And  now  the  cause  coming  on  for  further  directions  upon  the  mas-
ter's report,  the  question  was,  what  children  should  take  under  the  be-
quest of  the  residue?  1st.  Whether  all  such  children  as  the  defendant
Robert  should  have  at  the  time  of  his  death?  2d.  Whether  it  should
be  confined  to  such  as  were  living  at  the  death  of  Margaret,  the  testa-
tor's widow  ?  Or,  3d.  To  such  children  as  were  living  at  the  time  the
eldest  child  attained  the  age  of  twenty-one?

Lord  Chancellor  [Thurlow]  said  where  a  time  of  payment  was
pointed  out,  as  where  a  legacy  is  given  to  all  the  children  of  A.,  when
they  shall  attain  *  twenty-oni,  it  was  too  late  to  say,  that  the  time  so
pointed  out  shall  [not]  regulate  among  what  children  the  distribution
shall  be  made.  It  must  be  among  the  children  in  esse  at  the  time  the
eldest  attains  such  age.  He  said  he  had  often  wondered  how  it  came
to  be  so  decided,  there  being  no  greater  inconvenience  in  the  case  of
a  devise  than  in  that  of  a  marriage  settlement,  where  nobody  doubts
that  the  same.expression  means  all  the  children.
DAVIDSON  v.  DALLAS.
(Court  of  Chancery,  1808.    14  Ves.  576.)

Alexander  Davidson  by  his  will  bequeathed  to  the  children  of  his
brother  Robert  Davidson  £3000  to  be  equally  divided  among  them ;  and
if  cither  of  them  should  die  before  the  age  of  twenty-one  years  their
share  to  go  to  the  survivors.
The  testator  died  in  1792.  The  master's  report  stated,  that  at  the.
