case Langford versus pit at the roll one article to buy certain land he  thereby become seize thereof in equity but where a devise all his personal and  real estate and afterward article to purchase land and then die the heir at  law be hold to be entitle to this estate as not pass by the will by have the  article for the purchase be before the will for then the estate will have pass  upon a bill bring by the plaintiff for the performance of article for a  purchase the case be the plaintiff Langford vicar of Axminster in Devon do by  attorney enter into article with governor Pitt for the sale of land in  Cornwall the article be date November whereby the plaintiff agree to convey  the premise to the governor and his heir on or before ladyday then next at the  cost and charge of the governor and as counsel shall advice upon the make of  which conveyance the governor covenant to pay pound to the plaintiff governor  Pitt live until after ladyday but in long before the execute of these article  make his will by which he devise all his real estate to his son Robert Pitt  for life remainder to his old son John Pitt for life remainder to his first c  son intail male successive with several remainder over bequeathe all his  personal peer William er p estate to trustee to be invest in land and settle  as above and die soon after ladyday his say old son and heir lie claim to the  premise as descend to he and make his will wherein by express word he devise  the premise thus article to be purchase to his wife and other in trust to pay  his debt c peer William and soon afterward die leave John Pitt his son and  heir to who the governor have devise all his estate expectant on the death of  Robert Pitt the son the plaintiff Langford bring this bill against the  executor of the governor the executor of Robert Pitt the son and against John  the grandson to be pay the pound purchase money and though it appear in the  cause by the plaintiff own witness that in the plaintiff have pay to his old  brother daughter be the heir general of the family pound for her join with her  husband in a deed and fine to the use of the plaintiff and his heir note the  witness say this be rather to clear up the title than that it be necessary  from whence the defendant counsel urge it to be evident even by the plaintiff  own show that he have not at the time of enter into the article a good title  to the promise yet by the master of the roll it be sufficient if the party  enter into article to sell have a good title at the time of the decree the  direction of the court be in all these case to inquire whether the seller can  not whether he can make a title at the time of execute the agreement in the  case of Lord Stourton versus sir Thomas mere the Lord Stourton at the time of  the article for a sale or even when the decree be pronounce can not make a  title the reversion in fee be in the crown and yet the court indulge he with  time more than once for the get in this title from the crown which can not be  effect without a act of parliament to be obtain in the follow session however  it be at length procure and sir Thomas mere decree to be the purchaser indeed  it will be attend with great peer William inconvenience be decree to direct a  inquiry whether the contractor to sell have at the time of enter into such  contract a title for thus all encumbrance and defect must be rank into  wherefore it have be think sufficient to answer the end if at the time of the  decree or report the seller can make a good title see coffin v Cooper Ves and  accord it be usual for the report to mention that if such a three person join  the title will be good but see Lewis v loxam mere then the question be between  the defendant whether the devisees of Robert Pitt the son or the grandson  under the will of the governor be entitle to the land thus article to be  purchase for it be agree that the purchase money be to be pay by the executor  of governor Pitt and for the latter it be object by the attorney and solicitor  general that when the governor by his will devise all his real and also his  personal estate to be lie out in land and all this to be for the benefit of  big grandson John after the death of his son Robert Pitt either in one shape  or other these land thus agree to be purchase by the governor shall pass that  nothing can be plain than his intention to dispose of all his estate both real  and personal and Mr solicitor cite the case of Greenhill versus Greenhill vern  by which it be decree that where a man article to buy land this give the party  contract a equitable interest in such land which he may devise though before  the day on which the conveyance be to be make master of the roll I admit the  case of Greenhill and Greenhill see also prece in Chan in which I myself be of  counsel to have be so determine but this material difference be observable  between the two case there the article for the purchase be enter peer William  into by the testator before he make his will and so the equitable interest  which he gain thereby be well devisable but in the present case governor Pitt  will be make prior to the article for this purchase before he have any  equitable interest in the land consequent when he have no kind of title be can  devise nothing so that this interest in the premise gain by the governor  article must have descend to his son Robert Pitt as heir at law who may well  devise the same and though it may at first look strange that when the governor  devise all his real and personal estate these word shall not carry all yet it  will not seem strange when it be consider that a estate purchase after the  will can pass thereby now these article be as a purchase subsequent and though  the governor executor be to pay for such purchase they can have the benefit of  it be to advance the money only as a debt due from their testator decree Reg  lib b fol the master to inquire whether the plaintiff can make a title if he  can the purchase money to be pay by the governor executor peer William er p  out of his asset the master to see who have be in possession since ladyday at  which time the purchase money be to be pay and the conveyance complete  interest and cost to be reserve on appeal to the Lord chancellor this decree  be affirm so Jenkins v hiles Ves Wynn v Morgan Ves Seton v Slade Ves but see  Lechmere v brazier James W the defendant however be entitle to a inquiry when  the plaintiff can make a title with reference to the question of cost Harford  v purrier mad Daly v Osborne mere birch v Haynes mere it be lie down in Gibson  v clarke v b that in strict practice this inquiry ought not to be direct till  after the master report on the title but the court of chancery have in late  case hold that a direction for this inquiry shall be insert in the order to  refer the title Jennings v Hopton mad anon mad and if then omit have refuse to  supply the omission by another order hide v Wroughton mad as to the practice  in the exchequer see lubin v Lightbody price vide green v smith atk potter v  potter ves see Capel v girdler Ves broom v monk Ves earl of Radnor v Shafto  Ves gaskarth v Lord Lowther Ves Holmes v Barker mad