case smith against tindal a devise of all my land tenement and hereditament to  my wife reserve so much ayear to be distribute to the poor of the parish for  ever passes by reason of the perpetual charge a estate in fee to the wife S c  ante S c salk S c holt S c Eq ab Maximilian tailor be seize in fee devise to  the poor of Sutton forty shilling to be distribute by his executor with four  coat four bat upon every twentyfirst of November for ever he make his wife  Margaret executrix and also devise all his land tenement and hereditament and  all his personal estate to Margaret the executrix Margaret marry with one  Archibald Tindal and the husband and wife by indenture c covenant to levy a  fine sur cognizance de law come Ceo to the use of the say Archibald and  Margaret for their life remainder to Archibald and his heir with a warranty  who convey to the plaintiff modern report er p gold justice the first point be  what estate be convey by this will whether a estate of inheritance and the  second point be whether the warranty bind as to the first he hold it a fee  because of the word of perpetual charge a   light b a the personal estate be  not in the eye of the law a sufficient estate to answer a perpetual charge b  freak v lee t Jones b he will not speak as to the force of modern report the  word hereditament but go upon the perpetual charge and so will not speak to  the warranty powys justice this be in a will the question be if the word  hereditament will carry a fee then whether the perpetual charge will not make  it a fee accord to collier case c   reed v Hatton Mod c three whether this  collateral warranty will not bar the rebutter and last whether this warranty  can be give in evidence as to the first he think it may there be a difference  between the word inheritance and hereditament the first denote the interest  the latter describe somewhat that be not a tenement but in this case we be on  a will and so not to go to the learned and strict signification but for the  common parlance and intention d Wedlake v Harding hob S c more S c godb  Wilkinson v Maryland cro car S c W Jones Hopewell v ackland salk Canning v  Canning Moseley Baddele v Leppingwell burr Frogmorton v holiday burr do v  Richard term Rep Goodright v Stocker term Rep more v Mellor term Rep d to the  second point of the charge the will say to be deliver by my executrix and her  assign which must be construe as if to his wife and her assign for it seem to  regard her not only as executrix but as his wife personal who be the devisee  then the warranty secure the plaintiff title Vaugh hob brook title war Henry  pl Powell justice judgement ought to be for the plaintiff chief on the  warranty a devise of all my land tenement and hereditament he can not allow  will carry a fee as powys justice hold the word hereditament do not signify  the estate as inheritance do a devise of a hundred pound ayear pay forty  shilling ayear for ever must be a fee of the perpetual rend seymour case e    roll Abr e a collateral warranty may be take notice of as well by evidence as  by rebut he agree a warranty do not give a right a Fitzherbert Abr law Litt  sect a collateral warranty attach do not extinguish the tail collateral  warranty neither give nor extinguish but bind the right and so the entry be  wrongful because the right be bind if tenant for life levy a fine the fine  give a fee but then tenant for life commit a forfeiture holt chief justice  judgement for the plaintiff the word of the will give a fee here be a general  charge for ever and a sufficient personal estate to purchase c but he be not  satisfy to fix it upon the land he go upon the word hereditament modern report  to make a fee the word land and tenement carry only a estate for life but  hereditament carry the fee b that the word hereditament will not pass a fee  see Hopewell v ackland salk Canning v Canning Moseley palmer v Richard term  Rep more v Mellor term Rep b for if he have not a fee then it be not his  hereditament and when he give his hereditament he give a descendible estate  otherwise it be no hereditament c   light c these word can be satisfy unless  this word carry the inheritance the case of Wedlake v Harding be right report  in Hobart and wrong in more land of inheritance be only a description of what  land shall pass touch the warranty if a seize continue possession twenty year  and the disseizee enter or bring a ejectment the seize shall maintain his  possession by the statute of limitation for he have acquire a law possession  though not a right to the inheritance modern report er p hilary term the five  of queen whether in the queen bench sir John holt Knt chief justice sir John  Powell Knt sir Littleton powys Knt sir Henry gold Knt justice sir Edward  Northey Knt attorneygeneral sir Simon Harcourt Knt solicitor general