case fisher vers wigg in b r the surrender of a copyhold be to have the same  favourable construction as a will vide above p it come afterward for the  opinion of the court and by Turton and gold justice they be tenant in common  as well as if the estate have be give by will for a surrender be make to a use  which have as favourable a construction as a will and the intent here seem to  be that the issue shall take the estate in common the profit to be equal  divide and there be not any prescript form of word for make a jointestate or a  estate in common but where the intent of the party appear to be for the one or  for the other such the estate shall be accord and therefore if a man give a  estate to two habend one moiety to the one and the other moiety to the other  this make a estate in common   light   Litt b a and gold cite a case p car  between smith and Johnson where a man make a feoff to two equal to be divide  and to their heir which be the same case with that before we and Scroggs c j  and dolben incline to the opinion that those word make a estate in common and  not a jointestate as well in a deed as in a will but comens er p Jones I be of  a contrary opinion that it be a jointe state and upon search the roll it  appear that no judgement be enter Lord Hardwicke in the case of Rigden v  vallier report in atkins declare that no person have more reverence for the  argument of Lord chief justice holt than he have but in fisher and Wigg the  argument of the other two judge be more agreeable to the reason of the thing  and his more subtle and fine spin p holt c j contra strongly that they be  jointtenants for the essential difference between jointtenants and tenant in  common be that jointtenants claim by one and the same title and tenant in  common by several title and here all the issue claim under the same surrender  true it be that if a feoff be make to two habendum the one moiety to the one  and the other moiety to the other the feoff be tenant in common for although  they claim by one deed yet they be comens in by several title for the livery  must be several and if livery be make to one secundum form execution paper the  other will take nothing second the word equal to be divide make nothing more  than what be express before for between jointtenants the profit ought to be  equal divide but judgement be give accord to the opinion of the other two  judge salk this case be determine upon the principle that a surrender of a  copyhold be to have the same favourable construction as a will though this  principle be oppose in the case of idle v cook I p wms it be acknowledge and  the present case be consider as law in the case of gaskin v gaskin Cowp will  Ves say