case Metham versus duke OF devon discuss Occleston v Fullalove l r Ch refer to  in re hasties trust Ch d Lord chancellor Parker Eq can ab pl pl one devise  pound to all the natural child of his son by jane style the bastard bear after  make the will shall not take nay the child in ventre sa more shall not take I  and though in the principal case the money be to be pay by the executor as the  testator by deed shall appoint and the testator afterward make the deed of  appointment the deed of appointment refer to the will be hold as part of the  will the late earl of Devonshire devise three thousand pound to all the  natural child of his son the late duke of Devonshire by mrs Heneage and the  question be whether the natural child by mrs Heneage bear after the will shall  take a share of the three thousand pound Lord chancellor they shall not the  earl of Devonshire can never intend that his son shall go on in this course  that will be to encourage it whereas it be enough to pardon what be pass  beside bastard can take Inst b until they have gain a name by reputation for  which reason though I give to the issue of I S legitimate or illegitimate yet  a bastard shall not take peer William but then it be say the direction of the  will be for the executor to pay this pound as the earl the testator shall by  deed appoint and the earl afterward by deed appoint the pound to all the child  of his son the duke by mrs Heneage so that this now depend upon the deed and  therefore must refer to the child bear at the time of the execution thereof  yet per cur the deed refer to the will be as to this purpose to be take as  part thereof also it be a question whether a natural child in ventre sa mere  of the duke of Devonshire by mrs Heneage shall take Lord Parker incline that  such child can not take for the reason abovementioned videlicet for that a  bastard can not take until he have get a reputation of be such a one child and  that reputation can not be gain before the child be bear a bequest to a future  natural child be void Arnold v Preston Ves Wilkinson v Adam v d so to the  child of which a unmarried woman be ensient when with reference to a  particular man as the father from the impossibility of ascertain whether it be  or be not the child of the man refer to earl v Wilson Ves by to the child of  which she be ensient general for there be then no uncertainty Gordon v Gordon  mere under a bequest to child as a class legitimate child alone can take  unless it appear on the face of the will that illegitimate child be intend  Cartwright v Vawdry Ves Godfrey v Davis Ves Wilkinson v Adam ub sup swain v  Kennerlei v b Kenebel v scrafton east and see Vanderzee v Acklom Ves hercy v  birch Ves or the bequest be to child in existence at the date of the will as  to my present child and the testator have no legitimate child to satisfy the  bequest beachcroft v beachcroft mad Woodhouselee v Dalrymple mere and see  Bayley v Snelham S S a instrument though in form of a deed will be construe as  testamentary when it can only take effect after the maker death and can  operate as a deed Rigden v vallier ves Habergham v Vincent bro c c Ves jun and  see Heali v Copley Toml p c Reg lib b fol his lordship conceive the say deed  poll to be peer William er p part of the will of the say late earl of Devon in  the nature of a codicil thereunto explanatory of the will and that the money  thereby direct to be pay be a provision for such child or repute child of the  say duke by mrs Heneage as be live at the time of the date of the say deed  poll but not for such child as he afterward have by her