case MASSENBURGH versus ash cite Maddox v Stains p wms April in court Lord  keeper Ch Rep S c contingent limitation of a term for year adjudge to be good  the contingency be to happen within the space of year settlement of a term on  a marriage in trust for the husband for life remainder to the first son until  and after the first son come to then to such first son for the remainder of  the term but if the first son die before then to the second and every other  son in the same manner and if no such son or if all the son die before then to  I S a good limitation post case pound the case arise upon a deed touch the  contingent remainder of a term for year and though there be a will in the case  wherein there be a disposition of the same term yet it be agree the will can  not alter the deed but that the case must depend on the deed alone because as  the will be pen the clause be all bind up with relation to the deed but if  those clause have be substantive of themselves it will have alter the case Reg  lib b fol at the bottom vide exell v Wallace ves and as to that the case be  thus a term for year be assign to trustee in trust for baron and feme during  their life and the life of the long liver of they and if there shall happen to  be issue male of their body live at the time of the decease of the survivor of  they then in trust that the old son of that marriage shall be maintain out of  the rend and profit until heBecause as the will be pen the clause be all bind  up with relation to the deed but if those clause have be substantive of  themselves it will have alter the case Reg lib b fol at the bottom vide exell  v Wallace ves attain his age of year and then the whole term to be assign unto  he and in case he shall die before the age of year then in like manner for the  Vernon chancery case maintenance of the second three four and every other son  of that marriage one after another till one of they shall attain the age of  years Because as the will be pen the clause be all bind up with relation to  the deed but if those clause have be substantive of themselves it will have  alter the case Reg lib b fol at the bottom vide exell v Wallace ves and then  the whole term to be assign to he but in case there shall be no such issue  live at the time of the decease of the survivor of the say baron and feme or  in case there shall be such issue and they shall all die before any one of  they attain their age of year then he limit the term to the plaintiff sir  William Massenburgh that be his old son and heir by a former venture baron and  feme die and leave a son only who die while a infant of about five year old  the question be whether the remainder over to sir William Massenburgh be good  in the argue of this case it be agree by the counsel and so declare by the  court that as to the limitation of the trust of a term it be to be govern and  guide by the same rule in equity that the devise of a term be at law and not  to be carry further Philips v Philips p wms Watts v ball ibidem bale v Coleman  ibidem attorneygeneral v Sutton ibidem duke of Norfolk case Ch can and that  such limitation or contingent remainder as be good in one case will be so in  the other et e turning ndly that the general rule that have hitherto obtain be  that you may limit a term to as many person as you will one after another that  be in be at the time of the limitation and one step further to a person not in  be but that there can be but one continent remainder of a term for year but  the counsel for the plaintiff argue that where there be a contingent remainder  limit upon a contingent remainder if the first contingency never happen then  the second contingency be good and shall take place in be and insist much on  the inconvenience people lie under who estate consist in church lease by  reason they have no latitude leave by some hard resolution to make a  settlement Vernon chancery case of their estate or reasonable provision for  their family that these inconvenience be former so far consider in this court  that in such case they will admit limitation over which the commonlaw will not  then allow but see it do in chancery the commonlaw court soon follow the  example of this court and enlarge much upon the inconvenience that may often  happen shall this remainder be adjudge void and observe that here be no danger  of a perpetuity be the contingency must of necessity happen within the space  of twentyone year at most after the decease of either the baron or feme and  this can be say to come near a perpetuity than almost every settlement of a  real estate for here if the issue once attain his full age then the whole term  be to be assign unto he and he may dispose of it at his pleasure or otherwise  it shall go in a course of administration and they rely strong Vernon chancery  case er p on wood and sander case roll Abr sect as a case adjudge in point and  cite the case of Colton and heath and oak and Chalfont c on the other side the  defendant counsel insist much on that rule in case of executory devise that  one contingent remainder be good but a contingency upon a contingency be not  to be allow and to the case of wood and sander Cr they oppose the case of  child and Bailey and cite the case of Gooring and Bickertaffe and of Gibbons  and summer in the common plea and the case of Warman and seaman in this court  and urge that in case that rule be to be break which allow only one contingent  remainder there be no bind set and no man know where it will end for as they  may appoint the contingency to happen within the space of twentyone year so  they may enlarge it to thirty year and from thence to forty and so on without  end Lord keeper think it a case of great consequence and for as much as he  take the rule in chancery touch the Vernon chancery case limitation of trust  of term for year to be the same with executory devise of term for year at law  he will have the opinion of the judge before he will determine any thing in  this matter and direct a case shall be draw as the case stand upon the deed  and that it shall be try in a feign issue in the common plea vide Heyward v  Roqers post and case cite in note there Woodford v Thelluson Ves Ves new Rep  beard v Westcott taunt b a turner