c the lord paulett case S c Ventr Eq can ab Ch Rep vern affirm in dom proc see  journ h of lord vol p and refer by Lord Talbot c as the lead case upon  question of this nature in king v wither can tempt Talb follow Bellairs v  Bellairs l r Eq high avera benefit deal portion the Lord Paulett in a marriage  settlement raise a term of five hundred year in trust that out of profit lease  sale or otherwise the trustee shall raise pound apiece to young son and  daughter to be pay they at the age of twentyone year or their marriage or as  he shall direct in his last will and testament and after the sum raise the  term to merge in the reversion at the time of execute the deed his will be  draw with the bequest as aforesaid relate to the trust one of the child die  before oneandtwenty year unmarried her administrator demand the same as the  chattel of the party decease the court decree that it can accrue to the  benefit of the heir out of who estate the term be to be raise give reason and  make the difference as follow first that peruse all precedent offer he find  none that come up to this case make a great difference between a legacy and a  trust But it seem now settle that there be not the least difference whether  money be charge by a will on land Payable to a infant at twentyone or whether  such charge arise by deed duke of chandos v Talbot p wms smith v smith vern  Yates v Fettiplace ibidem and post c p Jennings v look p wms post c p that if  it have be a legacy by will legacy be govern by the rule of the law but where  sum be to grow out of a trust of a term the will of he that create the trust  be to be observe and although this be by will yet the will and the trust  relate to one another and execute at the same time it shall be construe upon  the trust and freeman the trust for such purpose be of a term carve out of the  inheritance it shall accrue to the heir it be more reasonable a inheritance of  a heir shall be respect than if it have be original good and chattel and so  the estate of a executor far allege that these sort of settlement concern most  of the great family of England be make upon a sort of a condition and the  consideration of advance the young child of such family the condition and the  reason of the advancement be prevent by death it be more reason that it shall  be for the benefit of the heir of the family out of who estate the trust be  create than that a executor shall go away with such sum that often be a  stranger to a family beside it can not be intend that the trustee shall be  charge with such sum present when the time of payment be not effluxed and only  maintenance assign in the mean time in this case the money be not actual  raised and the executor will have compel they to raise it the general rule be  settle in conformity to the text but a exception arise when it appear that  payment be defer in consideration of the state of the fund not of the  circumstance of the person who be to take it for the class of case in which  this distinction have be recognize see the industrious note to king v wither  and duke of chandos v Talbot where above Reg lib a fol give the decree almost  in the very word of the report freeman er p freeman de term S trin in curian  porter