Page:The English Reports v1 1900.pdf/736

twenty-one, and without issue, after the death of her mother, the appellant thereupon became entitled to one moiety of the said moiety, as heir at law of Mrs. Holford.

In answer to this objection it was said, that the words of the will or deed of appointment were, to the use of all and every the daughter and daughters, and to the heirs of their body and bodies, and for default of such issue, to her right heirs; the word such introduced the words it referred to, viz. heirs of their body and bodies. Let these words be inserted, and the contingency upon which the reversion was to take effect would stand thus, in default of heirs of their body and bodies; i.e. in default of the issue of one, if only one daughter, and of two if there should be two daughters, or, in other words, if there should be no issue of their or either of their bodies. Besides, the limitation was to daughter or daughters, whole if to one only, and by direct inference, whole to one only surviving daughter. It was observable also, that Mrs. Holford omitted the word respective; she did not say the heirs of their respective bodies, which she certainly would have done had she intended to deprive a surviving daughter of the share of her sister dying without issue and unmarried: it therefore seemed no less apparent, that Mrs. Holford intended, than that the words of her will did necessarily limit cross remainders between her two daughters.

After hearing counsel on this appeal, it was ordered and adjudged, that the same should be dismissed; and the decree therein complained of, affirmed. (Jour. vol. 31. p. 445.) [Distinguished in Dillon v. Grace, 1805. 2 Sch. and L. 462.]

Judith Medlicot being seised in fee of several freehold and copyhold lands and hereditaments in Sussex, and entitled to the remainder of certain leases of houses in Watling-street, London, for a long term of years, expectant upon the death of Dame Mary Selwyn, widow; and being also possessed of a very considerable personal estate, duly made her will, dated the 29th of September 1707, and thereby, inter alia, devised as follows:

Item, I give unto the said Selwyn Samber, the sum of £100 sterling, to be paid her at her age of twenty-one years, or day of her marriage, which shall first happen. Item, I give unto the aforesaid Selwyn Samber, one small silver tankard worked round with ridges like hoops. Item, If it shall happen that the said Lady Mary Selwyn, my late brother's widow, shall depart this life before the expiration of the leases of the two houses in Watling-street, London, the remainder of the said terms of or in the said leases will be vested in me, or my executor; and therefore, I do hereby give and bequeath all my right, title, and interest of, in, and to the said leases and houses, unto my aforesaid nephew James Noke, and my goddaughter Selwyn Samber; and her part and proportion to be applied towards her better maintenance and education. And to the intent all my debts, legacies, and funeral expences may be justly and honestly satisfied and paid, I give and devise all that my moiety, part, purpart, and share of all that my mansion-house called Bechington, in the parish of Friston, and also of all that the manor of Peak Dean, alias Peakthen, and also of all the freehold messuages, lands, tenements, hereditaments, and appurtenances whatsoever, within the several parishes of Friston, Eastdean, Eastborn, Willingdon, Pevensey, Westham, Hailsham, Falkington, and Jevington, or elsewhere, in the county of Sussex, called or known by the several