c Mr Bennett appellant v lord Salisbury respondent S c vern Nels Ventr but  erroneous skin Eq can ab appeal to the house of lord ante case Bennett of  Buckinghamshire by his will give to his two daughter twenty thousand pound  apiece to be pay unto they at their respective age of twentyfive or day of  marriage which shall first happen so as such marriage be have freeman after  the age of sixteen and with the consent and approbation of my wife and my  cousin lee and if they shall marry otherwise then to have only ten thousand  pound and he devise the residue of his personal estate to trustee to be lie  out in the purchase of land to be settle upon his daughter for life remainder  to their child prout c Bennett the testator die and the Lord Salisbury marry  one of the daughter before the age of sixteen with the consent of the mother  and trustee and Mr Bennett the appellant marry the other daughter the sole  question be whether the Lord Salisbury lady by marry before the age of sixteen  have lose one half of her portion by the construction upon his will and the  cause be hear in chancery the Lord Salisbury have a decree for the twenty  thousand pound and thereupon Mr Bennett appeal for Mr Bennett the appellant it  be insist that the word of the will be very plain that the testator intend but  ten thousand pound in case the marriage shall be before sixteen that in this  case here be no forfeiture of the whole portion but only of part that here be  a devise over see ante c p and note but in this case there be no express  devise over see Charles can and then the court of equity can not interpose as  be hold in the case of fry and porter because the surplus be appoint to be lie  out and settle and by breach of the condition the ten thousand pound fall into  the surplus that in every will the testator be his own chancellor and if his  intent be apparent freeman er p a court of equity ought not to examine how  reasonable it be for he to make such will because many time testator have  reason to themselves which be not know for the Lord Salisbury it be insist  that forfeiture be odious in law and therefore shall be take strict that  condition to restrain marriage be absolute void by the civil law Ante c p and  note that a condition not to marry without the consent of a and b be likewise  void by that law inasmuch as it be put in the power of other whether the party  shall marry or not that the testator can intend no more than that his daughter  shall not marry improvident and here it be agree on all band to be a good  match both as to quality and estate and freeman it be in proof that the  testator himself be in treaty for this match while his daughter be under  sixteen that the very word of the will may be satisfy and yet no forfeiture  for the word otherwise shall refer to the next antecedent which be the trustee  consent and that she have and beside bear she live till after sixteen maybe  say to be marry after sixteen and they cite the lady Bellasiss case report  post p and see post c p the decree appear in Reg lib a fol the court thereby  declare that notwithstanding any construction which can be put upon the word  of the testator will as imply that the marriage of his daughter under the age  of sixteen shall be a forfeiture the Lord Salisbury ought to be relieve  concern a devise of eight thousand pound in car adjudge by the Lord Clarendon  assist with hale and keel where such a condition be agree to be only in terror  and the decree be affirm de term paschae in curian porter