case Kentish versus newma Lord chancellor Harcourt article construe against  the word for the sake of the intent as where the wife portion be to be lie out  in land to be settle on husband and wife and the heir of their body and if not  lie out in land during their joint life and the wife shall die first that the  money shall go to the wife brother and sister wife die first leave issue and  the money be not lie out in a purchase yet the and not the wife brother and  sister shall have it equity supply the word if the wife die without issue so  Targus v puget ves and see uvedale v Halfpenny post Vol ill Watts v Guybon lev  Fonb Eq note b Henry Kentish intermarries with mary Hanwell widow who inter  all be possess of pound put out on security and the husband before the  marriage article to layout so much money of his own as with the wife pound  shall purchase pound a year and this to be settle on himself and his wife for  their life remainder to the heir of their body remainder to the husband in fee  but until such settlement make this pound be agree to be take as the separate  estate of the wife it be also agree by the say article that if no such  settlement shall be make during the joint life of the husband and wife then  the pound shall be to the sole use of the wife if live but if she shall die  before her husband then the pound to go to her brother and sister in the  marriage take effect of which there be issue a daughter the plaintiff and in  September the if he die leave no other issue and whether accord to the letter  of the article this pound shall go to the wife brother and sister or to the  peer William daughter to who the father by his answer consent it shall go in  present for her advancement in marriage be the question decree that the  daughter shall have this pound and not the wife brother and sister for that  the intention of the article be to provide for the wife and the issue of the  marriage and not for the brother and sister of the wife and for that the  parent be by the law of nature bind to take care of the issue but not of the  wife brother and sister who be provide for before and for who though they have  be leave destitute still the wife be under no obligation to provide that it  can not be intend that the wife ever think of prefer her brother and sister  before her own child and though the word be if the wife shall die live the  husband then the to go to the wife brother and sister yet must they be  construe to mean if the wife shall die without issue that even in the case of  a conveyancer of a legal estate the word without issue have be supply thus in  cro car Spalding v Spalding see this case cite post Hewit v Ireland the same  case cite in vent land be devise to a the testator old son and the heir of his  body and if he die live his mother then to the testator second son a die live  his mother and leave issue in which case it be object that the second son  shall take and that these word if he die live his mother be corrective and  explanatory of the first word but resolve otherwise and that the court will  supply the word without issue for that it can not be intend that the testator  will prefer the second son before the issue of peer William the old send so  neither in this case can it be think that the wife will refer her brother and  sister before her own child that this be matter of article be more under the  control of a court of equity than if it have be a vest estate this be  trustmoney over which the court have a power money toy be lie out in land be  to be take as land and though this money be not invest in land within the time  require by the article yet the court will dispense with that and if it have be  invest in land within the time then by the express word of the article it be  to go to the issue of the marriage beside in this case one of the trustee  themselves videlicet the brother who be to take advantage of not lie out the  money in a purchase have declare he will not claim title to the money if it be  not invest during the joint life of the husband and wife which declaration may  natural be presume to have be the reason why the money be not lie out peer  William er p also it be the duty of the trustee to call upon the husband to  lie out the money and make the purchase instead of which one of they by  declare he will not take the advantage of any omission of that kind have  encourage he to sit still so that if such trustee be t have the money he will  reap a benefit from his own wrong