case ansley against chapman Michaelmas term car roll a devise to a upon  condition not to sell but to a particular person and to pay thereout a  proportional part towards the payment of a annuity passes a estate for life  only for the law will not construe it a fee without some word of perpetuity  Jones   cro Elizabeth cro James   light b   Cowp term Rep term Rep term Rep  ejectment of land in Tottenham upon a special verdict the case be William lock  be seize in fee of the tenement in question and of diverse other mention in  the verdict and have diverse son videlicet Thomas Matthew John Henry and  Michael and be bind in a obligation that forty pound shall be pay annual to  his wife during her life make his will and thereby devise all his land by  several clause to several his son and among other he devise the land in  question to Michael and Henry his son upon this condition that if they sell it  to any but to Matthew lock his son then he to enter as of his gift and add  this clause item all the house and land which I have give between my son be to  this purpose that they all shall bear part croak car and part like go out of  all my house and land towards the payment of my wife forty pound per annum  during her life which I be bind to pay and which of my son refuse to bear  their part I will that be or they enjoy no part of my bequest give unto they  but my gift give to they shall go to the rest of my wellwilling son the  question be whether upon all this matter Michael and Henry have a estate in  fee by this will or for life only for if it be a estate for life only the  plaintiff who claim under the heir of Michael lock have no title and it be  argue at the bar for the plaintiff that it be a fee by this devise to Michael  lock first because the devise be to the old son who shall have take a fee by  descent if not by the devise and he intend every son shall have a fee as well  as his old croak car er p second by the clause that they shall not sell unless  to Matthew be intend that they have a estate of inheritance which they may  sell as Edward brook devise three because it be devise pay such a sum  videlicet every one his part of the forty pound per annum to the wife which  imply that the devisor intend they shall have a inheritance and it be say this  very case be so resolve in the court of ware by the advice of the two chief  justice and the chief baron that the intention of the testator will make it a  inheritance whereupon by Noy and Germin judgement be pray for the plaintiff  and it be argue by finch sergeant and Whitfield for the defendant that  forasmuch as there be not one word in the will which speak of any express  intent that he shall have a fee the law will not adjudge it to be so without a  intent apparent to be collect out of the word in the will and they say that  upon argument in the exchequer by all the baron after the say resolution in  the court of ware Tanfield chief baron who be one of those that give the say  resolution in the court of ware be of opinion that it be not a fee but for  life and so all the other baron agree with he and they produce the record  thereof under the seal of that court and afterward all the court here resolve  without open argument that it be but a estate for life only that pass by this  devise for as to the first reason before allege on the other side it be answer  that the old son have not any fee by the devise but by descent and operation  of law to the second they may be restrain from sell a estate for life and it  do not appear thereby be intend to give a fee and to the three reason allege  it be not devise pay such a sum which be a sum in gross as it be cite in  willock v Hammond but that every one shall pay out of his part towards the  payment of the forty pound per annum to his wife which be quasi a annual rend  out of croak car the profit of the land and no sum in gross and therefore no  fee give and as to that objection in the will that where be devise land to his  several son that every one shall have fee thereby as well as in a chattel it  be no law without his express intent may be collect out of the word otherwise  the law will not construe it to be fee in prejudice of the heir without the  word heir or in continuous or which tantamount whereupon it be adjudge for the  defendant