stables, and buildings, pleasure-grounds, lands, and hereditaments, called Plomer Hill House, in the parish of West Wycombe, and now in my own occupation, together with the cottages or tenements or premises thereto belonging, to trustees (therein named,) and their heirs, upon trust for my present dear wife Susanna Jemima Hicks during her life or widowhood, or until she shall cease to reside at the same premises, or let the same, or permit the same to be occupied by any other person than herself, she paying all taxes and outgoings in respect thereof, and keeping the same in good and tenantable repair;" and then, in the event of her death, second marriage, ceasing to reside, or letting the premises, or permitting any other person than herself to reside therein, he directs the trustees to be seised and possessed of these copyhold premises upon the same trusts as (regard being had to the nature and quality of the tenure of the said copyhold premises) will best correspond with the uses declared concerning the residue of his real estate. He afterwards devises to his wife all his money in the funds during her life or widowhood; and after her death or marriage, to such person as should be either tenant for life or in tail of his residuary estate, with a power to her to appoint 500l. as therein mentioned; and then gives to her absolutely, all the ready money which shall happen to be in his mansion called Plomer Hill House, at the time of his decease, all the articles of plate brought by her on her marriage, his family carriage, and the wines, provisions, and provender, live and dead stock, which at the time of his decease shall be on his copyhold "premises;" and then devises "all his household goods, furniture, books, prints, pictures, china, glass, and plate not thereinbefore bequeathed, unto the trustees in trust for his said wife during such time as by virtue of his will she shall be entitled to his copyhold mansion 1832. DOE dem. V. HICKS. 1832. DOE dem. บ. HICKS. mansion and premises; and after the determination of her estate in the same, in trust absolutely for the person who then, either as tenant for life or in tail male, shall be in the actual possession of his residuary real estates." The testator, therefore, by his will has not only devised the mansion to his wife, but has shewn a clear and anxious desire that his wife should continue to reside in the mansion which he then occupied, and that it should not be in any manner dismantled or unfurnished, but should be enjoyed by her in exactly the same state as that in which it was left at the time of his death. In his first codicil, made after the interval of a year, it is evident that the same intention that his wife should reside in the mansion house, in the same state as left at the time of his death, continued to be predominant in the testator's mind; for after reciting the bequest in the will to his wife of the plate, furniture, and other articles before adverted to, he proceeds to revoke such bequest in plain and direct terms, and in lieu thereof bequeaths all his farming stock, household goods, &c., " and all other his effects which should be in or about his residence at Plomer Hill aforesaid, and usually considered as comprised in and constituting his establishment there," unto his wife, for her own use and benefit absolutely. It is further to be observed, that the testator's wife appears to have been from the time of the making of the will down to the time of making the fifth and last codicil, the object of his peculiar bounty and regard; there being no codicil, with the exception perhaps of the third, which does not materially add to the provision already made for her by his previous dispositions in her favour. The will gives his wife a rent-charge of 300l. a year for life charged upon the residue, with a contingent increase of 100l. per annum, in case of the failure of issue of his son. By the first codicil, made after the death of his son without issue, he gives his wife absolutely the additional annuity of 100l. per annum, and bequeaths to her the residue of his personal estate absolutely to her own use. By his second codicil he constitutes her sole executrix and residuary legatee. By the third codicil he gives her the proceeds and profits of the five shares which he held in the County Fire Office, for her life. By the fourth, the codicil in question, he gives to his wife a further annuity of 100%. per annum for life. And by the fifth he gives to her, and at her disposal, all sums of money which she or the testator might be entitled unto, out of the effects of her late father, or that any other friend might leave her; and he orders his executors," in case she shall die before him, to fulfil her will and disposal thereof." This codicil was executed about nine months subsequently to that upon which the question arises. The will thus containing such a clear devise to the wife, with such a manifest indication of intention that she should reside in the mansion house called Plomer's Hill, and each codicil containing proof that the regard of the testator for his wife continued unabated and unimpaired until long after the execution of the fourth codicil, the first observation that arises is, that it is extremely improbable in itself that the testator should by general words, without making any reference to his wife, or any disposition in lieu thereof in her favour, revoke the only devise of land which he had made to her, which forms the first subject of his will, to which repeated allusions are made in the will itself, and first codicil, and her residence in which during her widowhood appears to have been the favourite object of his mind. . Still, however, the question arises whether he has by the fourth codicil revoked this devise or not? That 1832. DOE dem. V. HICKS. 1832. DOE dem. บ. HICKS. That the words used in the codicil do not necessarily revoke this devise, is sufficiently manifest by referring to them. The testator begins by saying, "I do make and add this further codicil to my will, hereby revoking and making null and void several of the dispositions heretofore made by me in my said will and codicil of all my freehold, copyhold, and personal estate and effects of all and every kind and description," and concludes it by saying, "hereby in all other respects but what is above mentioned confirming my said will and codicils." There are no words, therefore, expressly revoking this devise; on the contrary, if we hold all the dispositions of his real estate to be revoked, we construe the codicil directly against the testator's declared intention. It is as much open to argument that the devise to the wife may be one of these, or the very one which the testator intended to confirm, as that it was one of the several which he intended to revoke. Whether, therefore, this devise was revoked must be determined, not by any express words to that effect, but by the consideration whether, upon the construction of the codicil, the devise and disposition therein contained must of necessity be held inconsistent with the devise to the wife; or whether such a construction may be put upon the devise in the codicil, that both the will and the codicil may stand together. To consider this question, it is necessary in the first place to observe how the disposition of the testator's property stood under the will and the first codicil at the time when the fourth codicil was made. And upon a careful inspection of the will and first codicil it will be found, that at the time of executing the fourth codicil, the testator's real property stood thus disposed of; viz. the copyhold estate (the Plomer Hill house) was devised to the wife for life, the remainder forming part of the residue. The The Treravel estate stood thus: an equitable estate to his daughter, Anna Maria Hearle, for life, for her separate use; remainder to her husband for life; remainder to her children in tail as tenants in common; the remainder forming part of the residue. The residue of his property, consisting of the manor and advowson of Bradenham, two freehold farms in the county of Bucks, and so much of the testator's estate in the Plomer Hill House and the Treravel property as were undisposed of, and also comprising all his personal property, except the partial interests given to the wife, which have been before enumerated, formed one mass; which, at the time of making the fourth codicil, in consequence of the death of his only son without issue, stood devised immediately to the testator's grandson, John Graves, for life; remainder to his first and other sons in tail male; remainder to the first and other sons of the testator's daughter, Anna Maria Hearle, in tail male; remainder to his own right heirs. Whilst his property stood thus disposed of, the fourth .codicil is made, in which, after declaring his intention to revoke several of the dispositions made by him in his said will and codicils, of all his freehold, copyhold, and personal estate and effects of all and every kind and description," instead of and in the place of such devise, disposition, and bequest thereof, he gives, devises, and bequeaths all and every his freehold, copyhold, and personal estate and effects of every kind and description whatsoever, and wheresoever situated, unto his daughter, Anna Maria Hearle, and from and after the determination of that estate, unto his grandson, John Graves, and his heirs, in strict entail, as in the said will mentioned," with the additional clause in the codicil as to the time when John Graves shall take; " and in failure of such issue of the said John Graves, he orders that his said estates and effects shall go and descend, as is by his said VOL. VIII. Kk will 1832. DOE dem. ບ. HICKS. |
