case unett against Wilkes e contra heir at law put to election with respect to  copyhold not surrender lib Reg b fol S c Eden in chancery d and d may dr  Wilkes by will d February after give several legacy to his servant devise to  the reverend William Astley and Rupert dovey and their heir all his real and  personal estate of whatsoever kind and denomination in trust to receive the  rend profit and interest on the same and pay the produce from time to time to  his wife ambler mrs Frances Wilkes or else that they permit and suffer her to  receive and give discharge for the same during her life and in case she shall  think proper to continue and dwell at Willenhall at the house he then inhabit  that then they permit and suffer her for the term aforesaid to make use of all  his household good plate book implement of husbandry and stock of all kind as  cow horse big hay corn clover and such like thing but in case she shall not  think proper to continue there that then they shall deliver to his say wife  his chaise and the horse belong to it and such horse or horse as she shall  choose and what plate bed or linen she shall have occasion for in furnish some  other house in a manner agreeable to her and that they shall permit and suffer  her to enjoy and use all such thing as long as she live and that all the rest  of his good shall to by they convert into money and place out at interest  which interest they shall receive and pay her from time to time as it become  due or they shall permit her to receive the same as long as she shall live and  after give several pecuniary legacy to be pay after her death he direct the  trustee to convey transfer give or deliver to the plaintiff the reverend Mr  Thomas unett who be his heir at law all his real estate and all the rest and  residue of his personal estate and settle it on he and his heir for ever the  testator at the time of make his will and at his death be seize of a freehold  estate of inheritance of about pound ayear and of a copyhold estate of about  pound ayear but do not surrender the copyhold estate to the use of his will  his mansionhouse at Willenhall be copyhold after his death the plaintiff unett  claim the copyhold as heir at law for want of a surrender and also claim the  freehold and personal estate in remainder under the devise in the will and  bring his bill for a account of his personal estate against the widow who have  obtain administration to her husband and to have the trust of the will perform  the cross bill be bring by the widow to compel unett to make his election  either to take under the will or as heir ambler at law and in case he shall  elect to take as heir to have a compensation out of Unetts interest in the  estate devise to he equal to the interest in the copyhold which the testator  intend to give her by his will after hear the plaintiff counsel Lord Henley  chancellor be clear of opinion that this case be within the determination of  election and that the plaintiff unett must make his election that the testator  intention be manifest to devise his copyhold estate to his wife for her life  by the general word all his real estate which do not depend upon the  construction to be put upon those general word independent but the subsequent  word in case she shall continue to live at Willenhall c put it out of doubt  for his house at Willenhall be copyhold and that part of the will suppose he  have before give her the house for her life which can only be by the general  word and if they will pass his mansionhouse as copyhold they will all his  other copyhold ambler er p estate that the plaintiff by claim the copyhold  will disappoint the testator intention and therefore must make his election  his lordship also hold that he have determine his election to take under the  will by a agreement he have enter into with the widow about buy her interest  in the personal estate but this last question be not argue or speak to by the  plaintiff counsel but take up by the court on my mention it as counsel for the  defendant Herle v Greenbank atk Ves Boughton v Boughton Ves atk as to the  first question Tilly v Tilly July see frank v standish bro c c in note S c Ves  rumbold v rumbold Ves Pettiward v Prescott Ves Judd v Pratt Ves see whistler v  Webster Ves Jun on the doctrine of election general see Mr Swanstons elaborate  note on the subject Swanst and see butcher v Kemp mad with respect to the  question whether a person elect to take against a will be bind to forfeit all  the benefit he take under it or only to make compensation Lord Eldon in the  late case of Tibbets v Tibbets Jacob say he have look through all the case and  that they contain many dictam not easy reconcileable that he be of opinion  that there may be case where not only compensation be to be make but the whole  be to be give up that he think the old principle till shake by some late  determination be compensation but that that have be since shake see the  question discuss Swanst note Sudg power p d Edward