case seal versus seal see lion v Mitchell mad coke Inst hark Edward b Chan  case Peer wms S c brown Rep fearne count Rem to a devise of a personal estate  to one in tail remainder over the remainder be void in this case a man be  seize of a good real estate and also possess of a considerable personal estate  and have a intention to settle and secure both in his name and family do by  his will in write after several legacy and bequest give and devise all the  rest and residue of his real and personal estate to the plaintiff and the heir  male of his body to be beget for ever and for want of such issue to the  defendant and the heir male of his body to be beget for ever with like  remainder over to several other of the same name and make the defendant his  executor and die and now this bill be bring to have a account of the personal  estate and that precedent in chancery er p the plaintiff may enjoy the same to  his own use absolute the remainder over be void and the defendant bring a  cross bill upon pretence that there be direction in the will to have the whole  personal estate vest in the purchase of land to be settle in the manner above  mention but upon read of the will my Lord chancellor be clear of opinion that  these direction extend only to such part of the personal estate as be not upon  government security which be about pound or pound and for the residue which  amount to about or pound that be plain take no further notice of precedent in  chancery than in the devise above mention of all the rest and residue of his  real and personal estate for the plaintiff it be say as to that that the  devise over be absolute void and the whole vest in the plaintiff as not be  capable of bear any further limitation and this point the defendant counsel  give up but then they insist that the intent of the testator appear to be to  continue the real estate and the land to be purchase in the name of the  testator this court will order the settlement to be make in such manner that  the plaintiff may not have power to defeat the remainder and therefore that  the plaintiff shall be only make tenant for life with remainder to his first  and other son entail male and so for the other in remainder and the  attorneygeneral say the house of lord have in a case late make the like  provision for the benefit of the issue that they may not be defeat by the  father but my Lord chancellor say it be in a case of marriage article where  the intent be plain to provide for the issue of the marriage but here the  testator himself have express give it to the plaintiff in tail male and  therefore he think this court can not vary the limitation beside that the  defendant have a chance for the remainder if the plaintiff shall die without  issue before any recovery suffer and mention a case where such remainder take  place by the death of tenant in tail without issue before he can complete a  recovery and therefore order a settlement in this case to be make in the like  manner and the deed and write to be bring before the master for that purpose p  wms