case carter versus carter money devise to be lie out in land to the use of b  in tail remainder to the use of c in fee b have no issue agree with c by deed  to divide the money and before this agreement be execute b die this agreement  shall bind in favour of bar executor a devise pound to be lie out in land and  settle to the use of b in tail remainder to c in fee b and c agree by article  of write to divide the money in the manner therein mention b the tenant in  tail die without issue soon after the make of the article and before the be  execute by a division of the money this come before the court by way of appeal  from the bolls where a specific performance of the article be decree in favour  of the executor or administrator of b case tempt Talbot note some year before  the article be make there be a decree obtain to have the money lie out in land  and settle accord to the will but the matter rest there Lutwyche in support of  the decree say that at the time of the agreement it be very beneficial to the  person who have the remainder because the tenant in tail may have bar the  remainder have the money be lie out in land and settle as the will direct it  be a rule if money be to be lie out in land and settle to one in tail the  remainder to another in fee that he in remainder shall not be bar of his  contingency by the payment of the money to tenant in tail but in the present  case he in remainder be consent to the division legate versus jewel vern it  have be hold since in the case of Colwell and Shadwell see this case state in  chaplin v Horner p will that if money be to be lie out in land and settle on  one in tail with remainder to the same person in fee it shall be pay over to  the so Benson v Benson p will silly v Jago ibidem short v wood ibidem Edward v  countess of Warwick p will Trafford v boehm atk Coningham v moody Ves Bradish  v gee Ambl Rep Oldham v Hugh atk tenant in tail because immediate after the  money be lie out in land and settle he may bar his issue a fine may be take  and complete so far even in vacation time as to bar the issue in tail but a  recovery to bar a estate tail or remainder dependent on such estate can be  suffer but in term time which be give as a reason why money may be pay to  tenant in tail with remainder in fee to himself but not when the remainder be  limit over to another Mr attorneygeneral contra there be no reason to make a  distinction between the issue in tail and a remainder for the one be as much  in the view and contemplation of he who make the settlement as the other and  the majus and minus of the time necessary to complete a fine and recovery will  not alter the case case tempt Talbot Mr rider on the same side insist equity  will not decree money to tenant in tail though he have a remainder in fee to  he so Eyre case p will and Mr onslow case mention in the note to Eyre case but  the present practice it shall seem be conformable to the opinion contain in  Benson v Benson and the other case cite in note and afterward cite welldone  versus oxendon July at the roll a man by will leave pound to his wife to be  pay within six month after his decease provide she will release all her right  to dower of his real estate she die before the end of the six month and before  any release have be offer to her yet it be decree that she not have perform  the condition no one will be entitle to the legacy and therefore the bill be  dismiss if a husband before marriage covenant to make his wife a jointure and  she in consideration thereof covenant to convey her land to the use of her  husband and his heir and the wife die before the jointure be make a court of  equity will not compel a specific performance of those article Mr solicitor  general in his reply admit the case of welldone versus oxendon because the  widow have a election which never be make she can not be entitle to the legacy  but distinguish it from the present case because here both party be bind by  the mutual agreement as to the case of a covenant by the wife before marriage  he say a court of equity will compel a specific performance though she die  before a jointure be make and that it be so determine in the case of Cotter  versus Layer all p will Lord chancellor this be a mutual agreement between the  party to have the money divide between they and there be no child of tenant in  tail in be the tenant in tail die before any thing be do in pursuance of the  article yet case tempt Talbot er p every thing may be do now as well as it may  in his lifetime the decree be affirm case tempt Talbot note he seem to lie a  good deal of stress on tenant in tail die without issue de term S michaelis  geo two in curian porter