case butler versus Duncomb Lord chancellor July Eq can ab pl p wms S c  settlement on husband for life remainder to wife for life remainder to the  first c son remainder to trustee for five hundred year in trust after the  commencement of the term to raise pound by rend and profit sale or mortgage  for the portion of young child Payable at twentyone or marriage husband die  leave one daughter who marry the portion not to be raise in the life of the  mother nor any interest to accrue during the mother life because the trust be  to raise the portion after the commencement of the term which must be intend  when it come into possession settlement to the husband for life to the wife  for life and to first and other son in tail in default of such issue to  trustee for five hundred year remainder to the defendant Duncombe the  grandfather who make the settlement and his heir Vernon chancery case the  trust of the term be declare to be in trust that after the commencement of the  term the trustee shall by and out of the land tenement and hereditament raise  for the portion of such young child as George the son shall have by whether  his wife the sum of pound to be raise and pay out of the rend and profit as to  the effect of such a trust in respect of the and profit vide case cite in not  to anon ante vol p or by demising sell or mortgage the premise to be pay to  the child or child at twentyone or marriage which shall first happen the  husband die and leave only a daughter who when of the age of fifteen marry the  plaintiff in the lifetime of the mother the question be whether the portion  shall become Payable in the lifetime of the mother the objection rely on be  that it be not to be raise until after commencement of the term and the term  do not proper commence until it come in possession but be a vest remainder on  the make of the settlement and be no contingent remainder and cite the case of  cotton and cotton where a maintenance be to arise and be pay at the first  feast that shall happen after the commencement of the term hear at the roll  and decree it do not commence until after the death of the wife for the  plaintiff be cite the case of hellier and Jones where a term be sell in the  lifetime of the father to raise portion at twentyone or marriage greaves and  Mattison t Jones if he die without issue male of his then wife cur advisare  vult Vernon chancery case the cause come on afterward taster term to be  further hear the court declare the portion be not Payable until after the  decease of the jointress nor will carry interest in the mean time but Mr  butler be a considerable tradesman in Guildford the court think it not  reasonable that the whole money when Payable shall be secure or lie out for  the benefit of the wife and child but decree the wife be present in court and  consent that Mr butler may sell or dispose of a moiety of it as he think fit  also Gerrard v Gerrard ante p Staniforth v Staniforth ibidem and case cite in  not there respective but although these case have be constant Vernon chancery  case er p receive as the law of the court yet judge have express their opinion  of the inconvenience attend those determination and have anxious seek for  circumstance to distinguish the case before they Corbett v Maidwell ante p SC  Sandys v Sandys p wms where settlement husband have receive pound portion of  land of pound per and in the usual manner and then a term of year limit to  trustee in trust to raise if more than one daughter to be pay at or marriage  four daughter and on bill by one of they marry for raise pound be her share of  the pound the court declare it will not go one step further than precedent  shall force yet in this case the contingency mark out by the settlement have  all happen decree a sale or mortgage of a fourthpart of the term so  Hebblethwaite v Cartwright Forr and in reresby v Newland p wms a similar  limitation but with a power of revocation in the father and on the ground that  that power be still a subsist power the court will not decree the portion to  be raise and in that case Lord chancellor say the case of greaves v Mattison  sir Thomas Jones be a strange one and not common sense so broom v Berkley p  wms where the trust be in like manner to raise a portion Payable at or  marriage and also to raise a yearly sum for maintenance until the portion  shall be due the first payment of the maintenancemoney to be make at such of  the say halfyearly feast as shall next happen after the say estate so limit to  the trustee as aforesaid shall take effect in possession and on this dismiss  the bill for raise portion in the parent lifetime and affirm in dom proc bro p  c so Stevens v dethick atk churchman v Harvey Amb but in hall v carter atk  where maintenance also give but where it be a actual charge upon the estate  and not postpone till after the term come into possession the portion order to  be raise by mortgage a reversionary term note there be in the above case a  precedent term for a jointure to the wife then subsist in smith v Evans Amb  the trust be that in case the settlor shall die without issue male and leave  one or more daughter live at his death then a word on which the Lord  chancellor in his judgement lie great stress as to the effect of the word then  in such case vide beauclerk v dorm atk Biggs v bensley bro Ch Rep to raise  pound for his or their portion by lease assign or mortgage and decree the to  be raise with interest from the fill of the bill in Conway v Conway bro Ch Rep  the trust be to raise pound for the portion of young child at such time or  time and in such manner and proportion as the say John Conway by any deed c  shall appoint John Conway by will devise the to trustee to divide the same as  soon as it can convenient be do among all his young child upon the decease of  his wife meaning by such all of they that do not inherit his real estate which  be rely upon in the argument against raise the portion decree the portion to  be raise with interest from the death of the testator which be the question  and so much be the court against the construction for raise portion or  maintenance out of reversionary term that where it be oblige to raise the  portion it refuse to charge the difference between the sum annual allow for  maintenance and the sum charge lady Clinton v Lord Robert Seymour Ves in which  the judgement in lion v the duke of chandos atk be explain but as to Lord  Thurlow judgement in Conway v Conway bro Ch Rep vide judgement of Eldon Lord  Chan in Codrington v Lord Foley Ves in which the reluctance of the court to  raise portion by sale or mortgage of reversionary term be full recognize and  the rule as a summary of the case which be cite and comment upon be thus lie  down the rule upon the whole depend upon this whether it be the intention of  the party to the instrument attend to the whole of it that the portion shall  or shall not be raise in a particular manner take it prim a fancy to be the  intention upon the general rule if there be nothing more than a limitation to  the parent for life with a term to raise portion at the age of or marriage if  there be nothing more and the interest be vest and the contingency have happen  at which the portion be to be pay the interest be Payable and the portion must  be raise in the only manner in which they can be raise that be by mortgage or  sale of the reversionary term and see Lyddon v Lyddon Ves Vernon chancery case  er p Vernon chancery case de term S michaelis in curian porter