288 HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY.

(who was appointed trustee for that purpose,) and ratified by
tb» eourt; and certain questions having arisen relative to the
legacies bequeathed by the testator, the nature of which will
appear from the Chancellor's opinion, the case was submitted
to. him upon written arguments. And at this term, he delivered
his opinion as follows:]

THE CHANCELLOR:

Wood, the executor, in his answer to the bill filed by Thomas,
suggests a doubt, whether the latter is entitled, as .surviving
husband, to the two thousand dollars, which his deceased wife,
Isabella Thomas, was to have received out of the proceeds of
the real estate which was to have been sold by the executor, she
having died before the sale was made; and supposed that the
same may now belong to her brother and sister, she (the wife)
having died without issue. And this is the first question to be
considered. The brother and sister in their answers do not set
up any claim to this money, but my opinion in regard to it is
not placed upon this ground.

The testator has directed that his land should be sold by his
executor, and out of the proceeds thereof, Isabella, the wife of
Thomas, should be paid the sum of two thousand dollars. This
provision in the will converted the land, in the view of a court
of equity, into money, and the surviving husband has the same
title to demand the legacy bequeathed his wife as if it had been
payable out of the personal estate of the testator.

The Court of Appeals in the case of Hurtt vs. Fisher, 1 Har.
& Gill, 88, recognise in the most explicit terms the rule, that
lands devised to be sold are turned into money, and considered
in equity as personal estate. In that case to be sure, in which
the surviving husband (as here) was seeking to recover a legacy
which his wife was entitled to, out of the proceeds of the real
estate directed to be sold—the wife survived until after the sale
was made; which the court said removed all doubt of his right
to recover; but it appears to me very obvious from the manner
in which the rule of law is asserted, that the result would have
been the same if the wife had died prior to the sale. In the