case Robinson versus litton December Stansfield v Habergham Ves Jur turner v  wright de g f I SC cite post SC vin pl a devise land to his son and his heir  but in case he shall not attain and die without issue then he give the land to  his daughter and direct they shall be sell and the money divide among the  daughter the son who want threequarters of a year of intend cut down pound  worth of timber the daughter bring a bill to stay waste the court of opinion  they be entitle to a injunction as it be pursue the testator intention and  preserve the value of the estate intend to go to the daughter the father of  the plaintiff and defendant by his will devise to the defedant his son John  Robinson Litton the land upon which the question arise to he and his heir for  ever and in case he shall not live to twentyone and die without issue he give  the land to his daughter who be the plaintiff with several remainder over then  he go on and say my will be in case my son shall not this part of the case be  different report in vin it appear from Reg lib b fol that the plaintiff in  this cause the daughter of the testator by their counsel allege that they be  entitle to have certain estate of the testator sell in augmentation of their  fortune if the defendant his son shall live to attain his age of year that the  defendant have threaten to cut down timber see Gibson v smith ante atk anon  atk that the plaintiff have thereupon file their bill for a injunction that  the defendant have put in his answer and have thereby admit the devise in the  say testator will but he insist that he be entitle to the feesimple subject to  be defeat upon the aforesaid contingency and as the same may never happen the  plaintiff have no right to restrain he from cut down timber the plaintiff  therefore pray that a injunction may be award order that the plaintiff S shall  reply to the defendant answer and that the injunction shall be award until the  hear note the editor have not be ableto learn whether the injunction be make  perpetual he have not meet with the decree in the Reuisters book attain twenty  one my estate shall be sell and the money divide among my daughter for a  augmentation of their fortune and give to his daughter pound beside the estate  which come to the son by settlement be between three and four thousand pound  ayear the son who want about threequarters of a year of come of age intend cut  down three thousand pound worth of timber off the estate the bill be bring by  the daughter amicable for a injunction to stay waste and in order to have the  opinion of the court on this point whether the defendant have a right to cut  down the timber atkins Lord chancellor if the defendant have a legal right and  there be no equitable circumstance to restrain he I shall not do it but though  he may have a legal right yet if there be equitable circumstance he may be  restrain and it be not proper for I to give a liberty in doubtful case as to  the intention of the testator he certain have not the least think that the son  before his age of shall sell all the timber upon the estate the inheritance be  constitute of the land and timber upon it and that be devise to be sell for  the benefit of his daughter the intent be to give the value of the estate at  the time it be devise a person have meadow ground may as well make it arable  what be the will the clause must be construe as if they be in one and the same  clause suppose the last clause have be first the defendant will have be  consider as a trustee of the inheritance for the benefit of the daughter and  that be the point I shall ground the injunction upon to stay waste this court  have go great length to stay waste than the court of law have in give action  or grant prohibition against it as where there be tenant for life remainder  for life remainder in fee Roswells case roll ab pl Farrant v Lovel atk so  where there be tenant for life subject to waste remainder for life  dispunishable for waste remainder in fee the court will not suffer a agreement  between the two tenant for life to commit waste to take place against the  remainderman before the time come when the second tenant for life power  commence so Tracy v Tracy vern Abraham v Bubb Freem post so in mortgage and  security where the mortgagor have be in possession it be always grant because  the whole estate be a security but the court do it more strong where there be  a trust the clause in this will amount to as much as if he have atkins say I  give my estate to my son and his heir till twentyone to receive the profit  then to increase my daughter portion and here there can be no doubt but the  court will have do it there be at this day three sort of estate in land the  legal estate that be the fee or freehold second the use which by the statute  draw the legal estate after it atkins er p three the beneficial interest how  do it stand upon this devise there be a undoubted estate in fee in the  defendant and be may receive the profit till twentyone this amount to a devise  of the beneficial interest to he for that time and it will be very  extraordinary to suffer he to take away a great part of the inheritance of the  estate which be direct to be sell not for stranger but for the benefit of the  daughter for their portion the father be to judge of the provision for his  child after give the daughter pound he then direct this shall go in  augmentation there have be several case put which have never be determine as  that of a child in ventre sa mere but always say arguendo I and I shall make  no scruple in such a case to grant a injunction suppose the case of a  executory devise as in gore v gore p W S c I shall doubt whether the heir at  law ought not to be restrain from commit waste in the mean time I be therefore  of opinion the injunction ought to be make perpetual it be pursue the  intention of the testator and preserve the value of the estate intend to go to  his daughter