case witter v witter refer to Att Gen v ailesbury App Cas Hilary vacation Lord  chancellor king a executor in trust for a infant of a lease for year  determinable on three life on the lord refuse to renew but for life absolute  comply with the lord and change the year into life on the infant die under and  intestate this shall be a trust for his administrator and not for his heir  trustee can change the nature of the estate by turn money into land or a lease  for year into a freehold and a conversion Robert Witter possess of a term for  ninetynine year of land in the county of Chester if three life or any of they  shall so long live hold peer William of the late earl river make a his  executor and by his will devise the term to his infant nephew John Witter and  die his own life be one of the three life the executor apply to the earl river  to renew by add a three life and there be some slight proof that the earl have  refuse to make any more lease for year of his tenement in lease but have  change they to life in order to make vote in choose member of parliament when  he be in the administration so that in the present case the executor of Robert  Witter the lessee take a new lease in the name of a trustee to he and his heir  for three life vice that of the infant and the two old life and this be in  trust for the infant and his heir the infant die above the age of fourteen and  under twentyone unmarried and intestate whereupon the question be who shall be  entitle to this lease his heir or administrator it be insist that the  administrator of the infant be entitle and that it shall not be in the breast  of any executor or trustee to alter the nature of the trust estate any more  than it be in the election of a guardian to change the personal estate by  invest it in land see for this purpose the case of terry v terry and ragget  pre in Chan since this will be to give a absolute power of dispose of and  alter the right and property of the lease to one who be but a bare trustee  that if the court have be apply to for leave to do this they will never have  grant it without a peer William er p provision that in case the infant shall  die during his infancy the purchase shall not turn to the prejudice of the  representative peer William of his personal estate also that this will be  injurious to the infant himself who if it have continue as original it be a  lease for year may have devise it at fourteen whereas be turn into a freehold  descendible it can not be devise by he until his a on the other side it be  represent as likely to prove very detrimental to a infant if in a case where  the lord will not renew but for life the executor shall not be enable to  comply with this because the other two life may drop during the infant life  and the case will be the same if there be but one life in be and then the  infant instead of be deprive of the power of devise as have be object may have  no estate to devise that the put the infant life into the lease must be for  the benefit of the infant and of he only and as to what have be mention of  turn a infant personal into a real estate that seem to be a thing not  necessary but the renewal of the lease be a matter of absolute necessity Lord  chancellor this renew lease though for life shall follow the nature of the  original one and go to the executor or administrator of the infant as that  shall have do if the fact have be which have not be full prove that the Lord  river will not have make any other than a descendible Le see for three life  this may and ought to have be declare in trust for the benefit of the executor  and administrator of the infant if he shall die during his infancy now though  this trust be not declare yet it peer William be in equity imply since the  renew lease though for life come all lease which be for ear in consequence of  which the same shall be liable to a distribution accord to the statute so that  though the spiritual court can intermeddle with a freehold to distribute it  yet it do not follow but that this court may enforce such a distribution Reg  ib b fol by the name of Witter v Coup in the case of the Bart of Winchelsea v  norcliffe vern this observation appear to have be first make by sergeant  afterward lord commissioner Rawlinson and to have great stress lie upon it by  the Lord chancellor jefferys vide mason v day pre Charles Pierson v shore I  atk and in general a guardian or trustee shall not alter the nature of the  infant property so as to change the right of succession to it in case of the  infant death unless by some act manifest for the advantage of the infant at  the time rook v Warth ves Tullit v Tullit Amb inwood v twine Amb S c Eden  Vernon v Vernon cite in ex part Bromfield bro c c S c Ves Jun Oxenden v  Compton bro c c Ves Jun nor so as to affect the power of the infant over his  property even during his infancy ware v Polhill Ves ex part Phillips Ves see  also Ashburton v Ashburton Ves web v Shaftesbury mad Langley v Sneyd sim saint  see salk Oldham v Pickering and the note at the end of the case of duke of  Devon v Atkins vol but more particular the statute of Geo whereby a estate pur  autre vie be undevised or in part apply to the payment of debt accord to the  statute of fraud shall be distribute in the same manner as personal estate  peer William de term paschae