case Phipps versus Annesley e contra October a testator give his only daughter  the sum of pound at her age of or marriage and that the trustee shall levy and  raise by mortgage or sale of his land together with his personal estate as  much as will pay the pound but that it shall not be raise till or marriage out  of the before mention estate or land that it may not be a debt in his personal  estate Lord Hardwicke hold that the personal estate be except and that the  pound be a charge on the real estate the only question in this case of Phipps  and Annesley be whether pound give under the will of James earl of anglesea to  his daughter shall come out of the personal estate or whether it be express  exempt from the payment of it the will set out in general word as to my  worldly estate with which it have please God to bless I and then recite  several manor land c I devise they in trust for the payment of all my just  debt and all my legacy and the residue to my nephew Arthur AnnesLev item I  give and bequeatWto my only daughter Catherine the sum of pound over and above  the pound which be convey to her under my marriagesettlement atkins er p at  her age of or marriage and that the trustee shall levy and raise by mortgage  or sale of his land together with his personal estate as much as will pay the  pound but that it shall not be raise till or marriage out of the before  mention estate or land that it may not be a debt upon my personal estate there  be three different clause beside in the will that conclude with these word  that his land be devise to pay his debt and all his legacy in case his  personal estate shall not be sufficient Lord chancellor though this objection  come extreme late after two decree it must have its weight if as the plaintiff  insist it be right find atkins it be certain the rule of the court that  personal estate be the natural and proper fund to be first apply to the  payment of debt unless there be express word to exempt it see Galton v Hancock  post note walker v Jackson post I be of opinion however inaccurate pen that  the intention of the testator in the present case be to exempt his personal  estate from the payment of this pound for in the clause by which he bequeathe  this sum to his daughter he take notice that there be the sum of already  charge upon the real estate his design must have be to give her this as a  additional fortune and to connect the two sum together for where a less sum be  give under a will than under a settlement the rule will not hold that it shall  be take to be in satisfaction of a great it have be object that the  beforementioned estate must mean the personal estate personal estate be the  last antecedent and yet it certain do not but be set in direct opposition to  the personal estate and the word immediate follow or land be not disjunctive  as be insist on but explanatory rather of his intention that the shall come  out of the real estate charge before with the pound where there be a charge  upon a personal estate though it be not immediate Payable yet the person  entitle may come into this court and pray that a sufficient sum may be set  apart to answer the legacy when it shall become due heath v very post vol note  this probable be the reason of the testator insert the word that it shall not  be a debt upon his personal estate that so large a sum as pound may not be  lock up in the mean time until the daughter who be then young shall arrive at  eighteen or be marry and these word that it shall not be a debt upon his  personal estate be say indefinite and not for a limit time upon the whole this  be one of those case where by negative word in a will the personal estate be  except and therefore the pound as well as the pound be a charge upon the real  estate only Reg lib b fol Reg lib b fol