1. The intent of the testator, as gathered from the provisions of his will, should be given effect to the extent that such intent does not conflict with the rule against perpetuities.
2. Where a devise violates the rule against perpetuities, but is made as supporting life estates, or estates for years, which are concurrent or consecutive, the life estates or estates for years are not to be vitiated by the invalidity of the subsequent devise, unless it clearly appears that the prior created estates are elements or parts of the plan of ultimate devise.
3. Testator set up a succession of life estates, to his daughters, then to his sons, and finally to his grandchildren. Held, the devise was a unified scheme, intended to operate forever, and is therefore invalid as violative of the rule against perpetuities; and hence the testator died intestate as to his real property, which descends to his heirs-at-law as a consequence.
4. The devise must also fail for vagueness and uncertainty.
PER CURIAM.
The decree appealed from will be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion filed in the court below by Vice-Chancellor Fielder.
For affirmance — THE CHIEF-JUSTICE, TRENCHARD, PARKER, CAMPBELL, LLOYD, CASE, BODINE, DONGES, VAN BUSKIRK, KAYS, HETFIELD, DEAR, WELLS, KERNEY, JJ. 14.
For reversal — None.