case pain versus Benson and palmer April see Melson v Giles lr c p Kumar  Tarakeswar boy v Kumar Shoshi Skikhareswar lr ind App t b b his will appoint  the interest that shall be make of his personal estate to be pay to his  fatherduring his life and after his decease to his mother for her life and  after their decease give the residue of his personal estate to his brother and  sister and to the sister of his late wife Martha and Rebecca pain share and  share alike and then say in case of the death of my brother or any of my  sister or wife sister before I or the survivor of my father and mother I  appoint his her or their share to be divide among the survivor the brother die  in the testator lifetime but after the will be make and his sister in the  lifetime of the testator mother who survive her husband but be since dead  Martha and Rebecca pain claim the residue of t b s personal estate they be  entitle as the only survive legatee at the death of the survivor of the  testator father and mother to the whole residue of t b s estate to the  accumulate share of the person who be dead as well as their original five so  Worlidge v Churchill bro Charles Rep Thomas Bellasis September make his will  as follow I appoint all such interest as shall be make upon my personal estate  shall be pay to my father Thomas Bellasis during his life and to my mother mrs  Elizabeth Bellasis after his decease in case she shall survive he during her  life for their respective use and after the decease of my father and mother I  give all the residue of that say personal estate and in effect to my brother  and sister Charles mary and Elizabeth Bellasis and the sister of my dear  belove wife decease Martha pain and Rebecca pain the plaintiff to be equal  divide among they share and share alike and in case of the death of my brother  or any of my sister or wife sister before I or the survivor of my father and  mother I do appoint his her or their share to be divide among the survivor of  they the testator die in without revoke his will Charles Bellasis die in the  testator lifetime but after the make of the will mary and Elizabeth the  testator sister die in the lifetime of the testator mother who survive her  husband but be dead since atkins the bill be bring by Martha and Rebecca pain  against the defendant Benson the consignee of the money arise from the  testator personal estate for the residue of the say estate and that the same  may be pay to they it be insist by the attorney general for the plaintiff that  as they be the only survive legatee at the death of the survivor of testator  father and mother that they be the only person entitle to the whole residue of  the testator estate as well the original as accumulate share the counsel for  the defendant Charles palmer insist that on the death of Charles Bellasis mary  Bellasis and his late wife Elizabeth Bellasis become entitle by virtue of and  under the say will each of they to one four part or share of the say Charles  Bellasis of and in the balance remain in benson hand and that on the decease  of mary who die intestate in the lifetime of the defendant late wife the say  Elizabeth become entitle under the say will to one three part of the original  part or share of her say sister mary of the say personal estate and that on  the say mary death the defendant say wife and the testator mother as only  sister and mother of mary become also entitle by the statute of distribution  of intestate estate each of they to a moiety of mary four part or share of the  original five part or share of the say Charles of the say testator personal  estate that he have take out administration to his wife be entitle to the  several part or share of testator personal estate whereto his wife Elizabeth  become entitle on the respective deceases ofCharles and mary for tile  defendant be cite barn versus Ballard SC cite can tempt Talb Geo on the first  of June before Lord king there be a devise to four child of pound apiece at  eighteen or day of marriage and in case any of the child die before the age of  eighteen or marriage then to the survivor or survivor of such survivor one of  the child die a minor and then it survive to three another atkins er p  afterward die a minor and the question be whether the share that come by  survivorship to the last decease minor shall upon the minor death survive  again and hold it shall not it come before Lord Hardwicke in and this point  acquiesce in Perkins versus micklethwait p wms Charles Rep Rudge versus Barker  Tr term before sir Joseph Jekyll Cas in the time of Lord Talbot it stand over  till the last day of cause in the term and then be may the that his lordship  give judgement atkins Lord chancellor a bill be bring to have a account of the  residue of the personal estate of Thomas Bellasis and that it may be pay to  the plaintiff the principal defendant be Charles palmer who marry Elizabeth  Bellasis one of the testator sister the question be whether the whole  accumulate share of the person who be dead as well as the original five cloth  go over to the survivor at the death of the survivor of father and mother of  the testator I be of opinion that not only the original share in the residuum  of the personal estate do survive but the accumulate share survive likewise  and I find my opinion on the particular pen of this will it have be insist  that it be not subject to any new survivorship and I do agree this be the  general rule as where a man dive a sum suppose of pound to be divide among  four person as tenant in common and that if one of they die before twentyone  or marriage that it shall survive to the other if one die and three be live  the share of that one so die will survive to the other three but if a second  die nothing will survive to the remainder but the second be original share for  the accrueing share be as a new legacy and there be no further survivorship so  burgrave v Whitwick Charles Rep Perkins v Micklethwaite p W Rudge v Barker can  tempt Talb ex part west bro Charles Rep barn versus Ballard and the rest of  the case cite for the defendant be all of this general kind if this have be  like those case and the pen of the will have warrant it I shall have be of the  same opinion by the will he say and in case of the death of my brother or any  of my sister or wife sister before I or the survivor of my father and mother I  do appoint his her or their share to be divide among the survivor of they what  be the effect of this clause here be a express direction that if any shall die  before the testator it shall survive to the other atkins one of they die and  therefore his share do go to the survivor and if it have not be for this  clause of survivorship to take place before the death of the testator this  will not have survive at all but must have be consider a undisposed part of  the testator personal estate then I will suppose another have die in the  testator lifetime will the original five of he who die second in the lifetime  of the testator have go over and the share which survive to he upon the death  of the first have go over likewise undoubted both then what be the consequence  arise from this why that the testator mean not only the original but likewise  the accumulate share shall go over then the question be whether I can put a  different construction on the word share in one case than the other there be  no doubt but a man may make his will so that whatever he give original to  tenant in common and what shall likewise accrue to they by the death of other  shall go to the survivor then the question be whether the testator here have  not express such intention I be of opinion he have plain do so and indeed the  meaning of this testator be that the residue of his personal estate shall go  among such person as shall be live at the death of his father and mother I be  more inclinable to make this construction because I much question whether the  determination of former case have not be contrary to the intention of the  testator though consistent with rule of law for the intention of testator be  to prevent atkins er p any part go to stranger for who they have no kindness  and can not be suppose to have in their view at the time but the rule be now  settle and I do not vary it in the present case because I be of opinion that  here be express word which show the testator mean not only the original gift  to the atkins legatee but what accrue likewise by the death of those person  shall go to the survivor and therefore his lordship decree a account of the  residue and that the whole shall be pay to the plaintiff Reg lib b fol