case ibbetson versus Beckwith see bow v Lewis App Cas a testator set out say  vide den lessee of gaskin v gaskin Cowp where though the testator intent  appear to be to give the whole interest in the estate devise by he and have  give a disinherit legacy to his heir at law the court say they can not connect  the prefatory with the devise clause so right v Sidebotham dougl where no  stress be lie upon the introductory clause of the will in his will to give and  dispose of his worldly estate be a strong proof that he intend to dispose of  the inheritance of his land when there be sufficient word in the follow part  of the will for that purpose the word estate at such a place or in such a  place may carry a fee the whole complexion of a will ought to be consider  Thomas Beckwith make his will in the word follow videlicet as touch my worldly  estate wherewith it have please God to bless I I give devise and dispose of  the same in the manner follow imprimis I give my estate which I late purchase  of John Adamson to pay and discharge all my debt item I give and bequeathe  unto my love sister mary Beckwith all my estate at Helmehouse in hither dale  Leasing at crew and all my estate at Cubeck pay and discharge all legacy case  tempt Talbot er p before charge by my father will item I give unto my love  mother all my estate at Northwith close north close and my farm hold at roomer  with all my good and chattel as they now stand for her natural life and to my  nephew Thomas Dodson after her death if he will but change his name to  Beckwith if he do not I he give only pound to be pay he for his life out of  Northwith close north close and the farm hold at roomer which I give her upon  my nephew refuse to change his name to her and her heir for ever Mr solicitor  general and Mr fazakerly argue that this be a feesimple in Thomas Dodson the  testator intent be to dispose of his whole estate and there such construction  shall prevail as shall make the whole to pass that as this be his intent so  have he use word sufficient to carry the case tempt Talbot whole three thing  only be necessary in will to make the devise good videlicet the person  describe who be to take the thing which be to be take and the interest which  the party be to have in it all which concur here the word be sufficient to  describe the person the thing and the interest which the party be to have in  that thing in will the word estate right v Sidebotham dougl with also the  signification of the word estate in   Litt sec carry the whole interest the  party have as well hold in Wilson and Robinson be case lev where the opinion  of the whole court be that the word tenantright estate be sufficient to pass  the fee although as that case be report Mod it seem to be the opinion but of  two judge so in Norton and lad case Lutw the word whole remainder be hold to  carry a fee although one will think they will carry but a estate for life but  because the intent be manifest that a fee shall pass by these word it be hold  so accord that the objection of a precedent estate be give videlicet to the  mother by the word estate be idle for that as it be restrain to be but for  life and have the word inheritance be use instead of the word estate with such  a restriction it will have pass but a estate for life that the other part of  the will make his intent to pass a feesimple quite plain as the provision that  he shall take the testator name and the limitation over to another and her  heir for ever upon his refusal to take the name be a plain proof that he  intend he a feesimple not to be divest out of he but upon his refuse to take  the testator name and may well be compare to beachcroft and Beachcrofts case a  begin his will with dispose of all his worldly estate and then will that all  his debt be first pay and give his wife a moiety of what be leave after his  debt pay the question be whether a moiety of the real estate after debt pay  pass to the wife or only half of the personal estate per cur my worldly estate  comprise as well real as personal his worldly estate comprise all he have in  the world without doubt those word subject his real estate to the payment of  his debt and consequent a devise of a moiety of what be leave after debt pay  must comprise all that be liable to the debt and therefore decree a moiety of  the surplus of the real and personal estate to the wife vern where the word  worldly estate be hold to pass a fee Barry versus Edgeworth Abr Eq can and  hold and Barker June devise of all his estate in mount street adjudge to pass  a estate in fee Mr attorneygeneral and Mr Verney insist on the other side that  Thomas Dodson take but a estate for life it be a know rule that a heir be  never to be disinherit but by express word or by necessary implication and  there can be no case tempt Talbot necessary implication where the word be  capable of be take in two sense as they be in the present case where it be  natural to take the word in that sense which be use by people in common  parlance rather than in the strict legal sense this will be draw by the  testator himself who appear not to have be very know in the legal  signification of the word now the word estate do in common speech imply only  the personal possession as when it be say that a man have a estate by that be  mean land house c the clause of his change his name be rather a proof that he  intend he but a estate for life for it be usual in all such clause to provide  that not only the first taker but likewise every heir shall take the testator  name and that upon any of their default the estate shall go over but here be  no provision for the heir of Thomas take the testator name which look as if he  intend Thomas estate to determine with his life a gift of one inheritance for  life will give to the devisee but a estate for life because the word  inheritance be restrain to the term of a life can mean only a description and  not the continuance of the thing give and where after such limitation the  remainder be give over to another the remainderman take a fee because the word  inheritance where not restrain by other can mean only a fee which the word  estate do not and therefore very different from the present case his intent  appear far from difference of his expression in this clause and in that  whereby upon failure of take his name he limit it by express word to her and  her heir which diversity of expression prove a difference of intention in he  indeed in some case the devisee may have a feesimple not from the word but  from the purpose for which he take which require a continuance of the estate  as in this very will the clause whereby he devise several land to his sister  pay his legacy give her a fee case tempt Talbot er p but in the devise to  Thomas there be no particular purpose to make that construction requisite nor  be there any other clause in all the will which have case tempt Talbot a  devise over but this one Wilson versus Robinson be case lev be secure  Intelligible as the case be there state the misfortune of most of the modern  book be that they run to the argument and resolution before they have well  state the case leave we often to judge of the case by the argument beside the  word tenant right which be use in that case be of a particular signification  Burdet versus Burdet in be within the rule of pass a fee because of the devise  for payment of debt in Norton and lad case Lutw the word whole remainder which  be there use oust any notion of a estate for life only and in beachcroft and  Beachcrofts case vern there be a precedent charge upon the inheritance for  payment of his debt the devise of the moiety of what be leave must necessary  carry the inheritance the distinction take in Barry and Edgworths case Abr Eq  can between a devise of all his estate in such a place and at such a place  which fat say the book will carry but a estate for life be a express authority  for the defendant that but a estate for life passes by this will the word here  be the same as if he have put in the word at Sei per Lord chancellor I  remember that case very well and no such distinction be make in it as be  pretend by the book another strong authority for the defendant be Wilkinson  and Merrylands case cro car and Ro Abr hold but a estate for life Lord  chancellor the question turn entire upon the construction of the word of the  will what interest be intend to Thomas Dodson whether a estate for life or in  fee in order to come at the testator intent the whole complexion of the will  have be very proper take into consideration on both side and it have be say  that the first word worldly estate be use only to show that what he be then do  be mind to cause to testify but not intend by he to reach to the whole of his  estate as to that I be of opinion that these word prove he to have have his  whole estate in his view at that time indeed he may have make but a partial  disposition case tempt Talbot but if the will be general and that take his  word in one sense will make the will to be a complete disposition of the whole  whereas the take they in another will create a chasm they shall be take in  that sense which be most likely to be agreeable to his intent of dispose of  his whole estate if therefore Thomas take a estate in fee the will will be  perfect and take in the whole whereas if he take but a estate for life one  moiety will after his death descend upon he as heir at law and the other  moiety to the other coheir the clause whereby the estate be devise over to his  mother and her heir in case Thomas shall refuse to take his name have be argue  as a proof of his intend he but a estate for life but that depend upon the  construction of the word estate which will be clear from the sense he have  take it in through all the other part of this will whensoever he have use it  he have mean thereby to pass the inheritance it have be say indeed that in  those clause the fee do not pass from the force of the word but from the  nature of the purpose videlicet that of pay debt c but still the word be a  argument that he intend to pass the inheritance though not the whole argument  it have be say likewise that the word pay do not of itself import a fee but  still in what sense have he use the word my estate to pass the inheritance as  for example the word be leave out in the clause now in question which be a  very material and a very operative word but yet none will pretend that this  clause shall be expunge by reason of the omission of that single word then the  next word be all my estate Northwith close north close c without either in or  and which be likewise very imperfect so that it must return to the word all my  estate to my mother for life and to my nephew Thomas Dodson after her death  now although the word estate may in common speech not mean a inheritance yet  it be clear he have mean it so here and then take it in that proper legal  sense it will be a complete disposition case tempt Talbot of the whole whereas  take it to carry but a estate for life there will be a chasm a incomplete  disposition since half must descend to this very Thomas and the other half to  the other coheir as have be before observe in the countess of Bridgwater and  duke of bolton case salk Abr Eq can the devise of all his real estate in or at  I do not right remember which such a place be hold to pass a fee and I do not  think there be any difference between the word at or in they in my opinion  mean the same thing the case of Wilson versus Robinson lev and of Burdet  versus Burdet in case tempt Talbot er p be very strong authority for the  plaintiff in the first of which the fee be hold to pass by the word  tenantright estate and the latter be a devise of his particular estate at such  and such a place which be hold likewise to pass the inheritance nor do the  provision in the end of that case for payment of his debt influence the  construction but it be decree upon the force of the first word the same  resolution be in that of Barry and Edgeworth Abr Eq can p will S c all which  be so many express authority that the word estate carry a fee nor have any  case be cite to warrant the alter the know legal signification of it a  objection indeed have be make from the nature of the limitation and it have be  say that although the word estate may in other case carry a fee yet it can not  do so here because apply in the first instance to a estate for life only and  therefore be intend but as a description of the thing intend to pass but that  objection bath no weight in it for although he give it particular to his  mother in the first place yet the devise to his nephew be in general word and  I can see that the limitation for life in the first instance where the second  limitation be general can make any difference another objection have be make  that have he intend he a estate of inheritance he will have give it he in the  same word as he have limit it over upon his default of his take his name but  this word be so incorrect that I think no great stress can be lie case tempt  Talbot upon it what weigh with I be the intent plain appear to pass the  inheritance as be manifest from the other clause of the will indeed as to the  other land wherein the testator have not a fee the word my estate pass only  such a interest as the testator have if a fee then a fee if but a chattel then  that only the operation of the word be accord to the estate the testator have  in what he devise and so decree note the master of the roll hold that Thomas  the nephew take only a estate for life but Lord Talbot vary the decree at the  roll and be of opinion Thomas have a fee Reg lib a fol a estate in fee to  Thomas the nephew vide Bridgewater v duke of Bolton salk murry v wise vern  Prec in Chanc S c Chester v painter p will Barry v Edgeworth p will tanner v  Morse post Goodwin v Goodwin Ves Tufnell v page atk Ridout v pain atk roe v  Blackett Cowp hogan v Jackson Cowp Loveacres v blight Cowp gaskin v gaskin  Cowp Frogmorton v wright black Rep style v Walford black Rep Goodright v Allen  black Rep right and Sidebotham dougl Maccree v tall Ambl holdfast v Martin  term Rep Fletcher v Smiton term Rep case tempt Talbot er p case tempt Talbot  de term S HILLARII geo two in curian porter