
    IN EQUITY.
    Taylor, executor, v. Lucas and others.
    From Chatham.
    As to personal property, a residuary clause not only carries all not disposed of, but every thing that in the event turns out not to be disposed of.
    But one question wits presented in this case, viz, whether a legacy left to a legatee, which lapsed by his death in the lifetime of the testator, should be divided among his next of kin, or should belong to the -widow, tvho was residuary legatee.
   Fer Curiam,

after stating the question. — No rule is better established as to personal estate, though it is otherwise as to real, than that a residuary clause carries not only every thing Dot disposed of, but eyery thing that in, the event tarns out not to be disposed of, as by lapse and the other means specified in the cases. (1 Ves. Jun. 109, 110. Ambler 138. 8 Ves. Jun. 25. 4 Ibid 732. 15 Ibid 509.) The law raises a presumption in favour of the residuary legatee against every one except the particular legatee. The testator is supposed to deprive the residuary legatee only for the sake of the particular; and the bounty to him being prevented by death, .the residuary legatee is preferred to the next of kin,  