In Doe, Lessee of Poor v. Considine (1867) 73 U.s. 458, there was a difference of opinion on the question whether, from the mere collocation of the fourth and fifth clauses of a statute, it was to be inferred that land devised to a grandchild who died childless and intestate, should go to the testator's brothers and sisters instead of to his children.
It was said:
"It is well settled that where no intention to the contrary appears the language used in creating the estate will be limited and restrained to the purposes of its creation. And when they are satisfied the estate of the trustee ceases to exist and his title becomes extinct. The extent and duration of the estate are measured by the objects of its creation."
"A devises to B for life, remainder to his children, but, if he dies without leaving children, remainder over, both the remainders are contingent; but, if B afterwards marries and has a child, the remainder becomes vested in that child, subject to open and let in unborn children, and the remainders over are gone forever. The remainder becomes a vested remainder in fee in the child as soon as the child is born, and does not wait for the parent's death, and, if the child dies in the lifetime of the parents, the vested estate in remainder descends to his heirs."