case city of London versus Garway all Eq can ab pl S c a by will devise his  land to trustee to sell and to dispose of the money as he by write shall  appoint and for want of appointment to his four nephew a by write appoint his  trustee to pay several sum to several person but not near the value of the  land decree the surplus to the heir and not to the nephew as a interest result  and not dispose of Thomas Garway devise several land to his wife for life she  pay pound per and to a and b for their life and the life of the long liver of  they and if she die before they his trustee to pay the pound per and out of  the land devise to they and therein devise several land therein mention to  three trustee and their heir upon trust to sell and to dispose of the money to  be raise by such sale to such person as he shall by a paper to be sign by he  direct and appoint provide if he leave no such paper of appointment then the  trustee to stand seize in trust for the benefit of his four nephew and if any  of the appointees die before sale and payment of the money such share to  resort to his nephew Thomas Garway by a paper sign by he appoint his trustee  to pay several sum of money to several person therein name but not near to the  value of the land the question be whether the surplus shall pass by the will  to the nephew or result as undisposed of to the heir at law and decree it to  the heir at law the Lord keeper say this be not so strong a case as that of  sir Caesar Cranmer and the duke of Southampton and that to disinherit a heir  at law there must either be express word or a necessary implication accord to  the case Vernon chancery case in the yearbook of h Henry p bro ab title devise  a devise of land to the heir after the death of the wife by a necessary  implication give a estate for life to the wife because the heir be not to take  till after her death but if the devise be to a stranger after the death of the  wife that give no estate for life to the wife by implication but the estate  during her life shall descend and go to the heir at law vide on this subject  falconer v falconer ante Vol and case cite in not there and the principle full  recognize that whatever be not dispose of in equity result to the heir as at  law Stansfield v Habergham Ves and the general principle in berry v usher Ves  Wilson v major ibidem