portion which be the same thing Lord  chancellor in the case of clay versus Snell there be such a order but the  point be not debate but the question here be whether a court of equity shall  make a new rule the judgement that the plaintiff have recover at law be with a  be remiss execution and therefore to set aside the term will be to relieve her  against precedent in chancery the very judgement upon which she find her right  of relief in the case of precedent in chancery er p lady Radnor versus  Rotheram ante there be a purchaser it be true yet the court do not go upon  that reason and here the plaintiff be a dowress must be content with the  estate as the law give it post and the note thereto subjoin the redemption of  a mortgage be another case for the mortgage be look upon as a personal  contract and mortgagee have no interest beyond his money and therefore dismiss  the bill