b Tilley v Simpson in chancery easter the testator after declare that be  intend to dispose of all his worldly estate and make several devise to  different person give and bequeathe all the rest and residue of his money good  chattel and estate whatsoever to his nephew a b the question be whether a  beneficial interest in a real estate not before dispose of will pass to the  nephew by this devise Lord Hardwicke chancellor be of opinion that it will he  say where the court have restrain the word estate to carry personal estate  only have be where it have appear that it be the intention of the testator it  shall be so understand as where it have stand couple with particular  description of part of the personal estate as a bequest of all my mortgage  household good and estate in which the precede word be not a full description  of the personal estate he do not know any of those case where the precede word  be sufficient to pass the whole personal estate if the testator have say all  the rest and residue of my personal estate and estate whatsoever a real estate  will have pass this bequest amount to the same for the word chattel be as full  a description of the personal estate as the word personal therefore when be  have use word comprehend all his personal estate and then make use of the word  estate that word will carry a real estate the word whatsoever be use here  which be the same as if he have say of whatever kind it be and if that have be  the case it will most certain have carry the real estate the case of Tirrel v  page Ch Cas be very material to the present question and I think can be  distinguish there the gift be of all the rest and residue of my money good and  chattel and other estate whatsoever I give to I l the only difference in the  case be that there be the word other which I do not think can distinguish it  if it have be all the rest and residue of my household good and mortgage and  all other estate I do not think that will have carry the real term report er p  Ashhurst I of the same opinion buller I this be a question mere on the  intention of the testator and I think it be apparent on read the whole will  that it be his intention that every thing which he have shall pass by it for  after make particular bequest of part of his personalty he direct that the  residue of his personal estate shall be lie out in the fund then after give  his real estate for life he devise all the rest of his estate with all money  in the fund to the five devisees then as it appear that he have first dispose  of all his personal estate by other word he must have intend to pass his real  estate by the subsequent word for there be no other property on which they can  attach grose I where the devisor intend to confine the operation of the word  estate he add for life but in the latter clause there be no word of restraint  add postea to the defendant