case collet v collet June the d by a settlement before marriage security for  money belong to the wife be assign to a trustee to be lie out in the purchase  of freehold land and settle among other use to the first son in tail male with  like remainder to the second and other son remainder to the heir female in  tail the father and mother die leave the plaintiff two other son and four  daughter the old son now pray by his bill that the security may be assign to  he be tenant in tail and not lie out in land by a settlement make previous to  the marriage of the plaintiff mother several security for money belong to her  be assign to a trustee in trust within one year after the date of the  settlement or as soon as convenient may be after the marriage to be lie out in  the purchase of a freehold estate in land or house to be settle to the use of  the husband for life to the wife for life and to the first son of the marriage  and the heir male of the body of such first son with like remainder to the  second and other son of the say marriage remainder to the heir female of the  marriage in tail the father and mother die leave the plaintiff two other son  and four daughter the money in the say security be never invest in any  freehold land of inheritance nor be any of the security change except only  pound which be invest in a purchase of a moiety of two house by the consent of  the plaintiff mother and settle to the use mention in the settlement and now  the old son be tenant in tail pray by his bill that the remainder of the say  security may be assign to he and not lie out because if land be purchase and  settle he can as tenant in tail bar all the remainder over atkins Lord  chancellor the court be to execute the trust and the way to carry it into  execution be to order the money to be lie out in land and since the case of  Colwell v Shadwell before Lord Cowper it have be the constant rule of the  court to give the remainderman his chance so short v wood p W chaplin v Horner  ibidem and the case of v marsh in note ibidem Cunningham v moody Ves Calthorpe  v gough durn east say by where the reversion in fee be in the tenant in tail  himself and see Benson v Benson p W Edward v countess of Warwick p W Trafford  v boehm post vol Cunningham v moody Ves ex part king bro Charles Rep contra  Eyress case p W but on the brother and sister of the plaintiff who be in  remainder appear in court and consent his lordship order that the security not  already invest in land be assign to the plaintiff and that the representative  of the trustee do transfer they to the plaintiff to his own use and pay he  also the interest of such security atkins er p