case hans stanley Esq and Elizabeth whether and sarah stanley his sister  infant by edward hooper Esq their next friend plaintiff Philippa stanley widow  and whether stanley widow defendant may the the S c Ves cite William Stanley  and Ann his wife have two son George and Hoby who several marry in their  father lifetime William the father die Ann his wife survive he George  afterward die and leaves several child who be still live then Hoby die  intestate leave Philippa his wife possess of a very large personal estate the  child of George bring a bill against Philippa who have administer to her  husband and also against whether their grandmother insist that as the  representative of their father they be entitle with their grandmother to one  half of the moiety of the intestate estate the wife be entitle to the other  moiety by the pound car c the residue of the intestate estate after  satisfaction of debt direct to be divide into four equal part two four thereof  to be retain by Philippa the intestate widow one other four part to be pay to  whether Stanley the intestate mother and the remain four part to be lie out in  Southsea annuity in the name of the accountant general subject to the order of  the court for the benefit of the child of George equal to be divide William  Stanley and whether his wife have two son George and Hoby who several marry in  their father lifetime William the father die whether his wife survive way  atkins er p he George afterward atkins die and leaves several child who be  still live then Hoby diesintestate leave Philippa his wife possess of a very  large personal estate the child of George bring this bill against Philippa who  have administer to her husband and also against whether their grandmother  insist that as the representative of their father they be entitle with their  grandmother to one half of the moiety of the intestate estate the wife be  entitle to the other moiety by car c it be insist for the plaintiff that by  the statute of James cap sec it be enact that if after the death of the father  any of his child shall die intestate without wife or child in the life of the  mother every brother and sister and the representative of they shall have a  equal share with the mother in this case there be a wife leave but the intent  of the act be to put the intestate brother and sister and their representative  in the same light and condition with the mother so that whenever the mother be  entitle the brother and sister and their representative per be to have a equal  share with her and cite the case of Keilway v Keilway wms stram S c pale  yellow Rep S c Eq ab SC pl pasch Geo which be as follow the plaintiff be the  widow and administratrix of one that die intestate have no child but leave a  mother a brother and sister and brother child and it wasdecreed the wife shall  have a moiety and the other moiety equal to the mother brother and sister and  brother child as representative of the father per stock which case be exact  the same with the present in every circumstance except that in the present  case the intestate have no brother and sister live at his death which be not  material in regard that the child of the brother take by way of representation  it be insist for the defendant the intestate mother that these statute be to  receive a favourable construction to exclude representation in a remote degree  in respect of collateral agreeable to the case of carter v Crawley raym and  that the word in the statute of James be in the conjunctive and require a  brother or sister to be in be as well as representative of brother and sister  to make a case within that statute it have be determine that when the  intestate leaves brother or sister child and no brother or sister such child  take per capita as next of kin and not by representation Eq Cas Abr Welsh and  Welsh and that the construction of the statute be the same if a man die leave  ant and niece and no brother or sister such ant and niece will all take per  capita and the niece can not take per stirpes and yet if the father of the  niece have be live he will have take the whole and this be determine in the  case of durant and Prestwood June ante SC see the case in the note atkins and  from hence it be argue that as there be no brother or sister of the intestate  live if the plaintiff in this case take any thing it must be necessary per  capita and not by representation that when brother child take per capita they  must necessary take as next of kin because as they be not in equal degree with  the intestate mother they can not otherwise take at all and it be further urge  that if they be entitle by representation it may be carry to the four or five  generation for there be nothing to restrain it in this act as there be in the  statute of distribution which will create great confusion and fraction in the  estate of intestates Lord chancellor there be two question in this case first  whether the plaintiff who be the nephew and niece of the intestate shall share  with the intestate mother there be a widow of the intestate second suppose  they may share notwithstanding that objection whether they can come in in  respect that there be no brother or sister of the intestate live as to the  first it be direct within the case of Keilway and Keilway and I be satisfy  with the reason of that case it depend upon the construction of the proviso in  the statute of James which be very incorrect pen and so be the statute of  distribution and therefore a construction be to be make upon the second  statute accord to the intent and meaning of the legislature upon the statute  of distribution the descend line exclude all collateral and afterward go to  the next of kin so that the father or mother will take all as suppose a rich  citizen die intestate his share will all go to the mother therefore the  subsequent statute intend she shall have a provision only equal with a brother  and sister of the intestate atkins er p as to the second question it be a new  one for the intestate have leave no brother or sister for the mother to  collate or share equal with the case of Welsh v Welsh be ground upon the  statute of car see the word of the act do suppose that there must be some  person to take in their own right and other in right of representation but the  statute of James be of a different kind and let we in another person here be a  mother take a original share in her own right and the brother and sister child  take as if the brother and sister be live for the word and immediate precede  the word the representative must be construe in the disjunctive as to the  objection that such representation may be carry to several generation I think  that consequence do not follow for the proviso in the statute of James be to  be incorporate into the statute of Charles which express say that  representation shall not be carry beyond brother and sister child and this be  agreeable to the rule my Lord hale lie down in Ventr that statute make acquire  means shall be construe into one another atkins I think the statute of James  intend to let in the rule of the civil law which contain three line ascend  descend and collateral the descend line absolute exclude all other the ascend  exclude all collateral except brother and sister and they take alike his  lordship therefore order the residue of the intestate estate after  satisfaction of debt to be divide into four equal part and two four part  thereof to be retain by the defendant Philippa the intestate widow and one  other four part to be pay to the defendant whether Stanley the intestate  mother and the remain four part to be lie out in Southsea annuity in the name  of the accountant general subject to the order of this court for the benefit  of the plaintiff the infant equal to be divide Reg lib b fol