An Essay on the Learning of Contingent Remainders and Executory Devises

"An Essay On The Learning Of Contingent Remainders And Executory Devises" by Charles Fearne examines the long?standing questions of how words such as beirs, beirs of the body, and related phrases operate in wills and trusts, with particular reference to Shelley’s Case. It surveys the distinction between executed trusts (where the conveyance is complete) and executory trusts (to be carried out later), and the interaction of legal estates with equitable uses. The work traces a lineage of authorities and cases, from Bagshaw V Spencer to Perrin V Blake, contrasting whether such terms function as limitations that descend to heirs or create a purchase by heirs, and arguing that Perrin V Blake threatens certainty. Fearne argues for a testator?intent driven approach: there is no universal rule that applies blindly; the outcome depends on the relation of the limitation to the preceding estate, the wording, and the presence of trusts. Practical implications stress predictable rules to reduce litigation, while narrow exceptions allow departure where explicit qualifiers indicate a distinct testator intent. An extensive appendix presents opinions on Perrin V Blake and the Jamaica Williams will, illustrating ongoing doctrinal debates.