atkins case lethieullier versus tracy December SC post SC Amb sir W d by his  will devise all his estate purchase or to be purchase to m d his daughter for  life with remainder to trustee to preserve c remainder to the first son in  tail male and to the second c in tail general and in default of such issue  remainder to the daughter c and if m d die without issue remainder to sir h n  in tail with several remainder over m d after marry and subsequent to it  execute a deed by which she convey the reversion in fee of the land purchase  expectant on the several remainder under the will to g b and his heir in trust  for several use and covenant to levy a fine sur to go away to the use of the  deed and recite the limitation under the will in the order mention with a  proviso that the use declare by the deed shall not take place till after all  the limitation under the will a fine levy accord it be insist m d have by the  fine forfeit her estate for life but the court hold it be only a fine of the  reversion as the deed express recite all the intervene estate for life under  the will and limit use after all these sir William dodwell by his will devise  all his estate already purchase or to be purchase by his trustee to mary  dodwell his daughter and oh lie child for life with c atkins er p remainder to  trustee and their heir to preserve contingent remainder remainder to the first  son in tail male and to the second and every other son of his daughter mary  dodwell in tail general and in default of such issue remainder to the daughter  of his daughter mary dodwell and in case his daughter die without issue of her  body live at her decease remainder to sir Henry Nelthorpe in tail and in  default of issue by he to smart lethieullier for life with remainder to his  son in tail male and in default of such issue remainder to Charles  lethieullier the daughter arrive at her age of twentyone and marry and  subsequent to her marriage execute a deed bear date the saint of December by  which she convey the reversion in fee of the land purchase by the trustee  under the will expectant on the several remainder under the will to George  Brampston Esq and his heir in trust for the several use and purpose therein  declare and covenant to levy a fine sur to go away to the use of the deed and  in the deed and fine recite the limitation under the will in the word and  order in which they be mention there with a express proviso that the use  declare by the deed shall not take place till after all the limitation under  sir William dodwell will a fine be levy accord in Hilary term in January a  order be obtain by petition to Lord chancellor for a conveyance from the  trustee of all the land purchase under the will of sir William dodwell accord  to the limitation therein and particular that the last remainder in fee may be  convey to the daughter of the testator the petitioner late mary dodwell and  now mary Tracy the wife of Thomas Tracy Esq after the pronounce of this order  Mr tracy counsel be of opinion that a conveyance to her in pursuance of this  atkins order be subsequent to the deed of and the fine will defeat they both  apply to the court to vary this order and instead of the last remainder in fee  be convey to mrs Tracy that it may be convey to George Branstone Esq and his  heir in trust for the several use intent and purpose of the deed and fine in  Mr smart counsel for the Lethieulliers two of the remainderman pray the  petition may stand over that he may have a opportunity of inspect the deed and  fine on their behalf to see if mrs Tracy have n oh t forfeit her estate for  life by levy this fine as accord to the state of it in his brief it seem to be  a fine of her be ten for life Lord chancellor order the deed to lead the use  of the fine and the fine itself to be read and then say that it appear to he  plain to be a fine of the reversion because it express recite all the  intervene estate under the will and limit use after all these I will suppose  for argument sake that mrs Tracy have levy a fine sur to go away of her estate  for life yet as it be a trust estate and there be limitation to trustee to  preserve contingent remainder I be of opinion the fine will not work a  forfeiture of her estate for life because it can at all hurt or affect the  subsequent remainder as there be trustee under the will to preserve they and  therefore such a fine will in equity operate at most as a grant only of such  interest as she have a power to grant note so Penhey v Hurrell Freem lady  whetstone v saint bury p W so where a tenant for life of the legal estate make  a mortgage and levy a fine the court decree that the mortgagee shall hold  during the life of the mortgagor notwithstanding the remainderman have recover  at law upon the forfeiture Willis v Fineux Prec Charles say contra Prec  Charles Mr smart object that the expression in the indenture of fine all land  c of which mrs Tracy be seize must refer to a estate in possession for it do  not say land she be seize of in reversion Lord chancellor say there be no  weight in this objection because the technical expression S land tenement and  hereditament of which she now stand seize in reversion and not that she be  seize of a reversion in land c Mr smart also object to the proviso in the deed  that the fine shall not affect or operate upon the estate for life of mrs  Tracy or any other of the particular estate recite to be by the will of sir  William dodwell limit in use to the several person precedent to the reversion  in fee in mrs Tracy atkins Lord chancellor the proviso in the deed that the  limitation thereby create shall not disturb or defeat the estate for life to  mrs Tracy c under the will be ex abundant and if there have be no such proviso  shall have be clear atkins er p of opinion that the use of this deed will not  have control the estate for life to mrs Tracy under the will but on the  importunity of Mr smart his lordship direct the petition to stand over to the  next day of petition to give the remaindermans counsel a opportunity of  inspect the deed and fine