It  may  be  convenient  as  well  as  proper,  in  our  brief  survey  of
this  subject,  to  examine  the  doctrine  separately  in  respect  to
each  of  these  classes ;  as  the  application  of  it  is  not,  or,  at
least,  may  not  be,  precisely  the  same  throughout  in  all  of  them.'
The  first  class  may  be  illustrated  by  stating  the  case  where  a
portion  or  provision  is  secured  to  a  child  by  marriage  settler
ment,  or  otherwise ;  and  the  parent  or  person  standing  in  loco
parentis,  afterwards  by  will  gives  the  same  child  a  legacy,
without  expressly  directing  it  to  be  in  satisfaction  of  such  por-
tion or  provision.  In  such  a  ease,  if  the  legacy  be  of  a  sum
as  great  as,  or  greater  than,  the  portion  or  provision ;  if  it  be
ej'usdem  generis  ;  if  it  be  equally  certain  with  the  latter,  and
subject  to  no  contingency,  not  applicable  to  both ;  and  if  it  be
shown  that  it  is  not  given  for  a  difierent  purpose ;  then  it  will
be  deemed  a  complete  satisfaction.^  If  the  legacy  be  less  in
•

1  See  Hinchcliffe  v.  Hincheliffe,  3  Ves.  527,  where  Lord  Alvanley  intimated,
that  there  might  be  a  difference  between  cases  of  portions  by  settlement,  and
cases  of  legacies  by  will,  as  to  subsequent  adTancements.
