{ 34a Cam ruled and adjudged in the `!7ga. fome {ubihntial benelit ia to be derived from adopting the ei panes! tiee contended for, the Court will not alter the ufual contig? Rule difcharged. ]AcxsoN verfur VANDERSPRE!GLE’8, Executor. !']rHL$ was an a&ion brou ht to recover the amount of a bond, infavor of the 'lseltatrix, which the Executor had received. The plaintif claimed it as a legacy, under the follow- ing words in the will : “ Item, I give and bequeath unto Mary “ Enya, wife of William jlaelfan, all my wearing apparel, “ oufehold fumiture, plate, linen, books, and every moveable “ 1vbatf»e·ver.” The Teltatrix then proceeds to giveavariety of legacies in calh, and bequeaths the rell: and reiidue of the ellatc to Samuel Rehpn, and others. Her perfonal eltate whs
- 3out £2000, principally out at interell; ; but {he had no real.
ate. Rawle, for thcplaintid} urged, that the words were broad enough to cover the debts due to the Tellatrix. He referred to 12 Gap. 1. r Atl. 171. r77. 1.80.---4 Mod. 156. 1 Vez. 36g. 173. Ca. gg. b. 1 P. Wm:. 267. Brown 127. and, without reading the authorities, delired that the point might be rc- ferved: But, Br THE Co¤n•1':—We have no doubt at prefent. The meaningof the Teltatrix is plain enough. If the plaintifFs eonltruéiion were right, all the rell: of the will would be def- troyed. In this cafe, moveables mult be confined to things of the fame nature with thofe before fpecilied. Let there be a verdict for the defendant, with liberty for the plaintiif to move for anew trial, ii, on conlideration, he think his petition tena- ble. Verdiél: for the Defendant. Mencxsn verfu.: Mancren. yf A; 3,7 HIS caufe flood on the lift for trial. DIQOMRRH moveeb ' _ for a rule on the plaintiff to lile his warrantof Attorney. nat, By rue Couivr :-It has been often ruled, that this 3 application mult be made before plea pleaded. ‘ Rule refufed. 'Ntzsnrt
�
