ccliv how and CONNEYS case trespass in a action of trespass by how against  conney the case be that one smith be seize of two house and lease one of they  to his brother for life and afterward by his will devise videlicet I give to  my executor all my land and tenement free and copy to hold to they and they to  take the profit of they for ten year and afterward to sell the S aid land and  tenement and afterward die his brother die before the quarter of a year after  and it be find that the executor enter into the house undemised and take the  profit but not into the other and that at the end of the say ten year they  sell the whole Godfrey the house only which be in possession shall pass by the  will to hold unto they do imply matter of possession so as nothing passes but  that whereof they may take the profit the which can be of a bare reversion  also by this devise the executor have not interest in the thing devise but for  ten year whereas the brother of the testator have a estate for life which by  possibility may continue above twenty year and to prove that the meaning of  the devisor to be collect upon the word of the will ought to direct the  construction of the will he cite Chicks case Elizabeth and Elizabeth dyer at  another day it be argue by cook that both the house pass and the word take the  profit do not restrain the general word before videlicet all my land and  tenement but rather expound they cognizant such profit that they may Leonard  take of a reversion cum to fall upon for it may be that the brother shall die  within ten year and be cite the case h a man seize of diverse reversion upon  estate for life devise they by the name of all the earth property which be in  his own hand and by those parols the reversion do Leonard er p pass and yet  the reversion to speak proper be not in his hand and if the brother have die  in the life of the devisor they have clear pass and then his death or life  shall not alter the case and he resemble the case to the case in e the king  grant to the abbot of red that in time of vacation the prior and monk shall  have the disposition of all the possession of the say abbey ad sustentationem  earlier times a monk and if in the time of vacation they shall have the  advowson be the question for it be say that advowson can not be to their  sustentation but yet by the better opinion the grant of the king do extend to  advowson for it shall be intend such sustentation as advowson may give Godfrey  our case be not like to the case of h for there the devisor have not any thing  in possession and therefore if the reversion do not pass the devise shall be  utter void gawdy conceive that the house in possession only pass for the  devise extend to such thing only whereof the profit may be take but here be  not any profit of a reversion Clench and Wray contrary the intent of the  devise be to perform the will of his father and also of his own will and in  case the house in possession be not sufficient to perform both the will all  shall pass and therefore the devise by favourable construction be to be take  large so as the will may be through perform and also the devise be general and  further all his land and tenement which be not refrain by the subsequent word  to take the profit for to have and to hold and to have and to take the profit  be all one cro blow sheep cro trin Elizabeth in the king bench