
    Thomas C. Reston v. The executors of Thomas Clayton, dec’d.
    ^Fl'om Ncw-Hanovcr.
    A. bequeathed certain personal estates to trustees, “ until some one of bis grand-children, the lawful children of his daughter, B. should arrive to the age of twenty-one years, at which time the property was to be divided among his said grand-cliildven, equally, share and share alike.” Held, that all the grand-children living at the time the first of them attained to the age of twenty-one years, are entitled, share and share alike.
    Thomas Clayton, by his last will, gave ids estates, both Veal and personal, to certain persons in trust, to sell his lauds and his perishable property, and hire out Ills slaves, 46 until some one of his grand-children, the lawful children of Isabella Reston, of Scotland, should arrive to the age of twenty-one years, at which time his slaves were to be divided among- his said grand-children, equally, share and share alike; and all the rest and residue of his estate, to be equally divided among his said.grand-children, and given to them when they should arrive to full age respectively; and that his executors should allow for the annual profits of his estates, whatever sutnorsumsof money they might think proper, for the education and maintenance of his said grand-children, until they respectively should arrive to full age.” At the time of the making of the will in July, 1793, and of the death of the testator, in October following-, Isabella Reston, named in the will, had three children, Thomas C. who arrived (to full age in October, 1810, Mary and William. After the death of the testator, and before Thomas C. Reston arrived to full age, Isabella Reston had seven other children, who were alive at the commencement of this suit i and the question submitted to this Court was, whether the estates of the testator were to be divided among- the three children living, at the death of the testator, or among the ten children, living at the time Thomas C. Reston arrived to full age.
   Haul Judge,

delivered the opinion of the Court:— It is not necessary to enquire whether the legacies vested before the time pointed out for their payment. If they did not vest before that time, it is clear that all the grand-children are entitled ; if they did vest before that time, we aro authorised by the case of the Attorney General v. Crispin, (1 Brown, Ch. Rep. 386,) to say, that tiie consequence is the same. All the grand-children of Isabella Reston, living when her Thomas C. arrived to full age, are equally entitled. — (Ves. jun. 136. 2 Id. 687. 3 Id. 119, 150. Ambler, 334.)  