case webber against the earl OF montrath if there be no legal tenant to the  prcipe in order to suffer a common recovery yet after length of time it shall  be presume that there be a legal tenant S c Eq ab tenant in tail remainder in  tail to the defendant make a lease for ninetynine year determinable on three  life with a covenant that the lessee shall renew c and afterward he mortgage  the land to t S in fee who assign the mortgage to one flower afterward the  lease for life which be prior to the mortgage be determine the say tenant in  tail make a new lease to the now plaintiff pursuant to the covenant in the  first lease and then be and the assignee of the mortgagee join in a conveyance  of the equity of redemption to one Alcock in order to make he a tenant to the  prcipe and thereupon a common recovery be suffer in which the tenant in tail  be vouch and be vouch over the common vouchee and soon after die without issue  then the defendant the earl of montrath get this mortgage to be assign to one  jeer in trust for himself and bring a ejectment on a double demise by he and  the say jeer and thereupon the plaintiff exhibit this bill to stay the proceed  at law and have get a injunction a motion be make to dissolve it upon come in  of the answer but the counsel for the plaintiff insist that it may be continue  on the equity confess in the answer it appear that the assignee of the  mortgagee do join with the tenant in tail in the conveyance to Alcock to make  he a legal tenant to the prcipe and though it be object that this remainder to  the defendant can not be bar because there be no legal tenant to the prcipe  yet it be insist for the plaintiff that this recovery be suffer in the year  which be now more than twentythree year pass if he can not show that there be  a legal tenant to the prcipe it must be presume in his favour as a purchaser  that after such a length of time there be such a legal tenant and if this may  be presume then the mortgagee who be a trustee for the mortgagor and be join  with the a the mortgagor a beneficiary and trust in suffer this recovery it  shall be a bar to all remainder and this be prove by the case cite in the  margin where it be hold that a b Chan Rep vern b recovery suffer by modern  report beneficiary and trust in tail bar the in tail and all the remainder and  that such a recovery shall have the same effect in a court of equity and bind  the trust in the same manner as it will the estate in modern report er p law  in case he have the legal estate in he and as to a fine it have never be doubt  of late and that even a bargain and sale enrol by beneficiary and trust of a  estatetail shall bind the issue because such trust be not within the statute  de gift the counsel for the defendant insist that the plaintiff ought to give  a judgement at law with a release of error otherwise the injunction ought not  to be continue for that the defendant be tenant in tail it will be of some  advantage to he to have the legal estate so as he may dock the in tail and  avoid all the remainder over and then the plaintiff may have the benefit of  his title in equity and make the most of it the court nun of the case cite at  the bar come up to the present case for in all those case the trust cover the  whole estate of the beneficiary and trust as well as of those in remainder it  be true the case of basket v pierce a vern a be somewhat like it which be thus  the testator devise his land to trustee for ninetynine year for the payment of  his debt and if they do not act then he devise the land to t S and his heir in  trust to pay his debt and afterward to a b in tail remainder in tail to e g  afterward a b who be the beneficiary and trust in tail levy a fine and die  without issue and five year pass without any claim it be decree that this fine  and nonclaim bar the remainderman in tail for equitable right be bind by fine  as well as action and title at law and though it be insist for the plaintiff  in that case that the title of the remainderman be not yet commence because  the debt be not pay and the term for ninetynine year be subsist and that the  entire estate at law be in the trustee he ought to have enter and that it be  against equity for he to suffer the beneficiary and trust to be bar by a fine  and nonclaim through his default yet the court be still of opinion that the  plaintiff be bar it be true in the principal case the mortgagee in fee be a  trustee for the mortgagor but he be only so far a trustee as be derive under  the title of the mortgagor and have no relation to the remainder over and to  say that the remainder of a legal estate shall be bar by a recovery suffer by  a beneficiary and trust of a particular estate be go far modern report than  ever that point have be carry and seem to cross the intention of the statute  de gift for by that statute this remainder be vest beside this recovery be  suffer by a beneficiary and trust in tail which be but a particular estate who  at that very time have it in his power to have the legal estate by pay off the  mortgage it have be object that there be no good tenant to the prcipe but if  there have not it ought to be presume that there be a good one after this  length of time it be true it induce a strong suspicion that the defendant who  be the remainderman think himself bar by this recovery when be bring the  ejectment and declare on a double demise the one make by himself and the other  by the assignee of the mortgagee which title can stand together for if his  remainder be good his title under the mortgage be not and it be plain that the  plaintiff have a right to be relieve against any right the defendant can claim  under the mortgage therefore as to that a perpetual injunction be decree for  the plaintiff but as to the defendant title under the remainder a trial at law  be direct and after the trial a injunction be order till the hear this cause  modern report trinity term the eleven of George the first in the year in the  court of chancery earl of Macclesfield Lord chancellor sir Joseph Jekyll Knt  master of the roll