case Samuel PRATT Appellant mary Jackson Widow Respondent saint February Mews  dig twelve by marriage article a make a provision for his wife by way of  jointure and in bar of dower c proviso that nothing therein contain shall bar  or hinder her from enjoy any legacy or bequest which the husband may give to  her nor shall extend to all or any the household good or utensil of household  stuff ring plate jewel or linen of the husband at the time of his death a live  in London but have a large house furnish at Gosport which he let out to  government as a hospital on his death intestate the widow claim to be entitle  under the article to the furniture in both house but hold that she be only  entitle to the furniture of the house in London wms viner vol p can vol p can  Eq can ab can by article date the that of December previous to and in  consideration of the marriage of Nathaniel Jackson decease with the respondent  then mary burrow widow the say Nathaniel Jackson for provide a competent  provision and jointure for the respondent in full recompense and bar of dower  three or other demand whatsoever which she may have out of his real or  personal estate by the common or statute law or custom or otherwise howsoever  except as therein be except or provide covenant and agree with trustee that he  will within six month after the marriage settle and assure a estate of  inheritance in feesimple within forty mile of London of pound per and free  from all encumbrance to the use of himself for life remainder to the  respondent for her life for her jointure with diverse remainder over for the  issue of that marriage and afterward the reversion to the say Nathaniel  Jackson and his heir and recite that the respondent have three daughter by her  late husband Jonathan burrow decease who have make her executrix of his will  videlicet mary Rebecca and Hannah and that she be possess of or entitle to  some personal estate of her own which it be thereby agree the say Nathaniel  Jackson shall have no power over but that the same shall remain to the sole  and separate use brown of her and her child the say Nathaniel Jackson thereby  covenant with the trustee not to intermeddle therewith and disclaim all right  thereto and he also covenant with the trustee in case the marriage take effect  to pay the say three child pound apiece at their respective age of twentyone  or marriage and if brown er p any of they shall die such child portion shall  go to the survivor or survivor and likewise to educate and keep they in the  mean time during the joint life of himself and the respondent and after the  decease of either of they to pay interest for the money after the rate of  pound per cent per and and the respondent do thereby release and disclaim all  dower three claim and demand in or out of the real or personal estate of the  say Nathaniel Jackson by the commonlaw or custom of London or any other custom  or usage whatsoever except as aforesaid and then follow this exception provide  always neverthelerss and it be the true intent and meaning of these present  and of all the party hereunto that these present or any thing herein contain  shall not extend or be construe to extend to bar release or hinder the say  mary from have claim and enjoy any legacy or bequest the say Nathaniel Jackson  shall or may by his last will and testament in write duly publish in the  presence of and attest by three or more credible witness give devise or  bequeathe unto or for the use or benefit of the say mary nor to all or any the  household good or utensil of household stuff ring plate jewel or linen of he  the say Nathaniel Jackson at the time of his death all which he do hereby  agree shall be have receive and enjoy by the say mary her executor  administrator or assign the marriage take effect on the that of February  follow and the say Nathaniel Jackson die on the d of may next after the  article without issue and intestate whereupon the appellant obtain letter of  administration after his death the manor of rookwood hall in Essex of pound  per and be settle towards the jointure of pound per and and the residue be to  be settle when a convenient purchase can be provide and in the mean time the  residue to make up the pound per and be account for in money the several  portion also of pound apiece for the respondent three daughter be all pay and  the respondent in pursuance of the article receive all the household good and  utensil of household stuff in his dwellinghouse ring plate jewel and linen by  which the appellant be advice that the article be in every particular except  as to make up the jointure full perform but it happen that Mr Jackson be  before his marriage and at his death possess of a hospital call fortune  hospital near Gosport in the county of Southampton which he employ in  entertain sick and wound seaman of the royal navy by contract with the  commissioner and which for that purpose be furnish with near seven hundred bed  and other furniture suitable only for such a service and not for private use  and these the brown respondent lie claim to as household good or utensil of  household stuff within the intent of the article whereupon two several suit be  institute in the court of chancery by the appellant and respondent against  each other for a distribution of the intestate personal estate and in order to  settle and adjust this claim and these cause be hear on the d of July before  the Lord chancellor Cowper it be inter alian order that the master shall  distinguish what be the proper good of the intestate comprise in the marriage  article and what be the good in the say hospital belong to the intestate and  not proper his household good and to state the same special for the judgement  of the court in pursuance of this decree the master on the that of June make  his report and thereby certify that the say Nathaniel Jackson be possess of  the say hospital which be employ for the entertainment of sick and wound  seaman and for that purpose he have furnish it with bed bed and other  furniture and so continue it till his death but whether they shall be deem  household good or utensil of household stuff within the intent of the article  he submit to the judgement of the court and in the mean time by the consent of  all party defer inquire into the value on hear the special matter of this  report on the that of November follow before the Lord chancellor king his  lordship declare that the marriage article do extend to the household good and  utensil of household stuff in the say hospital from this decree the  administrator appeal and on his behalf it be insist p York t Lutwyche that the  good and utensil in the hospital be make use of by Mr Jackson in a public  business and undertake in the nature of a trade at a place upward of seventy  mile distant from London where he live and where brown er p he never reside or  have so much as a apartment for his own use but the whole undertake be entire  carry on by agent and servant that accord to this construction the respondent  may have be entitle to the whole of her husband personal estate in case he  have be of a trade wherein he may have employ his estate in household good or  utensil of household or wherein he may occasional have lie out his money for  improvement that as so great a provision be by the article make for the  respondent and her three daughter by her former husband without any  consideration except that of marriage only it be presume that she be not  entitle to any strain construction of the article in her favour and that  therefore the say order will be reverse on the other side it be contend c  Talbot I will that the good in question be plain within the description of the  word of the article household good or utensil of household stuff and their be  use for the sick and wound seaman do not make they less so that there be no  word in the article which show any intention to confine those general word to  any special sort of household good in any particular place or provide for any  particular purpose or that when Mr Jackson agree his wife shall have all his  brown meaning only be that she shall have some of his household good but on  the contrary the word all or any in the article show a intention that they  shall be carry to their utmost extent and that no such reservation or  limitation be mean that at the time of make the article the intestate be  employ in the same business and possess of the same good and therefore can not  make use of those general word without have in view the case which have happen  that these good be use by he not in the way of trade or merchandise but for  the purpose of housekeeping in his own house under the care of his own servant  and for the service of what may in some sense be call his own family that  there be no reason to apprehend that the party will have except these good if  the question have be put at the time of make the article as they be in the  possession and power of the intestate and it may very reasonable be agree that  these as well as other shall be a provision for his wife but if it be doubtful  whether the party will have except they or not if mention at the time of enter  into the article even in that case it will be safe to follow the word which  have a plain and certain meaning rather than establish a sense upon the ground  of a suppose intention different from and unsupported by any word which will  tend to render the construction of deed precarious and arbitrary and in the  present case will make it very difficult to determine how far the word shall  extend but after hear counsel on this appeal it be order and adjudge that the  decree complain of shall be reverse jour vol p