as 8 El. 4. 3. And Nichols Justice said That a Personal Action once suspended by the act of the party as here by the act of the Obligee in making the Wife of one of the Obligors his Executrix shall be Extinct for ever otherwise if by the act of Law And it seemed to the Court That by the last clause of the Devise of all his Goods to the Wife after his Debts and Legacies paid the Obligation passed to the Wife And inasmuch as that the duty and debt thereof is a thing in action which by our Law cannot be transferred by a Devise yet it shall enure as a Declaration of the intent of the Obligor that the debt is extinct and the Civil Law allows a Devise of debts due to the Testator to be good And it is averred in the Principal Case That the Debts and Legacies are all paid whereupon Judgement was given Quòd quaerens nihil capiat c. The suggestion was That whereas one was in debt to J. S. in Thirty pound who after by deed of Gift in his life-time conveyed all his Goods and Chattels to A. and after made the Plaintiff and B. his Executors and devised that the Plaintiff should pay out of the Thirty pound which he owed him Ten pound to the Defendant for a Legacy who brought the Plaintiff into the Ecclesiastical Court for the same where by the Law the Thirty pound debt is extinct by making the Plaintiff Executor and shewed that he had Proved the Will c. And per Curiam the Defendant shall have a Consultation forasmuch as the joynt-Executor hath no remedy to recover the Thirty pound against the Plaintiff his Co-Executor nor can have any Action for the same during the Plaintiffs life yet the debt not extinct but remains as Assets to any other Creditor as is 8 E. 4. And by the same reason that one debt shall satisfie another debt it shall satisfie a Legacy also and much the rather in regard the express intent of the Testator was to that purpose having precisely limited the Legacy to be paid out of the debt Quod not a per totam Curiam And Consultation was granted accordingly Yelv. Council for the Plaintiff CHAP. XII The general difference between an Executor and an Administrator and wherein they generally agree THey differ thus viz. An Executor is made either by the Testator or by his own Acts but an Administrator is appointed only by the Judge An Executor may appoint an Executor to the first Testator so cannot an Administrator yet a bare and meer Executor or a naked Executor to whom nothing is bequeathed in the Will made choice of meerly for his care and not at all for his profit cannot bequeath the Testators Goods in his Will by Legacies no more than an Administrator for these Goods are to be imployed only for the behoof of the Testator in which respect such Executor is accountable as well as an Administrator But of the Profits and Fruits which happen and arise of those Goods which belong to any as Executor he may make his Testament though not of the Goods themselves and so also in some cases may an Administrator They agree thus viz. An Administrator is entitled to all the Goods and Chattels of the Intestate as well as an Executor to all the Goods and Chattels that belonged to the Testator they are both alike liable to the payment of Debts and Legacies and they are both accountable These are the most general things wherein they differ and agree Their more particular agreements and disagreements are very many according to their distinct Beings Interests and Offices For which reason the Reader for his fuller satisfaction in this point is referred to his own Observations from the Contents of the several Chapters of this Testamentary Treatise CHAP. XIII Of the Executors Rights exclusively to the Heirs 1. The several divisions and distinctions of such things as come to the Executor and what Chattels are 2. Of such Chattels real living and moveable as accrew to the Executor 3. Of such Chattels real without life and immoveable as go to the Executor 4. Of Chattels personal living and moveable belonging to the Executor 5. Of Chattels personal without life and moveable pertaining to the Executor 6. Several Laws in reference to this subject 1. ALL things that come unto an Executor may be divided into things possessory and actually in the Testator or into things only in action and not actually in him and the things possessory may be divided into Chattels real and immoveable or into Chattels personal and moveable Again the possessory Chattels real may be divided into things living or into things without life Also the personal Chattels or Goods moveable may be divided into things living or things inanimate and without life There are also comprehensive of some of these Chattels principal and Chattels accessory that follow the principal So that Chattels are all possessions of Goods moveable and unmoveable except such as are in the nature of a Free-hold or parcel of it And they are called real or immoveable either because they are such in their own nature or because they appertain to something real by way of dependance as a Box with writings of Land the body of a Ward the fruit of a Tree or the Tree it self upon the Land or because they issue out of things immoveable and of a more real nature as Leases for years at Will Wardships Tenants Estates by Statute Merchant Staple or Elegit and Grants of the next Advowson 2. The Chattels Real Living and Moveable which did accrew to the Executor were such as these viz. Wardship being a real Chattel in respect of a Tenure of Land whereby was intended such Wardship as was by Knights Service and not such as is by Socage Tenure also a Villain for years as by Grant for a Term from him that had the Inheritance 3. The Chattels Real without Life and Immoveable that go to the Executors are generally and for the most part in Houses or Lands by Lease or extent upon Judgements Statutes or Recognizances or in things issuing out of Houses or Lands as Rents Commons and the like as arrerages of Rent behind at the Testators death also Advowsons Tithes Fairs Markets Profits of Leets and the like which the Testator had only for years Also the Title accrewed to the Crown upon Attainder of Felony where the party held not of the King viz. the Annum Diem Vastum that is power not only to take the Profits for a year but also to wast and demolish c. is but a Chattel And therefore though granted to one and his Heirs by the King yet shall go to the Executor not to the Heir Also a Lease for years determinable upon lives which is a Chattel and shall go to the Executor As also doth an Extent upon a Statute Likewise if a Termer for years grant his Term by Bequest or otherwise to A. and his Heirs
if A. dies his Executors not his Heirs shall have it for it is no Inheritance Or if such a Termer grant a Rent out of the Land to A. and his Heirs or the Heirs Male of his body yet shall it go to the Executor not to the Heir for it being derived out of a Chattel it self remains a meer Chattel and becomes not any Inheritance Also if a Rent be granted out of Land to one in Fee-Simple Fee-Taile for Life or Years and it be not paid to him in his life-time the Arrerages shall go to his Executor not to his Heir Or if a man seized of Land and possessed of a stock of Cattel Let it for Years and Covenant with the Lessee that he pay to Him and his Wife their Heirs and Assigns one hundred pound per annum during the Term in this Case after the death of the Lessor his Wife surviving him her Executor and not his Heir shall receive this payment Again if A. grant the next Presentation of the Church of B. unto D. In this Case if D. dies his Executor shall have it as a Chattel Not the Heir Or if A. grant a Lease for years of Land to D. and his Heirs and dies his Executor and not his Heir shall have this Term. And if A. possessed of a Term of years of Land grant it by Deed or give it by Will to D. and his Heirs or to D. and his Heirs Males or devise it by Will to B. for life the remainder to D. and his Heirs in these Cases D. shall have these Terms of years as Chattels and after his death his Executor shall have them Also if a Lessee for life make a Lease for years absolutely This in Law is a Lease for so many years if the life live so long and shall go to the Executor after his death And if one makes a Feoffment in Fee of Land the Feoffee covenanting to do divers things to the Feoffor and to forfeit five pound to him and his Heirs as oft as he shall fail performance and the Feoffee doth fail and break his Covenant divers wayes and the Feoffor dieth in this case his Executor not his Heir shall have and recover all the Forfeitures that are past and unpaid Also if any Goods or Chattels be granted to any Heads of Bodies Politick and their Successors their Executors and not their Successors shall have them In like manner if a Lease for years be made to a Bishop and his Successors and he die his Executor not his Successor is to have it 4. Among the living Chattels Personal that go to the Executor may be comprehended an Apprentice for years the interest of a Debtor in Execution for debt and in a Prisoner taken Jure belli Also Cattel of all kind yea and Fishes in a Pond Conies in a Warren Deer in a Park Pigeons in a Dove-house where the Testator was but a Termer or Lessee thereof for then they are to go to his Executor as Accessory Chattel following the State of their Principal viz. the Pond Warren Park and Dove-house Or if the Conies Pigeons or Deer were all tame they are then likewise to go to the Executor and not to the Heir so likewise are Hawkes reclaimed yea it is felony to steal Hawkes young in the Nest which implyes that they are Goods and belong to the Executor 5. Chattels Personal without life and moveable as all Householdstuff Implements and Utensils Money Plate Jewels Corn Pulse Hay Wood felled Wares Merchandise Ships Carts Plows Coaches c. are evident to belong to the Executor not to the Heir And generally all things sowed and not arising from the Earth without manuring go to the Executorsâ— and such things as grow of themselves to the Heir therefore Corn in the field growing or standing shall go to the Executor Also Hops though not sowen if planted likewise Hemp and Saffron do like Corn growing pertain to the Executor Also after Corn reaped and before the Tythes set out the Inheritor of the Tythes dying his Executor and not his Heir seems to have the best right to the Tythe after set out Also things above ground in Gardens as Mellons of all kind and the like go to the Executor not to the Heir as also all other things as have such a yearly setting or manurance as severs them in interest from the soile Also the Writings and Evidences that concern not the inheritance but only Leases Terms Goods Chattels or Debts pertain to the Executor If one that holdeth Land for the Life of A. B. sow the Land and A. B. happen to die ere it be ripe and cut and he that so holdeth the Land happen to die also before it be ripe the Executor of the Tenant shall have the Corn. And if the Tenant in Tayl sow the Land he doth so hold and die ere it be cut the Executor not he in Reversion nor the Heir nor the Issue in Tayl shall have it Also if A. make a Feoffment of Land to B. excepting the Trees thereon which he afterwards grants to B. for years in this Case the Trees are in the nature of a Chattel and if B. dies his Executor shall enjoy them Or if A. seized in Fee of Lands whereon Trees grow sell these Trees to B. who then dies before they be felled in this Case the Executor or Administrator of B. shall have them and may sell or cut them down Lastly The Executor without contradiction of the Heir may in any convenient time after the Testators death enter into the house descended to the Heir for the removing and taking away of the Goods so as the door be open or at least the key be in the door but he cannot justifie the breaking open of the door of any Chamber to take Goods thence But if the Goods be not removed in convenient time the Heir may distrain them as Dammage Fesante 6. If a Lease for years be made to a Bishop and his Successors and he die his Executor not his Successor is to have it If a Presentment to a Church happen to a Tenant in Tayle and he die before he Presents his Executor not his Issue in Tayle shall Present because the Chattel is not devested Likewise if a Termer have a Presentment which doth happen during the Term though he do not Present yet he shall have it If a Parson Vicar Master of a Hospital or any Body Politick be possessed of any Goods or Chattels in their own Right and die they shall go to their Executors or Administrators not to their Successors If a Lease be made for years or the next Advowson of a Church or Covenant for payment of money or the like be granted or an Obligation made to one and to his Heirs In all these Cases he hath this as a Chattel and it shall go to his
Rent belongs to the Heir where it is reserved by a Lay-person and he dies after Michaelmas and before the moneth ended Wherefore it was adjudged accordingly vid. 10. Co. 129. Action brought by an Administrator for Rent reserved upon a Lease for years by the Intestate and for Rent arrear in his time the Action was brought and he shews how Administration was committed by the Arch-Bishop but doth not say Quod profert hic in curia Literas Administrationis The Defendant pleaded and found for the Plaintiff And it was moved in Arrest of Judgement That the not shewing the Letters of Administration was matter of Substance which made the Declaration vicious and not aided by the Statute of 18 Eliz. or 32 H. 8. by the Verdicts for that enables the Plaintiff to his Action and the omission thereof takes from the Defendant the advantage which he might have by demanding Oyer thereof and c. The Court resolved That it was a matter of Substance which ought to be shewn by the Plaintiff to enable him to his Action And the Defendant shall have advantage thereof at any time wherefore it was adjudged for the Defendant Vid. 28 H. 6. 31. 16 Ed. 4. 8. 21 H. 6. 23. Plowd 52. Errour in a Judgment in C. B. The Errour Assigned for that in Assumpsit brought as Executor although he shews himself to be Executor to him to whom the Promise was made yet he saith not Testamentum hic in Curia prolatum The Defendant pleaded non Assumpsit and found against him and Judgement accordingly And this being assigned for Errour was held to be matter of Substance and not of form only and was therefore Reversed An Executor brings Debt upon an Obligation The Defendant pleads non est Factum and found for him And now the Question was whether the Plaintiff should pay Costs upon the New Statute of 4 Jac. which exacts That in every Action where the Verdict passeth for the Defendant the Plaintiff should pay Costs but it was resolved That this Case is not within the intent of the Statute he being in anothers right and of matter which lay not in his cognizance therefore the Law never intended to give Costs against him And so it is upon the Statute of 8 Eliz. where Costs be given in case the Plaintiff is Non-suted As it was ruled in one Fords Case and so it was Ruled here And although Manne said Costs had been allowed in the like Cases they appointed that henceforth it should no more be so It was held That an Administrator shall have Trespass de bonis asportatis in vita Intestati by the equity of the Statute of 4 Ed. 3. And an Executors Executor by the Stat. of 25 E. 3. On a Scire Facias the Case was this Goth was in debt to one Couper who died Intestate his Wife took Administration and brought Debt and had Judgement to recover and died Intestate Yate the Plaintiff took Administration of the Goods of Couper non Administrat and brought Scire Facias to have Execution on the Judgement But it was adjudged that it doth not lie for want of Privity but it is clear that he may have a new Action of Debt And by Popham and Yelverton if an Administrator recover Dammages on Trespass de bonis asportatis in vita Testatoris and then dye Intestate his Administrator shall have Execution thereon otherwise of a Debt recovered which was due to the Intestate Tenant in Dower makes a Lease for years reserving Rent and takes a Husband the Rent is in arrear the Husband dies and it was agreed by the whole Court That his Executors shall have the Rent If A. make a Promise to B. and after B. die Intestate and Administration of his Goods be committed to C. who after dies also Intestate and after Administration is committed to D. of the Goods of C. In this Case D. cannot have an Action on the Promise made to B. as Administrator to G. For he is not Administrator to B. in that Administration was not granted to him of the Goods of B. unadministred by C. CHAP. XXIII Of Actions maintainable against Executors or Administrators 1. Executors lyable to be sued by Creditors though their Testators Goods not actually possessed by them or imbeziled from them 2. What kind of Servants wages Executors are lyable to pay and discharge 3. How Executors are lyable in Case of breach of Covenant by their Testator in his life-time 4. In what Case an Executor may be lyable to pay his Testators Debt out of his the Executors own proper money 5. Several other Cases wherein Executors are lyable to be sued 6. Certain Cases wherein Executors are not lyable 7. Several Law-Cases touching Actions against Executors and Administrators 1. ALthough the Executor hath not actually and particularly laid his hands upon any of the Testators Goods yet shall he be said to be in possession of them so as to stand lyable to the Creditors so far as they extend in value though afterwards others do purloyne or imbezil them 2. Executors are lyable for the payment of the wages of the Testators Servants retain'd in Husbandry and the like but not for the wages of Waiters or Serving-men the reason of the difference is because of the Statute compelling the one not the other to serve Yet for them also an Action did lie against the Testator himself because of his Covenant 3. Where a breach of Covenant happens in the Testators life-time the Executor stands chargeable Therefore if one make a Lease of Land by Deed wherein he hath nothing and die before an Action of Covenant be brought against him it will be maintainable against his Executor though no express Covenant Also if a Lessee for years Covenants to repair the Buildings or to pay the Quit-Rents issuing out of the Lands Lett the Executor to whom the Term cometh must as well as his Testator perform that Covenant although he did not Covenant for him and his Executors Likewise if one be Lessee for years or for life without any Indenture or Deed as he may be and his Rent being behind dieth In this Case his Executor shall be lyable to the payment of this Rent though without any specialty But if the Lessee for years sell or grant away his Term or Lease and die his Executor shall not be charged for any Rent due after the death of his Testator though himself in his life-time was still lyable for the Rent to grow due after until the Lessor accept the Assignee for his Tenant So that if a Lease for years be made rendring Rent and the Rent be behind and the Lessee die his Executor shall be charged for this Rent or if the Lessee for years Assign over his Interest and die his Executor shall be charged with the Arrerages before the Assignment but not with any of the Arrerages due after the Assignment Also an Executor is chargeable for Tythes due
of Succession distinguish thus viz. Either he hath only Brothers of the whole Blood or only such Brothers Children or he hath Brothers by the half Blood or such Brothers Children In the first case the Brothers only succeed in the second case only the Brothers Children in the third case the half Brothers and such Brothers Children succeed equally according to their Stock or Root not according to the number of their persons Likewise if one dye leaving one Brother and three Children of another Brother deceased of the whole Blood the Brother alone shall have as formerly declared as much as the said three Children and these do succeed exclusively to all other collateral Kindred Also Brothers of the half Blood do exclude other collaterals Ascendent as Uncles Aunts whether by the Father or the Mothers side and that without distinction of Sex But put case a man dies without Children or Parents leaving one Brother by the Fathers side only another Brother by the Mothers side only for instance A man having had two Wives and a Son by each dies and the second Wife takes another Husband having a Son by him then if the Son by the second Wife of the first Husband dies he leaves a Brother of the half Blood by the Father and a Brother of the half Blood by the Mother In this case the Civil Law sayes that the Brother by the Fathers side shall succeed in the Goods that came by the Father and he by the Mothers side in the Goods which came by the Mother and both of them equally as to all Goods otherwise acquired but our Law knows no such distinction for they shall succeed equally being equal in degree and equal in Blood because by Marriage all was invested in the Father THE Orphans Legacy The Third Part. OF Legacies and Devises THE CONTENTS OF THE CHAPTERS of the Third Part. Â Chap. OF Legacies and Devises in General 1. Of Devisors and Devises or Legataries 2. Of Words and Expressions sufficient for Legacies 3. Of Conditions and their Resemblances incident unto Legacies 4. Of the several Marks and Kinds of Conditions and Questions in Law touching the same 5. What things are Devisables by Will and whether a Testator may Bequeath what is not his own 6. Of Lands Devisable by Will 7. Certain cases touching Devises of Lands void or not void 8. Certain Cases touching Devises of Land in Fee-simple 9. Certain Cases touching Devises of Land by way of Entail 10. Certain Cases in Law touching Devises of Land for Life only 11. Certain Cases in the Law touching Devises of Leases or for a Term of Years 12. Law Cases touching Devises of Reversions or Remainders 13. Touching Devises of Lands with Limitations and upon Conditions 14. Touching Devises of Rents 15. Of Devises touching the Sale of Lands by Executors or others 16. Of Legacies and Devises in respect of Marriages as also between Husband and Wife 17. Of Legacies and Devises to a Child in the Womb. 18. Certain Cases of Devises touching Lands and Real Chattels 19. Cases in the Law touching Legacies of Chattels Personall 20. Of Legacies touching Goods in Generall also what is to be understood under that Notion of Goods and what by Moveables and Immoveables 21. Law Cases touching Money Bequeathed by the Testator 22. Of Legacies relating to Debts with certain cases in the Law touching the same 23. Touching Election in point of Legacies to whom The Election of a Legacy expressed with too much Generality or Dubiety belongs whether to the Executor or to the Legatary with certain cases in the Law touching the same 24. When and how Legacies are null or become void or voidable with certain cases in the Law touching the same 25. Certain Positions or Assertions of Law for the better understanding of this Subject of Legacies and Devises with certain mixt cases touching the same 26. THE ORPHANS LEGACY The THIRD PART OF Legacies Devises CHAP. I. Of Legacies and Devises in General 1. What a Legacie or Devise is 2. What are the Requisites to the making of a good Devise 3. Whether is more Considerable as to Legacies the Time of making the Testament or of the Testators death 4. In what Court Legacies and Devises are properly Recoverable 1. A Legacy called a Devise at the Common Law is some particular thing or things given or left either by a Testator in his Testament wherein an Executor is appointed to be paid or performed by his Executor or by an Intestate in a Codicil or Last Will wherein no Executor is appointed to be paid or performed by an Administrator The Word Devise is specially appropriated to a Gift of Lands The Word Legacy to a Gift of Chattels though both are used promiscuously For a Devise is said to be where a Man in his Testament giveth or bequeatheth his Goods or his Lands to another after his decease Observe it is formerly said That a Legacy is a particular thing given by last Will and Testament For if a man dispose or transfer his whole Right or Estate upon another That according to the Civil Law is called Haereditas and he to whom it is so transferr'd is termed Haeres but at Common Law he is the Heir to whom all a mans Lands and Herediditaments do descend by right of Blood And by the same Law the Word Devise from the French Deviser is properly attributed to him that bequeaths his Goods by his last Will or Testament in writing the Reason being for that those Goods that now appertain only to the Devisour are by this act distributed and divided into many parts 2. To the giving of Legacies or to the making of a good and sufficient Devise there are several things Required The Person of the Devisor must be Legally qualified to Devise the thing Devised must be such as is Legally Devisable The Devisor at the time of making the Devise must have Animum Testandi That the Devisee or Legatary be in his Person such as is capable of taking by way of Devise That there be no Co-action on the Testator but that his Will be free and independent without fear force or flattery or other Sinister Contrivances That the Devise be made in that due manner and form as it ought to be That the thing Devised be Devised upon none other then if any Lawful Terms and Conditions That the words of the Devise be such as do clearly declare the Mind and Intention of the Devisor That Probate be made of the Testament after the Devisors death And in case it be of Land then that the Devisor be solely seized thereof in a Fee-simple Estate and not joyntly with another and that the Testament wherein such Devise of Land is be made in writing 3. To find out the Testators mind and meaning which is the very Index of the Testament the time of making thereof is regularly more considerable in point of Legacies then the Time of the Testators death
whereof he dyed actually Possessed or Interessed in Expectancy in his own and not in anothers Right nor in Joynt-Tenancy with another saving in some certain Cases in the Law specially excepted are Deviseable As now also are Lands Tenements and Hereditaments whereof some are Deviseable by Custom as Gavelkind and Burgage Tenure others by virtue of certain Statutes But more specifically first as to Chattels Real all Leases in Lands or Houses either for Years or Years Determinable upon Life or Lives or by Extents Statutes or Recognizances or Rents not Rents reserved by the Inheritor yet the Arraerages of them also Likewise Commons Advowsons Tithes Faires Markets Profits of Leet and the like in the Testator for Years and all such Creatures as a Termer hath in a Warren Park Pond Dove-house or the like in the Testator for Years Secondly as to Chattels Personal all Debtors taken in Execution Captives Apprentices all Cattle of all kinds Creatures naturally Tame or being otherwise are by Act reduced thereto as Hawks reclaimed or the like also Hounds Greyhounds Spannels Mastiffs Ferrits and the like also all Merchandable Goods and Commodities whatever Likewise Ships and other Vessels Naval with their Guns Rigging Tackle Apparel Furniture and Provisions Likewise Weapons for War Books Musical Instruments and the like Also Corn whether in the Ground Field or Barn And Trees Fell'd or not Fell'd being Sold from the Inheritance of the Ground or excepted by the Seller of the Inheritance of the Land Also all other Grain as Corn Also Hops Saffron Hemp and the like whether on the Ground or in the House Likewise Hay and all Fruits gathered but not Grass ready to be cut for Hay nor Fruits on the Trees but such as are seperate from the Inheritance therefore not Garden-Fruits in the Ground or not seperate from it Also Bills Bonds Mortgages Statutes and the like Also Money Plate and Jewels Likewise all Householdstuff Implements and Utinsils not fixed to the Freehold All Coaches Carts Waggons Plows and the like with their Appurtenances Likewise Desks Cabinets Trunks Chests and Boxes Excepting such as contain only the Evidences of the Inheritance and have used so to do Also all Linnen Bedding Pewter Brass and Iron that is Moveable and not fastened to the Freehold as aforesaid Therefore not such Coppers Cesterns or Furnices nor Locks and Keys Waynscot or Window-glass Finally here Note That Things in Action as Debts or the like are Deviseable so are Obligations and Counterparts of Leases Likewise Uses not Executed by the Statute of Uses but remaining at the Common Law And though Actions altogether uncertain are not Deviseable yet possibilities and uncertainties in divers cases are Deviseable 2. In and by the Question Whether a Testator may Bequeath any thing which is anothers and not his own is meant and intended any thing wherein neither the Testator nor the Executor nor the Legatary hath any just Propriety or which doth not of Right belong to either of them Now in order to the Resolution of this Question according to the Civil Law discrepant from the Common Law in this point the known Distinction is That if the Testator did certainly know the thing Devised to belong unto another and not unto himself at the Time when he Devised the same Then such Devise is good and the Executor if there be Assets sufficient is to purchase the same and Deliver it to the Devisee Otherwise it is in case the Testator were Ignorant thereof and supposed it to be his own unless the True Owner consent to the Legacy or that it was Bequeathed to Pious used And in case the Owner thereof will not Sell the same at least not at any reasonable Rate the Executor is to pay the Legatary the just value thereof 3. Suppose a Testator doth Bequeath something that is his Executors In this case the Legatary shall have it whether the Testator did or did not know it to be his The Law is the same though there be Co-Executors and the thing so Bequeathed belong only to one of them But in that case they shall all bear a proportion to be allowed them in Assets but if Assets fail the Legacy fails also 4. If a Testator Bequeath to A. B. the same thing which did appertain to A. B. in his own proper Right at the Time when the Testament was made it is a void Devise yea though A. B. should afterwards alienate the Thing so as that the property thereof were out of him at the Time of the Testators death 5. Notwithstanding what hath hitherto been said according to the Civil Law yet by the Common Law the Goods and Chattels that are another Mans are not Deviseable and therefore if one Man gives or devises another Mans House it is a void Devise So also if one Devise the Things that by special Custom of some Places as the Heir-looms do belong to the Heir this Devise is void for it is not Devisable from him 6. The Law with us is so far from countenancing a Devise of what is another Mans that it doth not allow the Goods and Chattels which the Testator himself hath joyntly with another to be Devisable and therefore if there be Two Joynt-Tenants of Goods and Chattels as when such Things are given to Two or Two do Buy such Things together and one of them Devise his part of the Things to a Stranger This Devise is void Insomuch that if in this case the Testator make the other Joynt-Tenant his Executor the Will as to this is void and he shall not be charged as Executor for these Goods but he shall have them altogether by Survivorship Nay the Goods and Chattels which the Testator hath but not in his own Right but in Right of another are not Devisable And therefore an Administrator cannot Devise the Goods and Chattels he hath as Administrator for such Devise is void Howbeit an Executor may appoint an Executor of the Goods of the first Testator which an Administrator cannot do CHAP. VII Of Lands Deviseable by Will 1. Whether Lands are Deviseable what Lands and how much thereof 2. What things may be Bequeathed under a Devise of Lands and what not 3. What Persons incapable of Devising Lands 4. Who may be Devisees or what Persons may take by a Devise of Lands and what not 5. What kind of Testament sufficient for a Devise of Land and what not 1 LAnds Tenements and Hereditaments held in Gavelkind are Customarily Devisable by Will So likewise are Lands held in Burgage-tenure whereof the Will may be only Nuncupative and without Writing and into which the Devisee after the Testators death may enter without any Livery of Seysin thereof made unto him yet this shall not prevent Survivorship in case of Joynt-Tenancy in such Tenure And though by the Common Law of this Realm Lands Tenements and Hereditaments are not Devisable yet now by Statute they are if held in Socage
a Disseisor Devise the Land he hath gotten by Disseizin this Devise as to the Disseizee is void Likewise if a Man be Disseized of his Land so that he hath nothing but a Right thereof left and then he Devise this Right or the Land this Devise is also void So if one Contract for Land and pay his Money for the same but hath no Assurance made him of the Land and he Devise the same to another such Devise cannot be good yet possibly he that received the Money may be compellable in a Court of Equity to Assure and Settle the Land according to the Devise Likewise if one Devise another Mans Land such Devise is void but if after such Devise made he Purchase this Land and die without Revocation now is that Devise good Also if A. Bargain and Sell Land to B. on Condition of Re-entry if he pay to B. Twenty Pounds and B. Covenants that he will not take the Profits until default of Payment and A. make a Lease of Seven Years thereof to another and after break the Condition in this case B. may Devise the Land and the Devise will be good 3. If one Devise his Land to the Children of A. B. by this Devise the Children that A. B. hath at the Time of the Devise made or at most at the Time of the Testators death and not such as shall be Born after his death shall take by that Devise and have the Land Also if a Devise of Lands or Goods be made to the Heirs of A. B. he then and at the Time of the Testators death being alive this Devise is void because the person to whom a Devise is made must be capable of the Devise by that Name by which the Devise is made to him when there is no other description whereby to infer the Testators meaning yet if Lands or Goods be Devised to the Executors of A. B. and he die before the Testator and make Executors This is a good Devise to such Executors or if a Man make a Feofment of his Land to the use of his last Will and then Devise that his Feoffees shall be Seized to the use of B. C. This is a good Devise of the Land per intentionem Also a Devise of Land to one paying so much a Year to another with a Clause of Distress upon failure of Payment is a good Devise but a Warranty cannot be made by a a Will Yet if Land be Devised for Life or in Tail Reserving a Rent in this case the Devisors Heirs shall be bound to the Warranty in Law and the Devisee shall take advantage thereof Also a Devise of Land may be made to one and a Devise of a Rent out of the same Land to another in the same Will and both stand good Likewise Land may be Devised to one in Fee and after the same Land in the same Will may be Devised to another for Life or for Years and both these Devises may be good and may well consist together 4. In like manner if a Man in the former part of his Will Devise all his Lands by general words to one in Fee and in the latter part of his Will Devise some special part thereof unto another in Fee Both these Devises are good and may stand together that is The former Devise is good for as much as is not afterwards more specially Devised notwithstanding the Subsequent Specification and the latter is good for so much as is so specially Devised notwithstanding the precedent general Disposition It is otherwise when the general Clause comes last for then the first Devise is void So also it is supposed to be where both the Devises are particular that then the first Devise is void As suppose a Man doth first in his Will Devise Long-acre to A. and his Heirs afterwards in the same Will he doth Devise the same Land to B. and his Heirs in this case some have held the first Devise to A. is void which others have denyed holding that both the Devises are good and that A. and B. in this case shall be Joynt-Tenants 5. If a Man Devise the Use Profits or Occupation of his Land by this Devise the Land it self is Devised Or if a Man Devise only the Profits of his Land this is a Devise of the Land it self For Lands will pass by words in a Will which will not pass by the same words in a Deed but whatsoever will pass by any Words in a Deed will pass by the same Words in a Will The Reason is because Wills are always more favourably interpreted than Deeds and there is good Reason for that also If a Man says in his Will I give all my Land or all my Tenements to A. B. he shall have not only all the Lands whereof the Devisor is Sole Seized but also all the Lands whereof he is Seized in Common or Co-parcenary with another and not only all the Lands he hath in possession but also the Lands he hath in Reversion of any Estate he hath in Fee-simple But if he say I give all my Lands in Possession only then the Lands he hath in Reversion are excluded out of that Devise 6. If a Man Seized of Land of Fee-simple in the Parish of Grade saith in his Will I give all my Lands in the said Parish to A. B. and after the Will made and published he doth Purchase other Lands in the said Parish and dyeth in this case and by this Devise A. B. shall not have the new Purchased Lands Yet by a new Publication of the Will after the Purchasing of such Lands they will pass to A. B. the Devisee Yea though he hath no Land in the said Parish at the Time of making the said Devise yet if afterwards he doth Purchase Lands in that Parish in this case such ne 〈…〉 Purchased Lands will pass by the said Devise because it shall in that case be intended that he meant to Purchase them Also if a Man hath some Lands in Fee-simple and other Lands only for Years in Dale and he Devise all all his Lands and Tenements in Dale by this Devise the Lands and Tenements he hath for Years doth not pass but if he hath no other Lands in Dale but those for Years in this case probably they will pass 7. A. Deviseth his Lands to M. his Wife until E his Daughter shall accomplish the Age of 21. Years the Reversion to the said E. and the Heirs of her Body upon Condition that she shall pay unto his said Wife during her Life in Recompence of her Dower of all his Lands 20 l. and upon default of Payment he wills his Wife shall enter and enjoy all the Lands during her life the Remainder ut supra the Remainder to I. S. in Tail and dies M. the Wife enters E. the Daughter being within the Age of 14. Years M. takes to Husband I. D. The Husband and
Justices That this was a Condition for so was the Intent of the Devisor For otherwise the Younger Sister had no Remedy for the Rent And in this Case it was Adjudged That the Younger Sister might enter upon a Moity of the Land for breach of the Condition in Non-payment of the Rent for which the Action was brought A Man had Issue a Son and a Daughter and he Devised his Lands to his Son in Tail and if he dyed without Issue it should remain to the next of his Name r The Son dyed without Issue the Daughter being then Married The Question was whether she should have the Lands It was Resolved by the whole Court That she should not for that she had lost her Name by her Marriage But if she had not been Married at the Time of her Brothers death she should have had it for she was the next of Name A. B. Seised of Lands in Socage Devised the same by Words to his Three Sisters a Stranger present Recited the Testators words to him whereat he Affirmed the same Afterwards the Stranger for his own Remembrance puts the words into Writing but read them not to the Devisor before his death This Devise so Reduced into Writing mode forme is void because it was written without the order or direction of the Devisor and consequently not within the Statute But if after the writing thereof he had read the same to the Devisor and thereupon the Devisor had Affirmed the same it had then been a good Devise It was the Opinion of c. A. deviseth his Lands to W. after the decease of his Wife and if he fail then he willeth all his part to the discretion of his Father and dyed W. Survived the Father being dead before without any disposition of the Land In this Case the Father hath a Fee-simple there being no difference where the Devise is That I. S. shall do with the Land at his Pleasure and the Devise thereof to I. S. to do with it at his discretion A Man Seised of Lands in A. hath Issue four Daughters A. B. C. D. and devised all his Lands in A. to A. and B. Two of his Daughters and made them his Executrices Afterwards he Purchased other Lands in A. A Stranger being desirous to Buy this Land of him newly Purchased he refused saying That this Land should go with the Residue of his Land to his Executors as his other Lands should go Afterwards the Testator made a Codicil and caused it to be annexed to his Will but in the Codicil no mention was made of this new Purchased Land In this Case this new Purchased Land shall not pass For Notwithstanding that the Reading of the Will and the making of a Codicil may amount to a new Publication yet it doth not manifest the Intent of the Devisor to be that more shall pass by that then he intended at the first Also the new Reading of the Will and the annexing of a Codicil may not properly be termed a new Publication And without an express Publication for this Land newly Purchased this Land shall not pass A Man Let several Houses and Lands by several Leases for Years rendring several Rents amounting to 10 l. per annum and made his Will in this manner viz. I Bequeath the Rents of D. to my Wife for Life the Remainder over in Tail By this Devise the Land it self shall pass for it appears his Intent was to make a Devise of all his Lands and Tenements and that he intended to pass such an Estate as should have continuance for a longer time then the Leases should endure and the words are apt enough to convey the Lands it being an usual manner of speaking of some Men who name their Lands by their Rents A Man Devised Lands to another Man and his Heirs The Devisee dyed in the Life of the Devisor and then the Devisor dyed In this Case the Heirs shall not take by the Devise for that the Heirs are not named as words of Purchase but only to express and limit the Estate which the Devisee should have for without these words Heirs the Devisee could not have the Fee-simple and the Heirs are named only to Convey the Lands in Fee-simple and not to make any other to be Purchaser but the Devisee CHAP. IX Certain Cases touching Devises of Land in Fee-simple 1. A Fee-simple may pass by several Words and Expressions in a Will which will not pass it by Deed. 2. A Power to Sell Land Devised passeth the Fee-simple so doth the Devise of the Land without other words on the least Consideration of a Payment to be made by the Devisee 3. A Fee-simple will pass in a Will as well by the Implication as Expression of the Word Heirs 4. A nice Distinction between Joynt-Tenancy and Tenancy in Common 5. A Devise of Lands to a Corporation for Life is a Fee-simple and whether it may pass by the Word Assigns without the Word Heirs or the Words For ever 6. A Fee-simple passeth in a Will by Implication of a power to Sell the Lands as well as by Payment of Money enjoyn'd the Devisee 7. In what Sense the Habendum shall be Construed where the Devise of Lands seems somewhat doubtful 8. In what Case a Fee-simple and all the Testators Inheritances may pass by General Words to the Devisee 9. A Devise in Fee made to one cannot in the same Will be made to another 10. How the Word Paying doth Create a Fee in a Devise and bow by a Devise of Rents the Land it self doth pass 11. A Devise shall be for the Dvisees Benefit not Prejudice also in what other Case a Fee shall pass by Implication 12. In what Case and by what Words the Fee and not Leases or the Leases and not Fee do pass by a Devise 13. Other Cases in Law touching this Subject 1. THere are many Words and Expressions whereby Lands will pass in Fee-simple by a Will which by a Deed will not so Convey the same As suppose a Man devise his Land in this manner viz. I give my Land in Dale to A. B. and his Heirs or to A. B. in Fee or to A. B. for ever or to A. B. Habendum sibi suis or to A. B. and his Assigns forever or to A. B. to give away or Sell or do therewith at his Pleasure All these and such like in a Will Create a Fee-simple Estate and A. B. shall have the Land to him and his Heirs for ever yet by such words in a Deed no more will pass then an Estate for Life save only in the first Case Also if any now since the making of the Statute of Uses Devise that the Feoffees of his Land shall be Seized of the Land to the Use of B. C. and his Heirs or to the Use of B. C and the Heirs of his Body or that his Feoffees shall make an Estate of the Land to B.
8. A Man Seised of a Messuage holden in Socage in Fee Devised the same by these words I Devise my Messuage where I dwell to A. B. and her Assigns for 10. Years and A. B. shall have all my Inheritances if the Law will In this Case the Devise in Fee of the Messuage is good and by the general words of the Will all his Inheritances do also pass 9. If a Man Devise Lands to one for ever there he hath a Fee for such an Estate might be conveyed by Act Executed But if he further Devise That if the Devisee do such an Act that then another shall have the Land to him and his Heirs the same is void for when as he hath disposed of the Estate in Fee to one he hath not power after in the same Will to dispose the same to another it being a Rule in Law That such an Estate which cannot by the Rules of the Common Law be conveyed by Grant Executed in his life time by Advice of Council learned in the Law such an Estate cannot be Devised by the Will of a Man who is presumed to be void of Council 10. A Man having Lands in Fee-simple and goods to the Value of 5 l. only Devised to his Wife all his Estate paying his Debts and Legacies his Debts and Legacies amounting to 40 l. It was Adjuged in this Case That all his Lands did pass by the Devise and that the Devisee had a Fee-simple in the Lands the word Paying enforcing it for they are to be paid presently which cannot be if the Lands pass not in Fee And if a Man Deviseth all his Rents It was held That all his Lands do pass 11. Note That by intendment of Law a Devise shall be for the benefit of the Devisee and not to his prejudice As if Land to the Value of 3 l. per annum be Devised to A. and that A. shall pay out of it 50 s. per annum In this Case A. hath but an Estate for life for he may pay it out of the Profits of the Lands and is sure to be at no loss But if it be Devised to B. for life the Remainder to A. paying 50 s. per annum out of it In this Case A. hath a Fee-simple by Implication because after the Payment thereof A. may dye before he can receive satisfaction for the same out of the Profits of the Land and therefore such Devise shall be a Fee-simple because the Law intends that the Devise was for the benefit of the Devisee 12. Note also That if a Man hath Lands in Fee and Lands for Years and he Deviseth all his Lands and Tenements the Fee-simple Lands pass only and not the Lease for Years 2 If a Man hath a Lease for Years and no Freehold and Deviseth all his Lands and Tenements the Lease for Years passeth 3 That if one Deviseth his Lands which he hath by Lease to his Executor for life the Remainder over that there ought to be a special Assent thereunto by the Executors as to a Legacy otherwise it is not Executed 13. A. Devised his Lands in London to his Son and his Heirs after the decease of his Wife and in Case his Daughter should Survive his Wife and his Son and his Heirs that then the Daughters should have it for Life and after their death I. and R. should have the same and that they should pay 6 l. 16 s. yearly to the Company of Merchant-Taylors to be disposed of to Charitable Uses In this Case three Points were Argued 1 Whether the Wife had an Estate for life by Implication of the Will And it was Resolved That she had 2 Whether the Son had a Fee-simple or Fee-tail And it was Resolved That he had a Fee-tail by Implication of these words viz. if his Daughters Survive his Wife and his Son and his Heirs whereby it is plainly implyed That the Heirs there intended are the Heirs of his Body and not his Heirs in Fee for so long as the Daughters live the Son could not dye without a Collateral Heir 3 What Estate I. and R. have after the death of the Daughters And as to That it was Resolved That they have a Fee-simple by Reason of the Annual Payment of Money and it is not to be regarded what Annual Value the Land is of over and above the Sums they pay for every Sum of Money paid or payable doth cause the Devisee to have a Fee-simple And Coke Chief Justice said That a Devise to A. and his Successors is a Devise of a Fee-simple without the word Heirs because it implyes a Fee-simple although it wants the express words Between L. Plaintiff and B. Defendant L. Seised of Land in Fee Devised it unto Two Persons Equaliter and to their Heirs Whether this made them Joynt-Tenants or Tenants in Common was the Question It was holden by the whole Court That they were Joynt-Tenants and not Tenants in Common A Man Seised of Lands Devised them by his Testament to his Wife to dispose and imploy them for her and his Sons at her own Will and Pleasure And it was held by Dyer Weston and Welch That she had a Fee by such words as if he had Devised the Lands for ever For the Construction of Law supplies the defect in these words of the Devisor according to his meaning And it was held by Dyer and Welch That the Estate in her is Conditional because these words ea intentione make a Condition in every Devise but not in a Feofment Gift or Grant unless it be in Case of the King And these words do amount as much as to say she should not convey it away to a Stranger but keep it and give it to his Sons S. Seised of Land in Fee holden in Socage and Devisable in Gavelkind Devised it to his Feme for her life paying 3 l. per annum to T. his Son during his life and that he should take but Two Load of Wood for Fire-boot And if she dyed before the said T. then he Devised all his Lands to R. his Son paying to the said T. 3 l. per annum and paying to such one of his Sisters 20 s. and to another Sister 20 s. The Feme dyes R. enters The Question was what Estate R. had by this Devise And it was Adjudged he had a Fee For when he Devised it to his Feme for life expresly c. and to R. generally without limiting the Estate and apppointed him to pay to T. 3 l. per annum during his life That carries in it an Intendment that he should have Fee especially when his Father therein further willed That his Son R. should pay two other Sums in Gross and none of them to be out of the Profits it is by Intendment and by Implication a Fee wherefore upon the first Argument it was Adjudged for the Defendant for they said That these Things which have been so often Adjudged ought
well as by any other words 7. The Residue of a Term is as the Term it self 8. A Man may Devise such an Estate by Will which he cannot make by Act Executed Or he may Create an Interest by his Will which by Grant or Conveyance in his life time he could not do 9. That may be the Devise of a Lease for Years in Law which doth not seem to appear such in Fact 10. The whole Term though not named shall pass by a Devise where no other can pass by Implication 1. IF one Devise his Land unto his Executors until his Son shall come unto the Age of 21. Years the Profits to be imployed towards the performance of his Will and when he shall come to that Age that then his Son and his Heirs shall have it By this Devise the Executors shall have it until he be of 21. years of Age and if he die before that time the Executors shall also have it until the time he should have been 21. Years of Age if he had lived so long and the word Shall in this case is taken for Should Likewise if one Devise his Land to his Executors for the payment of his Debts and until his Debts be paid by this Devise the Executors have but a Chattel and an uncertain Interest and they and their Executors shall hold it until the Debts be paid and no longer 2. If one Devise his Land to A. B. and the Heirs males of his Body for the Term of 99. Years it seems that by this Devise A. B. hath but a Lease for so many Years if the Heirs Males of his Body shall so long continue and that for want of Issue Male the Term of Years shall expire And in this case the Executor or Administrator not the Heirs Males of A. B. shall have it after his death 3. If one possessed of a Term of Years Devise the same to another and his Heirs or his Heirs Male by this Devise the Executors or Administrators not the Heirs of the Legatee shall have it So that if a Lessee for Years of Land Devise all his Interest therein to his Wife if she live so long and after her death if any part of the Term be to come Devise the same to A. B. his Son and to the Heirs of his Body in this Case and by this Devise the Executors or Administrators of A. B. and not his Heirs shall have it 4. If a Man Devise all his Lands and Tenements in D. yet Leases for Years do not pass by these words for by Lands and Tenements is intended Frank-tenements or Free-hold and not Chattels 5. If one hath a Lease for Years of Land and Devise it to A. B. for life by this Devise the whole Term is Devised and A. B. shall have the whole Term if he live so long and yet A. B. shall not have an Estate for life by this Devise So likewise the Law seems to be the same upon a Grant by Deed made in that manner And if a Man possessed of a Term of Years of Land Devise his Term or his Lease or the Land it self by a Devise in either of these words the whole Term doth pass A Term of Years is Devised to the Church-wardens of the Church of D. and to their Successors This is not good but for Goods so Devised the Law is otherwise A Man who hath a Term Deviseth the Land to one and his Heirs the Devisee dyeth and hath Executors his Heirs shall have the Land and not his Executors The Law is otherwise if the entire Term were so Devised 6. If a Lessee Devise his Lease or his Term or his Farm or his Profits Tenure or Occupation thereof by either of these Devises his whole Lease and all his Interest in the Land is bequeathed as well as by any other form of words But if a Man Devise his Land only for so many Years as his Executor shall name it seems this Devise is not good Yet if it be for so many Years as A. B. shall name and he name a certain Number of Years in the Testators Life Time this is a good Devise 7 A Man possessed of a Term of Years may Devise all the Residue of that Term of Years that shall be to come at the Time of his death And if a Testator having only a Term of Years in certain Lands doth Devise the said Land to A. B. and doth not say for what Time it seems that by this Devise the whole Term is devised unless the Testators Intent doth appear to be otherwise 8. A Man possessed of a Term for 40. Years by his Will Deviseth the same to I. S. after the death of his Wife and that the Wife should enjoy it during her life and that I. S. should neither Devise it nor Sell it but leave it to descend to his Son and in the mean Time my Will is That my Wife shall have the use thereof during her life yielding 10 l. Yearly to I. S. during her life at Two Feasts and made his Wife Executrix and dyed The Wife entered and paid the 10 l. Yearly according to the Will In this Case Three Points are Resolved 1 That I. S. doth not take by way of Remainder but by way of Executory Devise And a Man may Devise such an Estate by his Will which he cannot make by Act executed And that the Case is no more but this That after the death of I. S. the Wife should have the Residue of the Term. 2 The Devise is good being but a Chattel which may vest and devest at the pleasure of the Devisor 3 That there is no difference when one Deviseth his Term the Remainder over and when a Man Deviseth his Land or his Lease or the Use or Occupation or the Profits of his Land That a Man by his Will may Create an Interest which by Grant or Conveyance he cannot Create in his life Time 9. A. Devised his Lands to his Daughter and her Heirs when she came to the Age of 18. Years and that the Wife should take the Profits of the Land to her Use without any accompt to be made until the Daughter come to 18. Years and made his Wife his Executrix and dyed provided the Wife should pay the old Rents and find the Daughter at School the Wife enters proves the Will takes Husband and dyes It was found that all the Conditions were performed and that the Daughter was within the Age of 18. Years It was Resolved in this Case That it was a Term for Years in the Wife and a good Lease 10. A Man was Lessee for 40. Years of a House and by his Will gave the House to I. S. without limiting any Estate That he should have in it It was the Opinion of the Court That he should have the whole for no other Estate in the House either for Life or at Will shall pass by Implication or for one Year
or Years and therefore the whole shall pass to the Devisee A Man possessed of a Term of Years Devised the same in these words viz. The residue of my Goods Moveable and Immoveable I give to my Son John whom I make my Executor and to him I give my whole Years that I have in my Farm of M. and if he die I give it to my Daughters John the Executor and Devisee proveth the Will claiming the Lease according to the Will and dyeth Intestate His Administrator for good Consideration Selleth the Lease that remains Whence the doubt or Question was whether the Daughters or the Assignee should have the Lease The Case was referr'd to the Two Chief Justices and Justice Walmesley who all agreed That the Assignee should enjoy the Lease and not the Daughters Q. Whether a Devise to them in such manner be void One made a Lease for life after Leased the same to A. for 99. Years if he so long lived to Commence after the decease of the Lessee for life And if A. dyed during the said Term of 99. Years or the Lease otherwise determined and after the death of the Lessee for life then the Lessor granted for him and his Heirs that the Land should remain to the Executors of A. for 20. Years Lessee for life dyes A. Leased for 20. Years Rendring Rent and dyes Intestate B. takes his Administration and brings Action of Debt for the Rent It was Adjudged That it doth not lye for it seem'd to Gaudy and Yelverton That the Contingent of 20. Years was never Vested in A. But if A. had made Executors he might take by way of Purchase Executors being in name of Purchase As in Cranmers Case 14. Eliz. Dyer But if it had been limited to the Executors for Payment of the Debts of A. or the like then by the intent apparent there would be an Interest in A. and in the Executor for the use of A. as Popham and Fenner agreed in point of Law as to an Action of Debt A Man made his Will in this manner viz. I have made a Lease for 21. Years to I. S. paying but 20 s. Rent And it was held That it was a good Lease by the Will For that Word I have shall be taken in the Present Tense as is the word Dedi in a Deed of Feofment A Man Seised of a Mannor part in Demesnes and part in Lease upon Rent Suit and Service Devised by his Testament to his Wife during her life all his Lands in Demesnes and also by the same Testament did Devise to her all his Services and high Rents for 15. Years and further by the same Testament did Devise all his Mannor to another after the death of his Wife And it was Agreed by all the Justices That the last Devise took not effect for any part of the Mannor till after the death of the Wife and that the Heir after the Expiration of the 15. Years and during the Wives life shall have the Services and Chief Rents If a Man possessed of a Lease for Years of Land Devise the same to one for Life the Remainder to another although the first Devisee hath the whole Estate or Term in him and no Remainder can depend thereon at Common Law yet it is a good Devise to the second Devisee by way of an Executory Devise If certain Lands be Devised to one he cannot take them without the delivery of the Executor Or if a Man be possess'd of a Lease for Years of Land and Devise the same to another the Devisee cannot have it or enter upon it without the Executors or Administrators Consent CHAP XIII Law-Cases touching Devises of Reversions or Remainders 1. What Devise of a Reversion is good and what Remainder may be Devised 2. As the Limitation so the Devise of a Remainder after a Fee is void 3. In what Case the Devise of a Remainder of a Chattel-real may be void 4. The Devise of a void Limitation is a void Devise 5. A Devise in Remainder of Goods is void 6. In what Case the Devise of a Remainder over in Fee after Lease for Life made by Executors is void 7. The Difference between a Remainder Entail'd by Devise and Entail'd by Deed. 8. A Remainder Devised to a Church accrews to the Parson of that Church 9. A Refusal in one to take by a Devise shall not prejudice another in Reversion or Remainder 10. How the Devisors Daughters Issue without naming her shall have the Devised Remainder before the Issue of his Sons 11. A Termer of a 100. Years to come Deviseth it to one for Life the Remainder over it is a void Remainder 12. A Devise of a Remainder in Fee after a Lease which Devise is made by him in Remainder is a void Devise if the Lessor Re-enter 13. Several Cases wherein he in Remainder may Devise his Remainder 14. Fee-simple Devised to one the Remainder cannot be Devised to another albeit the first Devise were but Conditional 15. A Term of Years by way of Remainder is Devisable but a Devise by way of Entail with Remainder over is void 16. Lessor may Devise the Reversion of Land for Life notwithstanding a Feofment in Fee 17. Remainder of a Rent-charge in Fee may be Devised to one where the Land out of which the Rent doth arise is Devised to another 18. A Devise may be good for the Reversion of a Term where not for the Rent 19. The Devise of a Remainder may be good where yet an Estate Tail shall precede 20. He in Remainder shall take presently where the Devisee for Life is incapable of taking by Devise 21. Though a Man cannot Devise to himself yet he may Devise a Remainder to his own right Heirs 22. A Man may Devise a Reversion by the Name of all his Inheritance or Hereditaments 23. Devises of Remainders to the next of Blood 24. Where the Devise of a Remainder after the Remainder makes the former Remainder but an Estate for Life 1. IF a Man Devise his Land to B. C. for life the Remainder to the next of Kin or next of Blood of B. C. this is a good Devise of a Remainder Or if a Lessor Disseiseth his Lessee for life and makes a Lease for life to another for Term of life of the first Lessee the Remainder over in Fee though the first Lessee enters yet he in the Remainder may Devise his Remainder 2. If one Devise his Lands to A. so as he render 20 s. per annum to B. and if he fail thereof then his Estate to cease and to remain to B. this Devise is good but the Limitation of the Remainder is void because a Remainder cannot be limited after a Fee Therefore if a Man makes a Lease for Years upon Condition that if the Lessor disturb the Lessee within the Term that the Lessee shall have the Fee and maketh Livery accordingly and after the Lessor doth disturb the Lessee for
Rent where none is in arrear and after Deviseth his Reversion this Devise is not good 3. A Man possessed of a Term for 40. Years Devised that his Eldest Daughter should have the same to her and the Heirs of her Body the Remainder if she dyed without Issue Within the Term to C. his second Daughter in Tail The Eldest Daughter took Husband and dyed within the Term without Issue Her Husband Sold the Term. It was the Opinion of the Court That his Sale thereof was good and that the younger Daughter had no Remedy for it because it was a void Remainder being of a Term which was a Chattel-real and so is to go to the Husband 4. A Lease was made to A. for 41. Years if he should so long live and if he dyed within the said Term that then his Wife should have it for the Residue of the said Years It was held That the limitation to the Wife in Remainder was void for that the Term ended by the death of A. and then there was no Residue to remain to his Wife 5. A Man possessed of certain Goods Devised them by his Will to his Wife for life and after her decease to I. S. and dyed I. S. in the life time of the Wife did Commence Suit in a Court of Equity there to secure his Interest in Remainder A Prohibition was granted in this Case and the Reason was because a Devise in Remainder of Goods was void and therefore no Remedy in Equity for Equitas sequitur Legem It was agreed That a Devise of the Use and Occupation of Lands is a Devise of the Land it self but not so of Goods for one may have the Occupation of them and another the Interest in them 6. Suppose a Man Deviseth a Reversion depending upon an Estate for life to the Parson of D. and to his Successors if the Parson die and after a new Parson be made and the particular Tenant die also the new Parson shall have it Also if a Man Devise Land to one for Term of life the Remainder over in Fee and the Devisee for life refuse yet he in the Remainder may enter but if the Will were That the Executors shall make a Lease for life the Remainder over in Fee and they offer to make a Lease accordingly and the Lessee refuseth he in the Remainder shall not have the Remainder 7. I. S. hath issue Two Sons and dyeth the Elder hath Issue a Daughter who hath Issue a Son and dyeth Land is given by Testament to one for life the Remainder to the next Male of the Body of I. S. begotten the second Son of I. S. shall have the Land and not the Son of the Daughter It would be otherwise if the Remainder were so Entail'd by Deed. 8. If Land be Devised to one for life the Remainder to the Church of D. the Parson of the said Church shall have it And if a Man willeth that after 20. years after the death of the Devisor I. S. shall have the Land in Fee the Heir of the Devisor shall have the Land during the Term and not the Executor 9. A Man Deviseth his Land to his Daughter and Heir being a Feme Covert and to the Heirs of the Woman the Reversion over in Fee and dyeth the Husband refuseth to take by the Devise he in the Remainder entereth he shall retain the Land during the lives of the Husband and Wife but after their decease he Issue of the Wife may enter upon him 10. A Man Seised of Land in Fee hath Issue Two Sons and a Daughter the Father Deviseth the Land to his Wife for Term of life the Remainder propinquioribus de sanguine puerorum of the Devisor the Daughter hath Issue and dyeth the Issue of the Daughter shall have this Remainder and although that the Sons have Issue after yet their Issue shall not have it 11. A Man hath a Term of a Hundred Years to come and he Deviseth this to one for Term of life the Remainder over to I. S. this is a void Remainder it were otherwise if the Devise were that the Devisee shall have the Occupation of the Land during his life the Remainder over 12. A Lease is made for life the Remainder over in Fee reserving Rent by Indenture and for default of Payment that it shall be Lawful for the Lessor to enter and detain during the life of the Lessee he Re-enters for the Rent Arrear he in the Remainder Deviseth the Remainder such Devise of the Remainder is void 13. If Land be given to Two Persons Habendum to the one for life and after his decease to the other in Fee he that hath the Fee may Devise his Reversion thereof Likewise if Land be given to one for life and that after his death it shall descend to I. S. in Fee he may Devise this Remainder Or if a Lease be made dummodo solverit 10 l. to the Lessor for his life he may Devise the Reversion with the Rent Or if a Lease be made to an Infant or Feme-sole for life the Remainder in Fee and the Infant at his full Age or the Feme after Coverture disagree he in Remainder may Devise his Remainder 14. If the Fee-simple of Land be Devised to one the Remainder cannot be Devised to another albeit the first Devise be but Conditional And therefore if a Man Devise his Land to A. B. in Fee so that he pay 100 l. to C. D. And if he fail that then it shall remain to G. D. and his Heirs this Remainder to C. D. is void for upon the Failure of Payment by A. B. the said C. D. may not enter and have the Land but the Devisors next Heir Likewise if Land be Devised to F. G. and his Heirs and if he die without Heirs that then it shall remain to I. M. and his Heirs this is a void remainder 15. A Man may Devise a Term of Years by way of Remainder and the first Devisee cannot hinder the second of the Remnant of the Term. But yet a Man possessed of a Term of Years cannot Entail it by his Will And therefore if a Man Devise his Term to A. B. and his Heirs or to him and the Heirs of his Body or to him and his Issue the Remainder to B. C. this Remainder is void and the Devise is good for the whole Term of Years to A. B. and his Executors 16. A Man Seised of Two Acres in several Towns in one County that is of the one for life and of the other in Fee and maketh a Feofment by Deed of all his Lands in the same County and makes Livery in the Acre in Fee in the name of both the Lessor notwithstanding this may Devise the Reversion of the Acre for life 17. If a Man grants a Rent-charge out of Lands devisable to one for life the Remainder over to the Grantor and his
right Heirs and after the Grantor Devise the Land to a Stranger in Fee and die the Heir of the Devisor may Devise the Remainder of the Rent in Fee 18. A Lease for Term of 100. Years is made to a Bishop and his Successors he maketh a Lease for life Rendring Rent to him and his Successors and after he Deviseth the Reversion with the Rent in Fee this is a good Devise for the Reversion but not for the Rent 19. If a Man having Two Sons and a Daughter Devise his Land to his Wife for Seven Years the Remainder to his Younger Son and his Heirs and if either of the said Two Sons die without Issue of their Bodies the Remainder to the Daughter and her Heirs and the Younger Son die in the life Time of the Father and after the Father die in this case and by this Devise the Daughter hath a good Remainder but it seems the Elder Son hath first an Estate Tail by the Intent of the Devisor 20. If Land be Devised to A. for life the Remainder to B. for life the Remainder to I. S. in Fee in this Case if B. be a Person incapable of a Devise then he in the Remainder in Fee shall take presently after the first Estate for life ended And if the Devise be to a Person incapable for life the Remainder to I. S. in Fee then shall I. S. take presently 21. If a Man Devise his Land to two persons by name and the Heirs of either of their Two Bodies and for default of such Issue the Remainder to the right Heirs of the Devisor after the Devisors death one of the said Devisees dies without Issue the other Devisee hath Issue and dyeth In this Case and by this Devise the issue of such surviving Devisee shall have a Moity and no more of the Land 22. A Lease is made to I. S. for the Term of the life of I. N. the Remainder to the same I. N. for Term of life of the said I. S. I. N. in Remainder releaseth all his right to the said I. S. and dyeth In this Case the Lessor may Devise the Reversion And if a Man who hath a Reversion Deviseth this Reversion by the name of all his Inheritance or Hereditaments in D. it is a good Devise 23. If a Man having Issue Three Sons A. B. and C. doth Devise his Land to C. the Remainder to the next of Blood to the Testator In this Case and by this Devise A. shall have the Land after the death of C. as the next of Blood Likewise if a Man having Four Daughters Devise his Land to the Youngest in Tail the Remainder to the next of Blood by this Devise the Eldest Daughter and not all the rest shall have the Land after the Estate Tail Also if a Man hath Two Sons and a Daughter who hath Two Daughters Devise his Land to a Stranger for life the Remainder to his second Son for life the Remainder in Fee to the next of Blood to his Son in this Case if the Eldest Son die without Issue the Daughter and her Daughters shall have the Land 24. If Land be Devised to A. for life the Remainder to B. and the Heirs of his Body the Remainder to C. D. and his Wife and after to their Children by this Devise C. D. and his Wife have Estates for their Lives only and their Children after them Estates for their Lives Joyntly And albeit they have no Children at the Time yet every Child they shall have after may take by way of Remainder If one Devise his Land in this manner viz. I give my Land to A. in Fee-simple after his decease to B. his Son who is his Heir apparent By this Devise A. hath an Estate for life first the Remainder to his Son for his life the Remainder to the Heir of A. in Fee-simple One Devised his Land to I. S. from Michaelmas following for five Years Remainder after the Plaintiff and his Heirs He dyed before Michaelmas The Question was Whether this were a good Remainder Because it could not enure instantly by his death for it may not begin until the particular Estate which was not to begin till after Michaelmas and a Freehold cannot be in Expectancy But all the Court held That it very well might Expect For in Case of a Devise the Free-hold in the mean Time shall descend to the Heir and vest in him Wherefore without Argument it was Adjudged accordingly and that the Remainder was good If one Devise a Personal Chattel to one for life the Remainder over to another it is a void Remainder If a Man Devise a Term to one for life the Remainder to another for life with divers Remainders over The Executors Consent to the first Devisee will be a Consent as to all the other Remainders Or in Case a Man Devise a Term to one and a Rent thence issuing to another and dies the Executors Consent to the Devise of the Term is an Assent also as to the Rent If an Estate be given to the Husband and Wife and the Heirs of their Two Bodies the Remainder to the right Heirs of the Husband he may Devise that Remainder to his Wife CHAP. XIV Touching Devises of Lands with Limitations and upon Condition 1. The Condition of a Devise of Land not written in the Testators Life Time makes the whole Devise as void as if the Devise it self had not been written 2. A Fee-simple of Remainder upon Condition by way of Devise 3. In what Case the Executors of a substituted Devisee cannot claim the Lands Devised under Limitations 4. A Condition or Limitation may not continue a Devised Estate for part and defeat it for the residue 5. In what Case the word Paying shall be construed only as a Limitation and not as a Condition 6. Not he in Remainder but the Heir shall take the advantage of a Condition broken annexed to a Devise of Lands 7. A Condition or Proviso contrary to Law is a void Condition 8. The Heir may enter upon a breach of Condition notwithstanding a failure of somewhat that ought to have been done by a Third Person 9. The Heir may not enter where it is but a Limitation and not a Condition 10. If the Condition be That a Lessee shall not Demise the Premises for above one Year and he Devise the Premises it is a breach of the Condition 11. Lands Devised upon Condition of superstitious Vses are vested in the Crown 1. IF a Man give order for the writing a Devise of his Land to A. B. upon Condition and the Devise to him be accordingly written but the Testator dyeth before the writing of the Condition in this Case the whole Devise to A. B. is void And as in the case of Goods and Chattels conditionally bequeathed the Executor shall keep the Thing until the Condition be performed and after the Condition broken shall take advantage thereof So
made his Testament in writing and Devised the Mannor to his Wife for the Term of 30. Years in these words viz. For and to these Intents and Purposes following viz. I will and my mind and intent is That B. my Wife shall yearly Content and Pay out of the Issues and Profits of the said Mannor to Sir A. I. and others 30 l. And further Wills That the other Legacies given in his Will should be paid by her and therein Devised divers Legacies And further Willed That his Wife should be bound to Sir A. and others for the performance of his Will F. C. the Devisor dies the Wife enters on the Land c. takes the Profits and thereof pays the Legacies but not to Sir A. and others c. Whereupon the Heir Enters as for breach of Condition It was held by the Justices that it was no Condition but a Declaration of the Testators intention for to what end or purpose should the Wife be bound if it were a Condition But Judgment was not given in the Case for the Parties agreed CHAP. XV. Touching Devises of Rents 1. Rents Issuing out of Lands are as Devisable as the Land it self so as it be the Testators own Land 2. A Grantee may not Devise the Rent which he hath only for another Mans Life 3. Rent to be Issuing out of a Common is not Devisable 4. Several ways how Rents may be Devised 5. The Devise of the Reversion of a Rent upon a false suggestion is a void Devise 1. A Seigniory Rent or the like is Devisable as Land is and will pass without the Atturnment of the Tenant So that a Man may Devise a Rent de novo issuing out of Land or a Rent issuing out of Land that is in esse before And therefore if one make a Lease for Life or Years Rendring Rent the Lessor may Devise this Rent Likewise if a Rent be granted to one and his Heirs the Grantee may Devise this Rent Also a Man that is Seised of Land in Fee may Devise any Rent out of it at his pleasure But a Man cannot Devise a Rent out of another Mans Land that is none of his own nor out of that which he hath not and therefore if one Devise Twenty Pounds to be issuing out of his Mannor of Dale when in Truth he hath no such Mannor that Devise is void 2. If Rent be granted to one Man for the life of another it seems the Grantee may not Devise this Rent but that on failure of other disposal thereof in the Grantees life Time the Terre-tenant shall hold it as an Occupant And if one Devise a Rent of any certain Sum out of his Land to be paid quarterly and say not how long the Rent shall continue this is but an Fstate for life of that Rent 3. If a Man Seised of a Common granteth a Rent out of the Land although that the Land be Devisable yet the Grant is void and by Consequence the Devise 4. If a Tenant for life make a Lease for Years Rendring Rent and after the Tenant for life Surrender to the Lessor all his Right and then the Lessor Devise this Rent this is a good Devise during the life of the Lessee for life Or if a Man make a Lease for life Reserving Rent to him and his Heirs and the Lessor Devise this Rent this also is a good Devise of the Rent otherwise it is if he Reserve the Rent to him and his Assigns Or if a Lessee for Term of Ten Years make a Lease over for Term of 40. Years and the Lessor confirm the Estate Reserving a Rent to him and his Heirs and after by his Will Devise the Rent in Fee this also is a good Devise of the Rent after the Ten Years but not before 5. A Man Seised of a Rent makes a Deed reciting that whereas I. S. holdeth the said Rent of his Grant for Term of life he grants the Reversion of the said Rent after the decease of I. S. to the Grantee and his Heirs in Fee and in Truth I. S. had nothing in the Rent the Grantee Deviseth this Rent this is no good Devise of the Rent If the Husband make a Leafe for life to the Daughter and Heir apparent of his Wife being Covert Rendring Rent and the Wife-Mother die and the Husband Devise the Rent this is a void Devise of that Rent In an Action of the Case upon Trover the Defendant justified and pleaded Rent granted to A. his Executors and Assigns for the life of B. out of Black-acre and shewed that A. was dead and that he as Administrator to A. distrayned for the Rent on Black-acre in Arrears after the death of A. and that he is to have it during the life of B. It was Adjudged That the justification was not good either for matter or manner for that after the death of A. the Rent determined and cannot come to his Executors or Administrators for it was not a Thing Testamentary but a Frank-tenement and nothing in the Grant to A. and his Heirs for the others life If Rent be granted out of Land Devisable by Custom the Rent may be Devised within the Custom for it is of the same nature with the Land CHAP. XVI Of Devises touching the Sale of Land by Executors or others 1. The mean Profits of Lands Devised to be sold are not Assets in the Executors hands unless the Testator shall specially so Appoint it 2. The Heir and not a stranger though appointed in the Devise shall take the advantage of a Breach of Condition annexed to a Devise touching sale of Lands 3. Where the Executors have only an Authority and not an Interest in the Lands Devised to be sold the Heir of the Devisor shall have the mean Profits thereof till it be sold 4. Otherwise where the Executors have an Interest in which case the Money or Proceed upon the sale but not the mean Profits shall be Assets in their hands 5. Several Devises touching sales of Land with or without the Assent of another 6. By the word Appurtenances shall pass in a Devise Lands commonly used with a Messuage 7. A Copy-holders Case of Devise of Land to his Wife 8. Where one who hath but an Estate for life and no Interest to sell may yet have an Authority to Appoint who shall sell the Lands Devised 9. In what Case relating to this matter a Prohibition may Lye or not 10. A Case of Law wherein one Executor alone where there are two can not sell the Land Devised 11. How a sale of Lands Devised to be sold may be void for want of sufficient Authority 12. In what case a Sale of Lands Devised to be sold may be made by one Executor where there are two Appointed by Name 13. Where there is an Interest as well as an Authority and Trust the Executor of the surviving Executor may sell the Lands of the first Testator Devised to be sold 14.
10. By Devising the Bents § Ibid. By a Generall Implication p 244 § 11. Whether Fee-simple passeth in a Will by the Word Assigns without the Word Forever p. 242. § 5. Fee-simple Devised to one is not Devisable to another by the same Will p. 243. § 9. Fee and not Leases and Leases and not Fee in what Cases and by what words pass by a Devise p. 244. § 12. Fee of Land Devised to one the Rent thereof to another what the Civil Law in that Case p. 295. § 34. The Devise of a House though by the word Fee-simple thereof may pass only an Estate for life p. 255 256. § ult Felo dese Intestable as to Goods and Chattels not so as to his Lands p. 226. § 3. Felons under Attainder are Intestable p. Ibid § 3. They are not Intestable before Conviction p 20 21. § 2. They are Incepable of a Legacy p 206. § 2. The Qualifications thereof Ibid. Feme Covert she may without her Husbands consent make an Executor of those Goods whereof her self is Executrix or which she hath as Executrix p 226. § 3. Yet she cannot Devise them by Will Ibid. Being Executrix and under that Notion receiving Money she may release without her Husband p. 71. § ult Whether she may be a Legatary to her own Husband p 208. § 3. She may not Devise Lands to her own Husband nor unto others either with or without his consent p 205. § 1. 226. § 3. vid. Women Covert Feme Sole her Devise to him whom she after marries is void p 281 282. § 13. Field if Devised the Edifice thereon passeth therewith p. 295. § 33. Fraud or Covin in an Executors Payments shall not prejudice the Creditors p. 147. § 11. Fraudulent Recoveries no Barre to Creditors p 108. § 7. p. 113. § ult Freehold Devised not Cognizable before the Ordinary p 205. § 4. G. Garden passeth by the Devise of a House p 237. in prin Gavelkind Lands Devisable by Custom p 224. § 1. An Estate-Tail thereof Devised p 251. § ult Goods What shall pass by a Devise of all Goods Chattels Moveables and Immoveables p 289. § 7. Goods in generall Devised what shall pass under that Notion p 306 307. § 1. Goods in Common Devised by Implication p 302. § 3. Grantees may be Devisees p 226. § 4. Ground Devised the Edifice thereon passeth thereby although Erected after the Devise made p 297. § 42. The Ground whereon a House stood which is after burnt belongs to the Devisee or Legatary p 304. § 14. H. Habendum how to be construed in a doubtfull Case of Devises p 243. § 7. Have or the word I have in what case it shall be taken in the Present Tense p. 295 § ult Heire the different Acceptations of that word in the Civil and Common Law p 202 § 1. In what case he may enter upon Lands Devised to be Sold. p. 139. § 3. In what case he and not the Executor shall have the mean Profits of Land Devised to be Sold. p 273 § 3. He shall take the Advantage of a Condition broken that is annexed to a Devise of Land Ibid § 2. A Devise to one and his Heir in the Singular Number is but a Devise for Life p 253 § 3. The Heirs Rights exclusively to the Executons p 83. In what case Heirs shall not take by a Devise though they are therein mentioned p 238 239 § ult In what case a Devise by that Word Heirs shall yet go to the Executors p 257 258 § 1 3. Hereticks in what Sense Testable or not p. 21 § 3. They are Incapable of a Legacy p 206. § 2. The Qualifications thereof Ibid Horse one Devised to two Persons how the Divident to be apportioned p. 304. § 15. By a Bequest of Horses shall Mares pass if the Testator had no Horses p 303. § 10. Hospital-Lands or their Rents-Arreare not Deviseable p 225. § 3. House Devised when the Testator had none or many or burnt or ruin'd pull'd down demolished or re-edisied The Law in such cases p 294 § 27 p 296 § 39. House Devised with all things therein how that shall be understood p. Ibid. § 31 p 302 303 § 7. The Ground whereon stood a House Devised and after burnt is the Legataries p 304. § 14. Houses are Devisable under the Notion of Lands p 224. § 2. p. 301. § ult Two Houses and but one Stable betwixt them with which House Devised shall the Stable pass p 294. § 30. Husband being neither Executor nor Administrator to his Wife is not liable for her Debts after her decease p. 130. § 5. J. Ideots Intestable the Qualifications thereof p. 12 13 § 3 6 p 14 § ult Jewels Bequeathed what pass under that Notion or not in a Devise p. 306 § ult In what case they are not to be put into the Inventory p. 99. § ult If in what cases that word amounts not to a Condition p. 216 § ult Implication sufficient whereby to pass a Legacy or Devise p. 235 in fin Whether Legacies may pass by an Implication of a contrary Condition p. 211 § 5. Impertinences destroy not Legacies p. 209 210 § 2. Impossibilities only seemingly such no prejudice to a Legacy p. 304 305 § 16. What Impossibility destroys a Legacy p 439 § 35. Impossibility imposed on the Condition of a Legacy voids the Condition but not the Legacy p 325 § 13. Incapacity in the Legatary how many ways it may happen p. 341 § 22. Incestuous Persons how far Testable or not p. 21 § 5. Infant incapable of Devising p. 289 § 10. Whether a new Publication after Minority gives life to a Devise that had none before Ibid. Infant under the Age of 21 Years may not Devise Land p. 226 § 3. Infant in the Womb whether capable of being a Legatary or Devisee p. 208 § 3. Infant-Executor at what Age he may Administer p. 67 § 2. What his power is Ibid. § 3. He is bound by his own Release if he receive the Money p. 71 § 5. His Release not good p. 68 § 5. At what Age Administration granted during his Minority shall cease p. 67 § 2 p 69 § ult His Release without consideration void Ibid. In what case he may have an Action of Detinue but not of Accompt p 71. § fin Interpretation of a Devise ought to be with the fairest advantage for the Devisee p 290 § 15. Several Rules in Law touching the Interpretation of Testaments and Devises p. 437 c. Intestables their several kinds p. 10. Inventory whether it may be made by an Executor before Probate of the Will p. 95 § 5. Within what time it is to be Exhibited p. 97 98 § 1. How and wherefore it is to be made and what to be inserted therein p Ibid. § 2 3 Inventories may be over-ruled by a Jury p. 107 § 4. Joynt-Executors must be all joyn'd in Suit p. 108 § 6. vid. Co-executors
part not expressed is a Moiety implyed p. 293. § 23. p. 310. § 11. p. 441. § 49 50. Paying In what Sense that word shall be construed only as a Limitation not as a Condition p. 267 268. § 5. Payment not full in what case Equivalent to none at all p. 289. § 11. PiousVses Testaments to that end their Priviledges p. 8. § 4. Poor disagreement among the DD. touching Legacies to the Poor in such generall words p. 291. § 18. Pope whether he may alter the Wills of Testators p. 149. § 107. Portion of Goods not expressing what proportion Bequeathed signifies 〈◊〉 Mâ—ity p. 447. § 100. Portions or Filiall Portions the Law in that case p. 167 c. Possibilities in Expectation are Devisable as well as Possessions in Actual Demes 〈…〉 es p 311 § ult Presentations void not Devisable p 288 § 5. To whom belongs the Presentation in case of Intestation p 82 § 6. Prisoners In what Sense said to be Intestable or not p 15 § 3. Priviledged Testaments what the severall kinds thereof p. 7 § 1. Probate of Testaments the Law thereof when where how by and before whom with the Fees thereof p. 35 c. In what case the Executor may be compelled to Prove the Will notwithstanding his former refusall and thereupon Letters of Administration granted to another p. 165 § 2. What Proof Requisite for the Probate of a Will p. 40. c. Prohibition in what Cases it doth not lie p 113 § 7. In what Cases touching Lands Devised to be Sold a Prohibition may lie or not p 275 § 9. It doth not lie in case of the Husbands Release for the Wives Legacy p. 282 § ult R. Recovery by Fraud against an Executor no Plea in Barre to a just Debt p 108 109 § 7. Refusalls to Prove the Will p 39 40 § 6. How to Proceed in case of Refusall of Executorship p. 91 92 § 1. It is no absolute Barre to a Subsequent Administration p Ibid. § 3. It may be done by a Letter Extrajudicially as well as by a Judiciall Act. p 93 § ult How Refusers to Administer may yet afterwards be admitted or excluded p. 163 § ult Refusall in one to take by a Devise shall not prejudice him in Reversion or Remainder p 263. § 9 13. Release or Discharge in what Sense it may be said to be Bequeathed p 322 § 3 p 439 § 32. To Release is a good word to Devise Lands by p 235 in fin A Release of Actions by an Administrator whose Letters of Administration are after Revoked is void p 216 § ult Action for Executors upon a a Release p. 103. § ult Remainders and Reversions Devised p 261 c. What of that kind may be Devised p Ibid § 1. Remainders and Cross-Remainders by Devise of Estate Tail p 252 § 11. With Implyed Remainders Ibid § 12. Remainders Entail'd by Devise and by Deed how they differ p 262 § 7. Remainders Devised to a Church accrews to the Parson thereof Ibid. § 8 He in Remainder or Reversion shall not be prejudiced by the Refusall of him that should take by a Devise p 263 § 9 13. How the Issue of the Daughters without naming them shall have the Devised Remainder in preference to the Issue of the Sons Ibid. § 10. Several Cases wherein he in Remainder may Devise his Remainder p Ibid. § 13. Reversion of Land for life may be Devised by the Lessor notwithstanding a Feoffment in Fee p 264 § 16. Remainder of a Rent-charge is Devisable to one where the Land out of which it arises is Devised to another Ibid. § 17. A Devise may be good for the Reversion of a Term where it is otherwise for the Rent p 264 § 18. Remainder Devised may be good where yet an Estate Tail precedes Ibid. § 19. He in Remainder may instantly take where the Devisee is incapable Ibid. § 20. Remainder may be Devised by one to his own right Heirs Ibid. § 21. Reversion may be Devised by the name of all a Mans Inheritances or Hereditaments p. 265 § 22. Remainder Devised to the next of Blood Ibid. § 23. In what case Remainder after Remainder makes the former Remainder but an Estate for Life p. Ibid. § 24. Remainders Devised what void p 261. § 2 p 262 § 3 to 6 p 264 § 15. A Hundred Years to come Devised for Life the Remainder over is a void Remainder p. 263 § 11. Remainder in Fee after a Lease Devised by him in Remainder is a void Remainder if the Lessor Re-enter Ibid § 12. Remainder after a Fee Devised is Indeviseable albeit such Devise were but Conditional p 263 § 14. A Term of Years by way of Remainder is Devisable but a Devise by way of Entail with remainders over is void p Ibid § 15. Rents Devised p 270 c. As Devisable as the Land itself Ibid § 1. They are Devisable for another mans life Ibid § 2. Rents issuing out of a Common not Devisable § 3. Several ways of Devising Rents § 4. Reversion of Rents Devised upon a false suggestion a void Devise p 271 § 5. Rent Devised in what case the Land it self doth thereby pass p 138 § ult What Rent not Devisable p 225 § 2. In what case the Rent is due to the Heir not to the Executor p 103 104 § ult Rent due to the Executors of the Husband of the Tenant in Dower Ibid. Rent of Land in Fee received by Executors no Assets because belonging to the Heir p 85 § 3. The Land-lords Rent is payable by the Executor for the Ground whose fruit for the Term may be Devised to another p 298 § 46. Residue of a Term is as Devisable as the Term it self p 258 § 7. Residuary-Regatary hath an Advantage when others Refuse p. 291 § 17. Retainer of a Testators Goods by an Executor to pay himself good p 133 § ult p 149 § ult Reviver of a Will Revoked p. 34 § 1. Revocations Testamentary the severall kinds thereof p 31 § 1. Revocations by Marriage Ibid § 2. Revocation of a Will by a Wife after Marriage whether good or not p. 236 § ult Whether Revocation of Administration may without any Sentence in Court be by the Bishop who granted it p 166 167 § ult Revocations of Legacies and Devises p 331 c. What amounts to a Revocation of a Devise of Land p 228 in fin Severall Cases in Law touching what shall amount to a Revocation or Countermand of a Legacy or Devise p. 443 § ult Four Cases wherein Legacies are irrevocable p 443 § 74. S. Sale of Lands Devised to be made by Executors p 273 c. with or without the Assent of others p 274. § 5. In what case it may or not be by one alone where there are Two or more Executors p 275 276 § 10 12. How it becomes void for want of sufficient Authority p 175 § 11. In what Case it may be made by
out the Executor unless the money for the Land to be sold be to be distributed in pios usus because in this Case the Frank-tenement after the Testators death is in the Executors not in the Heir for which reason the Heir cannot enter in this Case as he might in the former 3. In an Action of Debt brought against Executors They were at Issue if Assets were in their hands or not and the Jury found by a Special Verdict That the Testator was seized of a House in Fee and made a Lease thereof and of certain Implements of household in it for years rendring Rent to Him his Heirs and Assigns and found that the Executors after the death of the Testator continually received the Rent and prayed Advice of the Court if the same were Assets in the Executors hands And the Opinion of the Court was That it was not Assets for that the whole Rent was to go with the Land in Reversion as magis digne and so did belong to the Heir not the Executors A man Willeth that after twenty years after the death of the Devisor J. S. shall have the Land in Fee the Heir of the Devisor shall have the Land during the Term and not the Executor CHAP. XV. What goes neither to the Heir nor Executor and in what Cases 1. Bona Paraphernalia go neither to the Heir nor to the Exeeutor 2. Things in joynt-Tenancy go neither to the Heir nor to the Executor 3. Things willed by the Testator to be sold for certain uses go to neither of them 4. A Lease simply for Three Lives goes neither to the Heir nor Executor 1. BY the Civil Law those Goods belonging to the Wife called Bona Paraphernalia descend neither to the Heir nor to the Executor neither are they by that Law subject unto the payment of the Husbands debts But now under that notion of Bona Paraphernalia we are not to understand the Wifes Apparel with her Bed Jewels and Ornaments for her person to be comprehended but her convenient Apparel and onely such as is agreeable to her degree and such shall go to the Wife onely the rest unto the Executor And thus much the very word being Etymologized doth imply 2. The Goods and Chattels which one hath in Joynt-Tenancy with another shall not on his death go to his Executor nor to his Heir but to the other surviving Joynt-Tenant and that by right of survivorship Otherwise it is with Tenants in common for if A. and B. have Goods or Chattels in Joynt-Tenancy and if either of them grant what belongs to him unto a Third person in this Case that Third person and he which kept his part unsold are Tenants in Common and therefore if either of them Two die the deceaseds part of such Goods and Chattels shall go to his Executor and not to the surviving Tenant in Common Also if Husband and Wife be Joynt-Tenants of Land and the Husband die the very Corn growing thereon shall survive to her together with the Land and though the Husband sowed it yet shall it not go to his Executor 3. The Monies or Profits arising out of Lands Willed by the Testator to be sold are not accounted as any of the Goods or Chattels of the person deceased and consequently do go neither to the Heir nor to the Executor but to the uses for which it was willed to be sold 4. If one have a Lease simply for Three Lives to him and his Assigns this is no Chattel therefore shall not go to the Executor and it is no Land therefore it shall not go to the Heir but in this Case it shall go to him who first after the Testators death Enters and Claims it as an Occupant if no assignment thereof be made in the life-time of the Lâ—ssee But a Lease for years determinable upon Lives is a Chattel and shall go to the Executor So also doth an Extent upon a Statute CHAP. XVI Of the Indivisibility of the right and interest of Co-Executors Their Indivisibility 1. In point of Power and Authority 2. In point of Interest and Possession 3. In Case of Plaintiffs and Defendants 1. WHere there are more Executors than One or Joynt-Executors to the same Testator One of them cannot give nor release his Interest to the other or if he doth it is void and he who so releaseth shall still have as much Interest as he to whom he released because each had the whole before Therefore if one Executor release but his part of a debt it hath been held that the whole is discharged But if one Executor alone sell Goods of the Testator he alone may maintain an Action of debt for the money So if Goods be taken out of the possession of one Executor he alone may maintain an Action for the same and that without naming himself Executor Also one Executor not joyning in suit with another may any time before judgment release but after Judgement he cannot because then it is altered in nature and turn'd into Rem Judicatam And though many Executors to one and the same Testator make but one Executor yet the devastation wast or misdoing of one shall not charge the rest nor make their Goods lyable for recompence but himself shall answer for it with his own Goods yet no further than the value of the Testators Goods so wasted or misadministred 2. If one of the Executors where there be Two or more grant his part of the Testators Goods all passeth and nothing is left to the other for that each hath the whole and there be no Parts or Moities between Executors Thus if an Horse come to four Executors each hath a Horse and yet all four have but one Also though a Lease for One thousand Years of One thousand Acres of Land come to Two Executors or more no partition or division can be made between them because it is not between them as between joynt-Lessees of Land where each hath but a Moitie in Interest though possession of and through the whole but among Executors each hath the whole and therefore if he grants his part he grants the whole yet one Executor may demise or grant the Moitie of the Land for the whole term and so may the other and this way they may settle a Moitie for each in some Third person intrusted for them but one Executor cannot make a Lease to the other of any part because he had the whole before nor can one of them Sue the other as Executor unless the Testator devise to one of his Executors all his Goods after such Debts and Legacies paid and satisfied for in such Case after satisfaction thereof that Executor may take the remainder of the Goods and maintain an Action of Trespass against the other if he take them from him and consequently an Action of Detinue if he keep or detain them but this he may do not as
or Keyes nor Fishes in the Pond nor Doves in Dove-houses scituate in Lands belonging to the Heir Nor Bona Paraphernalia that is the Wives convenient Apparel suitable to her Degree For as they are not to be put into the Inventory of her Husbands Goods so neither are they liable to the payment of his Debts But the Wives Jewels Chains and Borders and other Rich Ornaments of her Person are to be put into the Inventory of her deceased Husbands Goods Also Debts due to the Testator are to be put into the Inventory But Monies raised upon Lands given by the Testator for the payment of Debts or Legacies are not to be inserted into the Inventory Likewise all House-hold-stuff is to be put into the Inventory under which word are comprized Tables Stools Forms Chairs Carpets Hangings Beds Bedding Linnen Bason with Ewers Candlesticks with all sorts of Domestick Vessels whether of Earth Wood Glass Brass or Pewter yea Apparel Books Weapons Tools Cattel of all kind Victuals Corn and Grain of all Sorts Waynes Carts Plow-geare Coaches though no House-hold-stuff also Plate and Jewels and generally all things not affixed to the Free-hold but coming to the Executor and not descending to the Heir are to be Inventaried but such things as are affixed to and so become part and parcel of the Free-hold and all things that descend to the Heir and come not to the Executor are to be exempted out of the Inventory The Lady C. was possessed of divers Leases and conveyed them in Trust and afterwards married with A. B. the Lady received the money upon the Leases and with part of the money she bought Jewels and other part of the money she left and died A. B. took Letters of Administration of the Goods of his Wife and in a Sute in the Ecclesiastical Court the Court would have compelled him to have given an account of the Jewels and for the Money to have put them into the Inventory but the Opinion of the whole Court of B. R. was That he should not put them into the Inventory because the property of the Jewels was absolutely in him as Husband and he had them not as Administrator but of such things as be in Action as he shall have as Administrator he shall be accountable for and they shall be put into the Inventory And for the Monies received upon Trust it was resolved that the same was the Monies of the Trustees and the Wife had no remedy for it but in Equity and therefore the Husband should have it as Administrator And in that Case it was Resolved That if a Woman do convey a Lease in Trust for her use and afterwards marrieth That in such Case it lies not in the power of the Husband to dispose of it And if the Wife die the Husband shall not have it but the Executor of the Wife CHAP. XXII Of Actions mantainable by Executors or Administrators 1. The several kinds of Actions maintainable by Executors 2. An Action Personal in the Testator is none in the Executor 3. An Executor may sue for Rents and the Arrerages thereof yea in some Case where the Testator himself could not 4. An Executor Out-Lawed or Attainted may yet have Action 5. In what Case one Co-Executor may Sue another 6. In what Court Executors ought to Sue 7. Cases in Law touching this Subject 1. REgularly Executors may Charge all others for any Debt or Duty due to the Testator as the Testator himself might have done and the same Actions that the Testator himself might have had the same for the most part may Executors have also And therefore Executors may have Actions of Account Actions of Trespass de bonis asportatis in vita Testatoris Actions of Debt against Goalers upon escape of Prisoners Writs of Errour upon the Statute of 27 Eliz. Attaints upon the Stat. of 23 H. 8. Writs of Restitution upon the Stat. of 21 H. 8. An Indemnitate Nominis when the Testators Goods are taken upon an Out-Lawry against another man of his Name Actions of Covenant for breach of a Covenant made to the Testator Action upon the Case upon the Trover and Conversion of the Testators Goods an Ejectione firmae for an Ejectment of the Testator out of a Term an Action of Debt for Rent behind in the Testators life-time also an Action of Debt for the Arrerages of an Annuity due to the Testator in his life Likewise an Executor for Goods taken from him that belonged to the Testator or for a Treaspass done upon the Lease-Lands or a distraining or an impownding of Goods or Cattel may maintain Actions of Trespass or Replevin or Detinue even before the Will be Proved Likewise c. 2. But an Executor shall not have an Action for a Personal wrong done to the Testator when the wrong done to his Person or that which is his is of that nature as for which Dammages only are to be Recovered and therefore an Executor can bring no Action for the beating or wounding the Testator or for a Trespass done to him in his Cattle Grass or Corn or for a Wast by his Tenant done in his Lands for all these are but Personal Actions and die with the Testators person 3. If one grant a Rent out of his Land for life Provided that it shall not charge his Person and the Rent be behind and the Grantee dieth in this Case the Grantees Executor may have an Action of Debt for those Arrerages Likewise if any Rent or Arrerages of Rent be due to one upon a Grant of Rent out of any Land to him or reservation of Rent upon any Estate made by him of Land in these Cases his Executor may have an Action of Debt for this Rent or he may distrain for it so long as the Land chargeable with the Rent and out of which it doth issue is in his possession that ought to pay it or any claiming by or under him Yea an Executor in some Cases may have his remedy by Action for the Arrerages of Rent which the Testator himself in his life-time could not for if a man grant a Rent-charge out of certain Lands to another for life with a Proviso in the Deed that the Grantee shall not in any sort charge the Person of the Grantor generally and the Rent be behind the Grantee dieth the Executors of the Grantee shall have an Action of Debt against the Grantor and charge his person for the Arrerages in the life of the Grantee notwithstanding that Proviso because the Executors have no other remedy against the Grantor for the Arrerages for Distrain they cannot because the Estate in the Rent is determined and the Proviso cannot leave the Executors without remedy so that the word Proviso in this Case doth work only a qualification or limitation not a Condition or a Covenant 4. One that is Out-Lawed or Attainted in his own person may yet Sue as Executor because
thousand five hundred pound upon a special Verdict the Case was That W. M. had received annually out of the Exchequer Fifty pound as a Fee for his Diet for Thirty years together which was paid him by the Command of the Lord Treasurer who had Authority by Privy Seal to make allowance and payment of all Fees due but in truth these were not any due Fees And whether his Executor shall be charged with these Summs so received was the Question And after Argument it was adjudged that he should be charged for it was held That this payment of the money by the appointment of the Lord Treasurer was not allowable for the Privy Seal is not sufficient Authority to dispose of the Queens Treasure unless where it is due and he disposing of it otherwise it is out of his Authority 2. It was held That this money delivered by Authority of the Lord Treasurer who is quasi a Judicial Officer and it was quasi a Judicial Act by him yet it shall not bind the Queen for it was without his Authority and without warrant to make allowance thereof not being due and it is at his peril who receives it or demands allowance thereof For these and other Reasons mentioned in the Report it was adjudged for the Queen against the Defendant and although he were Executor he should answer for it as a debt from the Testator 11 Co. 90. b. Errour upon a Judgement given in an Assumpsit against an Executor upon a Promise of the Testators where the Plaintiff declared That the Testator in consideration of Marriage promised to pay the Plaintiff One hundred pound and for non-performance of this promise brought the Action and Judgement there given for the Plaintiff and this matter was assigned for Errour that the Action lay not against an Executor and all the Justices and Barons besides Clark Baron held it to be Erroneous for this cause For Anderson said The Reason why Debt lies not against an Executor upon a Contract of the Testators is because the Law doth not intend that he is privy thereto or can have notice thereof and he cannot gage his Law for such a debt as the Testator might and when debt will not lie it is not fit that this Action upon a bare Promise should bind him for it stands upon one Reason And if these Actions should be allowable it would be very mischievous wherefore the Judgement was reversed Q. Whether a Recovery in this Action against an Executor is allowable against a debt upon an Obligation if it should be an Administration for then it would be mischievous to Creditors and if it should not be an Administration it would then be mischievous to Executors that they should be charged therein and not have allowance thereof against other Creditors for it may be that at the time of the Recovery they did not know of other debts Note that this Term was given the like Judgement betwixt Griggs and Helhouse in an Action brought against an Administrator upon a Promise of the Intestates to pay money c. Debt against the Defendant as Administratrix of J. S. upon plene Administravit pleaded it was found by Verdict That the Testator at the time of his death had Goods to the value of One hundred pound and was bound to another by Obligation in One hundred pound and that the Defendant had taken in this Obligation and made another in her own Name with Sureties to the Obligor And upon the motion of Heale the Court held That this was an Administration and it is in the nature of a payment and so much of the Testators debt is thereby discharged and so it was said to be adjudged in Woods Case Nota fuit Ruled accordingly Pasch 30. in C. B. which was entered Mich. 28 29 Eliz. inter Stamp Hutchins Action upon the Case on Indebitatus Assumpsit doth well lye for every debt implyes a Promise and it is one good consideration in Facto whereon to found an Action But for a debt by simple Contract due by the Testator no Assumpsit lies against Executors and it was openly delivered by Popham Chief Justice No. 44 Eliz. to be the Resolution of all the Judges and to be a President in all Cases that might after happen It was agreed by Yelverton Williams and Crook Justices That if a man by Indenture lease Land to J. D. for years rendring Rent and J. D. dye making A. his Executor the Lessor may have Action of Debt against the Executor for the Rent reserved and the Arrears thereof after the death of the Lessee albeit the Executor never enter nor agree to the Lease for the Executor represents the Testators person and the Testator by the Indenture was stop'd and concluded to pay the Rent during the Term upon his own Contract and albeit the Rent exceeded the value of the profit of the Land yet the Executor cannot waive the Land but notwithstanding that shall be charg'd with the Rent Vid. Opin Ascue 21 H. 6. 24. 11 H. 4 Contr. Action Sur Trover and Conversion of Goods upon demurrer the Case was The Ordinary committed Administration of the Goods of an Intestate to the Defendant afterwards the next of Kin sues out a Citation in the Ecclesiastical Court against the Defendant to Repeal that Administration and he pendente Lite sells those Goods and afterwards his Administration is Repealed and Administration committed to the Plaintiff who for this Conversion pendente Lite brings this Action and it was moved for the Defendant that this Action lyes not for the Administration at the Common Law is well committed and the Statute doth not alter the Law in this point but gives a penalty against the Ordinary if he commits them not to the next of Kin and the Administrator till Administration Repealed hath an absolute Authority to dispose of the Goods as he pleaseth Tanfield è contra The Conversion pendente Lite in the Ecclesiastical Court is not lawful but is a Tort to the Plaintiff and that the Sentence there proves which is that all things attempted or done pendente Lite shall be void and the Justices ought to have regard to the Civil Law in this point as in 27 H. 6. Guard 118. 2 R. 2. Quare impedit 143. and 4 H. 7. 13. And by the Sentence it appears that the Administration is revoked as if it never had been and upon this reason it is in Dyer 339. where an Administrator recovered a debt and afterwards another procured himself to be joyned in the Administration and released the debt and afterwards it being revoked this release was not any bar to the execution And Mich. 25 26 Eliz. in the Common Bench between White and Cary this very point was in question and adjudged that the Action lay Gawdy The Action well lies for the Sentence doth not repeal mean Acts done by an Administrator which are for the Intestates benefit but forasmuch as these Goods were not converted
Lease for years worth Fifty pound per annum or more out of which he payes Ten pound yearly Rent and dies in this Case not the full value of the Land yearly but only so much as is above the said Rent shall be deemed Assets in the hands of the Executor or Administrator Or suppose the deceased dies possessed of Goods and Chattels to the value of Two hundred pound and in debt to M. Two hundred pound and to N. One hundred pound and to O. Fifty pound and to P. Twenty pound and Composition is made with M. for Sixty pound or other Summ more or less under Two hundred pound In this Case the Executor is deemed to have Assets chargeable to the other Creditors for so much as is above the Summ so compounded unto Two hundred pound Or where a man is indebted Forty pound to one and Thirty pound to another and dies leaving but Forty pound in all and his Executors agree with the Creditor of Forty pound for Ten pound and have his Acquittance for the Forty pound yet the Thirty pound remaining in their hands shall be Assets 2. If Executors do Recover any Dammages for Trespass or other wrong done to the Testator the money recovered will be Assets in their hands as well as Debts recovered upon Bonds or Bills or Lands by them taken in extent upon Statutes Recognizances or Judgements Yea without ever having these monies Executors may make them Assets in their hands viz. by making Releases or Acquittances or Acknowledgement of Satisfaction for this amounteth to a Receit and chargeth the Executors towards the Creditors with the whole penal Summ though possibly they receive but part as the Principal or some such proportion But Debts or Dammages recovered by a Judgement had by the deceased in his life-time whereof no Execution was are not Assets in his Executors or Administrators hands until Execution be made yea though Execution be made and the Dammages so recovered that they be gotten into the Executors hands or possession yet if the Judgement be Erroneous and the Execution avoidable it shall not be deemed Assets in his hands for which Cause a Debt Sued and Recovered by one as Administrator to A. B. and afterwards a Testament made by A. B. produced and proved is not Assets in the Administrators hands because the Executor in the said Testament may recover it from him 3. A Mortgage Redeemed is Assets unless the Executors redeemed it with their own money Likewise Goods of the Testators redeemed by the Executor with the Testators money are Assets in the Executor it is otherwise if the Executor having no monies of the Testators doth redeem them with his own money If the Testator grant a Lease for years or Horses Sheep Plate or other Cattle unto A. upon some Condition that A. did not perform after the Testators death in this Case the Chattel reverts and comes back to the Testators Executors and is Assets in their hands Also if A. Covenant with B. to make him a Lease of such or such Land by such a day and B. dieth before the day and before any Lease made now must A. make the Lease to the Executor of B. and the Lease so made to him shall be Assets in his hands because the Executor shall have the Term only as Executor So if A. undertake to deliver in to B. Twenty loads of Coles Wood or other Merchandize whatsoever and this is not performed in the life of B. but afterwards to his Executor this shall be Assets in his hands as well as the money recovered in Dammages for non-performing should have been Likewise any Goods or Chattels whatsoever given or bequeathed to any person by the Testator upon a Condition certain and the Condition not afterwards performed by such Conditional Legatary the said Goods and Chattels conditionally bequeathed do revert to the Executor and become Assets in his hands 4. Encrease gotten to the Executors by Merchandizing with the Testators Goods shall be Assets in their hands and shall charge them Likewise Dammages recovered by an Executor in an Action of Trespass shall as aforesaid be Assets and yet they were never in the Testator Also if a Lease be made to one for life the Remainder to his Executors for years and he dieth this will be Assets in the hands of his Executors though it never were in the Testator So where a Lease for years is bequeathed to A. for life and after to B. who dieth before A. although B. never had this Term in him so as that he could grant or dispose it yet shall it rest in his Executor as his Goods and be Assets in his Executors hands Likewise a Remainder for years so in the Testator that he might grant or dispose it at his pleasure though the same fell not in possession to the Testator in his life-time yet this is Assets to the Executor even whilst it continues a Remainder and before it falleth into possession because it is presently valuable and vendible In like manner Gain gotten by Trading as aforesaid with the Testators money Wool growing upon Sheep after the Testators death also the encrease of Sheep or other Cattel after the Testators death though never in the Testators actual possession shall yet be Assets in the Executor Likewise a Feoffment made to the Feoffors use for life and after him to the use of his Executors or Assigns for a certain number of years that number of years shall be Assets in the hands of the Feoffors Executor Also Goods hypothecated or pledged to the deceased in his life-time and not redeemed or the money thereof when redeemed is Assets in the Executors or Administrators hands Likewise the money raised by the Sale of the deceaseds Lands sold by his appointment by the Executors for the payment of his debts as when the deceased did in his life-time appoint that his Executors shall sell his Lands to pay his debts shall as aforesaid be Assets in the Executors hands Also if Executors had a Villein for years and the Villein purchased Lands in Fee and the Executors entered they had a Fee-Simple but it was Assets The reason was because they had the Villein in auter droit viz. as Executors to the use of the dead And if Executors having Assets do wast it or pay Debts or Legacies in any other order or method than the Law hath prescribed they must answer it out of their own Estates 5. Debts due to the Testator be not Assets in the Testators hands so as to charge him for the payment of Debts and Legacies until Judgement and Execution had or they be otherwise recovered received or released by him And an Executor paying the just value of the Testators Goods to the Creditors may retain the same Goods in his hands which nevertheless shall not afterwards charge the Executor as Assets But if question be concerning the value it is received by all that the
Executors if they have no further Authority or Interest than only to sell the Land and distribute the money for then the Frank-Tenement doth descend to the Heir and the Executors are bound to perform the Devise in convenient time But if the money for the same be to be distributed in pios usus then the Frank-Tenement is in the Executors after the death of the Testator and not in the Heir So that in such Case he may not Enter as in the former Yea if Lands Devised to be sold be not accordingly so done by the Executors the Law will then enforce them to sell the Lands so soon as they can because the mean Profits in that Case taken before Sale are not Assets to charge the Executors as compellable to pay debts of the same But if a man Devise that his Executors shall sell his Land there they may sell it at any time for that they have but a bare and naked Power and no Profit 4. If many Executors be named in a Will wherein Power is given to them to sell Land for any purpose and some of these Executors refuse the Executorship In this Case the other Executors who stand to the Will may dispose and sell the Land without the consent of the other who so refused the Executorship But Note That an Executors Executor cannot sell the Land of the first Testator who by his Will gave Power to his Executor to sell the same unless there be a Co-Executor surviving 5. Although the surviving Executor may sell the Land which a Testator doth bequeath to his Executors to be Sold because as the State so the Trust shall survive yet in case the Executors in that part of the Will impowering them to Sell be particularly Named each by his particular Name and one of them refuse and dye before Sale made then the Survivors cannot sell the same because the words of the Testator one of the Executors refusing or being dead cannot be satisfied unless the Testator express in his Will a Power to the Survivors or Survivor of them or to such or so many of them as take upon them the Probate of the Will without which words the Executors being particularly Named it is otherwise But if the Land to be Sold be left to his Executors generally not particularizing their Names then Sale made by some of them only in this Case is good for that now by the Statute of 21 H. 8. cap. 4. it is Provided That where Lands be Willed to be sold by Executors though part of them refuse yet the residue may sell But here Note That they may not sell to him that so refused because he is yet a party and privy to the Last Will and remains an Executor still so long as any Co-Executor lives For it was the Opinion of the c. Note that by the Opinion of the Justices if a man makes his Last Will and Wills that his Executors shall sell his Land and Devises his Land to his Executors to be sold and one of the Executors refuse the Administration of the Testators Goods before the Ordinary the other Executors cannot sell the said Land to the Executor so refusing the Administration by the Statute 21 H. 8. cap. 4. For that Executor notwithstanding such his refusal is still a party and privy to the said Testament and is one of the Executors at his pleasure It was adjudged in B. R. between Vincent and Lee where a man devised That his Sons in Law should sell the Reversion of his Land without mentioning their particular Names if some of them dye that the others may sell Upon a special Verdict the Case was A man seised of Lands in Possession and of other Lands in Reversion upon an Estate for life Deviseth by his Will in writing That his Executors should have all his Lands Free and Customary in D. for Ten Years to perform his Will and the Will of his Father with the Profits thereof and that after the Ten Years his Executors or any of them should sell it for the payment of his Debts He makes Three Executors and dies The one dies the Ten Years expire Tenant for Life dies the Two surviving Executors sell the Land c. Spurling This Sale is not good 1. The Reversion of the Estate for Life passed not because he had other Lands there to satisfie the words and it was not his intent to pass it because there were not any Profits to be taken thereby 2. The Sale by the Two surviving Executors is not good for it ought to have been by all or by one of them only But the Court resolved to the contrary in both wherefore it was adjudged accordingly The same Case is Reported by Anderson thus viz. J. T. brought Ejectione Firmae against J. W. and others The Defendants pleaded Non Culp whereupon Special Verdict was given the which in effect was That one Smith being seised of Twenty Acres of Land made a Lease thereof to one for Life and being also seised of Sixty other Acres made his Will in manner following viz. I Will and Charge my Executors and every of them to fulfill my Fathers Will and this my Last Will in which were divers Legacies In Consideration whereof I give all my Lands and Tenements to my Executors and they to take the Profits thereof by the space of Ten Years and those Ten Years ended I will the same to be sold by my said Executors or by one of them And made Three Executors and died after the Tenant for life died one of the Executors died also The Two Executors Enter on the Sixty Acres and receive the Profits thereof for Ten Years but Entered not on the Twenty Acres but after the Ten Years ended the surviving Executors sold the Twenty Acres to J. H. who Entered and Leased the same whereon the Action is brought It was said That the Executors did not Sell but it was adjudged that the surviving Executors might Sell For it appeared that the Intention of the Testator was That the Land should be sold for the performance of his Will which the surviving Executors might Execute and consequently do what the Testator appointed in order thereunto CHAP. XXVIII Of Debts Legacies and Mortuaries and the Executors method in the payment thereof 1. Debts to be paid before Legacies 2. The Executor may pay himself first 3. What Debts to the Crown shall have priority of payment before Debts to the Subject 4. Judgements upon Record to be satisfied next after the Debts due to the Crown 5. Next after Judgements upon Record Debts by Statutes or Recognizances are payable before meer Personal Debts 6. After Statutes and Recognizances Debts due by Obligations or penal or single Bills are to have the next precedency in payment 7. Debts upon Specialties Bonds and Bills are to be satisfied before Debts upon a simple Contract 8. After Obligations Debts due upon simple Bills Merchants Books and other Specialties are
his Execution shall have the preferment and before suing of Execution the Executor may give precedency to whom he will and may if he please satisfie the Recognizance before the Statute at least if he do it before Execution sued thereupon But Executors under pretence or colour of Recognizances for the peace or good behaviour or the like or under pretence of Statutes for performing Covenants touching the enjoying of Lands not forfeited nor any summs of mony possibly ever thereupon becoming payable are not to with-hold payment of debts by Specialty and thereby defraud the Creditors so that if the Statute or Recognizance be only for performance of Covenants and no Covenant be broken an Obligation for the payment of present money shall be discharged before it Also no Judgement or Statute that is discharged or is left and suffered to lye by agreement to bar others of their debts shall bar debts upon Obligations And here Note That a Statute is a more expedite remedy than a Recognizance for upon a Statute Execution may be taken out without any Scire Facias or other Sute which cannot be in the Case of a Recognizance for there if a year be pass'd after the acknowledgement no Execution can be sued out against the party himself acknowledging it without a Scire Facias first sued out against him and if he be dead then though the year be not pass'd yet must a Scire Facias be sued 6. After Statutes and Recognizances debts due by Obligations and penal and single Bills are to be paid if there be yet Assets And if there be divers Obligations then it seemeth to be in the power of the Executor to discharge which he will first unless the day of payment in the one Obligation be expired and in the other not yet come in which Case the Obligation whereof the day of payment is expired is to be first satisfied or unless a sute be Commenced for one of the Obligations for then it is not in the Executors power in prejudice of that sute to discharge an Obligation for which no Action is brought But if Two several Creditors bring several Actions against the Executor upon Two Obligations he that first getteth Judgement must first be satisfied Yet a debt due upon Record may be paid depending the Action and although in case of several Obligations when the time of payment upon the one was come at the time of the Testators death not so upon the other and he to whom the Obligation is whose time of payment was expired at the Testators death forbear to demand or sue for his debt untill the other Obligation become also payable In this Case it is then in the Executors power to pay which he please if the Goods extend not to pay both for it is the Commencement of the Sute only which intitles to priority of payment or at least restrains the Executors election therefore an Executor may not pay a debt of equal degree to a Creditor that brings no Action for the same after another Creditor hath brought his Action But whether a bare verbal demand without a sute be sufficient to hinder the Executors payment to the other is a question but resolved in the negative Yet an Executor may make payment of any debt due by Record as by Judgement Statute c. after sute begun by another for some other debt And notwithstanding what hath been said an Executor cannot in all Cases pay him first who first commenced sute but he who first hath Judgement must first be satisfied as when one Creditor doth first begin sute and others suing after him get Judgement before him And in such Cases the Executor may expedite the sute of the one by a quick confession of his Action and retard the sute of the other by Essoignes Emplances or dilatory pleas Nay after sute commenced yet until the Executor hath notice thereof he may pay any other Creditor and then plead that he hath fully administred before notice of the others sute 7. For it is a good Plea for the Executor to say That he had fully Administred before he had notice of the Plaintiffs Writ for though he do pay debts upon Contracts the Writ depending against him upon a Bond whereas he had no notice of the sute he shall not be in such case charged Yet regularly in this case of an Action brought upon a simple Contract the Executor is to plead and to set forth those debts upon Specialties yet debts upon a simple Contract are to be paid before debts of Charity Likewise debts upon a simple Contract are to be paid before amends for a Tespass done by the Testator And here Note that between a debt by Obligation and a debt for Dammages upon a Covenant broken there is not any priority or precedency but the Executor may pay which he please first But if one hath a debt due to him from the deceased upon a simple Contract or the like and he sue the Executor for it when there be debts due to others upon Bonds and Bills unsatisfied in this Case the Executor may not pay this debt nor may he suffer the Plaintiff to Recover in his Action unless he hath Assets sufficient to satisfie the Bonds and Bills over and above that of the simple Contract 8. After Obligations Debts due upon simple Bills or Merchants Books or other Specialties are to be satisfied and discharged though indeed Bills are of the nature of an Obligation and charge the Executor as well as an Obligation for whatever words prove a man to be a debtor or to have another mans money in his hands or wherein the Testator if he were alive could not wage his Law shall charge the Executor And under this Head may be placed debts due upon Shop-Books and some verbal Contracts and Covenants Parol 9. Now debts due for Rent upon Leases of Land or Grants of Rent will come into Consideration though some are of Opinion that debts due for Rent in the Testators life-time be the Rent reserved upon Leases made by or without Deed for years or at Will are in equality of degree with debts due upon Specialties if the Rent grew due since the Testators death then it is not in Law accounted the Testators debt for only so much is in Law accounted Assets to the Executor as the Profits of the Lease amounted to over and above the Rent so as for that Rent so behind the Executor himself stands debtor and therefore is sueable in the Debet and Detinet whereas for the Rent behind in the Testators life-time and all other the debts of his Testator he must be sued in the Detinet only For this reason it is that an Executor sued for debt upon Bond or Bill cannot except in some special cases plead a payment or recovery of Rent grown due since the Testators death though of Rent behind at the time of his death it be
be in the Debet and Detinet because he is bound by special words in the Obligation and here the debt which in the time of the Administratrix occurr'd is her debt and in Dyer 6 Ed. 6. 81. the Action is brought in the Debet and Detinet for Rent Arrear in the time of the Executor and admitted to be good Popham accord For the being charged with the Rent in her time it accrews by reason of the Profits of the Land which she her self received and therefore she is charged having quid pro quo For if an Executor hath a Lease for years of Land of the value of Twenty pound per Ann. rendring Ten pound per Ann. Rent it is Assets in his hands only for Ten pound over and above the Rent Fenner agreed to this Opinion and to that purpose cited 10 H. 6. 11. That the Husband shall be charged after the death of the Feme for Rent Arrear in his own time because he received the Profits of the Land So as the Rent grew due in respect of the occupation and taking of the Profits And therefore she is chargeable and not meerly as Executrix Clinch agreed with them wherefore it was then adjudged for the Plaintiff Note That afterwards this Judgement was reversed in the Exchequer Chamber for the point in Law For all the Judges of the Common Bench and Barons of the Exchequer held That she ought to be charged in the Detinet because she is charged only by the Contract of the Intestate 5 Co. 31. The Case was One died Intestate in the County of York and a Stranger prayed Letters of Administration to be granted to him which was Repealed by the Delegates at York there was an Appeal to the Court of Delegates in the Chancery who did Repeal the former Sentence at York and adjudged that the Party made no Will and granted Letters of Administration to him who Appealed to them The Arch-Bishop of Canterbury granted Administration to a second person and the Arch-Bishop of York to a Third person who made a Release unto the Debtor of the Intestate upon which Release debt was brought by the first Administrator against the Defendant who pleaded the Release made to him And whether this grant of Letters of Administration by the Judges Delegates were good or not was the Question But the better Opinion of the Court was That the Letters of Administration which were granted by the Judges Delegates was not good but there being Bona Notabilia the Administration was to be granted by the Arch-Bishop And it was said That if the Party who died Intestate had Goods in several Provinces both the Arch-Bishops there having a Peculiar might grant Letters of Administration and although the King be Supream Ordinary and by Delegates may do many Acts yet the Court of Delegates cannot do this nor have they power to Prove any Wills for the power of the Judges Delegates is Potestas Delegata corrigere non exequi And the Court said That it was adjudged in one Brakenburies Case That the Judges Delegates had not power to grant any Letters of Administration An Exception was taken to a Declaration because the Plaintiff conveyed his Interest to an Administrator to whom the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury did grant the Administration of all the Goods of the Lessee and did not shew how the Arch-Bishop granted it either as Ordinary or by his Prerogative And this was held by all the Court a material Exception But it was afterwards alledged That all the Presidents in this Court viz. B. R. and in C. B. were so in general without special shewing how and for that they would not change the Presidents they disallowed the Exception And in this Case it was held That if an Administrator doth grant Omnia bona catalla sua a Term which he hath as Administrator doth not pass for it is not suum but he hath it in right of the Intestate But if one hath a Lease as Executor or Administrator of the Mannor of D. and he granteth all his right and interest in the Mannor the Term which he hath as Executor c. doth pass for he had no other Right in it and his intent is to pass it but by general words it shall not pass Debt against the Defendant as Administratrix she pleaded Plenè Administravit the Jury found That the Intestate was indebted to divers by Obligations and that after his death the Defendant had taken in the Obligations and had obliged her self to pay the greater part of the summs contained in the Obligations at certain dayes to come and for the residue had promised to the parties That in consideration of delivery in of the said Obligations that she would pay c. And by the Opinion of Anderson Windham and Periam it was held clearly a good Administration so that the property of the Goods of the Intestate to that value were altered and changed in the Defendant Action Sur Trover And Declares as Administrator of J. S. and that Administration was committed to him by A. B. Official to the Bishop of Peterborrough and sheweth not that he was Ordinary of the Place or that the granting of Administration did belong to him and this matter after Verdict was alledged in Arrest of Judgement but because divers Presidents had been so and that such Declarations had been allowed the Court did give Judgement for the Plaintiff Debt as Administrator to one Philips and Declares That Administration of the Goods of Philips was committed to him per Adrian Vane Sacrae Theologiae Doctorem such a day apud Monmouth and the Plaintiff recovered in the Common Bench by default and Writ of Errour was thereon brought and the Errour Assign'd because it is not shewn that Vane was Ordinary of Monmouth nor that the committing of Administration appertained to him and in regard it was in a Declaration which ought to be certain and he is not a Bishop nor any person who may be intended to be the Ordinary the Judgement was therefore reversed It was moved by Coke the Queens Atturney That the committing of Administration being by the Arch-Bishop although he had not Goods in divers Diocesses because it is in his Province wherein he hath Jurisdiction it is not void but only voidable by Sentence and it is not like to an Administration committed by another Bishop of the Goods of a man who died in another Diocess or who had Goods in divers Diocesses and this difference hath been taken and agreed in the Queens Bench c. But the Justices said it was all one and the Administration is void in both cases and not voidable only Debt upon an Obligation of One hundred pound one of the Defendants was Out-lawed the other pleaded that he who was Out-lawed was made Executor and solely Proved the Will and Administred and that the Defendant as Servant unto him took divers of the Testators Goods by his Delivery and by his appointment had sold them
are to be sued for in that Court only yet the Ordinary cannot take Cognizance of Freehold devised And whereas it is said That the Devisee may not take the Legacy and serve himself but that it must be Delivered to him by the Executor yet the Law is otherwise in Case Lands or any Rents or other Profit to be taken out of Lands be Devised to a Man in Fee-simple Fee-tayle for Life or Years for in these Cases the Devisee may enter into and take the thing Devised without the Executors leave for so doing CHAP. II. Of Devisors and Devisees or Legataries 1. Who may be a Devisor or Devisee or Legatary 2. What persons are incapable of being Legataries 3. Whether an Infant in the Womb may be a Legatary or a Feme Covert to her own Husband 4. Whether Bastards may be Legataries 1. REgularly every one that is qualified to make a Testament may make a Devise of the same thing whereof he may make such Testament and whosoever is disabled to the one is disabled to the other also And therefore Infants under the age of 21. years may not be Devisors of Land nor of Goods under the age of 14. as to the Male or under the age of 12. Years as to the Female Nor may a Woman under Covert Baron Devise her Lands to her own Husband or to others with or without his Consent Nor may any Ecclesiastical person or Member of a Body Corporate Devise the Lands or Goods which they have in right of the Church or Corporation So that every Devisor ought to be a person qualified to devise and that both in respect of his Person and the thing Devised he must also have at the same time Animum Testandi and the thing Devised must be such as is Devisable And as to the Devisee or Legatary all such by the Civil Law as are uncapable of Inheritances and Goods are excluded from being Legataries or Devisees and indeed from being Executors But every one by that Law that may be made an Heir or Executor may also be a Legatary or Devisee and as to any others no Devise may be made Yet with this Difference that the Executor must be a Person capable both when the Testament is made and when the Testator dyes But it is sufficient for the Legatary that he be capable at the Testators death Indeed at the Common Law it is otherwise for there a Devise or Legacy may be given to all persons to whom a Grant may be made save in some few Cases And the Devise ought to be good and sufficient in Law at the time of the Testators death Therefore if a Man Devise Lands to an Hospital or the like when there is none such at the Testators death though afterwards made or erected such Devise is Null and Void The Reason is Because Devises at Common Law are Purchases and he that taketh Lands by Purchase must be capable to take the same when it falleth to him by the Purchase Thus by the Common Law the Devisee ought to be capable at the time of the death of the Devisor which holds also True by the Civil Law Hence it is that though a Man may not grant nor give Lands to his Wife during the Coverture because they both are but one Person in Law yet by Custom heretofore he might and by Statute now he may Devise his Lands to his Wife to have in Fee-simple or otherwise because such Devise taketh not effect till the death of the Devisor and then they are not one person So then Regularly whosoever may be a Grantee may also be a Devisee or Legatee 2. For which Reason a Cominalty not Incorporate by the Kings Charter to Purchase Lands is Incapable therefore if a Man Devise Lands Devisable in Fee to A. for Life upon a certain Condition the Remainder to certain Men of a Fraternity upon the same Condition not Incorporate by the Kings Charter and enabled to Purchase this Remainder is void Therefore a Legacy given to an unlawful Colledge is void for by that is meant all Companies Societies Fraternities and other Assemblies not so Constituted by the Prince and therefore incapable of being Legataries But generally a Devise may be good to any Person or Persons not specially rendred incapable by Law for by the Civil and Ecclesiastical Law the Legacy is void if it be given to an Heretick Apostate Traytor Felon Persons Excommunicate outlawed Persons Bastard unlawful Colledge as aforesaid Libeller ler Sodomite Manifest and Notorious Usurer except in some special Cases And yet it seems that a Devise of Lands to any such Persons is good within the Statute of Wills Likewise an uncertain Person can be no Competent Legatary no more then he is of being an Executor insomuch that if a Man Bequeath any thing to a person by a certain Name without other description of his person and there be more then one of the same Name known To the Testator in this Case neither of them shall be Legatary by Reason of the uncertainty Hence it is that Devises made in these words viz. To his best Friend or to his best Friends are void Devises Or to his Son A. B when he hath two Sons of the same Name unless you can help it by an Averment which Son the Testator meant but persons named Alternatively or Disjunctively are not so uncertain but may be admitted as Legataries And therefore if the Testator Bequeath 10 l. to A. or B. or to such or such a person both of them shall have the Legacy equally betwixt them Because this word Or is in favour of Testaments taken for and when it is so placed between two persons either as to the appointing of Executors or to the making of Legataries unless it can be well proved That the Testator did bear more affection to the one then to the other Or that he gave Authority to some other person of making the Election which of the two should be the Legatary Or when one of the persons is Incapable of being a Legatary for any of the Reasons aforesaid And if the Devisor doth Bequeath to his Brother or his Children such a thing saying I give to my Brother or his Children in this Case upon the presumption of Affection the Brother shall enjoy the Legacy during his life and after him the Children shall be the Legataries But if it be Devised to him and his Children then are both the Parent and his Children equal and Joynt-Legataries And whereas it is formerly hinted That an Heretick may not be a Legatary or Devisee understand it of an Heretick that is such at the time of the Devisors death for it doth not prejudice the Legatary that fie was an Heretick at the time of the making of the Testament so as he be not one at the Testators death Add nnto this Anabaptists for the Law Civil and Canon excludes them
One Devised all his Lands to another and the Heirs of his Body begotten and after in the same Will Devised That if the Devisee die the said Lands should remain to another in Fee The Court held That the Devisee hath notwithstanding an Estate Tail by the first words and no Estate pass'd by the last words One Devised his Land to W. his Son for Term of his Life and after his decease to the Men-children of his Body and in case the said W. dyed without any Man-child of his Body that then the Land should remain to another c. The Testator dies W. dies without Issue Male of his Body c. and the Question was What Estate he had the Justices of the Bench held that he had an Estate to him and the Heirs Males of his Body F. Seised of Land in Gavelkind had Three Sons and Devised part to one part to another the other part to the Third and if either of them dyed without Issue the other should be his Heir It was Adjudged an Entail in each and a Fee-simple by the words Heir to other And so it was Adjudged Hill 32. Eliz. in Carters Case C. B. If a Devise be made to one and his Heirs and in Case that he hath Issue a Daughter that she shall have the Lands If the Devisee hath Issue a Son and a Daughter and die the Son shall have the Land and although the Daughter afterwards take a Husband and hath Issue a Son he shall not eject the other CHAP. XI Certain Cases in Law touching Devises of Land for Life only 1. A Devise of Land to one not saying How long is an Estate only for life 2. Power of Distraining Devised to one without other words on Non-payment of a certain Annual Sum is only an Estate for Life 3. A Devise of Land to one and his Heir in the Singular Number or to one and his Children is but an Estate for life 4. Several Instances of Law touching Estates only for Life by way of Devise 5. Several Instances of Estates for Life by Implication Devised 6. A Devise of Land to one thereby obliged to a present Payment Creates a Fee-simple But if Payment be to Issue out of the Profits of the Land Devised it makes only an Estate Tail 7. A Devise of an Estate for Life in Reversion 8. A Devise of Two Estates for Lives the one to some in Being the other to others in Reversion 9. A. Devise of Lands in Esse or Posse Conditioned upon an Annual Payment to be made by the Devisee during his or her life which Devise is made by one in the Remainder in Fee and not in Possession doth pass an Estate only for life 10. A Devise by general words of all a Mans Estate Mortgages c. may pass as to the Real no more than an Estate for Life and not a Fee by Implication 11. The Law ever accommodates the Testators words whatever they be as nigh as possible to his intent and meaning 1. IF a Man Deviseth his Land to A. B. and say not how long nor for what Time by this Devise A. B. hath an Estate only for Life in the Land But if a Man Devise his Land to A. B. and his Assigns without saying For ever it hath been a Question whether he hath only an Estate for Life as was held by some or a Fee-simple as hath been Affirmed by others 2. In the latter part of the last Chapt. it was said That it was an Estate Tail of the Rent if one Devised to A. B. that if he and the Heirs of his Body be not paid 20 l. Rent yearly he and they shall distrain But now if the Devise only be That if A. B. be not paid 20. l. yearly he shall distrain c. by this Devise A. B. hath only an Estate for Life Likewise if one devise a Rent of 10 l. out of his Land to be paid quarterly and say not how long the Rent shall continue this is but an Estate in the Rent only for Life 3. If one Devise his Land to A. B. for his Life or to him without any more words or to him and his Heir in the Singular Number or to him and his Children he then having Children By all these and such like Devises A. B. hath only an Estate for life in the thing Devised And if one Devise That A. B. shall have and occupy his Land in D. and say not how long by this Devise A. B. shall have the Land as aforesaid only for life But If I Devise that A. B. shall enter into my Land and say no more by this Devise A. B. hath no Estate at all but power to enter into the Land only 4. A Man having a Son and a Daughter dies Lands are Devised to the Daughter and the Heirs Females of the Body of the Father by this Devise the Daughter hath only an Estate for her life for there is no such person for she is not Heir Likewise if one Devise his Land in D. unto A. B. for life and after to the next right Heir in the Singular Number and to his right Heirs for ever by this Devise A. B. hath only an Estate for life Or if one Devise Land to A. B. for life and after to the next Heir Male of A. B. and to the Heirs Males of the Body of such next Heir Male by this Devise also A. B. hath but an Estate only for life But if he Devise his Land to A. B. for his life and after to the Heirs or to the right Heirs of A. B. by these Devises A. B. hath the Fee-simple of the Land And if it be to him for life and after to his Heirs Males then he hath an Estate Tail But if one Devise Land to F. G. and M. his Wife and after their decease or the Remainder to their Children by this Devise whether they have or have not Children at the time F. G. and M. his Wife have Estates only for their lives 5. If one Devise his Land to A. B. in Fee after the death of C. D. being his Son and Heir apparent by this Devise C. D. hath an Estate for life by Implication and till the Devise take effect the Law gives it to him by descent The Law is the same where one doth devise his Land to A. B. after the death of his Wife by this Devise the Wife hath an Estate for life by Implication Likewise if a Man Devise in this manner I give my Goods to my Wife and that after her decease my Son and Heir shall have the House where the goods are it is held That by this Devise the Wife hath an Estate for life in the House by Implication But if a Man Devise his Land to A. B. after the death of I. G. a Stranger to the Devisor it seems that by this Devise I. G. hath no Estate at all by Implication
and that this doth but set forth the Time when the Estate of A. B. shall begin and that the Intent of the Testator is That his Heir shall have it until that Time The Reason of the difference is because a Man is bound to provide for his own not so for a Stranger and so the Law presumes what Nature doth teach 6. If one Devise his Land in this manner viz. I give my Land in D. to A. B. to the intent that with the Profits thereof he shall bring up my Child or my Children or to the intent that with the Profits thereof he shall pay to I. M. 10 l. or to the intent that out of the Profits thereof he shall pay yearly 10 l. By these Devises A. B. hath only an Estate for life albeit the Payments to be made be greater than the Rents of the Land Otherwise it is in case the Sum of Money is to be paid presently and not appointed to be paid out of the Profits of the Land in which case A. B. should have a Fee-simple in the Land 7. If the Father of A. be Tenant for life of Land the Remainder to A. in Fee And A. devise the Land to his Wife Rendring for her natural life 5 l. to the right Heir of the Father of A. by this Devise the Wife of A. hath an Estate for life after the death of his Father 8. Land was Devised to Husband and Wife and after their decease to their Children they then having Issue a Son and a Daughter In this case the Husband and Wife have but an Estate for Term of their lives the Remainder to their Children for life and no Estate Tail for the intent of the Testator here shall be construed according to the Rules of the Common Law and by the Common Law the Husband and Wife have but an Estate for their lives with a Remainder to their Children for their lives 9. The Son Seised of a Remainder in Fee after the death of his Father who was Tenant for life devised the same by these Words viz. I Devise to D. my Wife the Lands which I have or may have in Reversion after the death of my Father paying therefore yearly during her life to the right Heirs of my Father 40 s. and dyed his Father living It was the Opinion of the Court That no Estate passed by this Devise but for Term of the life of the Wife and that she should not pay the 40 s. until the Reversion did fall after the death of the Father 10. A. Seised of divers Lands in A. B. and C. the Lands in C. being in him by Mortgage forfeited Devised the Lands in A. and B. to several Persons and then adds this Clause in his Will All the rest of the Goods Chattels Leases Estates Mortgages whereof he was possessed he devised to his Wife after his Debts and Legacies paid made his Wife his Executrix and dyed The Wife entered into the Mortgaged Lands and devised it to the Defendant and his Heirs and dyed The Question was whether the Fee passed to the Wife by this Devise by the Name of all his Estate Mortgages c. It was the Opinion of the whole Court That an Estate for life only passed unto her and not a Fee by Implication of the general words in the Will 11. Note That there is a difference when one Deviseth his Term for life the Remainder over and when a Man Deviseth the Land or his Lease or Farm or the Occupation or Use or Profits of his Land For in a Will the intent and meaning of the Devisor is to be observed and the Law makes construction of the Words to answer and satisfie his intent and puts them into such order that his Will shall take effect And when a Man deviseth his Lease to one for life it is as much as to say He shall have so many Years in it as he shall live and that if he dyeth within the Term that another shall have it for the Residue of the Years And although at the beginning it is uncertain how may Years he shall live yet when he dyeth it is certain how many Years he hath lived and how many Years the other shall have and so by a subsequent Act all is made certain A Man made his Will in this manner Item I give my Mannor of Dale to my second Son Item I give my Mannor of Sale to my said Son and his Heirs what Estate he had in the Mannor of Dale was the Question It was held by Dyer Weston and Welch That in the first he had but an Estate for life for that it is as much as to say as if he would give his Mannor of Dale to him for his life for that as much is included therein without saying His Heirs And that Item seems a new Gift to a greater degree in the second place to make amends for the other Brown e Contra and that the Item is a Conjuntion Copulative and that the word Heirs expressed in the latter Clause extends to both the Mannors But if the Word Heirs were put in the Gift of the former Lands it would be otherwise Dyer if in the first place or Clause there were not any person named but that the words were Item I give the Mannor of D. Item I give the Mannor of S. to I. K. and his Heirs there and in that Case it would refer to both the Mannors W. C. by his Will Devised a Messuage in these words viz. I give to A. L. my Cousin the Fee-simple of my House and after her decease to W. her Son The Judges held That A. L. had an Estate for life and her Son a Fee-simple in Remainder And so it was adjudged R. D. Seised in Fee of a House and Possess'd of Goods made his Will in these words viz. The rest of my Goods Lands and Moveables whatsoever after my Debts Legacies and Funeralls paid to my Three Children I. T. and M. equally to be divided amongst them And it was Adjudged That they have an Estate only for life in the House and are Tenants in Common not Joynt-tenants CHAP. XII Certain Cases in the Law touching Devises of Leases or for a Term of Years 1. In what Case the Word Shall is taken for Should in Devise of a Term. 2. A Devise of Lands for 99. Years may be only for no more of that Term then the Issue Male of the Devisee shall continue 3. The Devise of a Term to one and his Heirs shall go to the Devisees Executors or Administrators and not to his Heirs 4. chattel-Chattel-Leases and Leases for Years pass not by a Devise of all his Lands and Tenements 5. By a Lease for Years Devised for Life doth pass the whole Term yet is it not an Estate for Life 6. The whole Interest of a Lessee in his lease-Lease-Lands doth pass by a Devise of his Lease Term Farm Profits Tenure or Occupation thereof as
the Devise of a House with all things therein 32. The Difference between a Devise of a Chamber and the Devise of a Shop 33. The Devise of a Field carries also the Edifice erected thereon 34. The Civil Law where the Fee of Land is Devised to one and the Rents of the same Land to another 35. in what Case an error or mistake in the Testator may be a prejudice to the Legatee 36. A Legacy or Devise may be inferr'd as well from the Testators Intention as Expression 37. A Devise by Reason of an Omission of that whereof the Testator said he would make a description is not void 38. A Legacy to Two whereof one is not accrews in the whole to the other that is 39. Further Exemplifications of Law touching Devise of Houses altered burnt and re-edified 40. An Exception of a Thing which is not is no prejudice to the Devisee 41. The same thing Conditionally twice Devised by two Testators to several Persons how or in what Case good to either or not 42. By a Devise of ground doth pass the Edifice thereon albeit it were erected after the Devise made 43. How a Devise is to be apportioned where the Devisees are joyned in the thing Devised but disjoyned in the manner of Devising 44. A Devise of Lands by a certain Name carries all of that Name though otherwise distinct unless the Testator intended otherwise 45. Any words that do but plainly declare the Testators meaning may serve for a Devise 46. The Executor shall pay the Land-lords Rent for Ground in Lease the Fruit or Proceed whereof is Devised to another for the Term. 47. A mistake in the Testator only of the Scituation of the Lands Devised shall not prejudice the Devise 48. The difference between necessary and voluntary Alienations prohibited to Devisees by a Testator 49 A Tripartite Case in point of Alienation prohibited by a Testator 50. How the disjunctive Or in Legacies and Devises is frequently understood for the conjunctive And. WHere a Man is Seised of a House in Fee or of Land in Fee and may devise such House or Land in such case may Devise the Doors Windows Wainscot or the like Incidents of the House also the Trees and Grass growing upon such Land Otherwise it is with a Tenant in Tail for Life or Years in Houses or Land 2 If a man hath an Use that is not Executed by the Stat. of Uses but remains at the Common Law he may make a good Devise thereof And therefore if one possessed of a Term of years grant it over to another to the use of the Grantor he may Dispose this use by his Will for it is in the Nature of a Chattel 3. One that hath Money to be paid him on a Mortgage may Devise this Money when it comes If A. Enfeoffe B. of Land upon Condition that if B. do not pay A. 100 l. such a day that then A. may Re-enter In this case A. may Devise this 100 l. if it be paid and the Legacy is good albeit it be made before the day of Payment come 4. A Man cannot Devisc by his Will any Real Chattels that he hath only in right of his Wife nor the Obligations that are made to her alone before or during the Coverture nor the Chattels Real or Personal which she hath in right only of another as Executrix But all her own proper Goods and Chattels Personal and all Obligations made to them both during Coverture he may Devise by Testament 5. A Bishop cannot by his Testament Devise the Presentation of a Church that became void in his time yet if he or the Parson of a Church have the Advowson thereof in Fee and Devise that Two or Three of his Executors shall present at the next Avoidance this is a good Devise 6. By a Devise of Immoveables which are Chattels real do pass Leases Rents and the like and by a Bequest of Moveables which are Chattels Personal will pass Bonds and Specialties but Debts pass not by either of these Devises By Immoveables are understood not only the foresaid Chattels-real but also in some sense Trees growing on the Ground Fruit on the Trees Terms of Years and the like and by Moveables are Regularly understood all Goods both Actually Moving and Passively Moveable 7. If a Man Bequeath to A. B. all his Goods he shall thereby have the Testators whole Estate his Lands Tenements and Freehold excepted and thereby the Debts and Money If he Bequeath to him all his Chattels he shall have thereby all as in the former Case If he Bequeath to him all his Moveables he shall have all his Personal Goods both quick and dead and if he Beqneath to him all his Immoveables he shall have all the Testators Leases and all the Natural Fruits thereof as Grass on the Ground Fruit on the Trees and the like consequently Fishes in a Pond Pidgeons in the Dovehouse c. as Appurtenances to the Ground Devised as well as the Natural Fruits or Grass growing on the same 8. If a Man Devise all his Goods and Chattels to A. B. and die and A. B. die also before he hath proved the Testators Will in this Case the Administration of the Goods and Chattels of the said Testator shall be committed to the next of Kin of the said A. B. and not to the next of Kin of the said Testator because in this Case A. B. was the universal Successor 9. If a Woman under Coverture Devise her Land then publish and approve it after her her Husbands death when she is sole by this means that Devise which was Originally void is now become good But if she make and publish it during the Coverture albeit her Husband doth afterward die and she become sole yet this accident alone without a new publication after her Husbands death will not make that Devise good The Law is the same as to Goods and Chattels 10. In like Manner if an Infant within Age as to Lands or within Age as to Goods Devise the one or Bequeath the other and publish the Will and after he come to full and competent Age publish and Approve it again By this means the Devise or Legacy becomes good otherwise it is in Case he do not Publish and Approve it when he attains to Full and Competent Age. 11. Suppose the Testator doth Devise in this manner viz. I Will that my Executor shall pay 100 l. to A. B. by the Tenth day of March next after my decease and if otherwise then my Will is That my Executor shall Surrender to him all the Right I have in a Lease of my Ground called Black-acre and dies The Executor doth not pay to A. B. above 90 l. by the day Appointed In this Case A. B. restoring the said 90 l. to the Executor shall have the said Ground and he may detain the Money till he recover the Land 12. Suppose the Testator doth Devise the
Daughter Whether may the Daughter compel C. D. to sell the Jewel and restore her the overplus It is held in the Negative But she may compel her Brother who is her Fathers Executor to Commence his Action at Law against C. D. in order to the Premises Or if the Testator say I will that C. D. receive 100 l. and restore the Jewel to my Daughter not expressing of whom he shall receive the 100 l. In that case the Executor is lyable for the 100 l. 11. Suppose a Testator in his Will saith Whoever shall be my Executor for the Goods and Chattels I have in Ireland shall give 10 l. to A. B. in Dublin the Testator makes three Executors for his said Estate in Ireland and dyes The Question is whether every of these Co-executors each of them having Administer'd to the said Irish Estate and each of them having a part thereof in his possession is obliged to pay 10 l. to A. B And whether that universal word in the Legacy whoever hath that force in it as to make each of them obliged in the case for 10 l. each It is Resolved A. B. shall have but 10 l. in all to be paid by from and among all the three Executors The Reason is Evident because they all make but one Representative being distinct rather in their persons than in their Office 12. A Testator having made A. B. and C. D. his Executors in his Will faith That either A. B. shall pay 10 l. to J. G. in lieu of a Legacy or C. D. alone shall be his Executor and dyes They both Administer In this case J. G. may sue both of them for the whole Legacy and C. D. is as far forth lyable to the payment thereof as A. B. 13. A Testator whose Wife is big with Child saith I will that if there be any Daughter born to me my Executor shall pay her 100 l. and dyes After the Wife is delivered of Twins viz. Two Daughters In this case the Executor shall pay 100 l. to each unless it appear the Testator intended the contrary In like manner if a man bequeaths 1000 l. to his Daughters without other words and dyes and his Wife after his death be within due time delivered of another Daughter that Posthume Daughter shall claim proportionably with the others in the 1000 l. if the Testator by his Will made no other provision for her 14. A Testator bequeaths in this manner viz. I give to A. B. 300 l. And I will that my Executors do pay 100 l. thereof out of the Arrears of Rent due to me out of such Lands naming them the other 200 l. out of such and such Goods to be sold after the Testator receives in his life time the said Arrears of Rent and Converts them to other uses and dyes without altering his Will In this case A. B. shall notwithstanding have the whole 300 l. The Reasons in Law are 1 Because it was no Condition but only a Demonstration that had relation to the Legacy bequeathed 2 Because a bare designation how or whence a Legacy may be paid set after a Legacy given makes it not Conditional 15. Suppose a Testator saith I bequeath some Money for the repairing of my Parish Church not expressing how much In this case the Legacy in favour of Pious uses is good though it be somewhat uncertain And his Executor shall expend so much Money as will suffice for the repairing thereof unless it require a vast Sum at least much too great for the Testators Estate conveniently to bear In which case it shall be presumed the Testator intended no more than his Estate would conveniently admit and the Ordinary in such case shall moderate the Sum with respect had to the Testators Estate 16. A man possessed of Goods and Chattels in England and Ireland makes his last Will and Testament and therein his Son a Minor his sole Executor and A. B. his Guardian and the Overseer of his said Will to whom he therein bequeaths 100 l. and dyes A. B. willing to have himself excused from the said Guardianship in part refuses it as to the Estate in Ireland In this case he shall lose the whole Legacy of 100 l. because the Law is That a Legatary refusing the Office or Duty imposed on him by the Will though but in part forfeits his Legacy in the whole 17. A Testator makes his last Will and Testament and therein appoints A. B. and C. D. his Executors after doth annex a Codicil to his Will and therein saith I will that A. B. one of my Executors shall give J. G. 10 l. when I shall have given him the said A. B. 100 l. And dyes without bequeathing him any such 100 l. The Questions are whether A. B. by reason of such words spoken by the Testator may have a right to that 100 l And whether he be obliged to pay 10 l. to J. G They are both answered in the Negative The reason in Law is because words meerly Enunciative relating to something that should be done in time past or to come without expressing the very thing it self signifie nothing as to a sufficient disposal of any thing which is not deduceable from any such bare Enunciations 18. If the Testator saith I give thee 100 l. when thou shalt Marry and thou art Married at that time when the Testator so made his Testament and demandest the 100 l. upon the Testators death In this case thou shalt have the 100 l. if the Testator at the giving thereof were ignorant of thy being then Married But if he then knew thereof thou shalt not have it till thou art Married a second time 19. If in two several and distinct Writings or Instruments bearing one and the same date the same last Will and Testament be found written verbatim save that in the one there is mention made of a lesser Legacy to one than there is to him in the other the lesser only is due As thus A. B. going beyond Sea makes his last Will and Testament the Tenor of which Will is exemplified or duplicated in two distinct Papers as if the one was only a Duplicate of the other only in the one of these is found a Legacy of 100 l. to C. D. But in the other a Legacy only of 50 l. to him whereof the Testator takes one with him to Sea the other he leaves at home behind him In this case C. D. ought not to have more than one of these Legacies and that the lesser also viz. That of the 50 l. only 20. A Testator being possessed of 800 l. value in Goods appoints A. B. and C. D. his Executors and bequeaths 400 l. to A. B. And after sayes whoever shall be my Executor shall pay 200 l. to J. G. and gives several other Legacies to the full value of his 800 l. Estate and dyes C. D. refuses the Executorship In this case A. B. is obliged
there A Stranger Disseises the Devisor if he die before Re-entry the Devise is void If there be divers Devises of one thing in the same Will the last Devise shall take effect Co. Lit. 112. b. If a Man Seised in Fee Devise the same to I. S. in Fee and afterwards makes a Lease thereof to I. D. for Years this is no Revocation of the Fee but only during the Years Also if afterwards he devise that Lease to another for Life yet that is not any Revocation of the Fee but only during the Estate for Life If a Man possessed of a Term for 40. Years Devise the same to his Wife and after Lease the Land to another for 20. Years and die that Lease is not a Revocation of the whole Estate but only during the 20. Years and the Wife shall have the Residue by the Devise It appears therefore that a Legacy may indirectly and by Implication be Revoked as well as directly and expresly also in part as well as in whole and the Will may stand where Legacies in that Will do not In a Replevin upon Evidence given the Case was this I. W. was Seised of the Lands in Question and of divers other Lands and by his last Will Devised all his Lands and Tenements to A. W. of London in Fee After which he made a Feofment in Fee of the same Lands which he had Devised to the said A. and when he Sealed the Feofment he demanded and said will not this hurt my Will To which it was Answered That it would not And he said If this will not hurt my Will I will Seal it and then he Sealed it and a Letter of Atturney to make Livery The Atturney made Livery in some of the Lands but not in the Lands in Question afterwards the Testator dyed It was said That the Feofment was a Revocation for if the Testator had said That this shall not be his Will then it had been a plain Revocation and then the making of the Feofment is as much as to say That the Will shall not stand But it was Answered and Resolved by the whole Court That it Appeared That the mind of the Testator was That his Will should stand and when he made the Feofment this was a Revocation in Law and here is no Revocation in Deed For he said If this will not hurt my Will I will Seal it And although that the Atturney made Livery in part so as the Feofment was perfect in part yet for the Lands in Question whereof no Livery was made the Will shall stand for a Will may be effectual for part and for part it may be Revoked and the Court told the Jury That this was their Opinion and the Jury found accordingly The Case in Chancery was this C. E. the Testator 15. Jac. made his Will in Writing and thereby Devised Legacies to Charitable Uses and to R. and W. his Brothers viz. to one 100 l. and to the other 1000 l. and other Legacies to his Kindred and made his Wife his Executrix and Appointed his two Brothers to be joyned with her as Executors in Trust for his Wife afterwards 22. Jac. he sent for several Persons to come to him when they came they demanded of him What Friend he thought best to be his Executor and to see his Will performed and whether he Trusted any Person more than his Wife He Answered That his Wife was the fittest Person and therefore should be his Sole Executrix Being then moved to give other Legacies to his Father Brethren and Kindred He Answered He would not leave them any thing But Bequeathed to I. S. his God-son 30 s. And being Requested by his Wife to give him a greater Legacy He Answered Thou knowest not what thou doest do not wrong thy self 30 s. is Money in a Poor Bodies Purse And the Testator spake these words Animo Testandi ultimam voluntatem declarandi And all this was set down in a Codicil And the first Will and the Codicil was proved in Communi forma Whether this Codicil was a Revocation of the Legacy given to the Two Brothers was the Question It was Resolved both by the Civilians and by the Judges of the Common Law That it was not a Revocation of the Legacies Their Reasons were Because there was an Absolute Formal Will made in his Health and there being no Speech made by him of his Formal Will nor of the Legacies thereby Devised The Answer to a Doubtful Question shall not take the Legacies before Devised And his Answering I will not give them any thing Upon such Doubtfull Speeches to Nullifie a Will advisedly made shall not be permitted without clear and perspicuous Revocation or words that do amount to so much And thereupon upon this Opinion of the Civilians and Judges the Lord Keeper Decreed the Legacies to the Brothers the Codicil having made no Revocation of them CHAP. XXVI Certain Positions or Assertions of Law for the better understanding of this Subject of Legacies and Devises with certain mixt Cases touching the same 1. IF the words of the Legacy be Doubtful or Ambiguous the Motive inducing the Testator or the Cause of the Legacy is specially to be inspected 2. In Cases Doubtful whether the Legacy be given Absolutely or Conditionally it shall be presumed as Pure Simple and Absolute rather than Conditional 3. In a Legacy Doubtful as to its value for want of some discriminating description thereof by the Testator that which is of the least value belongs to the Legatary 4. Likewise in all Dubious Legacies as to the Quantity thereof the least is generally to be understood 5. A Doubtfull Legacy relating to Goods shall be understood of such only as the Testator had at the making of the Testament for the clearing whereof the Law casts the onus probandi on the Legatary 6. Where the Doubt arises from the Testators words the Ambiguity shall be interpreted in favour of the Legatary 7. In the Interpretation of Legacies the common usage of Speech is more to be considered than the exact propriety of the words 8. Also the Testators sense and meaning is more to be considered than his words 9. The Testators words are to be understood rather as he thought then as he spake or writ that is the effect of the Testament is guided governed and over-ruled more by the Testators Opinion than as things are in themselves 10. When the Testators words of Bequeathing seem to interfere one with another the latter words shall for the most part prevail Yet not always so there are some Cases wherein Contrarium verum est 11. When the Testators mind and meaning is not as intelligible as it should be hold his words before the Glass of the Law to make it as visible as it may be the Law is the best and indeed the only interpreter in all such Cases 12. An imperfect Speech in Bequeathing a Legacy may
Joynt-Tenants in what cases p. 233 § ult p. 242 § 4 p 245. A nice distinction between-such and Tenants in Common p 242 § 4. To whom Goods in Joynt-Tenancy belong at the death of either Joynt-Tenant p 86. § 2. Such Goods are not Devisable p 223 § 6. Issue A Devise made in general to the Issue void by reason of uncertainty p 233 in prin The difference between Issue Born and not Born at the time of making the Devise in point of Entail or Joynt-Tenancy p 249 § 5. Jus Representationis what it signifies p 172 § 1. In the Line Transversall or Collaterall it holds only in the Brothers Children not in their Grand-children p 177 § 1. K. Kindred and Consanguinity how they differ p 170 § 3. Collaterall Kindred how far and to what degree they may succeed each other p 179 § 4. Kindred or of Kin to the Testator at the time of his death sufficient to take by a Legacy to his Kindred though they were not such when the Will was made p. 444 § 80. L. Lands Devisable by Will p 224 c. What and how much thereof Ibid § 1. What may pass by a Devise under that Notion Ibid § 2. By and to what persons Land is Devisable or not p 225 to 228 § 3 4. By what kind of Testament p 228 § 5. Lands may pass by Will where no Executor is named p 5 § 4. Lands may by the Common Law be Devised to whom Goods cannot by the Civil Law be Bequeathed p 226 § 4. A Devise of another mans Land void p. 228 § 5. Land twice Devised in the same Will to several persons how both may be good p 230 231 § 4. Whether Lands new purchased pass by a Will formerly made p 231 § 6 ult Leases for years pass not by a Devise of Lands if the Devisor had any Lands in Fee Ibid § 6. Customary Lands may pass by a Will without Writing other Lands not p 4 5 § 3. Lands Devised on a present Payment or on Payment out of the Profits thereof what different Estates they create p 254 § 6. Lands Devised with Limitations and upon Condition p. 266 c. Land Devised by a Coppyholder to his Wife p 274 275 § 7. Land Devised for life by the Husband to the Wife not for her Jointure no Barre to her Jointure p. 282 § 14. How the Devise of another mans Land may become a good Devise p. 228. § 5. Devises of Land void or not p 229 c. p. 441 § 47. Several Cases in Law touching Lands Devised p 288 c. Lambs Bequeathed understand such as are under a Year old p 441 § 54. Lease simply for Lives belongs neither to the Heir nor to the Executor p. 86 § 4. Lease made in trust by a Woman for her use who after Marries enures not to her Husband but to her Executor when she dies p 99 § ult Leases of Terms of Years Devised p. 256 c. Though Devised for 99 Years yet determinable upon one Life Ibid. § 2. chattell-Chattell-Leases pass not by a Devise of all the Lands p 257 § 4 By a Lease for Years Devised for Life doth pass the whole Term yet is it not an Estate for life Ibid. § 5. By what words a Lease and the Interest of the Lessee may be Devised p 257 258 § 6 The Residue of a Term is as Devisable as the Term it self p 258 § 7. A Devise of a Lease for Years may be in Law which doth not so appear in Fact p Ibid § 9. The whole Term though not named shall pass by a Devise where no other can pass by Implication p 259. § 10. Legacy what p 200. § 1. What Words or Expressions sufficient for a Legacy p 209 c. Whether the time of making the Testament or of the Testators death be the more considerable in Legacies p 202 203. § 3 p 227 § 4. In what Court Legacies are properly Recoverable p 204 205 § 4. The difference between Bequeathing a Legacy to one whenhe shall be of full Age and to one to be Payed when he shall be of full Age. p 281. § 12. Legacies and Devises in respect of Marriage p 279 c. What of her Legacy shall the Wife have if she Marry after her Election to the contrary p 280. § 8. Legacies between Baron and Feme p 279 c. Legacies grounded upon wrong Suppositions in the Testator inherent in the very Body and Substance of the Legacy it self do not oblige his Executors p 305. § 17. Several Sums Bequeathed to the same Party in two Instruments both otherwise containing the same Will the lesser only is due p 316. § 19. Legacy forfeited upon non-performance of some duty enjoyned p 446. § 92. Legacies referring to Debts and Cases in the Law touching the same p 321 c. They fall under four Heads p. Ibid. § 2. Legacies by Creditors to Debtors e Contra. p. 322. § 4 5. to § 10 A Legacy Bequeathed in fraudem Legis is void p 320. § ult A Legacy of a Debt is extinguish'd by payment of that Debt to the Testator p 324. § 11. Whether the Testators not having what he Bequeaths voids the Legacy p 330. § 8. The same Thing twice Bequeathed or Bequeathed unto two distinctly which of them shall have it p. 331. § 9. A Legacy given indistinctly to A. B. and there be two of the name who shall be preferred to the Legacy Ibid. § 10. If a Single Legacy be given only to one though it be Devisable yet it is not Dividable p. 332. § 15. ult Legataries who are incapable of being p. 206 207. § 2 A Legatary refusing his Office or Duty imposed on him by the Will though but in part looses his Legacy in the whole p. 316. § 16. In what case the Legatary shall have his Legacy presently though it be given him when he shall die p. 280. § 6. What the Legatary that Marries shall have when more is Bequeathed him in case he Marries not than if be doth Marry p. Ibid. § 7. The Legatary must expect the Executors delivery of his Legacy p. 440. § 39. How one may be a Legatary in Construction of Law only p. Ibid. § 42. Whether a Legatary-Executor may after Debts paid first satisfie himself p. 317. § 20. A Legatary if capable at the Testators death sufficient for the Legacy though he were not so when the Will was made p. 446. § 88. Letter from one friend to another sufficient to contain a Will or Devise p. 212. § ult p. 443. § 73. Letters of Administration in what case they may be granted p. 154 § 7. To whom p. 151. § 2. They may be granted in England by a Bishop of Ireland p. 155. § ult Whether they ought to be shewn in Court by Administrators in Actions brought by them p. 103 104. § ult Whether it be necessary to set forth in a Declaration by whom they were
be Administrator and have Administration of Leases as well as of personal things because he hath them as an Executor in anothers right and not to his own use Yea it is also said that a Bastard an Excommunicate or an Out-lawed person may be as able and as absolute an Executor as any other Also Infants may be made Executors but the performance of that Office shall not be committed to them untill they have attained unto the Age of seventeen years To the first forementioned may be added Corporations which although lawful ones yet may not stand Executors unless they can duely Prove the Will and take an Executors Oath Finally note that what hath been here formerly said of Executors may be also applyed to and understood of Administrators CHAP. VII Of an Executors Executor 1. That the Executor of a sole Executor is Executor to the first Testator 2. That an Executors Executor cannot perform a Trust committed by the first Testator 3. An Executors Executor hath nothing to do with the first Testators Goods where there is a surviving joynt-Executor 4. In what Case an Executors Executor shall have to do with the first Testators Goods when the surviving joynt-Executor shall not meddle therewith 1. AN Executors Executor where there is no joynt-Executor is Executor to the first Testator as he is to the second and consequently hath a right to all the profit and is liable to all the charge that the first Executor had or was subject unto yet with this caution and difference that the one Testators Goods shall not stand charged for the other Testators debts but each for his own respectively And if in such case the Executors Executor assume the Administration of the first Testators Goods he cannot afterwards refuse the Administration of the Goods of the later Testator but he may accept the later yet refuse the former but not è contra Also an Executors Executor shall not be admitted to Administer the Goods of the first Testator where the first Executor who was his Testator refused to Administer or died before Probate unless all the residue of the first Testators Goods after the debts paid be given in the Will to the first Executor 2. Where a special trust is by Will recommended to an Executor as to sell Lands c. This being not performed in his life-time shall not be performable by his Executor after his death Contrariwise it is of an interest as to take the profits of Lands for certain years towards payment of Debts and Legacies or for recovery of Rents of Inheritance left unpaid in the Testators life-time 3. If Two Executors be appointed whereof one maketh his Testament wherein he nameth his Executor and dieth his joynt-Executor surviving in this Case the Executor of the Executor is not to be joyned with the said joynt-Executor surviving neither in the Execution of the Will nor in Suits or Actions And if such Executor of the Executor have any Goods which did belong to the first Testator the surviving Executor of the same first Testator may have an Action against such Executors Executor for the same Insomuch that if the surviving Executor doth afterward die intestate yet may not the Executors Executor meddle with the Goods of the former Testator for the power of the Executor who died first was determined by his death the other then surviving And the Judge in this Case may commit the Administration both of the surviving Executor who died afterwards intestate and of the Goods of the former Testator not before Administred And if the Executor of the Executor who died first meddle with the Goods of the first Testator he may be sued by the Creditors of the first Testator as Executor in his own wrong But where there is no joynt-Executor there most things which concern immediate Executors extend also to the mediate or more remote Executors that the mediate Executor in the fourth fifth or further degree stands in like manner Executor to the first Testator as the first and immediate Executor and may sue or be sued as the former 4. Suppose Two Executors whereof One refuses to Prove the Will and Administer the other Proves it Administers and dies Testate In this Case the Executor of that joynt-Executor that so Proved the Will shall be the first Testators Executor and the surviving Executor so formerly refusing shall not now be admitted to intermeddle therewith because his Election determined at his Co-Executors death But it is otherwise where the surviving Executor hath accepted the Executorship for in that Case he shall have the sole disposing of the Estate and the Co-Executors Executor is not to intermeddle therewith but to surrender to the other what Goods belonging to the first Testator happen to be in his Custody Errour the Errour assign'd was That W. E. had brought debt upon an Obligation by the name of W. E. Administr Bonorum Catallorum A. E. durante minori aetate of J. E. Executor of the said A. E. Executor of R. E. and demands a Debt upon an Obligation of Twenty nine pound made to the said R. E. the first Testator whereas he could not bring an Action by this Name but as Administrator of R. E. But it was said that Administration of the Goods of R. E. being committed to him by this name omnium Bonorum c. A. E. it may well be committed to him by this Name especially when A. E. did not die Intestate but made an Executor 10 Ed. 4. 1. That by the grant of the Administration of the Goods of the Executor Administration is by it granted of all the Goods of the first Testator 27 H. 8. 7. Curia Contra clearly For by this Administration committed he hath no Authority to meddle with the Goods of the first Testator and for this cause the Judgement was reversed Debt against the Executor of an Executor The Defendant pleaded that the Executors Testator had fully Administred and that he had nothing in his hands at the time of his death and it was found that he had Assets Whereupon a Fieri facias issued to the Sheriff and he returned that the Defendant had nothing And it was held that the Sheriff should be amerced for he should have stopt making such Return And that it should be no prejudice to the Plaintiff for that the Debt shall be charged so long as the Record remains in force not Reversed by Errour nor Attaint And if he hath no Goods of the Testators he shall be charged of his own proper Goods For that when he pleaded that the first Testator had fully Administred he did not say that Assets did not come to his hands after his Testators death CHAP. VIII Of an Executor in his own wrong 1. Who is an Executor in his own wrong and what Acts make him such 2. How far an Executor in his own wrong is chargeable and how impleadable 3. What Acts shall not make a
Executors Age of Seventeen years and that Administration committed after that Age of the Executor is meerly void and notwithstanding this averment here the Executor might be above the age of Seventeen years and within the age of Twenty one years It was therefore adjudged Quod Quaerens nihil caperet c. 5. Co. 29. Trespass upon a special Verdict the Case was Jackson Lessee for years by several Leases of divers Lands some of them in the Diocess of York some in another Peculiar in the same Diocess devised all these Leases to his Son and made his Daughter within Age his Executrix the Mother takes Administration durante minori aetate of the Executrix in F. the Peculiar where the Testator died ad Commodum proficuum Executricis the Administratrix granted this Term durante minori aetate of the Executrix to the Plaintiff Whether the Grant were good or not was the principal Question The Court resolved that it was not good For such an Administrator hath but a special property ad proficuum Executoris but not a general property as another Executor or Administrator hath and therefore his sale of Goods unless they be Bona peritura or it be for necessity for the payment of debts which he is chargeable to pay it shall not bind But he may sue and be sued and yet his Authority is but a limited Authority and therefore like as if Letters ad Colligendum bona Defuncti were granted to one there he may sell bona peritura as Fruit or the like 2. It was moved whether the Assent of an Administrator durante minori aetate to the devise of a Term or the Assent of the Executor himself during his minority to such a Devise be good Anderson said That an Executor at the Age of Eighteen years may Assent but whether the Assent by such an Administrator be good or not they doubted 3. It was moved whether Administration should in this case be granted at Two places viz. the one within the Peculiar the other by the Arch-Bishop of York Ordinary of the Diocess or whether he should have the Prerogative in both as he had where Bona Notabilia were in divers Diocesses And it was resolved That there should be two Letters of Administration granted for the Arch-Bishop shall not have any Prerogative here because this Peculiar was first derived out of his Jurisdiction wherefore c. 5. Co. 29. Errour of a Judgement in Debt in C. B. The Errour assigned was because the Plaintiff sues by an Atturney where he was an Infant and ought to sue by Guardian But because the Action was brought by him as Administrator so that he sued in auter droit Infancy is no impediment unto him no more than Out-lawrie and therefore he might well sue by Atturney and it was thereupon adjudged for the Defendant that the first Judgement should be affirmed Note that if an Infant sue and not as Executor he must then sue by his Guardian vid. Case Bartholomew vers Dighton Hill 37 Eliz. B. R. in Cro. Rep. part 1. Pl. 22. Debt upon an Obligation made to the Testator The Defendant Pleaded a Release made by one of the Plaintiffs The Plaintiff replyes That this Release was made without any consideration and he who Released was within Age at the time of the Release made and it was thereupon demurred and adjudged for the Plaintiff that it was a void Release being by an Infant without consideration In the Case between A. and M. as Administratrix of J. during the minority of L. It was among other things Objected That the Plaintiffs Declaration was not good because it is brought against her as Administratrix durante minori aetate of L. And it is not averr'd that the said L. was yet within the age of Seventeen years sed non allocatur for true it is that if one brings an Action and entitles himself as Administrator durante minori aetate of one such he ought to shew that he is yet within the Age of Seventeen years as Co. 5. fol. 59. Pigots Case For that he is to take Conuzance how long his Authority shall continue and he ought to shew it to enable himself to the Action But when he brings the Action against one as Administrator durante minori aetate there such Plea need not be shewn for so long as the other continues his medling he shall be sued and the Plaintiffs need not take Conuzance of the age of the other as c. And here if her Authority were determined it should be shewn on the Defendants part therefore the Judgement was affirmed Note it was resolved by all the Justices of England That the Release of a Debt or a Duty by an Infant Executor after Probate made of the Will is not good because it should be a Devastavit and charge the Infant of his own Goods and also it should be a wrong which an Infant by his Release cannot do and also because it is not pursuant to the Office of an Executor Infant Executor Administration was committed durante minori aetate debt was brought against the Administrator and then the Infant came of full age and the Justices very much doubted whether the Action did abate A Guardian Recovered a debt on an Obligation made to an Infant the Defendant paid the Principal and Costs and prayed that the Guardian might be ordered to acknowledge satisfaction The Court said That a Guardian or an Infant or Executor may not acknowledge satisfaction for more than they receive and for so much they ordered the Guardian to acknowledge satisfaction And made an Order that no Execution should issue for the residue If an Administration be repealed from one and granted to another which was only durante minori aetate and that other bring the first Administrator to account and after give him a Release yet the Infant at his full age may compell the first Administrator to account to him again and the former account to such second Administrator shall not Bar him for such Administrators Release is not good unless for some such cause as for which it ought to be made It was by the Chief Justice of the Queens Bench demanded of the other Justices there Assembled upon hearing of Causes If one make an Infant his Executor that Releases a Debt due to him as Executor without receiving the summ due which receipt if it be good will be a Devastavit by the Infant of the Goods in his hands whether such Release shall bind the Infant or not It was agreed by them all That such Release is void for an Infant by his own Laches and Folly shall not prejudice himself Yet a Feme Covert Executrix may receive money without her Husband which was due to her Testator and give an Acquittance for the same and if she gives an Acquittance for debt which causes a Devastavit the Release shall be good and the Wife and Husband bound thereby the reason is
Executor but as Legatee 3. Where there are divers Executors they are all but as one person and therefore cannot plead several pleas being sued all of them represent the Testators person and they must all joyn in Suits as Plaintiffs and be joyned as Defendants or at least so many of them as have Administred therefore one Executor sued if he plead that there is another Executor not sued must also plead that that other hath Administred Thus Executors though never so many represent the person of the Testator as one person Therefore all of them shall have but one Essoyn neither before appearance nor after because their Testator himself whose person they represent could have no more And therefore where Executors as Defendants have appeared if any one of them will confess the Action this binds and concludes the rest but if one will plead one Plea and the other another some are of Opinion that that shall be received which is best for the Testators Estate So where they Sue such as will not prosecute shall be severed and the rest without them may proceed It is evident by what hath been said That Two Joynt-Executors being Sued cannot plead two distinct Pleas because they both represent but one person viz. the Testator who could have but one only Plea Yet others say they shall have several pleas and the most peremptory shall be tryed And if any one of Joynt-Executors Plaintiffs dies the Writ abates though he so dying was for non-appearance on summons before severed and so it is if one of the Co-Executors Defendants dies Yea if a Creditor Sue A. B. C. as Executors where only A. and B. are Executors even there by the death of C. the Writ abates Also if a man make Three Executors whereof Two refuse the Administration yet they shall be Executors by the Will and may Administer when they please and an Action ought to be in all their Names otherwise the Writ shall abate CHAP. XVII Of the Executors Interest and Possession and how it differs from that which he hath in his own proper Goods 1. What may be said to be in the Executors Actual Possession or not 2. How the Executors Interest in the Testators Goods differs from that which he hath in his own 3. Whether an Executor may by Will bequeath the Goods he hath as Executor 4. Whether the Administrator of an Intestate Executor may intermeddle with the Goods of the first Testator 5. How Testators and Executors are Correlatives as to Chattels 1. IN Chattels Personal the Executor hath such an Actual Possession presently upon the Testators death though never so far distant from him and without any laying his hands actually on them as that he may maintain an Action of Trespass against any taking them away or spoiling them though he or any for him never came near them but Chattels Real as Leases for years are not in his possession till himself or some for him actually enter thereupon But a Lease for years of Tithes be the Executor never so far distant from them at the time of the Testators death shall be in his actual possession instantly upon the setting out thereof so as he may maintain an Action of Trespass against any that shall take the same so set out though he nor any for him did never actually lay their hands thereon But in Glebe Lands into which Entry may be made the Case may be otherwise Nor are Debts accounted to be in the Executors hands till recovered So likewise Arrears of Rents yea of Inheritance behind in the Testators life-time for Executors are qualified to receive them also 2. An Executors Interest as Executor is only in his Testators Right his Interest in his own Goods is absolute and proper therefore though the Lord of a Villain might take all the Villains own Goods yet he might not take the Goods he had as Executor And from hence some have been of Opinion that an Executor granting all his Goods these are excepted which he hath as Executor except the Executor according to the Lord Dyer who is the Grantor be named Executor in the Grant 3. Nor can the Executor by Will bequeath the Goods he hath as Executor without a precedent alteration of the property thereof and with a Reconveyance thereof back to himself again 4. An Executor dying Intestate his Administrator cannot meddle with those Goods the Intestate Executor had as Executor but thereof Administration must be granted As De Bonis non Administratis to the next of Kin of the Intestate Executors Testator For thè reason aforesaid the Goods which a man hath as Executor are not liable for the Executors debts and therefore cannot be taken in Execution for his own proper debts For the same reason also the Goods which a Woman hath as Executrix are not devested out of her into her Husband by marriage nor can he have them after her death without being his Wifes Executor Upon the same ground it is as was but now hinted that the Goods and Chattels of the first Testator in the hands of his Executors Executor no alteration of the property thereof being made by his Executor shall not be liable for satisfaction of the debts of his said Executor As thus suppose A. makes B. his Executor and dies B. makes C. his Executor and dies Now if B. made no alteration of the property of the Goods of A. but meerly left them to C. In this Case the Goods which so came to B. as Executor to A. and so from B. to C. shall not be liable in Law to pay the debts of B. the immediate Executor of A. 5. There is a further discovery of an Executors Interest as to Chattels Real wherein Testators and Executors are as Correlatives for if a man make a Lease for life to one the remainder to his Executors for twenty one years the term of years shall immediately vest in the Lessee for even as Ancestors and Heirs are Correlatives as to Inheritance so are Testators and Executors Correlatives as to Chattels And therefore if a Lease for life be made to the Testator the Remainder to his Executors for years the Chattel shall vest in the Lessee himself as well as if it had been limited to him and his Executors And thus a Remainder of years limited to the Executors of a Lessee shall presently vest in the person of the Lessee himself because Testators and Executors are Correlatives as to Chattels CHAP. XVIII Of the Executors Right in opposition to the Heirs in reference to Mortgages 1. How the Executor doth more represent the person of the Testator than the Heir doth the person of his Ancestor 2. The difference in point of payment whether to the Heir or to the Executor in Case of Mortgages 1. IF the Feoffee in Mortgage before the day of payment which should be made to him make his Executors and die and his Heir entereth into the Land as he
per parol and Cited a Rule in the Civil Law Non vult esse haeres qui ad alium vult transferre haereditatem and Haereditas est totum jus quod defunctus habuit And to the second matter he said Qui semel repudiaverit haereditatem amplius haereditatem petere non potest and Qui semel repudiaverit shall not after be Executor quia transit in contractum And that Executors cannot refuse for one time but for ever but they may pray time to Advise or Consider of taking upon them the Executorship and it ought to be granted and in that Case the Ordinary is to grant in the mean time Letters ad Colligendum c. but is not to grant Administration And for these Reasons there being a refusal the Grant made after Administration committed was void and so was the Opinion of the Court. CHAP. XX. Touching what Acts may or may not be done by an Executor as well before as after Probate of the Will 1. An Executor may before Probate of the Will enter into the house of the Heir to seize on the Testators Goods 2. A limitation or qualification of that Power 3. In what Case payment must be made by or to an Executor though no Will yet Proved by him 4. What Actions an Executor before Probate of the Will may or may not maintain 5. An Executor may before Probate of the Will make an Inventory of the Testators Goods and Chattels 6. Several other things which an Executor may do before he hath Proved the Will 7. An Executor may retain the Testators Goods to satisfie his own Debt 1. THe Power of an Executor dependeth wholly upon the Will and designment of the Testator Now an Executor may before his Proving of the Will seize and take into his hands any of the Testators Goods yea enter into the house of the Heir if not locked so to do and to take the Specialties of debts and generally he may do all things which to the Office of an Executor pertaineth except only bringing of Actions and prosecution of Sutes for they cannot Sue till they have the Will under the Seal of the Probat-Office 2. Although an Executor may after the Testators death enter into the house where he lived and died and where his Goods are and thence take them away even before Probate of the Testament yet understand it with this caution That he must do this within convenient and reasonable time as within or about thirty dayes next after the Testators death and that also in a due and peaceable manner when the doors are open 3. An Executor may also before Probat of the Will pay debts and receive debts and make acquittances of debts owing to the Testator Yea if before such Proving of the Will the day be come for payment upon Bond made by or to the Testator payment must be made by or to this Executor though the Will be not yet Proved and that upon like pain of forfeiture as if the Will were Proved Also an Executor may before Probate give or sell any of the Goods and Chattels of the Testator not otherwise bequeathed in the Wiil and for the same may maintain his Action 4. For an Executor for Goods of the Testator taken from him or for a Trespass done upon the Lease Lands or for a distraining or impownding of the Goods or Cattel may maintain Actions of Trespass or Replevin or Detinue even before the Will be Proved because these Actions arise out of the Executors own possession But an Action of Debt or the like contracted by the Testator he cannot maintain before the Will be Proved for therein he must shew forth the Will Proved under the Court-Seal And as at the Common Law If a man be bound to another in a certain summ of money to pay at a certain day and the Obligee before the said day Release unto the Obligor all Actions he is barred of the duty for ever though he could not have an Action at the time of the Release made even so may an Executor before Probate of the Testament Release an Action And the Reason of both is because the right of Action is in them for that the Debt is a thing consisting meerly in Action and therefore though no Action as yet then lieth for the Debt yet because the Right of Action is in them the Release of all Actions is a discharge of the Debt it self 5. Another thing that an Executor may do before the Proving of the Will and which is expedient for him though as yet not so necessary is the making of an Inventory for the Executor had need be cautious that he do not intermeddle with or Administer the Testators Goods until he hath made an Inventory for although the Act of an Executor is said to hold in Law before the Proving of the Will and the making of an Inventory yet for intermeddling with the Testators goods as Executor before he hath made an Inventory or caused the same to be made though not exhibited he was according to Law punishable unless it were for doing such things as could not conveniently be deferred till the Inventory were made as concerning things relating to the Funerals or disposing such things as Servando servari non possint and such like Besides if he make not an Inventory and yet Administer he may be compelled to discharge out of his own purse more Debts and Legacies than happily the Testators Goods and Chattels did amount to 6. There are several other things which an Executor may do before he hath Proved the Will and he may also keep any of the Goods of the Testator so as he pay out of his own money the value thereof in Administration of the Testators Estate he may also if he want money to pay Funerals or discharge Debts sell any of the Chattels Real or Personal whereof the Testator died possessed yea though that thing were particularly bequeathed As if a man be possessed of a Term of years and bequeath the same to A. B. the Executor may notwithstanding the bequest at any time before his Assent given to the Legacy if he have not Assets sufficient to pay the Debts sell this Term of years and the Legatee is remediless So also he may do although there be Assets enough besides to pay the Debts but in such Case the Legatee may not be without all relief in a Court of Equity against the Executor as to Dammages but the Sale is unavoidable Lessee for years Devised his Term to one whom he made his Executor and died The Devisee entered before any Probate of the Will and held and enjoyed the Land for a year and more without Proving of the Will and then died it was a Question whether his Executor or in Case he died Intestate his Administrator should have the Term It was the Opinion of the Court That the Term was lawfully setled in the Executor by his Entry and it
his Suit is in anothers right viz. the Testators But he that is Excommunicate cannot proceed in Sute as Executor yet this Excommunication pleaded doth not abate or overthrow the Sute but makes that the Defendant may stay from answering his Sute until the Plaintiff be absolved and discharged from his Excommunication 5. Although one Co-Executor cannot Sue another for possession of the Testators Goods for that many Executors to the same Testator are but as one man and no man can Sue himself So that when the Testator doth make divers Executors if any one of them doth get the Goods or the possession of the Goods of the Testator the other Executor hath no Action for recovery of the same Goods or any part thereof for the said Reason that one Co-Executor cannot Sue another nevertheless if the Testator make divers Executors and do bequeath to the one of them the residue of his Goods it is not only lawful for him to whom they are so bequeathed to retain the same but also if the other Executor enter thereunto he is subject to an Action of Trespass Also if the Executor of a Co-Executor have any Goods belonging to the first Testator the other surviving Co-Executor of the first Testator may have an Action against the Executor of that deceased Co-Executor for the same Also if there be Two Administrations granted together he that is the rightful Executor or Administrator may Sue the wrongful Administrator for the Goods in his custody 6. Executors may not Sue for the Goods of their Testators in the Court Ecclesiastical but at the Common Law Yet in some Cases an Executor may Sue in the Ecclesiastical Court as touching his Testators Goods as when a man bequeathes Corn growing or Goods unto one and a stranger will not suffer the Executor to perform the Testament for this Legacy he may Sue the Stranger in the Ecclesiastical Court But if a man take from an Executor Goods bequeathed for this the Executor must Sue his Action of Trespass and not Sue in the Ecclesiastical Court Also Tenants may be Sued but at the Common Law by Executors or Administrators for Rents behind and due to the Testator in his life-time or at the time of his death and may for the same distrain the Land charged with the Rent 7. A Woman and another person were made Executors the Woman took Husband who did not alter the property of the Goods of the Testator and then the Wife died it was adjudged That the other Executor might have an Action of Detinue against the Husband for the same Goods Debt brought by an Executor as due to his Testator and Judgment given for him but before Execution the Plaintiff died Intestate and the Ordinary committed Administration of the Goods of the first Testator to another who Sued out a Scire Facias on the Judgement All the Justices agreed That the Scire Facias did not lye For that when the Executor died Intestate the Testator was dead Intestate also whereby the Judgement and Recovery was void Detinue brought by an Executrix against her own Husbands Executor the Case was this One Falconer who was the Plaintiffs first Husband made his Will gave divers Legacies and towards the end of his said Will said The Residue of all my Goods I Give and Bequeath to Frances my Wife whom I make my full and whole Executrix of this my Last Will and Testament to dispose for the wealth of my Soul and to pay my Debts and died indebted to divers persons to whom the said Frances paid the said Debts and all the Legacies having then Goods in her hand for which this Action was now brought she having after married one John Hunks who made the Defendant his Executor to whose hands the said Goods came Whereupon the Court demurred and Judgement was that the Plaintiff should recover for notwithstanding the Devise viz. of the Residue as aforesaid she hath them not as a Devisee but as Executrix because the words of the Devise can have no other intendment than that she should enjoy them as Executrix Debt brought by the Executrix of J. T. against W. B. The Case was this The said W. B. caused a Writing to be made and sealed which he delivered to V. C. to deliver to J. T. as his Act and Deed Accordingly the said V. C. offered the same to the said J. T. as the Act and Deed of the said W. B. But he utterly refused to receive the same as such notwithstanding which the said V. C. there left the said writing which matter the Defendant pleaded and said it was none of his Act whereupon was a demur and Judgement given for the Plaintiff Debt upon an Obligation Conditioned That if the Defendant in Michael Term then next ensuing in the Prerogative Court of the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury at London should give to D. his Executors or Administrators such a Release and Discharge from and against him and his Children for the receipt of One Hundred Marks as by the Judge of the Court should be thought meet That then c. The Defendant pleaded that the same Term one S. was Judge there and that the said Judge did not Devise or Appoint any Release or Discharge c. And it was thereupon demurred and adjudged to be no Plea For that it is not alleadged that he caused a Release to be drawn and tendered to the Judge to be allowed for it is on his part in discharge of his Obligation to draw such a Release as the Judge should allow Wherefore it was adjudged for the Plaintiff 5. Co. 23. b. Mich. 43 44. C. B. Pl. 42. Debt as Administrator to B. upon an Obligation The Defendant pleaded That the Plaintiff was an Alien under the Obedience of Philip King of Spain Enemies to our Soveraign the Queen and demands Judgement whether he should be Answered and it was demurred thereupon and adjudged that he should Answer Assumpsit By an Executor of a Promise made to his Testator The Defendant pleads non Assumpsit and found for the Plaintiff and Judgement for him And Errour was thereof brought and Assigned because he did not shew in Court the Testament in the Declaration mentioned Whereunto it was said That it was but default of Form which is aided after Verdict but all the Court held it to be matter of substance for otherwise he doth not entitle himself to the Action without shewing the Testament For which cause it was Reversed Debt upon a Special Verdict the Case was A Parson made a Lease for years rendring Rent at Michaelmas or within a moneth next after The Lessee Enters the Lessor dies within ten dayes after Michaelmas Whether his Executor hath any remedy for this Rent was the Question and Ruled that he had not for the Rent was not due in the Testators time nor until the end of the moneth And in such Case it hath been adjudged that such
after Argument at the Bar adjudged for the Plaintiff that it was not any Plea For they at their peril ought to take cognizance of debts upon Record and ought first of all unless for debts due to the Queen wherein she hath a Prerogative to satisfie them and although the Recovery was in another County than where the Testator and the Executors inhabited it is not material But if an Action be brought against them in another County than where they inhabit and before their knowing thereof they pay debts upon Specialties that is allowable wherefore it was adjudged accordingly Vid. 4 H. 6. 8. 21 Ed. 4. 21. Debt against an Executor who pleaded he had reines in ses mains but certain Goods distrained and impownded it was adjudged to be no Assets to charge him The Case was A. Covenanteth with B. to put his Son an Apprentice to C. or otherwise that his Executors shall pay B. Twenty pound A. doth not put his Son an Apprentice to C. and dyeth B. brings debt against the Executors of A. and it was Resolved by the Court That it lyeth not for Two Reasons 1. It cannot be a debt in the Executor where it was no debt in the Testator And if one Covenants to pay Ten pound debt lyeth against him or his Executors as 40 Ed. 3. 28 H. 8. Dyer are but if he doth Covenant that his Executors shall pay Ten pound an Action lyeth not against them 2. The first part of the Deed sounds in Covenant and the second part shall be of the same nature and condition Q. of this Reason Note Assumpsit by the Testator lies against his Executor in Case the Debt riseth upon a Loan and Promise of the Testator to pay and the Promise be for the payment of a meer debt and not to do any collateral Act and where the Testator himself by reason of such Promise could not have waged his Law in such Case his Executor is chargeable but upon a meer collateral Promise of the Testator an Assumpsit lies not against his Executor Such was the Opinion in Q. Eliz. time but now in Reg. Jac. the Opinion of both Courts was and resolved That the Action against the Executor lies as well in the one Case as in the other Scire Facias Sued by H. against W. Executor to his Father for Execution of a Judgment obtained against the Testator The Defendant pleaded Plenè Administravit at the time of bringing the Action and thereupon they were at Issue and the Jury found That the Testator conveyed a Lease in trust to one Fisher against whom the Executor had recovered One Thousand pound in Chancery which was come to the Executors hands Et si super tota materia c. Two Points in this Case were argued at the Bar and Bench 1. Whether the Plea of Plenè Administravit at the time of bringing the Writ were good in that Judgement was given against the Testator in his life-time and it was Ruled that it was not good but that in such Case the Executor should have pleaded There was nothing in his hands at the time of the Testators death because the Judgement bound him to satisfie that debt before others but by the joyning of Issue the advantage of that exception to the Plea was waved 2. Whether the Summ Decreed in Equity in the Chancery shall be Assets and they all agreed it should be Assets because the Jury found that by vertue of the Executorship it was come to the Executors hands 9 Eliz. Dyer 264. And money arising of the sale of Lands by Executors shall be accounted Assets Chapman and Daltons Case Plowd Also Dammages recovered by Executors pro bonis asportatis in vita Testatoris shall be Assets Vid. Pasch 39 Ed. 3. and C. B. Ordinary and Godfreys Case W. And others brought D. against the Defendant as Executor he pleaded Plenè Administravit And it was found by Verdict That the Defendants Wife was made Executrix who to defraud the Creditors had made a Deed of Gift of the Goods before her marriage with the Defendant and yet retain'd them in her possession and took the Defendant to Husband and died and the Defendant had now as much goods in his hands as would suffice to pay the Creditors their debts And the Court adjudged for the Plaintiff for that the Defendant confess'd himself Executor by pleading Fully Administred and therefore is chargeable because the property of the Goods passed not out of the Wife by that Grant being fraudulently made as aforesaid by the Stat. 13 Regin One sued an Executor in the Ecclesiastical Court for a Legacy who pleaded Recovery in debt against him at Common Law and beyond that he had not Assets wherewith to satisfie To which the Plaintiff in the Ecclesiastical Court Replyed That the Recovery was by Covin and that the Plaintiff in the Recovery offered to discharge the Judgement and the Defendant would not And hereupon the Question was whether a Prohibition should be awarded or not And it was Resolved That it should not be awarded for that the Covin or Fraud is properly examinable in the Ecclesiastical Court because the Legatee cannot sue for his Legacy at the Common Law Action upon the Case of Trover of Goods The Case was this a Recovery in the Exchequer was had against the Executor of P. of Debt and Dammages and Fieri Facias issued de bonis Testatoris si c. And if none then Damna de propriis the Executor dies the Sheriff levies Execution of the Testators Goods before the Return of the Writ and adjudged good notwithstanding his death after the Test of the Writ B. brings Debt against H. on a Demise for years to one unto whom H. was Administrator And the Writ was in the Debet and Detinet Whereupon in Arrest of Judgement it was shew'd in B. R. That it ought to have been in the Detinet only because against an Administrator But it was adjudged That it was good in the Debet and Detinet because the Rent due incurr'd in the Administrators time and the Land is not Assets but only so much of the Profits as the Land is worth above the Rents and the Administrator shall not answer for more than the Land is worth deducting the Rent But in all Cases where an Executor or Administrator brings an Action for a Duty Testamentary there it ought to be in the Detinet only because the Duty being demanded ought to be Assets An Executor is not chargeable for a Debt due by the Testator upon a simple Contract Regularly an Executor shall not be charged without Specialty in any Action wherein the Testator might wage his Law for that an Executor cannot wage his Law of other mens Contracts 46 Ed. 3. 10. b. 11 H. 6. b. Information in the Exchequer in nature of an Account was brought against D. Executor of W. M. supposing that W. M. had received money of the Queens amounting to One
because the presumption of Law is That his mind is not altered unless it may otherwise appear by sufficient Evidence Therefore the Testators words are specially to be referr'd to the Time when the Testament was made and most especially if the Testators words be generall words So that if a Father bequeath to his Son who is a Student all his Books and after buy other Books those other pass not by that Legacy Or if he bequeath 10 l. to his Parish Church and after remove his Habitation into another Parish where he dyes the 10 l. is due to the Parish wherein he lived at the time of making his Testament and not to the Parish wherein he dyed Yet if the Testator bequeath any thing to his Kindred in such general words the Kindred which were at the time when the Testament was made are not so included as to exclude such as were his Kindred at the time of his death Also if a Testator bequeath his Moveables such only are understood to be bequeathed as were the Testators when he made his Testament Likewise if the Testator Bequeath Releases to all his Debtors there are no more comprehended in that Legacy then were his Debtors when he made his Testament Or if he give to a certain Hospital all his Moneys in the Bank or in Bankers hands after his Debts paid and there be at that time a 1000 l. in their hands over and above his Debts and he lives so long that at his death there is 3000 l. in their hands above his Debts In this case there is only one 1000 l. due by that Legacy to the Hospital because the Legacy is to be computed according to what he had in their hands at the time of making his Will and not according to what he had at the time of his decease Also if he Bequeath all his Moveables having at that time Fruits of the Earth not seperated from the Soyl which yet afterwards and before his death are seperated In such case such Moveables pass not by that Bequest because they were not Moveables at the time of making the Testament But this is not uncontrovertable for in this point there are some of the Learned of another Opinion Or if a Man Bequeath so many pieces of such a certain Coyn which afterwards doth rise or fall in its value The Legacy in that case shall be estimated as the said Coyn was in value at the time when the Testament was made not at more nor less Also if a House with all things therein be Bequeathed such things as the Testator afterwards brings into that House are not within that Legacie And here observe That what has been said as to the Time of making the Testament holds True likewise and so is to be understood as to the time of making a Codicil the words whereof are chiefly to be referr'd to the time of the making thereof Insomuch that in case by way of Codicil a man Bequeath all his wearing Apparel to his Wife and after some Tract of Time makes a Will and dyes no more Apparel doth pass by that Codicil supposing it not contradicted by the Will then the Testator had when he made that Codicil And yet notwithstanding all this which hath been said that the Time of the making of the Testament is chiefly and specially to be referr'd to in the due Construction of Legacies yet this is to be understood only when the words of the Testator speak of the time Past or Present Not when he speaks of the time to come by words of the Future Tense Nor when he speaks by such words of the Present Tense as cannot take effect but for the future Also when the Legacy is Universal under some Name Appellative and in its Nature Collective as Herd Flock and the like such a Legacie admitting of Increase and Decrease the Time in that case of the Testators death is more to be inspected and considered then the Time when he made the Testament So likewise if the Testator willeth that such a one shall dispose of the Profits of his Estate it shall be understood of such Profits thereof as were at the Time of his death because the word Profits is universal and therefore not to be restrained only to the time of the making of the Testament Or if he Bequeath his Money in the Bank the Profits thereof at the time of his death shall pass by this Legacy which if you observe it differs from that Case of money in the Bank abovesaid also if the thing Bequeathed be such as is in ordinary use and by using is consumed and another of like kind had instead thereof That other shall pass by this Legacy for in such case not the Time of making the Testament but the Time of the Testators death shall be considered Nor is the Time of the Testaments making so considerable when the Legacy is Conditional for then the performance of the Condition will fall under chiefest Consideration Also the Time of the Testators death when it most tends to the upholding of the Testament is more considerable then the Time of the making thereof And therefore though the words in the Testament be of the Time Past or Present yet in that the Will of the Testator holds free and good even to his last-Breath They shall also Refer to the Future in those things that depend on the meer Will of the Testator And if he Bequeath indefinitely his Corn it shall be understood all such as he hath at the time of his death Observe finally That if the Testators words in a Bequest be doubtful whether they Refer to the Time Past or to the Time to Come they shall be understood to relate unto the time that is to come 4. Where a Devise is made of Goods if the Executor will not Deliver the same to the Devisee he hath no Remedy by the Common Law but must have recourse against him by way of Citation out of the Ecclesiastical Court to appear before the Ordinary to shew cause why he performeth not the Testators Will for the Devisee may not take the Legacy and serve himself but it must be Delivered to him by the Executor So that the Legatary hath no Remedy by the Common Law for any Legacy of Goods to him bequeathed except as that Law sayes in case where some particular thing as the Testators Horse Signet or the like is bequeathed Or if the Testator willeth that his Executors shall sell his Land and pay such and such Legacies out of the Proceed of the Sale thereof in such case the Legatories may Sue at the Common Law for the same But if the Legacies be Bequeathed to be paid out of Leases and not out of Fee-simple Lands then the Legatary may likewise Sue in the Ecclesiastical Court for the same For though Legacies
all Devisable and Two parts of Three though held in Knight-service But then the Will must be in Scriptis not Nuncupative Now though Land be thus Deviseable partly by Custom partly by Statute yet there are certain persons incapable of Devising Lands and there are certain Lands incapable of being Devised as appears by what follows in this Chapter 2. As Lands are now Devisable so there are certain Things in some certain cases that pass by way of Bequest by and under a Devise of Lands As thus A Man Seized of Land Devisable Buildeth a House thereupon the House is Devisable the Law is the same as to a Rent-charge de novo created Also a Man Disseisee of Land Deviseable Deviseth to the Disseisor in Fee in Recompence of a Release which the Disseisor made unto him This is a good Devise Also where a Man hath Land in Right of his Wife and he granteth parcel of it to another and after Deviseth the Residue to another This also is good Likewise where a Man hath a Seigniory to him descended of the part of his Mother and after the Tenancy descendeth unto him of the part of his Father both being Devisable and he not having any Issue In this case he may make Devises to several persons that is the Seigniory to one and the Tenancy to another The Lord Dyer also saith That a Termor of Land which is not Deviseable erecting a Furnace and fixing it in the midst of a House in the said Land may Devise this Furnace Also that where a Man is Seized of Land Deviseable and Deviseth totum statum suum to one and his Heirs This shall be a good Devise for the Land Likewise where a Man deviseth primam vesturam seu tonsuram prati which is Deviseable it is good and the Law is the same as to Trees growing and to grow for ever Also Tenant in Fee-simple or in Fee-taile may Devise the Corn though the Land be not Deviseable but as to Trees in that case the Law is otherwise Also a Man Seized of a Mill may Devise the Runner Stone but not the under Stone unless the Mill it self be Devised Likewise a Man Seized of a Common granteth a Rent out of the Land although that the Land be Deviseable yet that Grant is void and by consequence a Devise thereof Nor is an Advowson in gross Deviseable nor any other Thing which lyeth not in Tenure but a Mesnalty or Seigniory is Deviseable because they lye in Tenure And if the Husband Devise the Corn upon his Wives Land and dyes This is good whether the Corn were Sowen before the Marriage or after 3. The persons not qualified to Devise Lands by Will are such as These viz. A Bishop may not Devise the Land of his Bishoprick but of the Arrearages of the Rent of the Bishoprick he may make a Devise by Testament The Law is the same as to a Deane or Parson of a Church Also the Master of an Hospital cannot Devise the Lands of the Hospital nor the Arrearages of Rent issuing out of the same In a word Spiritual Persons Arch-Bishops Bishops Deanes Arch-Deacons Prebends Parsons Vicars or any Member of a Corporation may not Devise the Land or Goods which they have in right of their Churches or Corporations For the Head or any of the Members of a Corporation cannot make a Testament or a Devise of such Lands or goods they have in Common because they are to go in Succession Also an Infant of the Age of 16. Years Seized of Lands Deviseable who may Alien it by the Custom yet he cannot make a Testament or a Devise thereof or if an Infant maketh a Will of his Land within Age and dyeth after that he cometh to full Age making no Revocation This is not a good Will And yet although an Infant until he be of the Age of 21. Years can make no Devise of his Lands Yet it is held that by special Custom in some places where Land is Deviseable by Custom they may Devise it sooner Also a Woman under Covert cannot make a Devise of her Land with or without her Husbands consent neither to her Husband nor to any other Yet of the Goods she hath as Executrix to another she may make an Executor without his consent but of them she can make no Devise either with or without his consent because they are not Deviseable and if she do Devise them the Devise is void Touching such as are Born both Deaf and Dumb The Lord Dyer says They may make a Will of their Land by Signs Though others Affirm That a Man that is both Deaf and Dumb and that is so by Nature cannot make a Testament but that a Man that is so only by Accident may by Writing or Signs so also may a Man that is only Deaf or Dumb whether by Nature or Accident Also an Alien Born and not Denizon'd cannot make a Testament of his Lands yet if an Alien Purchaseth Land in Fee and maketh a Will and after the King maketh him a Denizon after he dyeth his Will is then good as to his Lands or Goods Also a Traytor Attainted from the Time of the Treason committed can make no Devise either of his his Land or Goods for they are all forfeited to the King yet a Pardon from the King restores him to a capacity of dying Testate as to both Likewise a Man Attainted or Convicted of Felony cannot by Testament Devise either Lands or Goods for they are also forfeited but if he be only Indicted and die before Attainder he is then Testable as to both or being Indicted will not Answer upon his Arraignment his standing Mute may possibly preserve him a power of Devising his Lands And although the Testament of a Felo de se be void as to his Goods and Chattels yet as to his Lands it is good So likewise although a Person Outlawed in a Personal Action cannot so long as the Outlawry doth continue in force make a Testament of his Goods and Chattels yet of his Lands he may not so of Persons Outlawed for Felony the Law is the same as to a Man Attainted of a Praemunire It is otherwise if a Man be only Excommunicated 4. Regularly all Persons who may be Grantees may be also Devisees Insomuch that a Devise of Lands is good within the Statute of Wills even to such persons as to whom a Legacy by the Civil Law is void except in certain cases such as Hereticks Apostates Traytors Felons Excommunicates Out-laws Bastards unlawful Colledges Libellers Sodomites manifect Usurers and Recusants Convict It is a Rule That the Devisee must be capable of the thing Devised at the Time of the Devisors death if it be then to take effect in Possession or if it be a Remainder he must be capable of it at the Time when the Remainder shall happen otherwise the Devise is void If so then a Devise to an Infant
Fruits of an Orchard or other Lands which at a Rent certain he hath taken to Farm for Seven Years who shall pay the said Rent the Executor or the Legatary It is Answered That the Executor shall pay it because it is a Personal Charge Or if he Devise certain Lands which he had lately bought but the whole purchase-money not paid at the Testators death the Executor and not the Devisee is lyable for the same But the Devise shall not take effect till the same be paid if there be no other Assets wherewith to pay it 13. A Man possessed of Three Fields whereof Two called Rushcrofts the one being of much better value then the other the third called Longlands doth Devise one of his Rushcrofts or Longlands which he will to A. B. and dies In this case A. B. hath his Election whether he will have one of the Rushcrofts or Longlands but if he chuses one of the Rushcrofts it shall be that which is nearest in value to Longlands 14. A Man made his Will and therein Devised to A. B. all the Lands which he had in the Tenure or Occupation of his Tenant C. D. Consisting of Meadow Pasture and Arrable Grounds Scituate about the Farm-house of the said C. D. and dies The Question was Whether other Pasture and Arable Grounds belonging to the Testator in the Tenure or Occupation of the said C. D. and by him Rented of the said A. B. but not Scituate as aforesaid were to be Comprized within this Devise In this Case it was Resolved in the Affirmitive The Reason is because the quality or Circumstance of the Place or Scituation is not here joyned with the Devise for any Restrictions sake but only by way of Demonstration 15. A Man bought certain Lands of A. B. with a Clause or Covenant of Redemption within a certain Time in the Nature of a Mortgage The Time of Redemption being Elapsed the Purchaser made his Will and therein ordered That his Executor should Restore the said Lands to A. B. paying what Costs and Charges the Testator had been at and Expended about the said Lands The Question was Whether the Mortgagor or Vendor now the Legatary or Devisee were in this Case obliged to pay the Redemption-money over and above the said Costs and Charges which the Testator had Expended about the Lands as aforesaid In this Case it is Resolved in the Negative viz. That the Devisee shall have the Land paying only the said Charges and without paying the Redemption-money 16. A. B. by his last Will and Testament makes his Two Sons C D. and D. B. the Joynt-Executors of all his Estate and dies C. B. for a certain Sum of Money Sells his Part or Interest in the said Estate unto D. B. his Brother After D. B. makes his will and therein Devises to the said C. B. all his Interest in the said Estate by his Father and dies The Queston was Whether C. B. by that Devise should have all the said Estate whereof the Two Brothers were made Joynt-Executors by their Father or only so much thereof as accrewed to D. B. by vertue of his Co-executorship In this Case the D. D. are somewhat divided but the prevailing Opinion is That C. B. by this Devise shall have no more then accrewed to D. B. by virtue of his Co-executorship because the other part of the Estate was his by Purchase and not by being Executor to his Father and the Property being altered by the Sale it ceased to be the Fathers Estate or any Estate to D. B. by the Father and became his own proper Estate by Purchase But the Question is put a little further as whether the said Devise shall be made good as the said part was when the Father dyed or as it was at the time of D. B. the Testators death In this it is Agreed That the said Devise shall be considered only as the Estate was at the Time of the death of the Devisor D. B. and not as it was at the Time of the death of his Father 17. A. B. being possessed of several Houses by Lease doth Devise Two of them in his last will and Testament unto C. D. such as he shall chuse or Two of them to C. D. which he will the rest to I. G. In this Case if C. D. refuse to take by this Devise and will chuse neither of the said Houses I. G. shall have them all 18. A. B. makes his Will and thereof C. D. his Son the sole Executor in which Will he appoints that a Fourth part of his Estate shall be given to the Poor in Case C. B. die without Issue C. B. Survives the Testator hath a Son makes his Will and therein Ordains That if his Son should happen to die Intestate and without Issue that then the Contents of A. B. his Fathers Will should be performed and dies leaving Issue a Son After the said Son of C. B. dies Intestate and without Issue In this Case In this Case some are of Opinion That the said Fourth part of A. B. the first Testators Estate is not due to the Poor because that general disposal which C. B. made in his Will ought to be understood only of such Things as might be claimed by the first Will and which could be due only by the same Others conceive That it is due to them in Case there were no other Legacies contained in the Will of A. B. which his Son C. B. was to see performed and discharged 19. If a Man doth Devise Land whereon is no House at the Time when the Testament was made but One is built thereon before the Testator dies in this Case the House as well as the Land shall pass by this Devise Likewise if a Testator Devise a Bond or Debt owving to him by some Goldsmith or Banker the principal whereof hath produced an encrease by the Interest thereof since the time of making the Devise In this Case by the Civil Law the Legatary shall have such Interest in the Bankers Hands as well as the Principal which accrewed by vertue of the Principal during the Testators life after the making of the Testament which by that Law holds true in all Credits producing an Interest or Accessory profit yet it is otherwise even by that Law as to annual Rents payable out of Land for therein the Civil doth agree with the Common Law That the Arrears of such Rents behind at the Testators shall go to the Executor and not to the Legatary to whom the Land is Devised 20. If the Legacy be not in being in rerum natura at the Time of the Testators death then neither the Thing bequeathed nor the value thereof is due to the Legatary but if the Thing Devised is only by any Impediment obstructed from being delivered in kind then the Devisee shall recover the true value thereof 21. If a Testator Devise in these words viz. I give
or which if demolish'd the Kitchin or the Stable could not remain useful 31. If a House Devised with all the things in it It is to be understood only of those things that werein it when the Testament was made and not of those things which the Testator brought into it afterwards likewise if a House be Devised with all the things which shall be found in it when the Testator dyes it is not to be understood of such things as were brought into the House without the privity or knowledge of the Testator or which were casually and by chance brought into it Contrariwise such things as were casually carried out of the House shall not be excluded out of the said Legacy or Devise nor any moveable Goods in the House which are not momentaneous but ever remaining there as of Domestick use For which reason Debts upon Bills or Bonds Money and Wares designed for Merchandize and the like are not within the said Devise of a House with all things in it 32. If a man Devise his Chamber he is to be understood rather to have Devised the things belonging to the Chamber than the Place But if a man Devise his Drapers-Shop he is to be understood to have Devised rather the Place than the Wares therein For that the word Drapers serves only by way of Demonstration to to shew what shop he meant Otherwise if he say I Devise my Shop and Cloth in that case it shall be understood the Cloth in the Shop 33. If a man Devise a certain Field wherein any Edifice or Building doth stand that Building doth pass by such Devise of the Field if not expresly excepted in the Devise yea albeit the Edifice were Erected after the Testament was made but if the Field be Devised excepting the Edifice thereon the ground in case the Building should be demolished is likewise excepted out of such Devise 34. If a man should Devise the Fee of certain Lands to one and the Rents Profits and Issuers of the same Land to another and both in the same Will In this case by the Civil Law the Rents thereof are equally to be divided between the two Legataries 35. Suppose a man in his last Will and Testament saith I give unto my Wife the Tenement and 700 l. which I had with her in Marriage when as in truth he had but 600 l. with her beside the Tenement In this case she shall have 700 l. with the Tenement unless it can be sufficiently proved that the Testator did think or conceive that he had had 700 l. with her in which case there is only 600 l. and the Tenement due to her by the said Legacy or Devise 36. A Legacy or Devise may be inferr'd from the mind and intention as well as from the Express words of the Testator As thus A. B. constitutes his two Sons his Executors and in his Will sayes That they shall not in any case Alien the Leases and Rents which out of his Estate are about to come to them but shall preserve them for Succession viz. of their Children and ordered it so that he made his two Sons enter into Recognizance to observe his said Injunction accordingly and dyes The Successors of the said Sons claim and demand the said Rents and Leases by vertue of the said Devise They cannot De jure but after the decease of both the said Sons it shall come to their said Successors not before 37. The omission of the quality or description of a Devise in a Will albeit the Testator therein said he would insert the same doth not viciate or null the Devise Therefore if a man Devise certain Lands and Tenements with their Appurtenancee scituate nigh a Town to the Corporation thereof and in his Will saith Which Lands and Tenements with their Appurtenances I shall after in this my Will describe and set forth the just bounds and Limits thereof as also what I would have the said Corporation Annually to do in remembrance of me for and in consideration of this my Devise But being by death prevented doth neither of these the said Devise is notwithstanding good 38. If Land be Devised to A. B. and C. D. when A. B. is not in rerum natura C. D. shall have the whole 39. A Testor doth Devise certain Houses to A. B. after the death of his Executor and dyes the Houses happen to be burnt living the Executor and by him Re-edifyed the Executor dyes In this Case the Executors Executor is obliged to surrender the Houses to A. B. but he may deduct the charges of Rebuilding them if they were not burnt by any default of the first Executor otherwise not But if they were burnt in the Testators life time and by him Rebuilt or others erected in the same place In this case the Devise is void unless it appears that the Testators mind was otherwise But if they were only mended altered and repaired so often that there remains now nothing of them at the Testators death as when the Testament was made In such case the Devise is good The Law is the same in case of a Ship or other Vessel so often Repaired that little or nothing thereof now remains at the Testators death which was at the time of making the Testament 40. A. B. Possessed of certain Lands called the Millfields in one corner whereof stood a Little Vineyard made his Will and therein Devised in this manner viz. I give unto I. G. my Lands called the Millfields excepting the Vines which shall be therein at the time of my Decease A. B. after the making of the said Testament and before his death did cut down the Vines which were in the corner of the said ground and dyes The Question is whether the corner of the said ground where the Vineyard stood shall pass by this Devise It is held in the Affirmative grounded upon that Rule in Law Exceptio rei quae non reperitur nihil importat 41. A. B. By his last Will and Testament doth Devise a certain House to C. D. in case his Ship returns within a year safe home from the Straights makes his Executor and dyes The Executor doth Devise the same House to J. G. under another Condition Depending that other Condition the said year expires and the Ship not return'd from the Straights whereby the first Condition of the Devise to C. D. fails In this case the Devise made by the Executor under that other Condition if performed is good otherwise it would be in case the former Condition had been accomplished in which case the Devise made by the Executor would have been void 42. If a man Devise a certain parcel of ground and after Erect an Edifice thereon the Building or Superstructure as well as the ground doth pass by that Devise and the Devisee shall have them both because the Rule in Law is Quod aedificatur in area Legata
cedit Legato As we use to say Cujus est solum ejus est usque ad coelum 43. Suppose the Testator doth Devise one half of his Lands in Dale to A. B. and doth Devise the same half part of the same Lands to C. D. and doth Devise all his Lands in Dale to J. G. and so joyns them all in the thing and disjoyns them in and by the words In this case J. G. ought to have one Moiety of the Lands A. B. and C. D the other Moiety After C. D. dyes before the day of performance of the Devise by which means his part accrews to his Collegataries by way of Accression or as we say by way of Survivorship and not to his Heir nor Executor Therefore as J. G. had more in the Devise than A. B. so now he hath more than A. B. in that part of C. D. 44. A. B. Possessed of divers Lands and Tenements among which were certain Lands called Lillystones and so called time out of mind but in regard of its great Extent he did for the better and more Commodious Letting it to Farm divide it into two parts and called the one the Vpper Lillystones the other the Lower Lillystones A. B. makes his Will and therein gives divers Lands and Tenements to his Niece among which he gives Lillystones not saying whether the Upper or the Lower Lillystones The Question is whether his Niece shall have all the said Lillystones or onely one of the said divided parts thereof It is Resolved she shall have the whole unless the Executor of A. B. can prove the Testator intended her only one part thereof 45. A Testator makes his Son Executor and in his Will saith Let my Hop-yard at the lower end of my Orchard and my Ground in the Parish of D. suffice my Cosin A. B. It is a good Devise of the Ground and Hop-yard to A. B. So likewise if he had only said let my Cosin A. B. be contented with the said Ground and Hop-yard or with my House scituate in c. Note that in this case the person of the Devisee must not only as in all other Legacies be certain but also the Land Devised must by the Description of its scituation be reduced to an infallible certainty otherwise the Devise will be void 46. A. B. Rents certain Orchards at 20 l. per ann for the term of Seven years makes his Will therein gives the Fruit thereof for the residue of the term yet to come and unexpired unto C. D. orders his Executor to deliver him the Lease to suffer him to enjoy the Fruits of the said Orchards for during the term aforesaid In this case the Testators Executor shall pay the said Rent and suffer C. D. to enjoy the Fruits thereof otherwise the Legacy might be nothing worth or if Fruit fail worse than nothing 47. An Erroneous demonstration by a Testator of the scituation of Lands Devised by him shall not prejudice the Devise As thus The Testator in his Will saith I Devise my Lands of Cammerweli which are in Ireland unto my two Nephews A. B. and C. D. Also my Lands of Kirkaven which are in Scotland and dyes After the Testators death there are found certain Lands which belonged to him called Kirkaven but they are not in Scotland The Question is whether those Lands in the description of whose scituation the Testator was mistaken do belong to the Devisees It is answered in the Affirmative if it appear the Testator had any thoughts of Devising them at all 48. A Testator makes his Son Executor and in his Will Prohibits him from alienating or Mortgaging the Estate or any part thereof whereto he is entitled by such Executorship commanding him to preserve the same for his Children lawfully begotten and dyes The Son for 100 l. doth Mortgage or sell outright to A. B. such certain Tentments of the said Estate as his Father the Testator left at his death in Mortgage to C. D. for 100 l. and with the Proceed thereof pays off the said 100 l. to C. D. to whom his Father in his life time had Mortgaged the same The Question is whether the Sons Obligation or Alienation thereof to A. B. contrary to the Testators express command be good in Law It seems not because of the Testators Prohibition fortified with a Reason That he would have it left to his Children lawfully begotten but the Law is otherwise and ratifies the Sons Obligation or Alienation thereof to A. B. Because it was a necessary expedient and not of his voluntary choice the Law touching such Prohibitions extending only to voluntary not to necessary Alienations 49. A. B. makes his Will and therein Devises certain Lands and Tenements to his five Sons by Name under this Proviso or Condition That if either of them Alienated his part thereof to a Stranger that then that part so Alienated contrary to his Will should be and enure to the Crown for ever and dyes After Two of the Sons sell their parts to One of the other Three their Collegatories and dye He after makes A. B. a stranger his Executor gives him the said Two purchased parts and dyes The Question is whether the said Two parts belong to A. B. or to the surviving Collegataries that did not Alienate or to the Crown It is Resolved that they belong to A. B. and not to the Collegataries nor to the Crown Not to the Collegataries because the person of A. B. the stranger is not here to be considered but the person of the Purchaser who Devised it to him who according to the Testators mind was one of those to whom the Testator permitted or tacitely implyed a Sale might be made And it is only they not others that are prohibited to sell their own parts and therefore the parts which they purchase are not as those which they hold immediately from the Testator prohibited by the express command or tacite intent of the Deceased to be alienated to strangers Nor to the Crown because the Condition of the Devise viz. Alienation contrary to the Testators meaning without which the Crown is not entitled thereto is not existent for that the parts meant by the Testator were sold to their Collegatary and not to a Stranger to whom indeed they were afterwards Devised but not in derogation to the Testators sense and meaning because not the person of the Stranger Executor to the Purchaser as aforesaid but the person of the Purchaser himself is chiefly to be considered 50. Note That in a Bequest of Legacies the word or is not much a Note of Disjunction as of Augmentation comprehending both because in Disposition of Legacies the Law expatiates the Interpretation as far as it may have any consistency with the Testators mind and meaning and will take its measures from the utmost Latitude of his intentions For which reason if the Testator saith I give my City-house or my Countrey Farm to my Daughter
Anne she shall have both And this is the Common opinion from which notwithstanding there are not wanting and they not of the minor DD. who recede in their Judgments and held That a Disjunctive in a Legacy ought to retain its force so as the Executor may be least burdened which seems nothing inferiour to Reason in an impartial ballance yet this may be relyed on as indubitable that where the Disjunctive is placed between two such things as are commonly conceived under the notions of Genus and Species or between the whole and his part then and in such case it shall be taken for a Conjunctive as if the Testator should say I bequeath to my Wife my Plate Jewels or such things as I provided for her the latter words whereof are Generical the former Specifical she shall have both Or if he saith I bequeath to my Wife my Wine which is in the City or in the Port the Port is held as part of the City and she shall have the Wine in both Likewise if any thing be bequeathed to D. E. or F. G. here in this case also the word or shall be taken for the Copulative and so that both of them shall equally take by this Devise unless the one be of nearer kin to the Testator than the other in which case the nearest of kin shall have it for his life the other afterwards or unless it can be proved that the Testator did bear more affection to the one than to the other in which case he to whom the Testator did bear most affection shall be preferred or unless the one of them is not legally capable of the Legacy in which case the word or shall stand as properly it is for a Disjunctive One Devised his Lands to his three Daughters and said further in these words viz. I will that every of them be others Heir by equal portions Whereupon it was doubted when one of them dyed whether the others should hold by survivorship as Joynt-Tenants Or in this case as Tenants in Common The whole Court was of opinion for the latter and not as Joynt-Tenants for that it appear'd the intention of the Donor was such in saying That each should be others Heir by equal portions which could not be if there were a survivor for thereby it is not possible the words of the Will can be of any force Although properly Houses pass not by the name of the Lands yet in a Devise they shall pass by the Name of all the Lands if the intendment be not otherwise by some Expressions of the Devisor for though in a Writ nothing shall be demanded or recovered but according to its proper signification yet in Wills Expressions shall be taken according to the Common intendment Wherefore in a Will by the Devise of his Land all his Houses may pass or not according as it is phrased by the Devisor For if a man Devise all his Lands his Houses shall pass but if he restrain the word Land according to its genuine propriety as Arable Land or doth couple it with Meadow and Pasture in such case the exposition of the word shall be taken according to the common intendment of the Devisor or having both Houses and Lands in A. and B. doth say I bequeath to C. all my Houses and Lands in A. And to D. all my Lands in B. In such case and by such expression the Devisor seems to exclude the Houses in B. out of the Devise to D. which expresly he includes in the Devise to C. Moore succinctly Reports the case thus viz. Debt for Rent the Defendant pleaded nihil debet Whereupon it was found That J. S. being seised of three Houses and other Lands Pastures and Meadows in Watford in the County of Hertford as also of a House and Land in the County of Oxford Devised the same in this manner viz I give all my Capital Messuage in the County of Oxon and all other my Lands and Meadows and Pasture in the Parish of Watford The Devisee brought Debt against the Lessee for years of the Houses in Watford And it was adjudged Maintainable because the word Land comprehends Houses and the Houses shall pass by the Devise CHAP. XX. Cases in the Law touching Legacies of Chattels Personal 1. CHattels Personal may be bequeathed to one for life and afterwards to another in which case the first hath only the use or occupation the other hath only the Propriety thereof So that if one Will that A. B. shall enjoy the use of his Houshold-stuff during his life and after that it shall remain to J. M. This is a good Devise thereof to J. M. But if the thing it self be bequeathed to the first of them then it is otherwise for the gift of a Chattel Personal though but for one hour is the gift thereof for ever Provided the Testator make it Absolute not Conditional 2. Chattels Personal do pass under the legal Notion of Moveables as Chattels Real do under that of Immoveables of both which the Law makes a Distinction into Creatures Living and Things inanimate albeit of the living Chattels Real there can but very few instances be given Such was Wardship in respect of the Tenure of Land As also Villenage for years or that right which the Lord had in the Villain only for a Term who resembled him whom the Civil Law terms Ascriptitius Glebae or one in perpetual Obligation to the Plow on some certain Lands The Real Chattels Inanimate chiefly consist in Houses or Lands or the issues thereof as by Lease for years or by Extent upon Judgments Statutes or Recognizances Or if the Testator had a Term of years in certain Advowsons Tythes Profits of Fairs Markets or Court Leets the Interest is a Real Chattel among the things inanimate likewise a Presentation to a Church upon the next avoidance and before it come to be void is a Real Chattel But of this and Chattels Personal with their respective Individuals the Reader may have a more exact Description if he hath a retrospect to Cap. 6. Par. 3. whereunto he is referred for clearer satisfaction 3. A. B. having two Brothers and one Son makes his Son his Executor and in his Will saith That he would have his Son let the said two Brothers who are the Sons Uncles have all the goods he hath in D. and M. or elsewhere saying withall That all these things he doth leave them for this Reason because he would not that his Son should have any Difference or Controversie with them In this case and by this Devise A. B. seems to leave his two Brothers only what was in common between him and them and no more This interpretation being grounded on the Reason annexed at the close of the Testators words where he saith Because his Son should have no difference or Controversie with them by which Reason he seems to have a prospect of Differences like to arise between him and
be certain though the Legatary dies before it comes the Legacy shall accrew to his Executors for in that Case the Legacy was due at the Testators death though not payable till that day certain be come But if the day or time be altogether uncertain the Legacy is then as if it were Conditional And the breach or non-accomplishment of a Condition in it self Lawfull and Possible doth either suspend or extinguish the Legacy And as to that frequent Condition relating to Marriage so commonly annexed to the Execution of a Legacy it is not Impertinent here to insert That albeit a Condition absolutely against Marriage is unlawfull yet not so if it be only against Marriage with such or such a Person or with such kind of Persons and therefore the Condition is good if the Testator gives his Daughter 100 l. under this Proviso That she Marry with a Merchant or a Merchants Son otherwise the Legacy to be void In which Case if she Marry first with a Merchant and after his decease with another who is not a Merchant nor a Merchants Son she shall loose her Legacy 26. Lastly The Legacy is but equivalent to a Cypher by the voluntary waiver and refusal of the Legatary declaring his dissent thereunto As also by the Actual and total destruction of the Thing it self Bequeathed for if neither the Quantity nor the Quality thereof can appear the Legacy is void Hence it is That the Bequest of a Debt is void if Payment thereof be made to the Testator in his life time otherwise if after his death it be paid by the procurement of his Executor But if the Testator himself doth exact the Debt the Legacy thereof is extinguish'd Otherwise if paid to the Executor by whose default if any other thing Bequeathed doth perish it shall be no loss to the Legatary nor any loss to him in Case the Legacy be something in general as a Horse or an Oxe not saying which or in Case the Legacy consist in Quantity as so many Bushels of Corn not saying of what Grain or in what Garner or Granary In which and other like Cases the Legacy is not void albeit the Thing so Bequeathed shall uttterly perish Upon Evidence in Trespass the Case was A. made his Will in writing and thereby Devised his Lands to E. H. and her Heirs and afterwards lying sick because the said E. H. did not come to visit him he Affirmed That E. H. should not have any part of his Lands or Goods It was the Opinion of the Court That it was no Revocation of the Will being but by way of Discourse and not mentioning his Will But the Revocation ought to be by express words that he did Revoke his Will and that she should not have any of his Lands given her by his Will Lands Devised by Will to one and after a Feofment thereof made by the Devisor to another the said Devise is Revoked by such subsequent Feofment As in the Lord Bourchers Case touching his Will made 23. H. 8. Note By all the Justices upon an Evidence to the Jury in an Ejectione Firme That if a Man hath a Lease and disposeth of it by his Will and afterwards surrenders it up and takes a new Lease and after dyeth That the Devisee shall not have this last Lease because this was a plain Countermand of his Will A Feme Sole was Seized of Lands in Socage and by her last Will Devised them to I. S in Fee and afterwards she took the Devisee to Husband and during the Coverture she Countermanded her Will saying That her Husband should not have the Land nor any other Advantage by her Will. It was Adjudged upon great deliberation that it was a Countermand of the Will the words being spoken after Marriage for the making of a Will is but the Inception thereof and takes not Effect till the Devisors death One Devised Lands to his Sister in Fee and after made a Lease to her for Six Years of the Lands to begin after his Decease and delivered it to a Stranger to the use of his Sister which Stranger did not deliver it to her in the Testators life time and she Refused and Claimed the Inheritance In this Case it was Resolved because the Devise and the Lease made to one and the same Person beginning at the same time cannot stand together in one and the same Person That it was a Countermand of the Devise But it was there Agreed by all the Justices That if the Lease had been made to any other than the Devisee they might stand together and the Lease should not have been a Revocation of the Will as to the Inheritance but only during the Term. In an Ejectione Firme upon Evidence to a Jury It was Resolved by the whole Court That if one maketh his Will in Writing of Lands and afterwards upon Communication saith That he hath made his Will but that shall not stand Or I will Alter my Will c. That these words are not any Revocation of the Will for they are words but in futuro But if he saith I do Revoke it and bear witness thereof hereby he absolutely declares to Revoke it in praesenti and it is then a Revocation And in this Case it was Agreed by the Justices That as one ought to be of good and sane Memorie at the disposing so he ought to be of as good and sane Memorie at the Revoking of it And as he ought to make a Will by his own directions and not by Questions So he ought to Revoke it of himself and not by Questions If a Man Devise 20 l. to the Poorest of his Kindred it is void by Reason of the uncertainty whom the Court shall judge the Poorest A Legacy of 20 l. given by a Testator to his Daughter to whom his Executor gave Bond in 40 l. for payment thereof according to the Will The Daughter takes Husband who sued the Executor in the Ecclesiastical Court for the Legacy The Ex-Executor pleaded payment according to the Bond and because the Ecclesiastical Judge would not allow the Plea the Executor brought a prohibition shewing by way of surmize the matter aforesaid Tanfield Serjeant moved for a Consultation because the Suit was for a Legacy which is of Ecclesiastical Cognizance And albeit the Executor pleaded Payment which is not there allowed yet he ought not to have a prohibition because Payment is a good Plea in that Court and if the Judge there will not allow it the other may appeal to the Superiour Judge and if this should be suffered in the Case of a Legacy then the Ecclesiastical Court should trie nothing But according to Gandy Fenner and Yelverton Justices the Surmize is good for the Executor by entring into Bond to the Daughter for Payment of the Legacy had Extinguish'd the Legacy and had made the 20 l. Devised a Debt Suable meerly at the Common Law and not
remembred them But for the foresaid Reasons it was adjudged for the Plaintiff That those Lands well passed by the Will Suppose a Man hath Two Sons both named John and conceiving his Eldest Son to be dead he Deviseth his Land by his Will to his Son John generally when in Truth the Eldest Son is living In this Case the Younger Son may alleadge and give in Evidence the Devise to him and may produce Witnesses to prove the Intent of his Father And if no Proof can be made the Devise shall be void for the uncertainty of it Glanvile Serjeant prayed the Opinion of the Court in this Case A Man had Issue a Son and a Daughter and Devised his Lands to his Son in Tail and if he dyed without Issue That it should remain to the next of his Name and dyed The Son dyed without Issue the Daughter being then Married whether she should have the Land was the Question And held per Curiam That she should not For she had lost her Name by her Marriage but it should go to the next Heir-male of the Name But if she had not been Married at the Time of her Brothers death the Daughter should have had it for she was the next of the Name One Devised certain Lands in N. in Tail the Remainder to the next of the Kin of his Name and at the Time of the Devise the next of his Kin was his Brothers Daughter who was then Married to I. S. the Devisor dyed The Tenant in Tail dyed afterwards without Issue Whether the Daughter should have the Land was the Question upon a special Verdict and adjudged without Argument that she should not For she is not now of the Name of the Devisor but of her Husbands Name But if she had been unmarried at the Time of the Devise and death of the Donor although she had been Married at the Time of the death of the Tenant in Tail without Issue yet she should have had the Land Wherefore it was adjudged accordingly Ejectione Firmae For certain Lands in A. upon Evidence to a Jury a Devise was shewn of an House with the Appurtenances and thereby Land in the Field was claimed And Popham doubted whether it should pass But Fenner said That it well might pass And that upon Demurrer in 28. Eliz. it was adjudged accordingly The Defendant then to make it clear shewed That the House was Copyhold and the Land Freehold And the whole Court thereupon conceived That it could not be said Appurtenant although it had been used with it Wherefore the Plaintiff was Nonsuited In the Case between H. and H. all agreed the Case of 13. H. 7. That a Testators Devise to his Heir of his Land after the death of his Feme is a good Devise by Implication to the Feme of that Land during her life for it appears he intended his Heir should not have it until the death of his Feme And none other can have it besides the Feme And therefore it is a good Devise to the Feme by Implication But if such a Devise had been to a Stranger after the death of his Feme it might peradventure have been otherwise for the Heir in the Interim might have had it Note That the Opinion of all the Justices was That if one make his Testament wherein are these words viz. I Release all my Lands c. to A. and to his Heirs It is a good Devise of the said Lands to A. and his Heirs Upon a special Verdict the Case was this A Woman Seised of Lands made her Will and devised the same to one and his Heirs after they Intermarry After Marriage the Woman intending to revoke her Will doth revoke it by words after Marriage and saith That her Husband shall not have the Land by her Will and after dyes Whether the Husband by that Will or the next Heir to his Wife shall have the Land was the Question The Case was Argued Pro Con several Arguments on both sides In fine it was Adjudged That the Will was void and that the Husband could take nothing thereby A Man Devised his Lands to his Wife from Year to Year until his Son I. come to the Age of 20. Years and dies the Wife enters I. dies before he attain the Age of 20. Years And it was moved by Harper whether her Interest were thereby determined And it was held by all the Justices That by the death of the Son the Estate of the Wife was determined and that she had no longer any Estate therein For it is to be intended that the Will of the Devisor was That his Wife should have the Land during the Minority of his Son for that he himself could not Legally dispose of the Land being within Age. And Dyer said That by these words de anno in annum It is intended that the Will of the Devisor was That the Interest of the Wife should determine by the death of his Son But if the Words had been until his Son should Come or might Come to that Age of 20. Years then notwithstanding his death the Estate of the Wife had continued A. Seised of the Mannor of Chessam extending into Chessam and the Town of Hertford and also of Lands in Hertford Devised by Will the Mannor of Chessam to B. his Eldest Son in Tail and the Lands in Hertford to C. his Younger Son It was held by all the Justices That the Younger Son should have all that part of the Mannor of Chessam which lay in the Town of Hertford A. Devised that his Lands should descend to his Son but Willed That his Wife should take the Profits thereof until the full Age of the Son for his Education and bringing up and dyed The Wife Married another Husband and dyed before the full Age of the Son It was the Opinion of the Justices in this Case That the second Husband should not have the Profits of those Lands till the full Age of the Son For nothing is Devised to the Wife but a Confidence and she is a Guardian or Bailiff for to help the Infant which by her death is determined and the same Confidence cannot be transferred to the Husband A Man Seised of a Messuage to which a Garden and a Curtilage did belong Enclosed with a Wall and there was no way to the Garden but through the Messuage He Devised the Messuage to his second Son in Fee not mentioning the Garden nor Curtelage nor saith cum pertinentijs It was Adjudged in this Case That the Garden and Curtelage did pass by this Devise They said a Curtelage is parcel of the House as a Stable and a Dovehouse and the Garden shall pass because it is as well for Necessity to it as for Pleasure A. Seised of Lands had Two Daughters and Devised the Lands to the Eldest and her Heirs that she pay to her Younger Sister yearly 30 l. It was the Opinion of all the