case PINBURY versus elkin Reg lib b fol refer to in re Cresswell Ch d Lord  chancellor Parker vern pre Charles Eq can ab pl one possess of a personal  estate devise if his wife die sans issue by he that then pound shall be pay to  his brother good also good though the brother die in the life of the wife one  make his wife executrix and give her all his good and chattel provide that if  she shall die without issue by the say testator then after her decease pound  shall remain peer William er p to the testator brother I S afterward the  testator die see Wilkinson v south t r Donn v penny mere J S the testator  brother die in the lifetime of the testator wife and then the wife die without  issue upon which peer William the question be first whether this legacy of  pound be original good it be to take effect in case the testator wife shall  die without issue by the testator second whether if original good it be not  since become void by the death of I S the legatee in the lifetime of the  testator wife and before the contingency happen this case be argue before Lord  chancellor his lordship take time to consider of it and now give judgement he  say that the word die without issue have several sense ante Nichols v Hooper  as first a legal sense when there be a failure of issue of tenant in tail so  as to entitle the remainderman or reversioner to a formedon in remainder or  reverter which be whenever there be a failure of issue of the body of tenant  in tail second another sense of die without issue be if the party die without  ever have have issue and that be the sense put upon these word in the case of  Brett v Pildridge cite in side and in keb where a man give a portion with his  daughter in marriage and the husband covenant with his fatherinJaw to repay he  pound part of the portion if the daughter shall die without issue within two  year after the marriage the daughter have issue within two year but she and  afterward her issue die without issue within the two year and the case come on  in chancery be refer to the opinion of four judge who all hold that the father  shall not have any of the portion back again in regard there once have be  issue of the marriage bell v phyn Ves peer William three but by the three  sense of a person die without issue be intend without leave issue at the time  of his death ante where above post forth v chapman and in this sense the word  die without issue shall be take in the principal case which indeed seem to be  the natural meaning of these word for take the case to be that I S die leave a  son and afterward that son die without issue and one shall ask any gentleman  not of the bar whether I S die without issue it will be natural true and  proper answer No I S do not die without issue but leave issue a son but that  son be since dead without issue so that now I S be dead without issue for the  word die without issue be relative to the death of the party and it be plain  that at I sacred scripture death when he leave a son he do not die without  issue moreover in the principal case the word import strong that they be to be  intend in this sense to wit die without issue live at the party death because  the legacy of pound be the legacy in question if the wife shall die without  issue by the testator then after her decease be to remain to the testator  brother see Hugh v sayer ante which word then after I e immediate after will  be inconsistent and repugnant if the die without issue shall be take in the  other sense whenever there shall be a failure of issue for this will be carry  the payment beyond the day it will be as absurd as to appoint the day of  payment to be tomorrow if it shall rain this day twelvemonth which be to make  the condition overreach the day of payment also his lordship say that take the  pound as intend to be peer William give whenever there shall be a failure of  issue of the body of the testator wife by he this will be a strange clog upon  a personal estate and subject it to the payment of a sum of money as it may ha  pen one hundred year hence when it will be no kindness to the legatee in who  favour it be personal intend vide ante Nichols v Hooper but by that time he  must be suppose to be dead and it may be difficult at such a distance of time  to find out his representative not but that a covenant to pay a sum of money  when there shall be a failure of issue of the body of b will sure be good vide  post Pleydel v Pleydel as to the other point in the principal case that the  testator brother who be the legatee of the pound in question be dead before  the happen of the contingency that be before the testator wife die without  issue the court say they be of opinion this possibility will go to the  executor of the legatee that it be true in Swinburne c some case be put which  seem to import the contrary but those case be so dark put and with so many  inconsistency as to be all overbalance by the opinion of Lord Nottingham in  vent anonymous case where a man devise pound to a at the age of twentyone year  and if a die under age then to b b die peer William er p in the lifetimeof a  and afterward a die under age yet decree that the executor of b shall have  this pound therefore decree that the plaintiff shall have his legacy of pound  with interest from the death of the testator wife and also his cost say vide  beauclerk v dorm atk big v bensley bro c c as to the effect of the word then  in limitation of estate and frame contingency Benyon v Maddison bro c c Ellis  v Ellis east king v wither can tempt Talb Dawson v killet bro c c barn v Allen  ib see this case state from the registrar book Ves Selwin v Selwin burr and  Bla Rep more v Hawkins h Bl Eden S c Jones v roe ib and t r very v wood Ves  Massey v Hudson mere