c hillier v hillier S c Eq can ab devise to dispose among child as she shall  think fit a devise be make in these word I give to my daughter hillier pound  to be order and dispose by her and for the benefit of her child as she please  without freeman er p give a account to any body mrs hillier die and make no  disposal the defendant her husband take administration and the child the  plaintiff bring their bill for this pound and the sole question be whether  there be any interest vest in the child by this devise for if there be not  then it belong to the defendant who be husband and administrator to the wife  and it be insist for he that it be give to the wife by the first word of the  will the husband become entitle to it and it be compare to a case adjudge in  this court where a devise be make to the wife for her separate use and that  the husband shall have nothing to do with it notwithstanding these negative  word it be hold that the husband shall have it no trustee be appoint but the  law seem now settle that a devise to a feme covert for her sole use or for her  separate use will exclude the husband marital right ex part ray mad Adamson v  Armitage Ves and if no trustee be appoint by the will the law will convert the  husband into a trustee for his wife Bennett v Davis p wms in Jones v cite in  Lumb v Milnes Ves Lord Alvanley m r be of opinion that a devise to a marry  woman for her own use make the subject of devise her separate property but  this be overrule in will v Sayers mad and in Robert v spicer mad for as soon  as it vest in her the law give it to the husband but yet it be argue that if a  devise be make to the wife in trust for another though the husband be entitle  in law yet it shall be still subject to the trust and the case of civil and  rich Rep c and gratte and Borrett be cite where it have be hold that a man  devise a personal estate to his wife to dispose among her child as she shall  think fit that it be not in her power to make a great inequality in the  disposal unless there be some particular reason for it and it shall go in  equal share among they in box v whitbread Ves and in butcher v butcher I Ves  and Bea the doctrine as to illusory appointment be much discuss but the  difficulty of lie down any fix rule on the subject be hardly remove in the  last ease however it be observe that a power of distribution however large the  term be a power in some degree couple with a trust which if not execute good  fide the court must resort to that lose doctrine that equality be equity and  the fund be to be distribute to all alike but the principal cause be refer and  so the court give no opinion but seem doubtful in the case in Bradley v  Bradley Ves sir W grant m r observe the distinction be perhaps slight which  exist between a gift for life with a power of disposition superadd and a gift  to a person indefinite with a superadd power to dispose by deed or will but  that distinction be perfect establish a gift to a and such person as he shall  appoint be absolute property in a now in the principal case there be no  express estate give for life to exclude the implication of a large interest  and the mode of appointment be not restrict by any form whatsoever in which  last particular the present case be strong than that cite but on the other  hand not particular object of bounty be point out in Bradley v Bradley but  here a benefit be intend for the testator grandchild though the proportion  which each shall take be leave discretionary if the true construction of the  will be that the wife be to take only for the benefit of her child though in  such manner as she think fit the husband as her administrator can have no  beneficial interest in the fund but if the wife have a power of spend any part  of the money for other purpose than those express point out there be strict no  trust and the husband be entitle Pushman v Filliter Ves nalin v Keighley Ves  win v Hawkins Br bull v Kingston Meriv morris v bishop of Durham Ves parson v  baker Ves Bland v Bland Cox can Curtis v Rippon mad the subject of disposition  over must be a ascertain one or the word of recommendation will not be bind  upon the first taker Reg lib a fol the lord commissioner recommend a reference  which seem to have be comply with as no further entry of the cause have be  discover freeman er p freeman de term S hill in curian porter