case richard Cheslyn and another appellant henry Cresswell and other  respondent that February Mews dig xv S c Eden follow in Harris v Davis coll  and shaw v MMahon dr W see also Sykes v Sykes l r Eq Ch fall v Biddolph l r c  p a by his will give the residue of his estate to three of his child share and  share alike as tenant in common and not as joint tenant but by a codicil he  revoke his daughter m from be one of his residuary legatee and in lieu thereof  give her a pecuniary legacy this three shall go to the testator next of kin  and do not belong to the two other residuary legatee as such Richard Cheslyn  decease by his will date the saint of July give and bequeathe to his brother  Thomas Cheslyn and his son the appellant pound part of his bank stock in trust  to pay the interest and dividend thereof as the same shall become due from  time to time to his son Peter Courtney Cheslyn for and during the term of his  natural life and from and after his decease to pay and transfer the same to  such person as will be brown entitle thereto by the statute of distribution  for divide intestate estate he also give and bequeathe to his say brother  Thomas Cheslyn and his son the appellant and the survivor of they or their  executor or administrator the further sum of pound part of his bank stock in  trust for his daughter mary Cheslyn whether covert or sole for and during the  term of her natural life and after her decease to pay and transfer the same to  such person as will be entitle thereto by the statute of distribution and he  also give and bequeathe to his say brother Thomas Cheslyn and the appellant  the further sum of pound part of his bank stock in trust for his daughter  Sarah Cresswell wife of Mr Henry Cresswell for her life and from and after her  decease to pay and transfer the same to her two child Charlotte Cresswell and  Richard Cheslyn Cresswell and to the survivor of they at their age of also he  give and bequeathe to his say brother Thomas Cheslyn and the appellant and to  the survivor of they the further sum of pound part of his bank stock in trust  for his granddaughter Charlotte Cresswell for and during the term of her  natural life to apply the interest and dividend for her support maintenance  and education and after her decease to pay and transfer the say pound bank  stock to her brother Richard Cheslyn Cresswell also he give to his say brother  Thomas Cheslyn and the appellant the further sum of pound part of his bank  stock in trust for his grandson Richard Cheslyn Cresswell to pay and apply the  interest and dividend of the same for his maintenance and education until he  shall arrive at the age of year and then to transfer the say pound bank stock  to he and in case he shall die before the age of then he give and bequeathe  the same to his sister Charlotte Cresswell he also give and bequeathe to his  son the appellant Richard pound part of his bank stock and to his son the  appellant Edward pound part of his bank stock he also give and bequeathe to  his son the appellant Edward all his household good and household furniture  plate linen clock and watch that shall be find at the time of his death in his  dwellinghouse at doctor Commons he also give and bequeathe to his son the  appellant Richard and his say daughter mary Cheslyn all his household good and  household furniture plate and linen that shall be find in his house at hackney  at the time of his decease equal to be divide between they share and share  alike and after give several annuity and other legacy to his brother and child  and other person therein name he give devise and bequeathe all the rest and  residue of his estate real and personal of what nature kind or quality soever  which he shall be any way entitle to at the time of his decease unto his son  the appellant and his say daughter mary Cheslyn equal share and share alike as  tenant in common and not as joint tenant and he appoint his brother Thomas  Cheslyn and his say son the appellant joint executor of his say will brown the  testator afterward make a codicil to his will date the that of December brown  er p whereby after recite that he have make his last will and testament and  thereby appoint his daughter mary Cheslyn one of his residuary legatee he  revoke her from be one of his residuary legatee and do thereby give to her in  lieu thereof the interest of pound new south sea annuity carry per cent to be  pay to her half yearly by his executor during her life and at her decease the  principal sum to be equal divide among all her brother and sister and in all  other thing he confirm his will the testator daughter mary die on the that of  April intestate and on the that of the same month the testator die leave his  old son the respondent Peter Courtney Cheslyn and his say two son the  appellant and his say daughter Sarah the wife of Henry Cresswell his only  survive child and his only next of kin the respondent Henry Cresswell and  Sarah his wife and the say Charlotte Cresswell and Richard Cheslyn Cresswell  in Trinity term exhibit their bill in the court of chancery against the say  Thomas Cheslyn and the appellant as the executor of the testator and against  the respondent Peter Courtney Cheslyn and also against Nicholas Cheslyn and  ruth his wife annuitant in the will name thereby claim to be entitle equal  with the appellant and the respondent Peter Courtney Cheslyn to a distributive  part or share of the pound bank stock and pound new south sea annuity devise  to the say mary Cheslyn for her life together with the dividend thereof from  the testator decease and also insist that the testator have by his codicil  revoke the bequest of one three of the residuum of his estate to the say mary  Cheslyn he ought to be consider as have die intestate with respect thereto and  that the same ought to be distribute among the respondent Sarah and Peter  Courtney Cheslyn and the appellant as his next of kin and therefore the bill  pray that the respondent Henry Cresswell and Sarah his wife may be pay one  full four part of the three part or share of the testator personal estate as  the proportionable part or share of the say mary Cheslyn devise to her for  life with such limitation over as aforesaid and all interest dividend or  profit which have accrue or become due thereon since the testator decease the  appellant and the several other defendant put in their answer to this bill and  the appellant by their answer insist that neither the respondent or either of  they nor the say Peter Courtney Cheslyn be or be entitle to any part of the  residuum of the testator estate but that the appellant under the will and  codicil be entitle to the whole of such residuum as his residuary legatee  issue be join and diverse witness examine the cause come on to be hear before  the Lord chancellor Northington on the that of march when his lordship be  please to order and decree that the clear residue of the testator personal  brown estate not specifical bequeathe shall be divide into three equal part  and one three part thereof to be pay to or retain by the appellant Richard  Cheslyn one other three part to be pay to or retain by the appellant Edward  Cheslyn and as to the other three part his lordship declare that the pound  bank stock and pound new south sea annuity which be give by the will and  codicil to the testator daughter mary who die in the testator lifetime and  after her death be limit over to the testator next of kin fall into and ought  to be consider as part of such lastmentioned three and that such three be  divisible in four and it be order that one such four shall be pay or transfer  to the respondent Henry Cresswell and Sarah his wife in right of his wife and  that one other four part thereof shall be pay or transfer to the appellant  Richard Cheslyn one other four part thereof to the appellant Edward Cheslyn  and his lordship declare that the remain four part thereof belong to the  respondent Peter Courtney Cheslyn from so much of this decree as declare t  jewel g perrott that one three of the clear residue of the testator personal  estate not specifical bequeathe be divisible in four the present appeal be  bring and on behalf of the appellant it be argue that the testator have by his  will appoint three residuary legatee namely the appellant and his daughter  mary and afterward by his codicil revoke her from be one of such residuary  legatee it be the same as if she have never be name in the devise of the  residue and the codicil have in express term confirm the will in all other  respect it be the same as if the testator have express say that his two son  shall be the residuary legatee of his whole estate whereas by the construction  of the court of chancery they be make residuary legatee of only two part in  three that brown er p the interest or dividend of the pound three per cent  annuity be give by the testator to his daughter mary in lieu of her share of  the residue which clear show she be to have no part of it and yet by the  construction put upon the will and codicil if shehad outlive her father she  will have have the interest of the pound and a part of that very three of the  residue in lieu of which it be give and which the codicil have take from her  that it appear by the will that the testator mean to dispose of his whole  estate and the codicil show no alteration of that intention on the contrary  though it make a alteration in the object yet it confirm his intention to  dispose of the whole and not to die intestate as to any part of his estate it  be therefore hope that so much of the decree as tend to deprive the appellant  of the whole clear residue of the testator personal estate will be reverse and  that the respondent bill so far as it claim any part or share thereof will be  dismiss brown on the other side it be contend c York r Clayton that if the  devise in question be consider mere on the will it be a devise of the residue  of personal estate to three person as tenant in common in which case if one of  the legatee die in the lifetime of the testator his share be lapse or if the  will be revoke as to such share it become undisposed of so as to be  distributable among the next of kin accord to the statute it be entire  different from the case of residuary legatee take as joint tenant in which  case the lapse share of a legatee die before the testator or such share revoke  by a codicil accrue to the other joint tenant but if this devise be consider  on the codicil which revoke the share give by the will to mary it be manifest  that the word of the codicil only confirm the will in all other thing without  make any new devise of the revoke share or give to the appellant any great  interest than that three which be give to each of they respective by the will  if however the appellant shall claim the revoke share of the residue not only  as residuary legatee but in the capacity of executor the answer be that the  testator have give particular legacy to each and particular share in the  residue by express devise he must not be understand to have intend more  without express word or clear indication of further bounty and it be manifest  that have devise his whole estate by his will he mean that his executor shall  have the office and trust of executor but that they shall take nothing  beneficial in that capacity it be therefore hope that the decree will be  affirm and the appeal dismiss with cost accord after hear counsel on this  appeal it be order and adjudge that the same shall be dismiss and the decree  therein complain of affirm jour vol p